| HOME | Featured Stories | May 2008 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: MORNING DEW
Posted by Yehoshua HaLevi, May 31, 2008. |
|
Yehoshua HaLevi writes:
"HOW I GOT THE SHOT: A macro or close-up lens is useful only if you first identify with your eyes the detail you want to photograph. The lens itself doesn't select the important content any more than a wide-angle lens keeps out unwanted scenery. I stumbled on this photo while en route to a reporting assignment in the Negev. I had left early to allow for a stop or two along the way and pulled onto the shoulder to admire a group of trees set amidst a vast, green wheat field. When I reached the edge of the field, I noticed this clump of stalks, my attention drawn to the light reflecting off the wet grass and the beads of dew clinging to the ears of wheat. I immediately shifted gears from a wide-angled landscape to a close-up. Monochromatic images like this sometimes lack punch, but in this instance I love the way the blades curve and spiral freely throughout the image. The extreme close-up accentuates the texture and more than makes up for any lack of color variety.
Dew is fleeting, and once the sun gets up, it melts away quickly. If
you like this look, however, you can easily recreate it any time by
grabbing the nearest water bottle and gently sprinkling the contents
onto your subject. Water has a natural tendency to bead and adhere to
the surface of flower petals, leaves, and even ripe fruit. In response
to a recent photo of the old city walls, I received a comment from a
reader in Italy, who wrote to thank me for vividly transporting him to
Jerusalem. "The picture made me see the bright, early-morning light,
feel the fresh air, and hear the morning noise of a city waking up."
Photography really succeeds, I think, when a two-dimensional image can
evoke this kind of deep, sensual response that doesn't exist in the
actual photo at all, which is just paper or pixels. Sometimes a tiny
drop of water or ray of sunshine is enough to set those feelings in
motion." Contact him at smile@goldenlightimages.com |
|
AT 2000 AND 60: A PERSPECTIVE ON THE JEWS' REVIVAL IN THEIR LAND
Posted by Friends of Hatikva, May 31, 2008. |
|
This was written by Arieh Eldad, a plastic surgeon, a member of the Israeli Knesset and an activist for a strong Jewish state. |
|
If the Zionist revolution was intended to bring normality to the Jewish people, it was destined to fail. The Jewish people is not a normal people. There is no historical parallel to a people with four thousand years of continuous history. You may say that in Egypt there are antiquities that predate our Patriarchs, but there is no connection between the Egypt of the Pharaohs and the Egypt of today. It is not the same people, the same language, the same religion, or the same culture. You may say the Chinese culture is more ancient than ours. But the Chinese remained in their land and were not destroyed and exiled twice and did not return from far away exiles to re-establish themselves. The Jewish people is not a normal people. In the same way, Judaism is not a normal religion. There is no parallel to the unbreakable tie between the Jewish religion and nationality. And our movement of national liberation –– Zionism –– is unlike any other national liberation movement of the past centuries. African or European peoples who fought for their freedom had to eject foreign rulers and declare independence. The liberation movement of the Jewish people had a double task: to gather the exiles of Israel from around the world and to free its land from foreign rulers. So Zionism is not a normal liberation movement. Considering these three anomalies, is it any wonder the Jewish people's desire for normalization was not realized with the return to Zion? We did become "productive": no longer just middlemen, brokers, traders, and bankers; the Jews in the land of Israel are also soldiers and farmers and industrialists. But if Zionism hoped to take the Jews out of exile and raise a generation in the land free of oppression and the complexes of exile, we can say we have succeeded in taking the Jews out of exile but not in taking that exile out of the Jews. Apparently 2000 years of persecution, forced conversion, destruction, expulsion and exile created a new species of Jew who is a professional survivor. Most of those who carried the genes of Bar Kochba fell on the way. The genes of Josephus Flavius keep popping up on the stage of history in characters such as the leaders of the Judenrat, Kastner, those who turned Jewish underground fighters over the British in "The Season," those who sank the Irgun arms ship Altalena, and the most recent "heroes" who uprooted and exiled the residents of Gaza in what they called a "disengagement." A direct line leads from Josephus Flavius to Mordechai Vanunu and Ilan Pape. A direct line leads from Aristobulus, the Hasmonean king who opened the gates of Jerusalem to Pompeii of Rome in order to survive the war with his brother Horkynus the Hasmonean, to Ehud Olmert who is ready to open the gates of Jerusalem to the Arab enemy in order to survive politically and win support from the world's sole superpower. So Zionism has failed in its mission of normalization. But Zionism had set other goals, first among them saving the Jewish people from the impending disaster. Herzl, who heard the Parisian mob, students of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," yelling "Death to the Jews" during the Dreyfus trial, understood that the Emancipation was not the solution to the problem of the Jews in exile. And Herzl understood that if the existence of the Jews in exile could not be guaranteed and Jews were to be saved, the exile needed to end and they needed to have a state that would be a safe refuge from anti-Semitism. Zionism also failed in this mission. It came too late. The destruction of the Jews of Europe preceded the establishment of the state. And those who say that the destruction of the Jews contributed to international support for a Jewish state are right. Zionism had to fail in order for its goal to be achieved. But Zionism was too late for the six million who rose in smoke and whose ashes fertilize the fields of Europe. As much as the gentiles who refused to give Herzl a charter over the land of Israel are to blame, so are the Jews who refused to unite and redeem themselves. The Haredim waited for a messiah to come from heaven, the Bundists preferred Yiddish and exile, the socialists wanted to redeem to the world and thought that when economic classes would be abolished, the Jewish problem would also be solved. All of them vigorously fought Herzl. And the Zionism of those who followed in Herzl's path but were unable to free themselves from the chains of exile, who preferred "one more dunam and one more goat and one more rally against the White Paper" to taking up arms and expelling all foreign rulers from Israel –– they also bear responsibility for the failure to save the Jews of Europe and for the State of Israel coming too late and not being a safe haven when it was needed. But even now after the State of Israel has been established, it does not seem a safe haven for the Jews. Over 23,000 Jews have been killed in Eretz Israel since the modern return to Zion, solely because they were Jews. In no other country have so many Jews been killed solely because they were Jews. So perhaps our "safe haven" is not such a safe haven. Perhaps the Jews are safer living in the United States, France or Iran. Anyone attempting to tally such an "accounting" of deaths of course ignores the six million murdered in Europe. And the hundreds of thousands slaughtered in riots and pogroms and crusades, from Siberia to Arabia, Ethiopia to Spain. The State of Israel was established so Jews could determine their own fate, to fight and defeat their enemies, not to be human dust but to turn their enemies to dust. The State of Israel can fulfill this mission and therefore at least in this regard is the realization of generations of dreams. But as long as its leaders are of the race of Flavius, they may turn Israel over to the worst of its enemies and fail to prevent the destruction now threatened by Iran, and they may themselves bring the Arab enemy into the country and into Jerusalem. They are prepared for the first time in the history of the Jewish people to recognize the right of another people to establish a state in Eretz Israel. From this point of view, perhaps it would have been better if a Jewish state recognizing the right of another people to Eretz Israel had not been established? Perhaps it would be preferable if a state of six million Jews had not been established, if its leaders are incapable of facing the enemies who want to destroy it, and are Jews of exilic character who prefer that the world fight for us and stop Iran with sanctions and pressure, and they are blind and deaf and do not see what is clear to all: the leaders of Iran act as suicide bombers who are prepared to sacrifice their lives in order to destroy Israel? Perhaps it would be better if the largest concentration of Jews in the world had not been established if its leaders are incapable of preventing its destruction? No! The law of exile is a law of destruction or conversion. Exile ends either in gas chambers and crematoria, or a golden exile with intermarriage rates above 50 percent. In Eretz Israel, where a state of the Jews has been established, a Jewish State can be established. A state of Jews daring to rise as one and not a state of Flaviuses. A state prepared to deal with its enemies and wipe them out, and not look to the gentiles for salvation. Not even to the good gentiles known as "friends of Israel," who are ready to promise that if Israel is attacked with nuclear weapons, Iran will be destroyed. We do not want to be an excuse for the destruction of Iran. We want to and we can liberate Eretz Israel from any foreign ruler, whoever it may be. Not because the land is necessary for security. Eretz Israel is our homeland, not a safe haven. It is our only home even when it is under fire. We must and can return Zionism to its forgotten goal –– the liberation of the homeland. Zionism is not a mistake. It's just that those carrying the flag have wearied and have become post-Zionists, if not outright anti-Zionists. After 2000 years, our fate is once again in our hands. If our leaders have gone bad and are trying to push us into the abyss, we have no one to complain to but ourselves. It is in our hands to guarantee the existence of the State of Israel, and turn it from the state of the Jews into a Jewish State. To turn the State of Israel into the Kingdom of Israel. Friends of Hatikva write: "Hatikva is a new political party in Israel that proudly and forthrightly stands for Zionism. Hatikva vigorously believes that the entirety of the Land of Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people, and that we must never sacrifice even one inch of our birthright. Hatikva believes in a strong Israel that will not appease its enemies but instead will unapologetically exercise its military power to protect the Jewish people. The American Friends of Hatikva, although legally independent, shares the same principles as the Hatikva party in Israel and is devoted to educating the people about the need for a strong Zionism. We invite you to visit our website www.HatikvaUSA.org and to join and support the American Friends of Hatikva. Contact us at info@hatikvausa.org" |
|
TZIPI, WE HARDLY KNOW YOU
Posted by Dawn Treader, May 31, 2008. |
|
This was written by Herb Keinon and it appeared today on the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
The paradox that is Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was on abundant display late Wednesday afternoon at the Mt. Herzl military cemetery in Jerusalem. There, standing around the pine-tree shaded grave of David Raziel, the former IZL commander whose 67th yartzeit was being marked, Livni –– along with some 25 IZL old timers –– sang the Betar anthem, "Tagar" (defiance: "On all obstacles and hindrances/ Whether you succeed or fail/ In the flames of the revolt/ Carry the flame to kindle/ For silence is mire/ Sacrifice blood and soul/ For the sake of the hidden glory." "To die or to conquer the mountain," the song concluded, and Livni chimed in. "Yodefat, Massada, Betar." The paradox here is a double one. First the ideological paradox: Livni, chief negotiator of the Israeli delegation reportedly willing to cede 91 percent of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority, singing the famous words of Ze'ev ("both-banks-of-the-Jordan") Jabotinsky. And then there was the more practical, political, paradox. Indeed, one couldn't help but wonder what was going through Livni's mind as she sang the words, "for silence is mire," and "to die or to conquer the mountain." Two of the most oft-voiced criticisms of Livni of late have been her silence in the face of the investigation of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and a lack of "fire in the belly" needed to capture the mountain, in this case represented not as part of Eretz Yisrael, but rather the zenith of Israeli politics: the prime minister's chair. Unlike a year ago, Livni on Wednesday –– following the damning testimony of Morris Talansky –– left it to Defense Minister Ehud Barak to call for Olmert to step down, without then having the gumption to do so himself instead of serving another day under a man in whom he not longer had confidence. Livni, last May, made a similar call to Olmert after the publication of the Winograd Committee's interim report. "I told him that resigning would be the right thing for him to do," she said at the time, but then shied away from drawing her own conclusions and quitting the government if he did not. And, for really the first time in her very charmed political career,
Livni got clopped on the head in the media at the time for this
seeming hypocrisy.
BUT NOW, she's obviously learned her lesson. Now, rather than calling a dramatic press conference and drumming up expectation, she summoned the press to the memorial service that was barely on the media's radar screen. And rather than speaking bluntly, she hinted broadly. And at the end of the day Wednesday, it was Barak, rather then Livni, who got clopped by the press. "The state is not just a technical matter of borders and citizens; it is not just symbols, a flag, and an anthem," Livni said. "The state has a vision and values that obligate its citizens and its leaders." And then, she added, giving a clear indication of what was on her mind, "Before we can be a light unto the nations, as we would want, it is fitting for us first to work inside our home to show the light." Livni, obviously, feels she is best suited to serve as the nation's candle-in-chief. And, if the polls are any indication, the public feels the same way –– another Livni paradox: The country loves her, if only because it knows so little about her. The one thing it does know is that she is clean and straight, and as the country emerges from the Omri Sharon-Moshe Katsav-Haim Ramon-Avraham Hirschson-Ehud Olmert era, it will be looking for one thing –– a clean and straight candidate. Israelis are now obsessed with corruption, and Livni is widely viewed as the one candidate who can regain the public's trust in the system, who can take corruption off the agenda. "Is she really Snow White?" one of her associates was asked. The reply: "She is definitely not corrupt." She is also not lavish, not cut in the same cigar-loving, living-the-good-life mold of Olmert, Barak or Likud head Binyamin Netanyahu. In one of the few in-depth profiles of her, a piece last year in The New York Times Magazine, Livni said, "I prefer jeans to a suit, sneakers to high heels, markets to malls ... In general, I don't like formality at all. It is just part of what I do. You know, when I was young, I went to the Sinai and worked as a waitress." That lack of excess is also bound to have an appeal to Israelis, rebounding from hotel suites costing thousands of dollars, be they for Olmert in Washington, or Netanyahu during the Second Lebanon War in London. It is no coincidence, by the way, that there are so few in-depth profiles of Livni. Over the last year she has carefully guarded her media image, speaking almost exclusively on the radio or television, where she has complete control of content. And, even then, she keeps those appearances to a minimum, seemingly a firm believer in the dictum "more is less." And, as a result, the public does not know much about her positions. What they do know they often hear in long, painfully convoluted sentences at press conferences that sound good at first blush, but then on second take don't really mean that much. As a result, if the public backlash against having leaders who could feature in that 1980s television show, "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" sweeps Livni into office, the open question is where will she lead the country? And this is where she falls short. One associate, who said he would vote for Livni, added –– in the same breath –– that she lacked the "vision thing," is not a particularly good manger and is indecisive. Colleagues who have worked with her describe a micro-manager who has trust in very few people, and does not give those who work under her a sense that she has faith in their judgment. They describe a person who changes her mind a great deal, and who can take an inordinately long time making a mundane decision, such as filling a personnel vacancy. She has also been described as awkward in personal relations, but not arrogant as it sometimes appears; impatient and somewhat "testy." An indication of a rather mercurial managerial style is the fact that over the last year eight of her top staffers –– people filling positions such as chief of staff, chief political adviser and media adviser –– have stepped down. On the up-side, however, she is described as someone who listens and thinks things through.
Regarding diplomatic policy, those on the Right who harbor hopes about the woman who can sing the Betar anthem by heart and has an impeccable Revisionist pedigree (her father and mother were both IZL fighters), will be sorely disappointed if they think her policies toward the Palestinians would be fundamentally different from Olmert's. The Annapolis process, or better yet the idea of a shelf-agreement with the Palestinians, is an idea she hatched at the tail end of 2006, and then sold in 2007 to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has since taken the ball and run with it. Unlike Olmert, who diplomatic officials say is skeptical that the agreement can be worked out, Livni –– who is heading the negotiations glaring exception being that she is much more adamant than Olmert that actually believes it can. There are no major divisions between her and Olmert regarding borders, security and Jerusalem, with the only glaring exception being that she is much more adamant than Olmert that Israel must insist, before an agreement is signed, that the Palestinians completely reject any claim to a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees and their descendants. One diplomatic source said, however, that another difference between her and Olmert is that Livni –– ever the lawyer –– sees the drawing up of a peace agreement itself as an achievement, that the agreement, the piece of paper, is what is important. Olmert, the official said, places less importance on the document. As to the fledgling Syrian track, Livni's position is not clear. She sounded less than overly enthused last week by the announcement of indirect talks with the Syrians through the Turks, but this may be more because of a sense of pique at being left in the dark over the negotiations than anything else. She did, however, take what the international media would call a more "hard-line position," on the talks than Olmert, saying that in order for there to be an agreement, the Syrians would have to renounce support for Hizbullah and Hamas, and end its "problematic connections" with Iran. Olmert was less explicit in publicly broadcasting those positions. One area where there may be a more pronounced difference with Olmert's policies is in relations with Europe. While known to have a good and friendly relationship with Rice, Livni –– according to diplomatic officials –– would likely place more of an emphasis on Europe. As foreign minister, Livni has spent untold hours in conversation with the Europeans, and has grown to appreciate their importance. Livni would certainly not ignore the US, the officials said, but would likely spend more time than Olmert paying attention to the EU and dialoguing with it. According to one diplomatic official, in this regard, Livni would likely be more like Shimon Peres than Yitzhak Rabin. "Rabin was 100 percent oriented toward America," the official said. "Peres understood America, but his heart was in Europe. Livni would likely be more like him." Regarding how to deal with the rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, one official said that as a result of her lack of security experience, Livni would probably have more of an inclination to follow the IDF, which itself is currently split on the wisdom of a large-scale military incursion. But if she decided to go in, the official added, knowing her style, she would want to have an exit strategy clearly and carefully mapped out beforehand. An indication of a rather mercurial managerial style is the fact that over the last year eight of her top staffers –– people filling positions such as chief of staff, chief political adviser and media adviser –– have stepped down. On the up-side, however, she is described as someone who listens and thinks things through. Regarding diplomatic policy, those on the Right who harbor hopes about the woman who can sing the Betar anthem by heart and has an impeccable Revisionist pedigree (her father and mother were both IZL fighters), will be sorely disappointed if they think her policies toward the Palestinians would be fundamentally different from Olmert's. The Annapolis process, or better yet the idea of a shelf-agreement with the Palestinians, is an idea she hatched at the tail end of 2006, and then sold in 2007 to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has since taken the ball and run with it. Unlike Olmert, who diplomatic officials say is skeptical that the agreement can be worked out, Livni –– who is heading the negotiations –– actually believes it can. There are no major divisions between her and Olmert regarding borders, security and Jerusalem, with the only glaring exception being that she is much more adamant than Olmert that Israel must insist, before an agreement is signed, that the Palestinians completely reject any claim to a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees and their descendants. One diplomatic source said, however, that another difference between her and Olmert is that Livni –– ever the lawyer –– sees the drawing up of a peace agreement itself as an achievement, that the agreement, the piece of paper, is what is important. Olmert, the official said, places less importance on the document. As to the fledgling Syrian track, Livni's position is not clear. She sounded less than overly enthused last week by the announcement of indirect talks with the Syrians through the Turks, but this may be more because of a sense of pique at being left in the dark over the negotiations than anything else. She did, however, take what the international media would call a more "hard-line position," on the talks than Olmert, saying that in order for there to be an agreement, the Syrians would have to renounce support for Hizbullah and Hamas, and end its "problematic connections" with Iran. Olmert was less explicit in publicly broadcasting those positions. One area where there may be a more pronounced difference with Olmert's policies is in relations with Europe. While known to have a good and friendly relationship with Rice, Livni –– according to diplomatic officials –– would likely place more of an emphasis on Europe. As foreign minister, Livni has spent untold hours in conversation with the Europeans, and has grown to appreciate their importance. Livni would certainly not ignore the US, the officials said, but would likely spend more time than Olmert paying attention to the EU and dialoguing with it. According to one diplomatic official, in this regard, Livni would likely be more like Shimon Peres than Yitzhak Rabin. "Rabin was 100 percent oriented toward America," the official said. "Peres understood America, but his heart was in Europe. Livni would likely be more like him." Regarding how to deal with the rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, one
official said that as a result of her lack of security experience,
Livni would probably have more of an inclination to follow the IDF,
which itself is currently split on the wisdom of a large-scale
military incursion. But if she decided to go in, the official added,
knowing her style, she would want to have an exit strategy clearly and
carefully mapped out beforehand.
Contact Dawn Treader at dawntreader3@yahoo.com
|
|
BELGIAN WOMAN WAGES WAR FOR AL QAEDA ON THE WEB
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 31, 2008. |
|
This comes from the
International Herald Tribune and is archived at
|
|
BRUSSELS: On the street, Malika El Aroud is anonymous in an Islamic black veil covering all but her eyes. In her living room, El Aroud, a 48-year-old Belgian, wears the ordinary look of middle age: a plain black T-shirt and pants and curly brown hair. The only adornment is a pair of powder-blue slippers monogrammed in gold with the letters SEXY. But it is on the Internet that El Aroud has distinguished herself. Writing in French under the name Oum Obeyda, she has transformed herself into one of the most prominent Internet jihadists in Europe. She calls herself a female holy warrior for Al Qaeda. She insists that she does not disseminate instructions on bomb-making and has no intention of taking up arms herself. Rather, she browbeats Muslim men to go and fight, and rallies women to join the cause. "It's not my role to set off bombs –– that's ridiculous," she said in a rare interview. "I have a weapon. It's to write. It's to speak out. That's my jihad. You can do many things with words. Writing is also a bomb." El Aroud has not only made a name for herself among devotees of radical forums where she broadcasts her message of hatred toward the West. She also is well known to intelligence officials throughout Europe as simply "Malika" –– an Islamist who is at the forefront of the movement by women to take a larger role in the male-dominated global jihad. The authorities have noted an increase in suicide bombings carried out by women –– the American military reports that 18 women have conducted suicide missions in Iraq so far this year, compared with 8 all of last year –– but they say there is also a less violent yet potentially more insidious army of women organizers, proselytizers, teachers, translators and fund-raisers, who either join their husbands in the fight or step into the breach as men are jailed or killed. "Women are coming of age in jihad and are entering a world once reserved for men," said Claude Moniquet, president of the Brussels-based European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center. "Malika is a role model, an icon who is bold enough to use her own name. She plays a very important strategic role as a source of inspiration. She's very clever –– and extremely dangerous." El Aroud began her rise to prominence because of a man in her life. Two days before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, her husband carried out a bombing in Afghanistan that killed the anti-Taliban warlord Ahmed Shah Massoud at the behest of Osama bin Laden. Her husband was killed, and she took to the Internet as the widow of a martyr. She remarried, and she and her new husband were convicted in Switzerland for operating pro-Qaeda Web sites. Now, according to the Belgian authorities, she is a suspect in what the authorities say they believe is a plot to carry out an attack in Belgium. "Vietnam is nothing compared to what awaits you in our lands," she wrote to a supposed Western audience in March about wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Ask your mothers, your wives to order your coffins." To her followers she added: "Victory is appearing on the horizon, my brothers and sisters. Let's intensify our prayers." Her prolific writing and presence in chat rooms, coupled with her background, makes her a magnet for praise and sympathy. "Sister Oum Obeyda is virtuous among the virtuous; her life is dedicated to the good on this earth," a man named Juba wrote late last year. The rise of women comes against a backdrop of discrimination that has permeated radical Islam. Mohamed Atta, the Sept. 11 hijacker, wrote in his will that "women must not be present at my funeral or go to my grave at any later date." Last month, Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda's second in command, said in an online question-and-answer session that women could not join Al Qaeda. In response, a woman wrote on a password-protected radical Web site that "the answer that we heard was not what we had hoped," according to the SITE monitoring group, adding, "I swear to God I will never leave the path and will not give up this course." The changing role of women in the movement is particularly apparent in Western countries, where Muslim women have been educated to demand their rights and Muslim men are more accustomed to treating them as equals. El Aroud reflects that trend. "Normally in Islam the men are stronger than the women, but I prove that it is important to fear God –– and no one else," she said. "It is important that I am a woman. There are men who don't want to speak out because they are afraid of getting into trouble. Even when I get into trouble, I speak out." After all, she said, she knows the rules. "I write in a legal way," she said. "I know what I'm doing. I'm Belgian. I know the system." That system has often been lenient for her. She was detained last December with 13 others in a suspected plot to free a convicted terrorist from prison and to mount an attack in Brussels. But Belgian law required that they be released within 24 hours because no charges were brought and searches failed to turn up weapons, explosives or incriminating documents. Now, even as El Aroud remains under constant surveillance, she is back home rallying militants on her Web site –– and collecting more than $1,100 a month in government unemployment benefits. "Her jihad is not to lead an operation but to inspire other people to wage jihad," said Glenn Audenaert, the director of Belgium's federal police force. "She enjoys the protection that Belgium offers. At the same time, she is a potential threat." Born in Morocco, raised from a young age in Belgium, El Aroud did not seem destined for the jihad. Growing up, she rebelled against her Muslim upbringing, she wrote in a memoir. Her first marriage, at 18, was unhappy and brief; she later bore a daughter out of wedlock. She was unable to read Arabic, but her discovery of the Koran in French led her to embrace a strict version of Islam and eventually to marry Abdessatar Dahmane, a Tunisian loyal to Osama bin Laden. Eager to be a battlefield warrior, she hoped to fight alongside her husband in Chechnya. But the Chechens "wanted experienced men, super-well trained," she said. "They wanted women even less." In 2001, she followed her husband to Afghanistan. As he trained at a Qaeda camp, she was installed in a camp for foreign women in Jalalabad. For her, the Taliban were a model Islamic government; reports of their mistreatment of women were untrue. "Women didn't have problems under the Taliban," she insisted. "They had security." Her only rebellion was against the burka, the restrictive garment the Taliban forced on women, which she called "a plastic bag." As a foreigner, she was allowed to wear a long black veil instead. After her husband's mission, El Aroud was briefly detained by Massoud's followers. Frightened, she was put in contact with the Belgian authorities, who arranged for her safe passage home. "We got her out and thought she'd cooperate with us," said one senior Belgian intelligence official. "We were deceived." Judge Jean-Louis Bruguière, who was France's senior counterterrorism magistrate at the time, said he interviewed El Aroud because investigators suspected that she had shipped electronic equipment to her husband that was used in the killing. "She is very radical, very sly and very dangerous," he said. El Aroud was tried with 22 others in Belgium for complicity in the Massoud murder. A grieving widow in a black veil, she persuaded the court that she had been doing humanitarian work and knew nothing of her husband's plans. She was acquitted for lack of evidence. Her husband's death, though, propelled her into a new life. "The widow of a martyr is very important for Muslims," she said. She used her enhanced status to meet her new "brothers and sisters" on the Web. One of them was Moez Garsalloui, a Tunisian several years her junior who had political refugee status in Switzerland. They married and moved to a small Swiss village. There, they ran several pro-Qaeda Web sites and Internet forums that were monitored by Swiss authorities as part of the country's first Internet-related criminal case. After the police raided their home and arrested them at dawn in April 2005, El Aroud described extensively what she called their abuse. "See what this country that calls us neutral made us suffer," she wrote, claiming that the Swiss police beat and blindfolded her husband and manhandled her while she was sleeping unveiled. Convicted last June of promoting violence and supporting a criminal organization, she received a six-month suspended sentence; Garsalloui, who was convicted of more serious charges, was released after 23 days. Despite El Aroud's prominence, it is once again her husband whom authorities view as a bigger threat. They suspect he was recruiting for the feared Christmastime attacks last December and that he has connections to terror groups operating in the tribal areas of Pakistan. The authorities say that they lost track of him after he was released from jail last year in Switzerland. "He is on a trip," El Aroud says cryptically when asked about her husband's whereabouts. "On a trip." Meanwhile, her stature has risen with her claims of victimization by the Swiss. The Web site Voice of the Oppressed described her as "our female holy warrior of the 21st century." El Aroud's latest tangle with the law hints at a deeper involvement of women in terror activities. When she was detained last December in the suspected plot to free Nizar Trabelsi, a convicted terrorist and a one-time professional soccer player, El Aroud was one of three women taken in for questioning. Although the identities of those detained were not released, the Belgian authorities and others familiar with the case said that among those detained were Trabelsi's wife and Fatima Aberkan, a friend of El Aroud and a 47-year-old mother of seven. "Malika is a source of inspiration for women because she is telling women to stop sleeping and open their eyes," Aberkan said. El Aroud operates from her three-room apartment above a clothing shop in a working-class Brussels neighborhood where she spends her time communicating with supporters on her main forum, Minbar-SOS. Although she insists she is not breaking the law, she knows the police are watching. And if the authorities find way to put her in prison, she said: "That would be great. They would make me a living martyr." After all, she said, she knows the rules. "I write in a legal way," she said. "I know what I'm doing. I'm Belgian. I know the system." That system has often been lenient for her. She was detained last December with 13 others in a suspected plot to free a convicted terrorist from prison and to mount an attack in Brussels. But Belgian law required that they be released within 24 hours because no charges were brought and searches failed to turn up weapons, explosives or incriminating documents. Now, even as El Aroud remains under constant surveillance, she is back home rallying militants on her Web site –– and collecting more than $1,100 a month in government unemployment benefits. "Her jihad is not to lead an operation but to inspire other people to wage jihad," said Glenn Audenaert, the director of Belgium's federal police force. "She enjoys the protection that Belgium offers. At the same time, she is a potential threat." Born in Morocco, raised from a young age in Belgium, El Aroud did not seem destined for the jihad. Growing up, she rebelled against her Muslim upbringing, she wrote in a memoir. Her first marriage, at 18, was unhappy and brief; she later bore a daughter out of wedlock. She was unable to read Arabic, but her discovery of the Koran in French led her to embrace a strict version of Islam and eventually to marry Abdessatar Dahmane, a Tunisian loyal to Osama bin Laden. Eager to be a battlefield warrior, she hoped to fight alongside her husband in Chechnya. But the Chechens "wanted experienced men, super-well trained," she said. "They wanted women even less." In 2001, she followed her husband to Afghanistan. As he trained at a Qaeda camp, she was installed in a camp for foreign women in Jalalabad. For her, the Taliban were a model Islamic government; reports of their mistreatment of women were untrue. "Women didn't have problems under the Taliban," she insisted. "They had security." Her only rebellion was against the burka, the restrictive garment the Taliban forced on women, which she called "a plastic bag." As a foreigner, she was allowed to wear a long black veil instead. After her husband's mission, El Aroud was briefly detained by Massoud's followers. Frightened, she was put in contact with the Belgian authorities, who arranged for her safe passage home. "We got her out and thought she'd cooperate with us," said one senior Belgian intelligence official. "We were deceived." Judge Jean-Louis Bruguière, who was France's senior counterterrorism magistrate at the time, said he interviewed El Aroud because investigators suspected that she had shipped electronic equipment to her husband that was used in the killing. "She is very radical, very sly and very dangerous," he said. El Aroud was tried with 22 others in Belgium for complicity in the Massoud murder. A grieving widow in a black veil, she persuaded the court that she had been doing humanitarian work and knew nothing of her husband's plans. She was acquitted for lack of evidence. Her husband's death, though, propelled her into a new life. "The widow of a martyr is very important for Muslims," she said. She used her enhanced status to meet her new "brothers and sisters" on the Web. One of them was Moez Garsalloui, a Tunisian several years her junior who had political refugee status in Switzerland. They married and moved to a small Swiss village. There, they ran several pro-Qaeda Web sites and Internet forums that were monitored by Swiss authorities as part of the country's first Internet-related criminal case. After the police raided their home and arrested them at dawn in April 2005, El Aroud described extensively what she called their abuse. "See what this country that calls us neutral made us suffer," she wrote, claiming that the Swiss police beat and blindfolded her husband and manhandled her while she was sleeping unveiled. Convicted last June of promoting violence and supporting a criminal organization, she received a six-month suspended sentence; Garsalloui, who was convicted of more serious charges, was released after 23 days. Despite El Aroud's prominence, it is once again her husband whom authorities view as a bigger threat. They suspect he was recruiting for the feared Christmastime attacks last December and that he has connections to terror groups operating in the tribal areas of Pakistan. The authorities say that they lost track of him after he was released from jail last year in Switzerland. "He is on a trip," El Aroud says cryptically when asked about her husband's whereabouts. "On a trip." Meanwhile, her stature has risen with her claims of victimization by the Swiss. The Web site Voice of the Oppressed described her as "our female holy warrior of the 21st century." El Aroud's latest tangle with the law hints at a deeper involvement of women in terror activities. When she was detained last December in the suspected plot to free Nizar Trabelsi, a convicted terrorist and a one-time professional soccer player, El Aroud was one of three women taken in for questioning. Although the identities of those detained were not released, the Belgian authorities and others familiar with the case said that among those detained were Trabelsi's wife and Fatima Aberkan, a friend of El Aroud and a 47-year-old mother of seven. "Malika is a source of inspiration for women because she is telling women to stop sleeping and open their eyes," Aberkan said. El Aroud operates from her three-room apartment above a clothing shop in a working-class Brussels neighborhood where she spends her time communicating with supporters on her main forum, Minbar-SOS. Although she insists she is not breaking the law, she knows the police
are watching. And if the authorities find way to put her in prison,
she said: "That would be great. They would make me a living martyr."
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
IT'S ONLY A FEW BAD 'UNS .....THAT'S WHAT THEY KEEP TELLING US
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 31, 2008. |
|
This comes from the Faith Freedom website
|
|
Those that follow the worldwide problem of Islam, continually
hear the popular "it's only a few" excuse by the Islamic apologists.
Well, I beg to differ. Lets finally put that excuse to rest.
If it were only a "few", then how can these FACTS be explained?
TURKEY: Landslide win for Islamic party in Turkey
ANKARA, Turkey –– A party with deep Islamic roots has won a landslide victory in Turkey's elections –– a win that would allow it to rule without a coalition and amend the constitution if it receives enough seats in parliament.
Since they have taken control they are slowly moving Turkey away from being a secular nation.
Turkey's parliament has approved a constitutional amendment that would ease the ban on women wearing Islamic headscarves in universities. The ban has been strictly enforced on campus since 1997 when the staunchly secularist military ousted a government seen as too Islamist.
Most recently they are getting stricter and stricter. Just like the rest of the Islamic world.
TURKEY: Law Banning Alcohol, Cigarettes Comes Into Effect
(ANSAmed) –– ANKARA, MAY 13 –– A new law to overhaul tobacco and alcoholic beverages usage drew fierce criticism from sector representatives, and is seen as another negative factor in Islamist-rooted AKP's record of conservative arrangements. Law No. 5752, which will take effect tomorrow, bans the sale of alcoholic beverages and cigarettes "by breaking its packaging or dividing them." Sector representatives say if implemented, it would mean that the sale of alcoholic beverages by the glass at establishments like restaurants and bars would not be allowed.
PALESTINE: Hamas wins Palestinian election
This morning, Hamas leaders announced that they had an "outright majority" in the 132-seat Palestinian Legislative Council. "Hamas has won more than 70 seats in Gaza and the West Bank, which gives it more than 50 percent of the vote," said Ismail Haniyeh, a leader of Hamas.
EGYPT: Islamic Terrorist Group Muslim Brotherhood Increases it's Seats in Parliament Five Fold
Egypt is supposed to be our Allie, who we actually give $3 billion a year to.
By Michael Slackman
CAIRO, Nov. 27 –– The Muslim Brotherhood may be banned, but it has demonstrated in the latest parliamentary elections that it is by far the strongest Egyptian opposition group, trouncing the secular political opposition and weakening the governing party's power monopoly.
Results made public today by the government showed the Brotherhood winning 29 more seats in Saturday's runoff in the second round of parliamentary voting. The group won 47 seats in the first round this month, meaning that with just one more round of elections to go, the Brotherhood already has 76 seats –– more than five times its total in the departing Parliament. Because of the group's outlaw status, its candidates run as independents.
Lebanon: Islamic Terrorist Group Hezbollah Gains Seats in Lebanese Government
After the 2005 elections, Hezbollah won fourteen seats in the 128-member Lebanese Parliament. In addition, Hezbollah has two ministers in the government, and a third is endorsed by the group.
Hezbollah did not disarm when it entered Lebanese politics, and experts say the group's new political involvement is not an indication that the group is becoming more moderate.
The facts show us that we are talking about MILLIONS of
Muslims who support Islamic terrorists and are voting them into their
governments. Not just a handful or a few as Islamic apologists try to
portray. Let's not kid ourselves, the Islamic world is getting
stricter and stricter and they are not our Ally. Feel free to use
this article in your debates. (Please include my link).
Islamic apologists and excuse makers: Do you care to explain? I will be waiting....
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
LOOKING OVER SHARON'S WALL
Posted by Emanuel A. Shulman, May 31, 2008. |
|
In January 2004 I wrote the following, entitled: "Looking Over Sharon' wall". It was intended as a forecast of things to come. I have always believed that, if you are willing to predict future events, stick your neck out and put it in print. You are then either proven right or wrong in public. Please read the following and determine how close I was in 2004 –– now looking back from 2008. |
|
Few of Israel's planners, including Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Shimon Peres (perpetual loser) former Justice Minister Yossi Beilin (voted out of his own Party), America's President George W. Bush, etc. have contemplated the full long-term impact of another Arab Palestinian State on the 'other side of Sharon's security wall'. Allow me to suggest a few things that are likely to happen (not necessarily in order of their happening): 1. Each of the nations who have Arab Palestinians on their territory and have refused them citizenship will eject their 'Palestinians' toward the new Arab State of Palestine. Those nations include Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Libya –– not inclusive of those Arab Palestinians living now in Europe, America and elsewhere. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia already ejected 700,000 Arab/Muslim Palestinians into Jordan after the PLO betrayed their brethren in Kuwait during 1990. 2. The estimated number of Arab/Muslim Palestinians to be ejected from their current residences in Arab and non-Arab countries ranges from 3 to 5 million –– depending upon whose figures you believe. (Note! The neo-State of Palestine would be overcrowded if only 500,000 were allowed to enter.) 3. It would be highly probably that most new Arab/Muslim Palestinians migrating into this volatile area of the Middle East would be located in tents or shack slums, pressed up close to the Jewish State of Israel against Sharon's Security Wall. There they will need water, sewage, food, employment which the U.N. and E.U. will demand that Israel provide. Piling up against the Security Wall will provide a Gaza-like condition which will have intended political and practical consequences not yet understood by Sharon and his cronies. There they will squat in misery and squalor as they have in refugee camps now going on 50 years. They will howl and scream, not against Yassir Arafat (or whomever takes his place) but against the Israelis who will not allow them past the Security Wall to join their Israeli-Arab brethren. That's what they'll say, appealing to the World to pressure Israel into opening the gates. 4. The virtual "Palestine" CITY OF THE WALL will grow to a typical festering refugee camp of squalor, filth and disease. As in other refugee camps, It will be an incubator for discontented youth who will join other Terrorists who will freely operate close to Sharon's Security Wall/Border. As in Gaza, the Terrorists of many nations will become operating gangs, recruiting new members, manufacturing missiles, mortars, rockets, explosive devices –– with no Israeli troops to interfere or disturb their planning. The removal of Jewish residents and Israeli troops will allow Terrorists to form well-organized and efficient armies of conquest through Terror. 5. Local Arab/Muslim Palestinians manufacturing weapons will now be free to produce mortars, Kassem Rockets, 'et al' but, once it's no longer necessary to use the Egyptian tunnels in Rafah to smuggle in weapons, then larger weapons can be trucked, shipped or flown in. That means that larger missile launchers and artillery can be imported into the Terrorist Center of the World –– much the same as the 10,000 missile launchers set up by Hezb'Allah in the area of Lebanon after the IDF retreated when ordered by then Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Launching mortars, missiles over the Wall into the densely populated near-by Israeli cities will be too easy. Any documents promising peace and de-militarization to Israel which are drafted by the Europeans, the Arabist State Department, the non-Jewish Leftist Jews mandating a "Weapons-Free Zone" will, as always, be unenforceable –– if not comical. 6. WMD, Weapons of Mass Destruction. Since the territory abandoned by Sharon will now be free of Israelis patrols or the IDF's snap raids, the Arab Palestinians can import WMD –– including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical). Hezb'Allah, Al Qaeda, PFLP, PLO, Tanzim, Al Aksa Brigades, Hamas, 'et al' will have no problem in acquiring NBC –– WMD (Weapons of Mass Death) from Iran and Syria which would easily pass into Arab Palestinian hands –– and may already have. Israeli intelligence definitely knows that of the 10,000 missiles on the Lebanese border in the zone abandoned by Barak, a substantial number have chemical warheads. 7. It is highly probable that the U.N. and the E.U. will be invited by the Palestinian Authority into the new territory to interfere with any reprisal raids against Terrorists by Israel. Hot pursuit of Terrorists, targeting Terrorist leaders, destroying weapons' depots will be difficult, if not impossible IF the U.N./E.U. troops are interspersed among the 'supposedly' civilian population. That could get worse if American troops are added to the so-called "Peace-Keeping Forces" planned by E.U. through NATO. Be assured that none of these troops would act as Americans are presently doing in Iraq or as Israelis have done to intercept and thwart Terrorist plans. Recall that U.N. troops stationed in Lebanon to stop Terrorists from attacking Israel became a porous line, often assisting Terrorists up and back after their violent missions. 8. I would imagine that Sharon will provoke a civil war when he tries to remove what some of the Media and world governments pejoratively called "settlements" but are really Jewish communities –– villages, towns and cities. It has long been the plan of the Arabist State Department, in collaboration with the Labor Left of Israel and now even Arik Sharon, to turn over to incoming Arab Palestinians all the farms, homes, factories, wineries, water, sewage systems and electrical grids all built by the Jews. This will be claimed compensation for the 400,000 Arabs who fled at the behest of the seven Arab armies so they could sweep the Jews from the land into the sea without being impeded by Arab villagers jamming the roads. (As an aside, there is to be no compensation to the some 850,000 Jews who were ejected from the Arab countries where they had lived for centuries, nor will they be recompensed for the properties they were forced to abandoned after the seven Arab countries ignominiously lost the first war of 1948.) 9. Israel (under Sharon) will have also given up the water aquifers under the Judean and Samarian hills that provides Israel with 33% of her fresh water resources. Given the Arab custom of not treating their sewage and allowing it to run down, raw, into the valleys and from there down into the aquifers so that water flowing from it will be heavily polluted. The aquifer will be contaminated and any water coming from there would have to be heavily chlorinated and even boiled in order to drink safely. This situation is already occurring in those areas given over to the Arab Palestinian Authority now under Yassir Arafat's control under the Oslo Accords. Imagine the ground and air pollution when 3 or more million Arabs are packed up against Sharon's Security Wall/Border. Note! The aquifer in Gaza under the control of the PA is now drained so low from excessive pumping that it has been infiltrated with salt sea water. The Arabs call it their "salt tea". Having over-pumped their wells after Israel's Water Authority turned over water control to the P.A., the Arabs then demanded to be connected to Israel's main water carrier. 10. Sharon will have given up the Jordan Valley which was always considered a natural barrier to invasion from Jordan by Arab armies and a natural tank trap. This was confirmed on 6/29/67 by a once secret advisory by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff study of what Israel must keep in order for America NOT to have to rescue her from an attack by any coalition of Arab Armies. Sharon will also be forced to give up their water rights to the Jordan River. Sharon will have given up the natural barrier of the Judean and Samarian Hills with their steep incline along with their high positions for artillery and the narrow roads that enemy armies would have to navigate to get to the heart of the Jewish country and Jerusalem. 11. Sadly Sharon, along with willing Leftist Jews, seems determined to divide Jerusalem and quit claim on Jewish Rights to the Holy Temple Mount. According to maps and plans developed long ago by Yassir Arafat, Jews, will be allowed to approach the Western Wall –– only –– with the permission from the Arab Muslim Waqf. The Waqf are the Muslim trustees to whom Moshe Dayan (a non-Jewish Jew) gifted the Holy Temple Mount of King Solomon after Israel liberated the eastern half of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Days War. Like most Leftists he didn't want observant Jews to have a focal point for their rightful historical and religious claims on Jerusalem. The Left started the Oslo process then, although the real planning and conspiracy by Peres, Beilin and Rabin to evict all Jews from the territories began in earnest in the early 1980s. In effect, under the Sharon/Bush planning, the Eternal Jewish Capital City of Jerusalem will return to the same division when Jordan illegally occupied it for 19 years. King Hussein destroyed 58 Jewish synagogues, drove out the Jewish residents, and turned the ancient Jewish graveyard on the Mt. Of Olives into truck routes with its headstones used as urinal splash plates for Jordanian soldiers. Yes, indeed, Arik, you will surely leave a legacy that no one will forget. Having free unimpeded access to Sharon's Wall on their side, there will be little problem for the Arabs to dig down 20 or 30 meters (approximately 60 to 90 feet) as they have done successfully in the tunnels from Egypt to go under the Security Wall into Israel's heartland. They can dig –– not dozens but hundreds of such tunnels which could only be filled on the Israeli side if and when found. I would imagine that Terrorist operations would ramp up far more viciously than we have seen even in these past 3 years. In addition, they will have assistance from Arab Muslim Palestinians living inside of Israel as citizens (with full civil rights). Once Sharon has shown the yellow feather of fear and retreat as did Ehud Barak, Israeli Arab citizens will quickly cross over to assist what they consider the likely winner, namely Arafat or his replacement. Think of Judea and Samaria in terms of a replica of Arafat's mini Terrorist state which he created inside Lebanon. No law except Terror, a free retreat for every Muslim Terrorist to ply his wicked trade –– something like the Muslim Jihadists pouring into Iraq through Syria from Egypt, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Chechnya, Yemen, Algeria and even non-Muslim Arabs from France and England. They only will stay long enough to beat or kill enough Americans –– if they can and many will move into the new Arab State of Palestine. But, Arafat's new State will be a permanent base of Terror operations against Israel, the Arab nations such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and then, globally, to America and Europe. It will be a more than a safe haven for Terrorists –– it will be their new Terror Mecca created by Sharon and Bush. Should Israel now feel that she needs to engage in hot pursuit of Terrorists or to try to take out missile launchers, be assured the U.N. would vote sanctions as would the E.U. who has been pouring money into Arafat's pockets and the P.A. –– most of it embezzled. As one looks over Sharon's Wall to a land once brought back to civilization by the Jews, your will soon see a backward conglomeration of a compressed howling mob of Arab Muslim Palestinians made into useful refugees by Arafat or his replacement. It will be one gigantic pest house of disease and sewage running down the middle of the street with hostile Terrorists always pushing, bombing, sniping, suicide bombing and pressing against or under Sharon's Wall. They will always be in contact with the Arabs living in the heart of Israel, breeding in extraordinary numbers and subsidized by Arab nations for birthing new Arab Muslim Palestinians –– much as they were paid by Iran, Syria, Saddam and Saudi Arabia to martyr themselves while killing Jews. The end will be intended to be the same either way –– that is, kill Jews with bombs or with babies who are later taught –– from the age of 3 and up –– to hate the Jews, kill them when able and advancing toward being a 'Shaheed' (martyr for Islam). Look over your War Wall, Arik, and see what you have done. You once had forward vision when you were a General and you were one of the truest and best warriors for the Jewish State of Israel. Now you are old, and as happens to old men, you dream of the past when you could think ahead and plan well. Now, you will try to evacuate Jews and give their life's dreams to the millions of incoming Arabs who will be packed tightly against your Wall. So, now your legacy is to squeeze Israel behind a Walled Ghetto, 9 miles wide from the sea to its very center. As the millions of Arab Muslim Palestinians are packed into the impossibly small area of Arafat's State, they will begin to do what the Arabs promised in 1947, namely, to push the Jews into the sea. This will be your legacy Arik Sharon IF you continue to assist the creation of another Arab State of Palestine. You will join Haman, Herod or Hitler in the eyes of the Jewish people. Be assured you will have a place in history as a betrayer of the Jewish people and hated for eternity. 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 |
|
YOU CAN'T APPEASE EVERYBODY
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 31, 2008. |
|
This is by Ann Coulter. Visit her website at www.anncoulter.com |
|
After decades of comparing Nixon to Hitler, Reagan to Hitler and Bush to Hitler, liberals have finally decided it is wrong to make comparisons to Hitler. But the only leader to whom they have applied their newfound rule of thumb is: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. While Ahmadinejad has not done anything as starkly evil as cut the capital gains tax, he does deny the Holocaust, call for the destruction of Israel, deny the existence of gays in Iran and refuses to abandon his nuclear program despite protests from the United Nations. That's the only world leader we're not allowed to compare to Hitler. President Bush's speech at the Knesset two weeks ago was somewhat more nuanced than liberals' Hitler arguments. He did not simply jump up and down chanting: "Ahmadinejad is Hitler!" Instead, Bush condemned a policy of appeasement toward madmen, citing Neville Chamberlain's ill-fated talks with Adolf Hitler. Suspiciously, Bush's speech was interpreted as a direct hit on B. Hussein Obama's foreign policy –– and that's according to Obama's supporters. So to defend Obama, who –– according to his supporters –– favors appeasing madmen, liberals expanded the rule against ad Hitlerum arguments to cover any mention of the events leading to World War II. A ban on "You're like Hitler" arguments has become liberals' latest excuse to ignore history. Unless, of course, it is liberals using historical examples to support Obama's admitted policy of appeasing dangerous lunatics. It's a strange one-sided argument when they can cite Nixon going to China and Reagan meeting with Gorbachev, but we can't cite Chamberlain meeting with Hitler. There are reasons to meet with a tyrant, but none apply to Ahmadinejad. We're not looking for an imperfect ally against some other dictatorship, as Nixon was with China. And we aren't in a Mexican stand-off with a nuclear power, as Reagan was with the USSR. At least not yet. Mutually Assured Destruction was bad enough with the Evil Empire, but something you definitely want to avoid with lunatics who are willing to commit suicide in order to destroy the enemies of Islam. As with the H-word, our sole objective with Ahmadinejad is to prevent him from becoming a military power. What possible reason is there to meet with Ahmadinejad? To win a $20 bar bet as to whether or not the man actually owns a necktie? We know his position and he knows ours. He wants nuclear arms, American troops out of the Middle East and the destruction of Israel. We don't want that. (This is assuming Mike Gravel doesn't pull off a major upset this November.) We don't need him as an ally against some other more dangerous dictator because ... well, there aren't any. Does Obama imagine he will make demands of Ahmadinejad? Using what stick as leverage, pray tell? A U.S. boycott of the next Holocaust-denial conference in Tehran? The U.N. has already demanded that Iran give up its nuclear program. Ahmadinejad has ignored the U.N. and that's the end of it. We always have the ability to "talk" to Ahmadinejad if we have something to say. Bush has a telephone. If Iranian crop dusters were headed toward one of our nuclear power plants, I am quite certain that Bush would be able to reach Ahmadinejad to tell him that Iran will be flattened unless the planes retreat. If his cell phone died, Bush could just post a quick warning on the Huffington Post. Liberals view talk as an end in itself. They never think through how these talks will proceed, which is why Chamberlain ended up giving away Czechoslovakia. He didn't leave for Munich planning to do that. It is simply the inevitable result of talking with madmen without a clear and obtainable goal. Without a stick, there's only a carrot. The only explanation for liberals' hysterical zealotry in favor of Obama's proposed open-ended talks with Ahmadinejad is that they seriously imagine crazy foreign dictators will be as charmed by Obama as cable TV hosts whose legs tingle when they listen to Obama (a condition that used to be known as "sciatica"). Because, really, who better to face down a Holocaust denier with a messianic complex than the guy who is afraid of a debate moderated by Brit Hume? There is no possible result of such a meeting apart from appeasement and humiliation of the U.S. If we are prepared to talk, then we're looking for a deal. What kind of deal do you make with a madman until he is ready to surrender? Will President Obama listen respectfully as Ahmadinejad says he plans to build nuclear weapons? Will he say he'll get back to Ahmadinejad on removing all U.S. troops from the region? Will he nod his head as Ahmadinejad demands the removal of the Jewish population from the Middle East? Obama says he's prepared to have an open-ended chat with Ahmadinejad, so I guess everything is on the table. Perhaps in the spirit of compromise, Obama could agree to let Iran push only half of Israel into the sea. That would certainly constitute "change"! Obama could give one of those upbeat speeches of his, saying: As a result of my recent talks with President Ahmadinejad, some see the state of Israel as being half empty. I prefer to see it as half full. And then Obama can return and tell Americans he could no more repudiate Ahmadinejad than he could repudiate his own white grandmother. It will make Chris Matthews' leg tingle. There is a third reason to talk to dictators, in addition to seeking an ally or as part of a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction. Gen. Douglas C. MacArthur talked with Japanese imperial forces on Sept. 2, 1945. There was a long ceremony aboard the USS Missouri with full press coverage and a lot of talk. It was a regular international confab! It also took place after we had dropped two nukes on Japan and MacArthur was officially accepting Japan's surrender. If Obama plans to drop nukes on Ahmadinejad prior to their little chat-fest, I'm all for it. But I don't think that's what liberals have in mind. Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
ISRAEL'S WATER PROBLEMS –– 2008
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 30, 2008. |
|
Binyamin Ben Eliezer, a not terribly bright politician, has offered various solutions for what is likely to be a water crisis for all of Israel –– for a long time to come. Ben Eliezer wants to build more water desalination plants, apparently to offset his Party's famous plans to abandon the Golan Heights which is one of Israel's principal water sources. But, Eliezer may not have taken into account the raw sewage sabotage that the Palestinians are implementing by letting untreated sewage run into the sea from Gaza. The prevailing currents push the sewage North, contaminating Israel's coastal areas where more than 70% of Israel's population and Israel's main industrial base in centered. Once the contamination levels of human feces and chemicals reach a certain level of density (PPM = Parts Per Million), any desalination plant will be closed down. Their filter membranes would clog and the disease-laden water would simply flow through. One doesn't expect Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert or his Leftist Party Coalition (Kadima, Labor and Meretz) to do anything to stop the sewage flow. Then there is the matter of gifting Jordan with the Millions of Cubic Meters of water as Israel's singularly most famous gesture of good will. Israeli leadership is full of such "gestures" –– among other foul-smelling substances. Israel's so-called "Leadership" is gesturing away the Jewish nation into a permanent, ever worsening state of drought. Have you ever spoken to Israel's so-called "Leadership"? Outside of dirty politics, where they are superb, in practical things they are dumb as a stump. Water futures? "not to worry". Pollution? "not to worry". Terrorist growth? "not to worry". Loss of the water protected from Israel's Golan Heights? –– "not to worry". Loss of the aquifers under the Israeli mountains of Judea and Samaria? –– "not to worry". Sewage contamination? –– "not to worry". Why worry when the Members of the Knesset have plenty of food and filtered water in the Knesset dining room? Reality simply doesn't enter those rooms the lazy, craven Leftist Knesset Members think are hallowed. As for Prime Ministers, the words "dumb" or "stupid" doesn't even approach describing their incompetence and corrupt nature. The most recent Prime Ministers are killing the country and, after they have succeeded in despoiling the nation, they will try to escape and live on the loot they scavenged from the Peoples' Treasury. First: Cut off water and fuel supplies to Gaza until they build sewage treatment plants sufficiently large enough to treat sewage to the highest level technology allows. Get rid of incompetent leaders and make them take educational tests to determine if they are fit to hold any post in government (like the psychometric tests Israeli students must take to attend university). Start building more desalination plants –– which should have started 20 years ago. Cut the water being delivered free to Jordan. Dig a channel from the Haifa area down to the Jordan Valley. This channel is to parallel the Jordan River and NOT mix salt water with fresh water. (Note! I offered such a water plan to Israel more than 25 years ago –– which contemplated hydroelectric power, desalination plants, modification of the moisture content in the Jordan Valley for improved crops' production and sea water lakes for recreation and fishing. But, there were people then in power –– like Ben Eliezer, who simply had zero vision and an inability to process information. As they say, those chickens have come home to roost. Drought is endemic in the Middle East. Biblical records speak of 7 year droughts –– as in Egypt –– but, in fact, droughts of 50 to 100 years have been recorded in core borings of land. However, when you are a politician and reasonably stupid, you talk about solutions (to raise your public image) but do nothing to implement them or something too little to be effective. Experts in hydrology, water conservation and recycling of waste water have been alerting successive governments about serious water shortages, pollution and contamination for years but they have been ignored. How can you expect politicians who have never worked a day in their lives (other than to hustle the Peoples' money into their own pockets) be expected to deal with down-to-earth critical issues like water, national security, resettling 10,000 Jewish men, women and children they uprooted, etc. when they could not even run a small vegetable stand in Machane Yehuda (the local outdoor market)? This is not a trivial matter, given that droughts can last 50 or more years across the Africa/Asian Middle East, much of which is in an advanced stage of desertification. This is before the forecast effects of climate change due to measurable global warming. Martin Sherman, for example, has written in great detail about Israel's water shortages [see here. ] for years –– to no avail. Israel desperately needs a highly intelligent government of problem solvers. She cannot survive on government planning shown to be dedicated to graft, corruption by crooks whose first morning thought is how to stay in power and fill their own pockets. Appropo –– the international space station's single toilet has malfunctioned and the U.S. will now pay Russia $30 million dollars to send up a space craft with a new Russian toilet. Can you imagine what will happen in Israel when, because of a water shortage, your household will be allowed to flush only once a day (or once a week)? Those are simple practical matters which inept government like the current one run by the Kadima/Labor Parties cannot grasp or deal with. ### Following is a deeper analysis from a paper I published in 1992:
Israel has been given a brief reprieve from a critical water shortage. The unlikely once in a century snow and rain cannot be depended upon in future winters. Let us suggest that this one year be used as breathing space to develop alternate water sources on an emergency basis. There are a few available sources that can be developed. For example: While waiting to build the necessary but very expensive salt water desalination plants, let us capture more of the run-off that flows into the Mediterranean and is lost. More valleys can be dammed up in lakes and their bottoms sealed to stem seepage and catch surface runoff. There is another perhaps greater run-off of lost fresh water. Irreplacable aquifers deep under the earth's surface also stretch out under the Mediterranean. Some aquifers are close to the sea floor surface near the point where the continental land mass meets the sea. Although much of the flow continues to remain trapped in the rock formations beneath the sea basin, a great deal escapes into the salt water of the Mediterranean. Those off-shore fresh water springs can be drilled, capped and piped. We will only be taking the fresh water which has already escaped the aquifers directly under the land mass of Israel. As many know, we have been depleting those land-based aquifers by excessive pumping. This creates negative pressure, allowing salt water to invade the aquifer, making the aquifer itself and the wells it feeds unusable and often unrecoverable. Taking fresh water from off-shore points will increase available supplies and allow us to possibly decrease our on-shore pumpage. Locating fresh water undersea springs is no problem for the senisitive instruments of today which can distinguish levels of comparitive salinity. Where the fresh water does not come to the surface of the sea floor, we can drill, again using techniques developed for drilling shallow oil wells. There are other methods: The plan suggested by Laudermilk, the founder of Israel's present water system, suggested a pipe from the Haifa area to carry Mediterranean Sea water through the Jezreel Valley directly into the Jordan River and on to the Dead Sea. (No doubt, he intended to separate sea water from fresh water.) Topographic maps show a drop between the Mediterranean in the Haifa area and the Dead Sea. There is a slight earth bridge of several meters which can be easily breached. I believe that a diversion of Meditteranean water with its relatively low salt content can be extremely beneficial in a new water system. It would entail building a concrete tunnel through the Jezreel valley between the sea and the Jordan valley. The salt water would be contained except where it was diverted for special uses. The following outlines the general plan. It is intended to provoke the scientific reader into adding his own components, both technical and conceptual. 1. The basic inlet would extend into the sea sufficently far to ensure an uncomtaminated supply of sea water. ### Regarding the current water crisis, I reprint another article I
published in December 1998,
ISRAEL'S LOOMING WATER CRISIS By Emanuel A. Winston –– December 1998 Be prepared for the Israel government and American Administration to throw a smoke screen over Israel's soon-to-be-lost water. As part of the Wye "River" fiasco, Israel's leaders have finalized her commitment to give away her irreplaceable underground rivers. Arik Sharon, now Foreign Minister, will soon be visiting Washington, there to discuss, among other things, some of the bribes Israel is to receive for caving in on the Wye Agreement. One of those bribes is to be the construction of a desalination plant, presumably to relieve Israel's coming water shortage. This shortfall will become acute as she transfers control of the aquifers under the Judean/Samarian hills –– representing approximately 30% of Israel's fresh water resource. Since ONE desalination plant cannot possibly produce even a fraction of the lost water, it can now only serve as a political curtain to hide the consummate stupidity of Israel's three successive Governments, namely: Labor/Meretz under Rabin and secondly Peres and now Likud under Netanyahu. I mention these names so the readers may forever mark those responsible for the drying up of Israel. So, what is wrong with turning sea water into drinking water? Absolutely nothing, IF like Saudi Arabia, you have unlimited billions of dollars to build the "many" plants needed and free fuel to power the high energy needs of such plants. Even California couldn't do it with money and fuel from their own pumped oil. Saudi Arabia had the money and the excess natural gas to literally burn from its vast oil deposits but Israel is not blessed with such reserves. So, what's the problem? A really big plant can range in cost from $3-5 Billion dollars and that's only to build. Then it needs a huge amount of electrical power. In Israel's case, that would likely require either a vast expansion of present power plants –– more coal and/or nuclear –– or construction of new electrical plants. Here one has the problem of additional Billions in cost to construct, the continuous maintenance costs to produce the power, the polluting fuel (coal or nuclear) and finally the cost per cubic meter of water which will be so high that it will require government subsidies which then comes back in increased taxes. So, whether it's paid with the water bill or paid from other tax revenues...the people still pay the enormous increase. And that, dear readers, does not solve the problem of losing 30% of Israel's water. I have the feeling that one could line the shores of the Mediterranean with such plants in order to make up the shortfall of 30%. But, that's not all. Presently, our erstwhile leaders are under pressure from our good friends Madame Albright in cahoots with the EU to give up the Golan Heights to Syria. So, what's wrong that? Besides having primitive leaders in Syria who are armed to the teeth with chemical weapons and the missiles to deliver them, we again have the problem of water. Israel water resources from the Golan represents 40% of its total water supply. If you couple the 30% being given to Arafat with the 40% to be given to Syria that makes a nice round figure of 70%. But wait...Israeli or American politicians can be expected to jump in to tell you that they will arrange an agreement where, at a fixed price, the Palestinians will sell Israel this water with various guarantees. Certainly our erstwhile Jewish leaders will jump at the chance of accepting more guarantees because Oslo I and II, Hebron and Wye worked out so well. Today, with the water from the Judean/Samarian aquifers and the waters from the Golan and a rapidly diminishing central aquifer Israel is pushing the envelope of its growing water needs. If Israel lost even 5% of current water resources, certain industries would be closed or rationed. If it went beyond that, civilian rationing would begin with a vengeance. Some may recall a brief drought several years back where the level of the Kinneret (Israel's northern reservoir) fell 5 meters. The government and the people were beginning to panic as the seculars began to urge to Rabbis to pray for rain. Well, finally the rains came and just in time. Mostly due to a volcanic eruption in the Philippines which spewed forth particulate matter in a plume which drifted over Israel causing a weather change resulting in what was called "Century Rains". However, just as an unexpected quirk of nature (HaShem) caused the rains, other such quirks caused drought. The African continent is undergoing such a drought and a process called desertification is ongoing and expanding rapidly. Israel is part of the African continent. Droughts of Biblical proportions lasting years are not unknown in this region of the world. Therefore, if one factors in drought; giving away of 70% of her water resources; increased population along with increased water consumption, the inadequate but costly desalination solution –– Israel would dry up to a small, burnt out cinder in the next decade. One can hardly wait for Bibi and Arik to drink a water toast with Clinton/Albright/Arafat and Assad over the new miracle of creating water where there is very little. And then there is the sewage. We are giving the Palestinians clean water and getting their sewage back, just as is presently happening in Gaza. They pour untreated sewage into the wadis and streams, polluting the shrinking water table. The Palestinians ruined the Gaza aquifer in 2 short years as they sunk 2000 wells. This over-pumping lowered the water table, allowing the sea water to seep in. In Gaza they now drink what they call "salt tea". The Gaza aquifer is unrecoverable. If Israel gives up control of the Judean/Samarian water resources (30%) and possible the 40% under the Golan Heights to Syria, the foreseeable over-pumping will lower the water-table of Israel's only remaining aquifer on the coast and the Mediterranean will invade the sweet water. Everything that Israel made bloom will wither and die –– along with the State of Israel herself.
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 |
|
TEXAS CHILDREN ROPED INTO ISLAMIC TRAINING
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 30, 2008. |
|
This was written by Bob Unruh and it appeared today in World Net Daily Bob Unruh is a news editor for www.WorldNetDaily.com. |
|
Class by CAIR teaches: 'There is one god, Allah' Public school students at Friendswood Junior High in the Houston area have been roped into Islamic training by representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations during class time, prompting religious leaders to protest over Principal Robin Lowe's actions. Pastor Dave Welch, spokesman for the Houston Area Pastor Council, confirmed the indoctrination had taken place and called it "unacceptable." "The failure of the principal of Friendswood Junior High to respect simple procedures requiring parental notification for such a potentially controversial subject, to not only approve but participate personally in a religious indoctrination session led by representatives of a group with well-known links to terrorist organizations and her cavalier response when confronted, raises serious questions about her fitness to serve in that role," the pastors' organization said. According to a parent, whose name was withheld, the children were given the Islamic indoctrination during time that was supposed to be used for a physical education class. "I am simply trying to get the word out to those whose kids may not have told them about an Islamic presentation that all kids were required to attend," wrote the parent, who was working to assemble protests to the school board. WND previously has reported how public school textbooks used across
the nation have begun promoting Islam, teaching
WND also has reported on several other schools that have taught Islam as a required subject. In the Texas case, a school e-mail to parents provided only a half-hearted acknowledgement that such mandatory religious indoctrination might not have been the best decision. "In hindsight, a note should have been sent home to parents indicating the purpose and content of the presentation in time for parents to contact me with questions or concerns or requests to exempt their child," the school note from Lowe said. "This will be our practice in the future, should we ever have another presentation of a similar nature." School officials also said the "Islamic Awareness" presentation was "to increase understanding of the Islamic culture in response to racially motivated comments that have been made to students on campus." The pastors said in a statement: "According to students who were forced to attend these sessions, these Islamic evangelists taught them: * Adam, Noah and Jesus are prophets The pastors noted that the principal's claim there were "comments" to students on campus was unverified. Nor does that excuse or justify "this infringement upon the religious beliefs of students and parents of the community nor the violation of school policy and possibly state and/or federal law," they said. "We do not believe that this unapproved action by Principal Robin Lowe represents the school district and certainly not the majority of students or parents in the Friendswood community. Our commitment is to support all appropriate administrative, legal and political remedies to assure that this will not happen again and these Islamic activist organizations are kept out of our schools," the pastors said. The parent reported the presentation was 30 to 40 minutes long and handled by two Muslim women from CAIR's Houston office. CAIR, as WND has reported, is spinoff of the defunct Islamic Association for Palestine, launched by Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook and former university professor Sami al-Arian, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to provide services to Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Among the convicted CAIR staffers are former communications specialist Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison on charges he trained in Virginia for holy war against the U.S. and sent several members to Pakistan to join a Kashmiri terrorist group with reported ties to al-Qaida; and Bassem Khafagi, who was arrested in January 2003 while serving as CAIR's director of community relations and convicted on fraud and terrorism charges in connection with a probe of the Islamic Assembly of North America, an organization suspected of aiding Saudi sheiks tied to Osama bin Laden. In October 2006, Ghassan Elashi, a member of the founding board of directors of the Texas branch of CAIR, was sentenced to nearly seven years in prison for financial ties to a high-ranking terrorist. The parent reported Lowe told students her sister, niece and nephew were Muslim. But the parent complained the Muslims "were given full attention of our kids, during academic school time, to present their religious beliefs. ... This was put right at the end of the school year ... which will most likely prevent a Christian response." There also was no parental notification, and students were required to attend. "The kids did not even know they were having an assembly or what topic it pertained to until they entered the gym," the parent wrote. "I send my kids to school for academics. ... I teach them religion at home." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
STOP DONATING TO UNIVERSITIES THAT TOLERATE ANTI-SEMITIC HATRED
Posted by Marni Soupcoff, May 30, 2008. |
|
This was written by Dave Gordon and appeared as a Full Comment in National Post http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/05/28/ dave-gordon-stop-donating-to-universities-that-tolerate-anti-semitic-hatred.aspx |
|
When York University's call centre phoned me last week to solicit a donation, I thought it was auspicious that it occurred the week of Israel's sixtieth birthday. I not only declined a donation to my alma mater, but made it known that I would not offer money to an institution that sits on its hands as hatred is proliferated and even funded in its halls. I hope to encourage others to remove their financial support from that and other institutions. Tens of millions of dollars from Jewish donors and alumni are given to schools like York, University of Toronto and Ryerson. These donors, as well as Jewish students currently attending these schools, should know that these institutions have become enablers to events like Israeli Apartheid Week, and initiatives like Ryerson's proposed academic boycott of Israel. University donations are directly, or indirectly, furthering the cause of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment on campus. That these Jewish philanthropists stay quiet is remarkably troubling: It's as if they tacitly approve of these campus events. Their silence, and their donations, must be brought into the open. One donor in particular gave $10-million to York this year, while also giving $5-million to United Jewish Appeal. They have sufficiently demonstrated their love for the Jewish people and Jewish causes, but it seems as though their priorities are lopsided, and they do not know, or care, on what their money is spent. Would it not be more prudent for advocates of Israel, truth and the Jewish people, to direct their donations to organizations whose mandates are to combat anti-Israel and anti-Semitic activity on campus? These groups are operating on a veritable shoestring, at a time when the community ought to rally behind them, the way that so many anti- Zionists and anti-Semites are organizing many rallies on campus. Ben Feferman of Hasbara –– a pro-Israel campus advocacy group –– calls these hate-filled incidents "crimes against students." In November, 2007, York University saw several hate-filled incidents. Hasbara Fellowships organized an informational table campaign about Noam Chomsky. The table was swarmed by anti-Israel students, shouting that "Hizbullah is not a terrorist organization. The real terrorists are Zionists and the Americans." A faculty member shouted "Gestapo!" at Jewish students. That same month the Campus Coalition of Zionists put on an Iran Awareness Campaign. Anti-Israel students mobbed the table. They then began ripping materials down, shouting and pushing students. These mini-riots were posted on YouTube. Itamar Marcus, who runs Palestinian Media Watch, came to speak at York. Anti-Israel students stormed the event and would not let him speak. In March and April of this year, also at York University, Jewish students were called "Zionists Pigs." Also heard was, "You Jews should go back to Germany, where you belong." Pennies were thrown from a second story balcony at Jewish students. At York there was a "Naqba Rally" celebrating the extremist Palestinian narrative of Israel's founding. When Natan Sharansky came to York, anti-Israel students told one Jewish student: "Get off our campus you genocidal racist" and "you are bringing a second holocaust upon yourself." Jewish activist groups need more funding to respond to these and other incitements. In a York University course, "Introduction to Critical Concepts: An Introduction to Politics," the textbook says, "Israel continues to use state terrorism in an attempt to subvert the Palestinians' quest for nationhood." This is a small sample of what happens regularly on just one campus. At a Carleton University rally, a Jewish student held up a photo of the terrorist who gunned down eight yeshiva students. Another student responded with this gem: "Good, he's a hero. That's eight less Zionists in this world." Many Jewish students feel intimidated on campus and are afraid to show outwardly that they are Jews. While universities get millions of dollars in donations from alumni, Betar –– another Israel advocacy group on campus –– is operating on modest community donations, without UJA funding. They are the ones in the trenches, counter-protesting, leafletting, educating students, and bringing in those speakers who have the courage to speak about the Jewish homeland in favorable terms in an unfavorable environment. Hasbara and Betar's mandates are simple: the combat of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism on campus with proactive programming. I call upon alumni to divest from any university whose administration says nothing about anti-Semitism on campus, and stop only giving money to large umbrella organizations that don't involve themselves directly in the battle. Instead, choose to help those organizations who have pledged to support students' Israel advocacy, and actually do so on a daily basis. I encourage big donors to meet with our Israel advocacy campus representatives, to hear the stories first hand. As for the call I received from York University –– I asked them to keep my number on file and continue to call whenever they have a funding drive. I'll be the one giving them an earful until things change for the better. Marni Soupcoff is a columnist and editorial board member at the National Post. She has a law degree from Stanford University. Contact her by email at msoupcoff@nationalpost.com |
|
WHY THE CHURCH SHOULD SUPPORT ISRAEL
Posted by Michael Evans, May 30, 2008. |
|
Many Christians ask me, "How do I know if my church is a Bible-believing church that doesn't teach replacement theology, progressive dispensationalism or supersessionism?" Ask yourself some questions: 1. Does my church pray for the Jewish people, the peace of Jerusalem, and Israel? If the answer to these questions is "No," then you may be a member of a church that refuses to believe the Bible, and rejects God's Eternal promises to the House of Israel. If your church seems powerless, and appears not to be blessed by God, perhaps this is the reason. Israel is a Miracle Nation because of its formation; and when we stand with Israel, we are standing with God's prophetic plan. We must be part of God's dream and His team and support Israel and the Jewish people. Their existence and the rebirth of Israel is a miracle. As Christians, we believe in miracles. The resurrection of our Lord was the greatest miracle. If He can live again, it is no problem at all of for Him to restore the Nation of Israel. Israel was not born in 1948. It was born in the heart of God and revealed to Abraham many years before the birth of Isaac. God made a blood covenant with Abraham that the land of Canaan would be given to Abraham's seed through Isaac. (Genesis 15:18) As part of that vision, God told Abraham that for 400 years his seed would be strangers in a land that did not belong to them. (Genesis 15:13) The seed of Abraham from Isaac spent 400 years in Egypt before Moses led them out, and Israel, the nation, was born. "Who had heard such a thing? Who had seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? Or shall a nation be born at once? For as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children." (Isaiah 66:8) Enduring Covenant People Unique as this religious centrality is, there is one reason above all others why committed Christians must stand with Israel: The God of the Universe, the God that we worship, has chosen to make an everlasting convent with the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob-the Jewish people. The word "everlasting" has nothing temporary or confidential about it. It clearly means, "lasting forever." And although Jews are found today in North and South America, Australia, Russia, Europe, many parts of Africa, and virtually every other continent on earth their historic spiritual and physical center was, and always be, the Promised Land of Israel. God's Eternal covenant with the descendents of Abraham featured the promise to give them the land of Israel as an everlasting possession. This is recorded in the very first book of the Bible, Genesis, in chapter 17. Why the Church Should Support Israel? Because God Does! "Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed" (Genesis 12:1-3) Israel is God's dream, and we are called to be a part of His team. The title deed belongs to God Almighty. When God made His eternal promises to Israel, there was no United Nations. There were only pagan nations to challenge this dream, to challenge God and His word. To be apathetic toward of God's Divine plan or Eternal purpose, and our role as Christians in it, means to reject Our Lord's Divine Assignment to the Church and heavenly opportunity. God's prophetic time clock has been set on Jerusalem time! And the spotlight of Heaven is still on the Jews. It all began with them, and it will all end with them. God's plan is an eternal one! If what we do as Christians does not matter in the light of eternity, then we had better stop doing it. As Christians, can no more neglect our responsibility to stand with the House of Israel then we can neglect believing in the promises of God. Jerusalem is the only city for which God commands us to pray. He also commands a blessing on those who pray for Jerusalem! When you pray for Jerusalem, Psalm 122:6, you are not praying for stones or dirt, you are praying for revival (2 Chronicles 7:14), and for the Lord's Return. Also, you are joining our Lord, the Good Samaritan, in His ministry of love and comfort to the suffering. "If you've done it unto the least of these, my brethren (the Jews) you've done it unto me." It is our divine commission. King David explained precisely why God Almighty has commanded us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and has commanded a blessing upon us for doing so. The revelation is found in Psalm 122:8: "For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, Peace be within thee." God is telling us to pray for the souls of Jerusalem. David felt that prayer needed to be offered up for all of his brothers, and friends who lived there. Prayer needs to be offered today for the House of Israel, for those who live there from over 120 nations of the Earth. It is the city most targeted by terrorists, simply because it is Jerusalem. It has drawn the Jewish people of the world like a prophetic magnet...those who have prayed, "New Year in Jerusalem." In Psalm 122:9, David's revelation says, "May there be peace as a protection for the Temple of the Lord." Ultimately, we are praying for Satan to be bound. In Isaiah 14, Satan said he would battle God from the Temple of the Lord, on the sides of the north. When we pray for the peace of Jerusalem, we are praying for the souls of the City of Jerusalem; we are praying for the Temple of the Lord; and, we are praying for the Messiah to come. The prophecies of the Bible point to the Temple of the Lord as the key flashpoint that will bring the nation of the world to Jerusalem, and ultimately result in the battle that will end Satan's reign over the earth for all eternity. It will spell his final death. In 691 A.D., Islamic adherents in Jerusalem built the Dome of the Rock over the Foundation Stone, which was the spot of the Holy of Holies in the Bible. Islam later attributed another event to the Foundation Stone: the binding of the son of Abraham the "Hanif," the first Monotheist. As the Koran does not explicitly mention the name Isaac, commentators on the Koran have identified the son bound by Abraham as Ishmael. Thus Islam teaches that the title deed to Jerusalem and the Temple Site and all of Israel belong to the Arabs –– not the Jews. If fact, Mohammed never set foot in Jerusalem, nor is the city mentioned by name in the Koran. His only connection to Jerusalem is through his dream or vision where he found himself in a "temple that is most remote." (Koran, Sura) It was not until the Seventh Century that Moslem adherents identified the "temple most remote" as a mosque in Jerusalem (perhaps for political reasons.) The truth remains that this site which now stands the Dome of the Rock, as is sacred to Jews as the Temple site, will be the basis for the battle of ages that will be fought. There is a divine reason the Church was born in Zion! All roads lead to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. The world is hopeless, not knowing what to do. Heaven and Earth met in Jerusalem, and will meet there again. The destiny of America and the world is linked to Jerusalem. It is epicenter of spiritual warfare and affects the entire world. Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria are the battle zones. It is no accident that the Great Commission is directed toward these prophetic areas. If Christians are not salt and light then the Great Commission will become the Great Omission! "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1:8) If Our Lord and Savior reached out in compassion to Israel, and made prayer for her His highest priority, do we dare make it our lowest? There is a direct correlation between the power that Heaven promises for the Church and its birth in Jerusalem, and the Church's obedience to be a witness In Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. The church cannot, and must not, ignore Christ's Eternal mission for her, and at the same time, expect power from on high. If His disciples' obedience was directly related to a power surge from Heaven and the birth of the Church, can disobedience empower the church and lift her heavenward to fulfill her final mission? "Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising." (Isaiah 60:1-3) (The above is an excerpt from Dr. Evans' book Why Christians Should Support Israel.) Michael Evans is the author of "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," and founder of Jerusalem Prayer Team, America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem. Contact them at www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org and ddress email inquiries to jpteam@sbcglobal.net |
|
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS ON SYRIA; HOW ISRAEL CAN REMAIN JEWISH & DEMOCRATIC; HEZBULLAH'S TAKEOVER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 30, 2008. |
|
ARABS PLAN MASS CIVILIAN INVASION OF ISRAEL They plan to mass the descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees at the borders of Israel and then cross them. Hamas tried to do the same, recently. The government of Israel issued clear and publicly known orders to its troops to shoot all who attempt to cross into Israel. An Arab admitted that knowing of Israel's intent to use whatever force is necessary to stop the invasion, the Arabs would not take the chance of trying to invade. That's deterrence! Time to issue the order, again (IMRA, 5/2). If Israeli troops did shoot down mobs trying to storm the country and take it over, the world would condemn Israeli "brutality," as if the Muslims didn't deserve it and is if the world didn't bear some responsibility for letting the Arabs assume, from constant examples, that the world does not mind Arab attacks on Israel, only Israeli self-defense. The Western moralizers against Israel are immoral. OLMERT GIVES PARTS OF JERUSALEM TO RUSSIA There was almost no news about this in English and little in Hebrew. The Olmert regime acquiesced to Russian demands for Jerusalem land Russia once owned. Olmert's regime is very agreeable –– agreeable to foreigners. Residents and businesses in the 17-acre "Russian Compound" area are upset, but had no say. That's Israeli democracy. Residents of 40 years standing in certain other parts of Jerusalem found themselves served with eviction notices (Barry Chamish, 5/19). KUWAIT'S ELECTION The Islamists won half the seats in the parliament. Women won none. For now, the balance still tips against the Islamists, because Cabinet members are ex-officio members of the legislature (IMRA, 5/19). What happens next election? STRATEGIC ANALYSIS ON SYRIA A former Israeli intelligence officer assessed relations with Syria. After stating Syria's goal –– to get the Golan and to improve relations with the US –– he failed to carry his analysis further. Upon signing a treaty with Israel, Syria, like Egypt, might get advanced US weapons. That would tempt Assad or (which the strategist failed to consider) his successor to war (IMRA, 5/19). His analysis suffered from a belief in a "peace process" and not seeing jihad as religious. HOW ISRAEL CAN REMAIN JEWISH & DEMOCRATIC A professor from Hebrew U. spoke on the subject with erudition about Judaism and, I thought, naivete about Israeli politics. He made a thoughtful point that the state should not try to define Jewish matters, it should just see to it that the country has a law of Jewish return, Jewish symbols of the state, and Jewish education. He favors allowing civil marriage and divorce. He finds that young people are interested in Judaism on their own, but don't know much about it and are alienated when they feel authorities compel them to adhere to it. The Israeli was asked how his country should react to criticism that its return policy does not allow for multi-culturalism. He replied that many countries have such a return policy, though the Jewish people needs it whereas others do not. An example is the 20,000 Russians of Finnish origin who were admitted into Finland without have to meet the usual naturalization criteria. Let the critics stop singling out Israel, he said, it makes their view suspect. Besides, it is not their business. He finds that Israel has changed a lot in the past decade. The Ultra-Orthodox are much more involved in the State. The Arabs now strive to undo the Jewish state, not just demand what they consider equality. He contends that calling the Arabs a fifth column is self-fulfilling and thinks they should be given more. Perhaps, but they have been largely radicalized already. I think that giving them more strengthens their drive to take over. They don't belong in a Jewish state. Regarding the Arabs, he said that the political Center has dissolved. He considers Olmert and Sharon in the Center, and Netanyahu and Lieberman on the Right. I consider them all on the Left, when in office or when describing their main views. Sharon may have been a tough general, but he formed a leftist party, then brought it into Likud, where it diluted the party's nationalism. Clever, eh? They all favor territorial concessions to the enemy. The professor sounded unaware that the Palestinian Arabs already have a state, the one called Jordan. If people would acknowledge that fact, they would stop feeling any urgency for a Palestinian Arab state in the Territories. They also might realize that statehood is not the long-term goal of Arafat's Arabs but conquest of Israel. The deduction from that realization would be to fight and oust the Arabs, not to empower them. He admits that land-for-peace and unilateral withdrawal failed, and warns that holding on to the Territories forever, except for settlement blocs, would swamp Israel demographically. Guess he isn't aware of the changed demographics favoring the Jews. He failed to consider taking steps that cause the Arabs to leave the Territories and Israel, and annexing vacated areas as well as settlement blocs. Absent the Arabs (and the hundred thousand Russian antisemitic gentile immigrants that he seems unaware of), and Israel can remain a Jewish state. The notion that Arabs may swamp the Jewish state if those Arabs are not in a defined state but just Territories, doesn't seem logical. On the other hand, he seems unconcerned how many Palestinian Arabs could enter an Arab state set up in the Territories, and dry up Israel by siphoning off its mountain aquifer. Neither does he consider the effect of so many Arabs on the Israeli side of the mountain, no natural barrier. I think it makes more sense for Israel to keep all the water and put the Arabs on the other side of the mountains. Much safer that way and fairer, since the Territories traditionally are Jewish territory and as chief and intended heir to the Mandate, Israel has the right to annex the Territories. But it should not annex the Arabs with the land. The notion that Israel should be the steward of the Territories for the Arabs until the Arabs can be trusted to make peace seems less realistic than Israel taking over the Territories because the Muslims cannot be trusted to make peace. It is not a matter of finding a new regime in the P.A. but of Islam fundamentally being imperialistic. Since Israel has the better claim to the land, it should start taking it over, without taking in Arabs. The professor thought he was reminding us that the present Israeli regime was elected on a platform of withdrawal. He was not reminding us but misleading us. The parties that opposed withdrawal won a minority of seats. However, some of them joined Sharon's coalition, asserting their condition that he not withdraw. He did, and their greed for patronage kept them from voting down his government. They do not follow the will of the people, in Israel. As for the state being democratic, that is yet to come, if the state can survive the existing leftist authoritarian state that is appeasement-minded. The professor thinks Israel is democratic. Hence he favors getting a written constitution. He did not take into account that the ruling elite, which took Zionism largely out of the curriculum, and oppresses dissent, might write a constitution that entrenches the Muslims, further weakens Jewish content of education, and does not pry the Left away from its police state tactics. I realized a shortcoming of American education. Americans are not taught how to ask concise and pertinent questions. Instead, member of the audience give speeches, remarking about themselves and rambling on, until my bladder is near bursting. HOW ISRAELI "DEMOCRACY" WORKS Israel's Prime and Foreign Ministers brief foreign leaders, such as (enemy) Mubarak of Egypt, on negotiations with the P.A.. The Olmert regime does not brief its coalition partners on those negotiations (IMRA, 5/17). Authoritarian. MUSLIM HATE-SPEECH France banned a TV station's broadcasts for urging Muslim children to murder Jews. Egyptian and Saudi satellite broadcasters transmit messages of hatred and violence to German Muslims. Bigotry has increased significantly there. A hard core of about 10% take it utterly seriously, and about a third are inculcated with hatred of the Jews and of the West. The small percentage of German Muslims belonging to Islamist organizations may increase, since so many have adopted their bigotry. They call their German teachers "Jews," as an epithet, when they think their instruction does not follow Islamic law. Anti-Christian sentiments are less common. Islamic antisemitism started with Muhammad. He is quoted by the Islamists on that. The Nazis financed some of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's antisemitic campaign. One of the Nazi themes was that of an international Jewish conspiracy to take over the world (which the Nazis tried doing. The current antisemitic campaign piggybacks onto popular culture. For example, bigoted slogans are put into rap music and onto t-shirts. Germany and Germans do not react much against Islamic antisemitism. The Interior Ministry makes some effort, but the Foreign Ministry allows the satellite propaganda to persist (IMRA, 5/17). WHY HIZBULLAH WITHDREW AFTER COWING LEBANON Hizbullah defeated and cowed the other militias and the Lebanese Army. Then it removed its troops. It could have taken over Lebanon. That was not its objective. It wants to be free to continue jihad, not be tied down with daily governmental responsibilities. By demonstrating its military superiority, it will not be interfered with. It now can organize the Shiites, control the border, and import heavier weapons for war. It also may command the Lebanese Army. Israel misunderstood how terrorists work. Its "peace movement" sympathized with the enemy. It thought that withdrawal would leave responsibility for governing to the terrorists, who would mellow and develop the economy. Instead, they just get more territory and people to work with. Thus Abbas and Hamas demand that Israel feed their people while they make war (IMRA, 5/17). Less than a week later, Hizbullah arranged with the powerless government of Lebanon to let it have a majority of votes in the legislature. 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 |
|
BODIES FOR BODIES –– LIVES FOR LIVES
Posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, May 30, 2008. |
|
It is intuitive. Yes. And it is painful. But it is a policy that would ultimately both save lives and put an end to the torturously nightmarish situation of uncertainty that the families of our captured soldiers frequently endure. Bodies for bodies. Lives for lives. No exceptions. If you are planning to capture an Israeli to swap you damn well better make sure he doesn't die during the operation or later in captivity. The kind of operation that unavoidably wounded IDF soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev as they were taken captive in July 2006 would not have been carried out in the first place if the terrorists knew they were taking a big risk that their efforts would ultimately only yield a body swap. The nation's hearts go out to the families of the POW/MIA's, but the families of future kidnapping targets also have rights. Trading live terrorists for bodies could very well mean the unnecessary death of future targets. Yes. The nation has an obligation to return its soldiers –– both living and dead. But its obligation to prevent future unnecessary deaths takes precedence. Dr. Aaron Lerner is co-founder of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Contact him at imra@netvision.net.il |
|
IMPORTANT MESSAGE ABOUT THE AL DURA VICTORY FROM PHILIPPE KARSENTY
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 30, 2008. |
|
A Great Bravo to Philippe Karsenty for his courage and his dynamic resilience ..... His fight for TRUTH.....and to those who believed in him and supported him as a team, let's move this to the next step NOW I thank you, Philippe Karsenty, and ALL
This is what he writes: |
|
As most of you may already know, on May 21st we won our appeal against France 2 in the al Dura case. This legal victory is the victory of truth over lies...over state-sanctioned lies and anti-Semitic propaganda. We owe this victory to each and every person who, in his way, and according to his means, helped us open doors that were closed. This battle was won by an international team! Today, one week after we delivered a smash in the face to France 2, French media have given virtually no coverage to this incredible court decision. The verdict of acquittal of all charges is fully explained in a 13-page ruling that is 100% to our advantage; each and every line of the court's judgment is an accusation against France 2. Furthermore, the ruling has far-reaching and universal implications for freedom of thought, expression, justice, and media responsibility. If you wish to read the Ruling (in French), just ask and I'll send it to you.
HOWEVER, THE GAME IS NOT OVER YET. France 2 is still denying the truth and French media, if and when they even mention the case, are still covering France 2's lies. France 2 has been lying about the al Dura affair for seven and a half years. They are still lying today. The next battle will be political; we will have to ask the French government to demand that the state-owned TV channel admit that the al Dura news report was a fraud and issue a public apology for broadcasting a staged "killing" and, therefore, an apology for being the party to a colossal historical hoax. It is well within the government's responsibility to take these steps. As the de facto CEO of France 2, Sarkozy has the power to conduct an internal investigation of the TV station in order to separate the truth from the lies. I call on you, my friends and supporters, to notify all of your contacts, and the relevant organizations you support, to join me in demanding that Sarkozy exercise his authority to make amends on behalf of France 2. Only then can one even attempt to redress a wrong that has resulted in death and injury to so many innocent people. I cannot thank all the people who helped us achieve this victory but I'd like to express my appreciation to several organizations for their unflagging support: the American Freedom Alliance, the Zionist Organization of America, the American Jewish Congress, Stand With Us and some Washington think tanks. I'd also like to thank two French-language media –– Radio J and Guysen.com –– whose reporting on the affair, in good times and bad times, was consistently thorough, informative, and honest. UNFORTUNATELY, SOME PEOPLE UNDERMINED OUR EFFORTS during this fight for the truth. The most serious damage to our cause was done by certain members of the American Jewish Committee, notably the AJCommittee's representative in Paris, Valérie Hoffenberg, who for the past three and a half years has worked actively against our efforts to reveal the truth. She functioned as the gate-keeper at the Elysee Palace (the French White House), discouraging serious discussion of the al Dura hoax among decision makers, and blocking access to me and others who were capable of providing evidence of the hoax. Her role was crucial and destructive. Within the past year, the Elysee Palace received many letters and faxes in support of our position on the al Dura hoax. Almost everyone in the government was aware of the case and of the support my position was receiving. However, it was assumed, at the Elysee, that my position did not have the support of American Jewish organizations –– that the American Jewish community, in fact, supported France 2's version of the story. This impression was created by Valerie Hoffenberg who actually advised French politicians to "keep their hands off the case." Hoffenberg was working behind the scenes to discredit me and to assist France 2 in covering up its lie. On September 2007, the AJCommittee leadership realized that it was on the wrong side of the issue –– protecting the worst anti-Semitic blood libel of modern times. They then chose to mask the behaviour of their Paris representative by issuing a congratulatory press release that contradicted their actual position. The press release was designated for an American and English speaking audience. When its Paris representative was asked to issue a public statement about the case in French, she refused. Even after our recent, major victory this May, she has steadfastly refused to comment in French: she doesn't want to jeopardize her relationship with the French establishment. Over the past year, in an effort to prevent the AJCommittee from undermining our efforts, I personally alerted AJCommittee President David Harris several times. I also met with people from his organization to inform them of the problem. He has also been contacted by numerous donors demanding that he instruct Valerie Hoffenberg to withdraw her opposition to my efforts in the case. To no avail. Meanwhile, here in France, the American Jewish Committee claims to be "the oldest and the most influential American Jewish organization." For those who know the truth about the negative role it played in this crucial battle, this claim is laughable. If you know people connected to the American Jewish Committee, please inform them of the situation and seek an explanation. I will not spare the AJCommittee in the book I am currently writing –– slated for rapid publication in both English and French –– where I will reveal the whole story of this path towards the truth. In closing, I would like to suggest you consult these two links: –– The first one is the statement I made after the verdict, on May 21st Thank you for your interest and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. Merci et à bientôt, Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
"KINGDOM OF THE SPIRIT" –– BEN GURION IN 1961
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 29, 2008. |
|
This comes from the Atlantic Magazine
In this, the Bar Mitzvah year, signaling the coming of age of Israel, it seems fitting to make an assessment of the young and enterprising democracy. We turn first to its elder statesman, David Ben-Gurion, who has been Prime Minister of the republic of Israel during eleven of its thirteen years of existence. David Ben-Gurion was the founding prime minister of Israel.
|
|
The Jewish people are not only a national and political unit. Since their first appearance on the stage of history they have been the personification of a moral will and the bearers of a historic vision which they inherited from the prophets of Israel. It is impossible to understand the history of the Jewish people and their struggle for existence—both when they were a nation rooted in their own soil and more or less controlling their own destiny, and when they were a wandering people, exiled and dispersed—unless we bear in mind the unique idea which their history embodies, and the stubborn opposition, not only physical, political, and military, but also spiritual, moral, and intellectual, which the Jews have always confronted. In ancient times, our most important neighbors were Egypt and Babylon. The struggle with these mighty neighbors was political and military as well as cultural and spiritual. Israel's prophets spoke out against the spiritual influence of these neighbors on Israel's religio-moral concepts and social patterns. They advocated faith in one God, the unity of the human race, and the dominion of justice. Today, the Jewish people, having held their own, appear again in the same area in which they evolved. The entire environment in this region has been completely transformed since Bible days. The languages, religions, civilizations, and the very names of the ancient Middle Eastern peoples have disappeared. Yet Israel, though largely uprooted for two millenniums, continues its ancient traditions of language, faith, and culture—as it were, uninterruptedly. Little is known about the history of our people during the period of the Persian rule. The Hellenistic era initiated by the conquest of the East by Alexander the Great in 331 B.C. led to a desperate struggle between Judaism and the superb Hellenistic culture. The struggle was not only that of a downtrodden people fighting foreign oppressors. In the main, it was a cultural contest of great drama between two unique peoples utterly at variance in material, political, and philosophical terms, but alike in spiritual grandeur. The Jewish people's most difficult test came, however, after the birth of Christianity. Unlike the cultures of Egypt and Babylon, Greece and Rome, Christianity was not foreign to Judaism. It stemmed from the Jewish people; its inspiration was from a Jew whose ideas belonged within the framework of the Jewish concepts of his day. The new faith was given its direction away from Judaism by Saul of Tarsus. Called Paul, he was the son of a Jewish citizen of Rome living in Syria. He was brought up in the spirit of Judaism and was a zealous Pharisee, but as a Diaspora Jew he had absorbed something of Hellenistic culture. Once a fanatical opponent of the Christians, he "saw the light," came to believe in Jesus as the Son of God, and gave new direction to the sect. His mission, he believed, was to the Gentiles, and he created a church opposed to Judaism. In the name of Jesus, we find it said, "I am not come to destroy [the law] but to fulfill." Paul, however, was determined to root out the law. About five hundred years after the defeat of Bar Kochba in 135 A.D., the land of Israel was conquered by the Arabs. Unlike most of the preceding conquerors, these invaders were not merely a military force; they were armed with a new faith, Islam. This religion, though not an outgrowth of the land of Israel, showed clear signs of Jewish influence. The conquests of Mohammed and his disciples were more rapid and remarkable than those of Christianity. All the peoples of the Middle East and North Africa succumbed to the new religion. Only the Jewish people withstood it. A new ideological trend against the Jewish people's survival arose with the great revolutions of modern times, in France and Russia. The French Revolution, inspired by "Liberty, egalite, fraternity," had powerful effects throughout Europe: it undermined monarchy and feudalism; it gave the Jews the first impetus to emancipation and equality of rights. But this revolution demanded of Jewry the obliteration of its national character. Many Western Jews willingly succumbed, and an assimilationist movement arose which threatened to overwhelm the Jewish people. The Jewish historic will withstood even this powerful challenge. Emancipation instead led to new expressions of its national character and Messianic yearnings. Much of Jewry divested itself of its theocratic garb and adopted a secular outlook, but its attachment to its historic origins and its homeland became stronger; its ancient language awoke to new life; a secular Hebrew literature was created; and there arose the movements of Chibbat Zion ("Love of Zion") and Zionism. The emancipation which came from without was transformed into self-emancipation –– a movement of liberation from the bonds of dependence on others and life in foreign lands –– and the first foundations were laid for the resuscitation of the national independence in the ancient homeland. Like the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution also aroused –– and continues to arouse –– repercussions throughout the world. Once again the Jewish people were confronted with an ideological struggle and a historic test, no less grave and difficult than all those that had gone before. In 1917 the Balfour Declaration was issued; for the first time since the Destruction of the Temple, the Jews were recognized by a world power as a separate nation, and they were promised the right to return to their land. The League of Nations, established at the end of World War I, gave international confirmation to the Balfour Declaration and recognized the historic connection of the Jewish people with their ancient homeland. In the same year, the Bolshevik Party gained power in Russia, and the new regime, which promised redemption to the world, dealt a grievous blow to the Jewish people: Russian Jewry, the largest and most vital Jewish community in the world, was forcibly cut off from the rest of the Jewish people and their renascent homeland. But for some time after the Bolshevik regime had attained absolute power, Russian Jewry contributed the finest of its pioneering youth to the revival of the Jewish people in the land of Israel. The achievements of this youth bear witness to the capacities latent in Russian Jewry and the aspirations that live within it, and all the external pressures, physical and spiritual, cannot crush or destroy it. The foundations for the resurgence of the Jewish state were laid mainly by Jews from Russia and eastern Europe, and in May, 1948, the state of Israel was proclaimed. The adherents of Jewish independence refuse to rely on any foreign verdict. They are well aware of the limited numbers and capacity of the Jewish people; they can respect and esteem the great powers which are responsible for the fate of tens of millions of people and whose influence extends beyond the limits of their own territories. But there is one kingdom in which the Jewish people regard themselves as equal in all respects, even in the capacity to influence humanity at large and the generations to come, and that is the kingdom of the spirit and the vision. In this kingdom, neither quantity nor the size of armies has the last word. It is not through numerical strength or political and economic power that Jerusalem and Athens have left their mark on the culture of a large part of the human race. In pointing out to the world a new way toward freedom, peace, justice, and equality, the advancement and redemption of humanity, and the realization of the dearest hopes of mankind in our day and in all generations –– in these spheres the great and powerful nations have no monopoly. The Jewish people, who after two thousand years of wandering and tribulation in every part of the globe have arrived at the first stage of renewed sovereignty in the land of their origins, will not abandon their historic vision and great spiritual heritage –– the aspiration to combine their national redemption with universal redemption for all the peoples of the world. Even the greatest tragedy ever wrought by man against a people –– the Hitlerite holocaust, which destroyed one third of the Jewish people –– did not dim the profound faith of all Jews, including those who went to their death in the ovens of Europe, in their national redemption and in that of mankind. The Jewish people will not submit to foreign bondage or surrender to the great and the powerful in determining their future and their road to the vision of the Latter Days. In the state of Israel there is no barrier between the Jew and the man within us. Independence is indivisible. There is no contradiction between spiritual independence and an attachment to humanity as a whole, just as political independence is not incompatible with international ties and economic independence does not necessitate economic autarchy. Every people draws sustenance from others, from the heritage of the generations, from the achievements of the human spirit in all eras and all countries. Mutual dependence is a cosmic and eternal law. There is nothing in the world, large or small, from the invisible electron to the most massive bodies in infinite space, which has no bonds with its fellows or with unlike bodies. The whole of existence is an infinite chain of mutual bonds, and this applies to the world of the spirit as well as to the world of matter. It is less conceivable today than in any previous generation that any people should dwell alone. Now that, after our long journey through world history and all the countries of the globe, we have returned to our point of departure, and for the third time have established the commonwealth of Israel, we shall not cast off the rich and extensive international experience that we have acquired; we shall not retire into our shell. We shall open wide our windows to every aspect of world culture, and we shall endeavor to acquire all the spiritual and intellectual achievements of our day. We shall learn from all our teachers, but we shall guard our independence. We shall not succumb to separatism or isolationism; we shall preserve our bonds with the world outside, but not accept external domination. The roots of independence lie in the heart, in the soul, in the will of the people, and it is only through inner independence that it is possible to win and maintain external independence. The most dangerous form of bondage is the bondage of the spirit. The Jewish people's rejection of the dominance of physical force, however, does not mean the denial of the place of physical force in life as a means of defense, to ensure life. We should be denying Jewish history from the days of Joshua Bin-Nun until the Israel Defense Forces if we were to deny the fact that on occasion there is a need and place for physical force to preserve life. That would be foreign to the spirit of the Jewish people. From the days of the prophets to the times of Einstein, Jewish intuition, both religious and scientific, has always believed in the unity of the universe and of existence, in spite of their numerous forms and expressions. And although, since days of old, the finest sons of the Jewish people, the prophets, sages, and teachers, have always regarded the supreme mission of Israel as residing in the kingdom of the spirit, they have not belittled the body and its needs, for there is no soul without a body, and there can be no universal human ideals without the existence of national independence. In the establishment of the Jewish state, the victory of Jewish over Arab arms played a great and decisive role, but the root and origin of this victory lay in the moral and spiritual superiority of the Jewish defenders. The faith of the Jewish people in the superiority of the spirit is bound up with their belief in the value of man. Man, according to the faith of the Jewish people, was created in the image of God. There could be no more profound, exalted, and far-reaching expression of the greatness, importance, and value of man than this; for the concept "God" in Judaism symbolizes the apex of goodness, beauty, justice, and truth. Human life, in the eyes of the Jewish people, is precious and sacred. The sons of man, created in the image of God, are equal in rights; they are an end in themselves, not a means. And it is no wonder that the sages of these people based the entire law on one great principle: "And thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Love of one's neighbor applies not only to Jewish citizens. "The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the home-born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt." Even in ancient days, the people of Israel were distinguished by an original conception of history which had no parallel among the peoples of East or West, neither of Egypt nor Babylon, India nor China, nor Greece and Rome and their heirs in Europe, until modern times. Unlike the other ancient peoples, ours did not look backward to a legendary golden age in the past which has gone never to return, but turned their gaze to the future, to the Latter Days, in which the earth will be filled with knowledge as the waters cover the seas, when the nations will beat their swords into plowshares, when nation will not lift up sword against nation, or learn war any more. That was the historical philosophy which the prophets of Israel bequeathed to their own peoples and through their people to the best of all nations. This expectation and faith in the future stood by our people during the tribulations of their long journey through history and have brought us to the beginnings of our national redemption, when we can also see the first gleams of redemption for the whole of humanity. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
|
|
MUSLIM GANGS 'TAKING CONTROL' AT HIGH-SECURITY PRISON IN UK
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 29, 2008. |
|
This appeared on Jihad Watch
|
|
"Staff appear reluctant to challenge inappropriate behaviour ... for
fear of doing the wrong thing."
Muslim gangs are threatening to take control of one of Britain's top security prisons where inmates include al-Qa'eda terrorists, a report reveals.
Staff at Whitemoor jail, Cambs, believe a "serious incident is imminent" as several wings become dominated by Muslim prisoners. There is an on-going theme of fear and instability among employees, says the Prison Service's Directorate of High Security report. "There is much talk around the establishment about 'the Muslims'," it says. Some staff believe the situation has resulted in Muslim prisoners becoming more of a gang than a religious group. "The sheer numbers, coupled with a lack of awareness among staff, appear to be engendering fear and handing control to the prisoners," the report says. The situation has become so bad that white prisoners are warned about the Muslim gangs by staff on arrival. The concern about Muslim prisoners is in danger of leading to hostility and Islamophobia, the report warns. "Staff appear reluctant to challenge inappropriate behaviour, in particular among black and ethnic minority prisoners, for fear of doing the wrong thing," the report adds. "This is leading to a general feeling of a lack of control and shifting the power dynamic towards prisoners." Just under a third of the 500 prisoners at Whitemoor are Muslim. Although they include the shoe-bomber Saajid Badat, the majority of them have been jailed for offences unrelated to terrorism. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
HOOPOE WINS NATIONAL BIRD CONTEST
Posted by Gil Ronen, May 29, 2008. | ||
|
The Jewish state's national bird is the hoopoe (duchifat in Hebrew), after being chosen in a national election process that stretched over six months, and which was initiated by the Society for Protection of Nature. The winner was declared by President Shimon Peres, whose own last name refers to a vulture. The hoopoe, a crested bird with a unique appearance which is mentioned in Jewish legends about King Shlomo (Solomon) and the Queen of Sheba, is common throughout Israel. According to legend, the hoopoe is capable of cutting through stone, and is referred to as "nakar turia," or mountain chiseler, in the Talmud. Legend also has it that when its beak breaks, the hoopoe can continue chiseling through rocks with its folded crest –– hence its name duchifat, which means "two beaks" in Aramaic. Ethiopian Jews called it the "Moses Bird" and believed it would carry them to Jerusalem one day. Unafraid! The hoopoe is unafraid of human beings, but when in danger, it makes a hissing sound and secretes a foul-smelling liquid. Its friendly nature may have been the deciding factor in the elections: the final vote tally shows it far ahead of the competition, in what some analysts say is the result of generations of "campaigning" in which it wandered alongside Israeli children on innumerable footpaths. The final contestants who made it through the bird primaries in December 2007 were the night owl (tinshemet), red falcon (baz adom), spur-winged plover (siksak), griffon vulture (nesher), finch (chochit), kingfisher (shaldag), bulbul, warbler (pashosh), the honey-sucker (tzufit), and, of course, the hoopoe. Land of a billion wings The candidates were chosen out of about 540 species of birds which populate Israel's skies regularly. Israel is considered a world center for bird-watching. Because of Israel's central location between three continents and astride the Syria-Africa fault line, more than 500 million birds cross its skies annually. The contest was birthed by The Society for Protection of Nature, which decided that Israel needed a national bird of its own, just like other avian superpowers such as Egypt, the U.S.A., Mexico, Iraq and Austria. The Society for Protection of Nature decided that Israel needed a national bird of its own. A public committee with representatives from the academic world, government ministries, writers and schoolchildren's representatives determined 25 percent of the vote. The rest of the vote was determined through a combination of public voting through the internet, voting by 70,000 children in the nation's schools, and thousands of soldiers who voted at their bases and through text messages. Votes were also cast by 20 Knesset members and Israeli diplomats in 40 cities worldwide. The hoopoe received 35 percent of the vote, trailed by the tiny warbler with 10.3 percent and the finch with 9.8 percent. The honey-sucker, spur-winged plover, bulbul, griffon vulture and red falcon each received about 7 percent of the vote, the night owl got 4.8 percent and the kingfisher barely flew in, with just 3.5 percent.
Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
ISRAEL'S 60 YEARS OF A BREAKTHROUGH ECONOMY
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 29, 2008. |
|
Enclosed you'll find my latest OpEd on Israel's economy, which has systematically defied the "Prophets of Doom." Additional OpEds and newsletters on issues of national security and overseas investments in Israel are posted at http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il. Enjoy it, Shabbat Shalom and may we heed the lesson of this week (opening) portion of the Book of Numbers (Ba'Midbar –– "desert" in Hebrew): In order to survive challenges/threats –– while wondering in a political, spiritual, social or economic "desert" –– one should exhibit a pro-active, optimist, Can-Do mentality, Yoram |
|
The 1948-2008 series of Arab-Israeli wars, coupled with Palestinian terrorism, have been bumps on the path of unprecedented Israeli economic growth: From a $1.2 billion GDP in 1948 to a $170 billion GDP in 2007! From a labor and land-intensive import-based economy, which is vulnerable to security and political uncertainty, to an increasingly know how-intensive export-driven economy, which is less vulnerable to wars and terrorism. Sixty years ago, Israel was labeled as an economy-deprived country. In 2008, the "London Economist" claims that "Israel has an economy with the power to astonish...[featuring] most NASDAQ-listed companies, other than Canada and the US." Israel has been recently admitted to the OECD –– the exclusive club of the leading global economies –– the Shekel has joined thirteen other top-traded currencies, and Israel's credit rating has been upgraded by Moody's, Standard & Poor and Fitch. During the last four years, Israel's economy has grown 5% annually, compared with a 2.7% annual growth for the OECD countries. Despite the draining 2006 war in Lebanon, the costly 2005 "Disengagement" from Gaza, the unprecedented Palestinian terrorism and prolonged political uncertainty, Israel's economic fundamentals have been vigorous: minimal budget deficit (1%), low inflation (2.8%) and interest (5%) rates, surplus of trade balance ($4 billion) and balance of payment ($5 billion) and high foreign exchange reserves ($28 billion). 400 global (mostly US) companies have established plants and research & development centers in Israel. They express confidence in the long-term viability of Israel's economy, notwithstanding the failing peace process and the exacerbation of Palestinian terrorism. For instance, most of Intel's chips and microprocessors have been developed by Intel-Israel. Hence, Intel constructs its sixth ($4.5 billion) Israeli plant, which will boost the 2007 $1.5 billion export by Intel-Israel. IBM has just acquired its third Israeli company in 2008 and Microsoft concludes its seventh Israeli acquisition in recent years. HP, Texas Instruments, GE-Medical, Motorola, Cisco, EMC, AOL, Google, Marvelle, Kodak, AT&T, Xerox, Phillips, SAP, Siemens and more giants have followed suit. They have realized that in order to play in the top high tech league, they must set foot in Israel, thus gaining access to Israel's unique breakthrough technologies. They leverage Israel's competitive edge: generating groundbreaking technologies. 140 per 10,000 Israelis are engaged in research & development, ahead of the US and Japan with 85 and 70 per 10,000 respectively. As a result, Israel is second only to the US in the absolute number of start-ups, but leads the world in the number of start-ups per capita. Overseas investment in Israel's high tech exceeds any single European country and surpasses France and Germany combined. Total overseas investment in Israel reached $23.4 billion in 2006, compared with $10.5 billion in 2005, $9.1 billion in 2004 and $5.1 billion in 2003. In addition to warren Buffet, who made his highest overseas investment in Israel ($4 billion), overseas investors include leading investment banks, such as Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and Morgan Stanley, prestigious venture capital funds, such as Sequoia, Greylock and Benchmark, prime insurance companies such as Mass Mutual, AIG and Marsh McLennen and state employees pension funds such as California, Illinois, New York and Oregon. According to Morgan Stanley, "Israel's economy is robust, able to withstand geo-political constraints and global slowdown, featuring a strong Shekel, low interest rate, reduced inflation and budget deficit, a trade surplus and surge in overseas investment." Israel's 60 year impressive economic track record constitutes a proof that –– when it comes to the impact on sophisticated economies –– the performance of Wall Street supersedes the terrorism of Gaza Strip. Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il |
|
IRAQI CHRISTIANS WARN OF 'NEW CATASTROPHE FOR HUMANITY'
Posted by Crystal K. May 29, 2008. |
|
Ethnic cleansing of non-arab, historic Communities of
Khaldean, Syriac, Assyrians, being wiped out in Iraq. Not only Kurds!
("First they came for the Jews...")
This is by Patrick Goodenough, CNSNews.com International Editor,
|
|
(Editor's note: Adds comment from Assyrian Universal Alliance.) (CNSNews.com) –– Days before Sweden hosts an international conference aimed at pushing ahead the political and economic reform process in Iraq, hundreds of exiled Iraqi Christians demonstrated outside the country's parliament Sunday to draw attention to the minority's plight in their homeland. "A new wave of ethnic cleansing is going on in Iraq," Iraqi Christian representative Behiye Hadodo told the gathering. "If these atrocities continue, the Chaldean, Syriac and Assyrian communities there will be wiped out altogether, creating a new catastrophe for humanity." Iraq's Assyrians are a non-Arab ethnic minority located mainly in northeastern Iraq, and adherents of Christian denominations including the Chaldean Catholic and Syriac Orthodox churches. A 1987 census recorded 1.4 million Christians in Iraq, but the numbers began to drop after the 1990 Gulf War, reaching around 800,000 before the U.S. invaded in March 2003. Persecution at the hands of Islamic radicals –– killings, church bombings, kidnappings, forced conversions and harassment –– has prompted hundreds of thousands of Christians to flee the country since 2003. Although accurate statistics are unavailable, researchers believe the community may have been halved in the past five years. Many have moved to Syria and Jordan, and others to northern Europe, Australia and the United States. Of an estimated 70,000 Iraqi Christians in Europe, nearly half are reported to live in Sweden. Speeches during Sunday's rally in Stockholm centered on continuing harassment by fundamentalists in Iraq, including abductions and assaults of girls and women, and the forcing of women to wear veils in line with strict Islamic doctrines. Participants reiterated calls for international support for an autonomous safe region for Iraqi Christians in the historical Assyrian region in the north of the country. Hadodo, a representative of the European Syriac Union, said the demonstration's goal was to draw the attention of the United States, European Union and United Nations to the "ongoing terror" and especially to the murder of Christian clerics in Iraq. On Thursday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will join counterparts and officials from around the world including U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for a meeting near Stockholm that will follow up last year's launch of the International Compact with Iraq. The compact is a partnership between the Iraqi government and the international community, aimed at pursuing political, economic and social development over a five-year period. Iraqi officials are expected to outline progress made during the past year, with a strong focus on the security situation. Among those due to attend is Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, whose government is accused by the U.S. of destabilizing Iraq by supporting insurgents there. Iraq's Christians are hoping that the meeting in Sweden will consider their concerns too. "Since the liberation of Iraq much attention has been devoted to the demands and expectations of Iraq's Shi'a, Sunni, Kurds," Hermiz Shahen, secretary of the Australian chapter of the Assyrian Universal Alliance, said Wednesday. "[Yet] the plight of the Assyrian nation is attracting little attention in the outside world." Pointing to the high number of Christian refugees, Shahen said the international community must make the issue a priority. Within one or two generations, he said, Christians in the Middle East –– the birthplace of Christianity –– may be reduced to a negligible number, having been forced to flee radical Islam. "It is important that the Assyrian voice be heard [at the meeting in Sweden] and the Assyrian nation be distinctly recognized," he said. "It is time for the advocates who call for democracy, justice and human rights to stand up for the rights of the indigenous Assyrians of Iraq." Shahen said Assyrians' demands included equitable representation in government and amendment of the Iraqi constitution to protect Assyrians and allow them "true and equal citizenship." They also wanted the establishment of an Assyrian governorate or province, administered by Assyrians under the jurisdiction of Iraq's central government. This would encourage refugees, whether internally displaced or outside the country, to return, and enjoy political, educational, linguistic, religious and cultural protection, he said. Prior to the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime, the U.S. designated Iraq as a "country of particular concern" (CPC) for religious freedom violations. The 1998 International Religious Freedom Act allows for a range of steps, including sanctions, to be taken against governments that engage in or tolerate serious religious freedom violations. CPC designation was subsequently lifted, but the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, an independent body advising the White House and Congress, last year placed Iraq on a "watch list" pointing to escalating, unchecked violence against religious minorities as well as "evidence of collusion between Shi'a militias and Iraqi government ministries." Earlier this month, the commission in a letter to Rice said it remained seriously concerned about the situation, citing violence against non-Muslims "from Sunni insurgents and foreign extremists, as well as pervasive violence, discrimination, and marginalization at the hands of the national government, regional governments, and para-state militias, including those in Kurdish areas." Some of the commission's members argue that Iraq should already have be returned to the CPC blacklist, but the commission said it would make a recommendation in the near future, after a visit to Iraq. Earlier this year the Chaldean Catholic archbishop of Mosul, Paulos Faraj Rahho, became the most senior Christian figure to be slain. His body was found after gunmen abducted him at his church, killing three men with him. The Minority Rights Group International says Iraq is the second-most dangerous country in the world for minorities in 2008, behind Somalia and ahead of Sudan, Afghanistan and Burma. Crystal is moderator of EUROPEANS_WHO_SUPPORT_ISRAEL@yahoogroups.com. Contact her at k_hallal@yahoo.com |
|
SYRIA AND/OR IRAN TO BOMB PALESTINIANS AND JORDAN?
Posted by Beth Goodtree, May 29, 2008. |
|
Who knew that Syria and/or Iran might bomb their cause celebre, the Palestinians? Certainly these aggressors do not. Yet this is exactly what might happen –– especially in the following scenario involving Iran, what with all the threatening rhetoric coming from Ahmadinejad. To borrow a phrase from The Golden Girls' Sophia Petrillo, picture it: President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is feeling his oats at having forestalled, yet again, the UN inspectors and effectively tying the hands of the nations who dread him getting a nuclear bomb. The sanctions mean little to him. He feels unbeatable. And he is also constantly filled with a visceral hatred of Jews in general and Israel in particular. "The Little Satan," he calls it. And although Ahmadinejad might be a tyrant, he's not crazy. He would never attack the United States, otherwise referred to by him as "The Great Satan." But he sure as heck might send a few missiles in Israel's direction, especially if he's feeling particularly invincible. Then again, he might get Syria to do it. Either way, on this bright and sunny morning sometime in the near future, while the morning doves are cooing and the petunias are opening their glorious petals to the sun, while the air sings with bumble bees fertilizing the orange groves and roses, and the palm fronds waft gently in a fragrant breeze, Ahmadinejad gives the word. And the word is death. But not mere death. Ahmadinejad wants to see the accursed Jew suffer in ways even Hitler didn't imagine. And so he had his top military men assemble a special bomb. At the same time that his top scientists and military men were devising an especially horrendous form of not-ready-for-prime-time death, Ahmadinejad was getting ready his excuse. Just like the fake 'Jenin Massacre" that never occurred, or the al-Dura shooting that was done by the Palestinians themselves and then blamed on Israel, he had his most devious minds devise another atrocity to commit and then blame on the Israel. Ahmadinejad is using this latest fake atrocity as an excuse for the missiles he is about to let fly. Little does he realize that he is about to commit a real atrocity, not on Israel and the Jews, but on the people he conveniently champions –– the Palestinians, and maybe even Jordan. Ahmadinejad gives the word and the first of two missiles is launched towards Israel. The time is now about two hours before the Sabbath, when most Israelis are out and about getting ready for sunset and prayer. It's the busiest time of the week and Ahmadinejad has calculated it so as to invoke maximum death and injury. And horror.. Horror is very important, not merely for the psychological effect upon his sworn enemies, but to show the world that unless they follow his dictates, the same will happen to them. At IDF Defense Headquarters, they track the missile's launch and the Arrow3 Missile Defense System is automatically activated. The system is an upgrade from the current Arrow2 system and untried in actual battle. Too late it does its job, but somehow, the first missile falls harmlessly on a recently deserted street in one of the most observant sections of Jerusalem. Some storefront windows are shattered, the pavement is destroyed, but no one was still out in the shopping area to be hurt. Ahmadinejad is furious. He tells his generals to make the next one count. And at IDF Headquarters, no one is resting easy. Soldiers who had gone home for the Sabbath have been pouring in from the first second it was recognized that Israel was under attack. They rapidly check and readjust the Arrow3 Missile Defense System and wait. Shortly, another missile is spotted coming in from the northeast and the Arrow3 is again activated. This time it works and hits its mark –– the missile that is heading towards one of Israel's most vulnerable areas. However, the true horror has just begun. The missile Iran shot at Israel is intercepted and 'neutralized' above the eastern bank of the Jordan River. But what nobody knew was the missile's payload. It was filled with napalm and phosphorus, as well as radioactive material. When the missile is intercepted by the Arrow3, it explodes in midair, raining burning chemicals and radiation far and wide upon the populations on either side of the Jordan River below. Suddenly, Jordanians and Palestinians who are going about their daily lives are pelted with burning fragments of death. Their clothes catch on fire and on both sides of the Jordan, people are running into the river to douse the flames. Men, women and children have been turned into screaming pillars of fire, their flesh melting and charring as they run. But the water is no help, for the entire surface of it is afire from the phosphorus and napalm. They die, burning in the water and breathing in air turned to flame. And those who manage to survive have had their burns and wounds infected with microscopic particles of radioactive material. Their deaths will be even slower and more horrifically agonizing than their countrymen who agonizingly roasted to death in the initial bombing. And so Iran (or maybe its satellite, Syria) has inadvertently bombed Jordan and the Palestinians. Could this scenario happen? Absolutely. And unless the world, especially those nations threatening Israel, are very, very careful, it will. Beth Goodtree, was an award winning writer on Jewish-American and Israeli issues until Metastatic Ovarian Cancer silenced her voice three years ago. Despite a grim prognosis, she has overcome, for the time being, her disease. This is her first article since her illness. Contact: BethGoodtree@yahoo.com |
|
PALESTINIAN INDUSTRY OF LIES
Posted by Marc Samberg, May 29, 2008. |
|
This was written by Danny Seaman. It was published today in YNET http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3549532,00.html Danny Seaman is the director of the Government Press Office |
|
Media manipulation has become strategic Arab weapon against Israel A French court has acquitted Philippe Karsenty of libel charges over his claim that TV network France 2's news report from the Netzarim junction in September 2000 was staged. The ruling constitutes an achievement in the effort to expose the truth around the incident that has become known as the Muhammad al-Dura affair. However, this is just the first stage in the struggle against international media coverage of the Middle East, which has been biased for many years now. The revelations of the deceit in the al-Dura affair are a result of intense work by physicist Nahum Shahaf. He was followed by many good people from academia and the world of journalism who exposed the methods used by the Palestinian industry of lies to produce images that are etched in the collective memory via global media. This was succinctly defined by American Professor Richard Landes as "Pallywood." The al-Dura affair is the most conspicuous and blatant of the phenomenon of media manipulation undertaken by Palestinian workers employed by international media outlets. These employees stage, produce, and edit events and photos in a bid to slander Israel in the world. Media reports and photos such as the al-Dura case affect global public opinion and governments. The stages events undermine Israel's ability to conduct itself within the conflict and affect our ability to maneuver and secure targets in times of emergency Media manipulation has in fact turned into an strategic Arab weapon used against the State of Israel. It is used as an equalizer vis-à-vis Israel's military advantages while boosting the Arabs' global status vis-à-vis Israel. During the Second Lebanon War, international media personnel on the ground reported of an "IDF massacre in Qfar Qana," while bloggers at homes around the world quickly and without much effort revealed that the incident was in fact a Hizbullah production. Yet this did not prevent the international community from pressing Israel to end the war. Several weeks before that we saw the photos of a Palestinian girl on the Gaza beach –– later revealed to be the reenactment by a Palestinian photographer of an event the IDF was not involved in. Just recently, a mother and her four children in Gaza were hit by an explosive device carried by Hamas men, an incident that was immediately attributed to the IDF by the media. 'Credible' sources The bias is not only reserved for times of emergency. Often we see reports about some kind of harm done to the Palestinians by Israel that immediately make headlines worldwide. In many cases, the charges turn out to be false, yet the damage to Israel is already done. This stems from the fact that foreign networks do not do the minimum they should be doing –– verifying sources and crosschecking information. After all, they always attribute reports to Palestinian reporters and always find "credible" sources that would confirm the charges. This may be forgiven the first and possibly second time. Yet once these revelations emerge time and again, we could expect foreign media outlets to be stricter and exhibit proper professional conduct before again leveling false charges at the State of Israel. Therefore, exposing the truth behind the Muhammad al-Dura events is vital for the elimination of the phenomenon of staged media reports and for undermining the natural manner with which this phenomenon is accepted by global media outlets and the leniency they show to it. This tolerance sometimes stem from reasons of political sympathy, but mostly for reasons of financial profitability. Israel must make clear to global media outlets that they bear responsibility for the reports of their employees and must insist on adherence to journalistic ethics and accurate reporting, even when dealing with the State of Israel. The establishment of a public relations office in the Prime Minister's Office could be an important factor in this struggle. In order to truly succeed in the media war, a structural bureaucratic change and additional funds are not enough. It is vital to internalize the essence of the struggle which the state contends with in the media. Members of the office must be willing to dedicate the required effort, while displaying public courage at times, in order to disprove and thwart the blood libels formulated by the Palestinians and to force global media outlets to adhere to professional standards. In addition, as proven by Karsenty, Shahaf, Landes, journalists Gérard Huber and Stéphane Juffa, and others, the state can and should enlist the assistance of private professionals who are willing to fight for the State of Israel's good name and for the truth. Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
CONTRARY TO COMPLAINTS AGAINST ISRAEL; DYING TO PLEASE BUSH; THE CAUSE OF THE WARS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 29, 2008. |
|
CONTRARY TO COMPLAINTS AGAINST ISRAEL Israel's Shdemah Army base is just south of Jerusalem. It is in Area C, which according to the Oslo Accords, is under total Israeli control. The site overlooks the new Jerusalem-to-Gush Etzion highway, itself built as an alternative to the tunnel route that often gets targeted by terrorists. The IDF quietly abandoned the base. The government did not offer it to Jerusalem or to the Jewish people. It secretly offered it to the Arabs, to build a neighborhood, rather than letting the Arabs start in area A. Surveyors already marked the area out for the Arabs. Jews in the area are alarmed at the future threat to their security that would ensue. A Member of the Knesset added this problem to other abandonment of security for the Jews, such as bringing hundreds of P.A. police into more P.A. cities, arming the P.A., and the removal of anti-terrorism checkpoints (Arutz-7, 5/16). The Left, the foreign media, and other anti-Zionists complain that Israel builds communities and housing in order to block Arab expansion and stake more of a claim to the Territories. Truth is, Israel mostly does the opposite. And the Arabs do get foreign funds for building in order to block Jewish expansion. That the Left does not complain about. The media is the champion of the double standard, sometimes known as antisemitism. In thus supporting the terrorists, the media and the Left considers itself virtuous. They are most immoral! What are the stakes here? The Arabs continue the jihad they started against modern Zionism in 1920. They are trying to take over the country. That would mean death to millions of Jews, for those Arabs are bigoted killers. Israel has a right to a government that protects them, and the government has a right to protect them. It should be building in order to block Arab expansion. It certainly should not take down checkpoints that block Arab terrorists. Neither should it allow Arab building overlooking roads that Israelis need to travel on. That problem was resolved for Israel in 1947-49, the War for Independence. At that time, Arabs tried paralyzing Israeli transit and starving Jerusalemites by attacking road travel. Jewish forces cleared the roads and in a few cases, removed Arab villages from strategic sites, including some at sensitive border points. Now it is like 1947. This time, the place of the British Mandate government in siding with the Arabs against the Jews, arming the Arabs against the Jews, and disarming the Jews against the Arabs, has been taken by the government of Israel. Some Jewish state, celebrating its 60th anniversary! Ben-Gurion should have named the newly independent Jewish state "Judea," instead of Israel. Then it could be celebrating its anniversary in the thousands of years. The State would have been named after its ancient forebear, and the province by that name would more readily be recognized as a Jewish one than by the nickname, "West Bank," which includes the province of Samaria. THE MUSLIM ARAB MIND AT WORK A lecturer in Jordan suggested that suicide bombers should strike at Dimona [Israel's nuclear facility] with portable nuclear bombs (Arutz-7, 5/16). Can the Muslim Arabs do something for mankind instead of hating most of it and destroying what it can? The significant difference between their notion of God and the Christians' notion of the Devil eludes me. ISRAELI RIGHT PRAISES BUSH Various allegedly right-wing politicians in Israel, from Likud, Shas, National Religious Party, and National Union, found much in the speech by Pres. Bush to praise as worthy of emulation by their deficient Prime Minister. Bush's speech upheld positive national pride, Zionism, God, God's giving the Land of Israel to the People of Israel, and it condemned making concessions to terrorists. The politicians wished that their Prime Minister felt the same as Bush. Maale Adumim Mayor Kashriel asked Bush to honor his letter promising former PM Sharon that Israel may retain major towns in Judea-Samaria. State Dept. officials replied that the letter was not meant as a promise. It was kept vague for that reason, and was meant just to enable Sharon to cite it (Arutz-7, 5/17). In other words, Bush is phony and duped most of the Israeli public. I felt so at the time. The US often reneges on vague promises or not-so-vague ones. This incident reveals the real nature of the US government. Don't trust it. The stated principles are good; the words were only words. Bush betrays them. Whom do those politicians think PM Olmert gets his ideas for concessions from? From Bush and Bush's envoy, Rice! Question for Bush: Since you believe that God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people, why do you insist that the Jewish people give some of it to their mortal enemies? How dare you talk about God's wishes and then defy them? Are you even aware that most of the Land of Israel already is under Jordanian sovereignty? Don't make concessions to terrorists? Rice keeps demanding such concessions. Take down checkpoints, she importunes Israel. Then, she says, those Jew-hating Muslim Arabs will enjoy life better. But so will the terrorists, who could move more freely. Bush's policies are those of a killer. Bush doesn't fool me. How can he fool the Israeli politicians? Is there not an honest one among them and among the major media, to contradict Bush? Are they all under the spell of illusion and hypocrisy? Some "right wing!" "DYING TO PLEASE BUSH" Israel removed still more checkpoints, at the behest of the hostile State Dept.. Terrorists usually exploit this "easing of conditions for Palestinians" to launch attacks. The casualties and Israeli counter-attacks, coming during an international business conference in Bethlehem, may disrupt the conference and be used by the media to make Israel look bad (IMRA, 5/18). Why doesn't the media make the terrorists look bad? After all, they are bad! Terrorism drives out business, but the media blames Israel for the poor P.A. economy. BUSH'S FALLACY ON ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT In a press review of his meeting with Abbas, Pres. Bush mentioned that the first thing they discussed was Lebanon. He said to Abbas, "I appreciate you sharing your strategy with me." Abbas has a strategy for Lebanon? Bush stated the "false premise upon which the entire house of cards known as the Bush vision is built: 'The (PA) President and his team are committed to peace. They stand squarely against those who use violence to stop the peace process. '" Pres. Bush said that, when given a chance, the western Palestinian Arabs "will build a thriving homeland." (IMRA, 5/18.) And they would build it in the Jewish homeland. Unfair to the Jews. Nor is it a truthful statement, especially "when given a chance," as if Israel stops them. They have had ample opportunity. Israel built much infrastructure for them. It gave them autonomy so they could build for themselves. Instead, they preyed upon themselves and sent assassins into Israel, so that Israel had to restrict their movement. Their general criminality discouraged foreign capital and wasted foreign aid. They bungled their opportunity. The world should stop lavishing funds and sympathy upon those pathetic enemies of mankind. Pity for pirates? Abbas and regime praise terrorism. How can Bush pretend otherwise? Bush can pretend, because the major media also pretend. They don't gather news so much as disseminate allegations in support of their view. Abbas agrees with Bush's regret that Iran is taking over Lebanon, through its proxies. Abbas would regret that, because Hamas is one such proxy and much of Fatah, supposedly Abbas' own organization, increasingly has become another. WATER USAGE IN GAZA Israel uses recycled water for agriculture. The P.A. does not. It uses fresh water, then runs out (IMRA, 5/2) and blames Israel for hogging the water. Waste not, want not, my teacher used to say. WHOSE VIEW GETS HEARD? Then he complains, from the pages of the prestigious Times, which gives space to appeasement of the Arabs and not to my view, that nobody wants to hear any criticism of Israel or to hear the Arab point of view. I have written hundreds of pages about the Times' lopsided and erroneous presentation of the Arab point of view and of the paper's unfair criticism of Israel that usually omits Israeli rebuttal. The Muslim Arabs get frequent access to the media, but pretend that they are denied most access. As stated earlier, Western media and leaders don't want to criticize the Arabs. Israel they criticize all the time. As usual, the Arabs blame their enemies for what the Arabs do and pretend to be the underdogs. WHO SUFFERS, AND WHY Khoury feels sorry for the Arabs in the Territories, calling their life hell. It isn't hell, if one compares their filled out bodies with the emaciated ones of some Africans and south Asians. But it is unpleasant for his people to be ruled by Arab dictators who extort their money, use much of it for war even though they had negotiated peace, and who bring up their children to want to murder other people. If he feels sorry for his people, why doesn't he condemn their Arab rulers? The answer is that the Arabs are ashamed to admit fault. They prefer to blame others. Should statehood be given to would-be murderers? Since the Arabs keep attacking Israel, don't Israelis deserve sympathy? They don't get it from Khoury. That man, who talks of taking responsibility for what one does, does not admit any wrongdoing by his people, who have done as much wrongdoing as any others. He urges the P.A. leadership to confront Israel. How irresponsible! They have a peace agreement. All they had to do was keep it and negotiate a final agreement, for Israel was willing to cede them much of the Territories. But that's the Muslim Arab way –– confront rather than resolve peacefully. They also demand everything rather than compromise anything except temporarily. This is because their religion seeks to conquer the world in holy war, which includes propaganda. THE CAUSE OF THE WARS Here's another example of his multi-faceted falsehoods: "Israel has depicted the problem as rooted in the Arab world's refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. But even after the majority of Arab states demonstrated their recognition of this right by supporting the Saudi peace initiative of 2002, nothing changed...the true problem lies in Israel's rejection of the Palestinian right to an independent state..." I call his falsehoods multi-faceted, because in just two, related sentences, he embeds a number of false and misleading claims and concepts. The Arabs started the wars on Israel. It is not up to Israel to make peace but up to the Muslim Arabs to stop making war. The Muslims had their reason for starting the war. Khouri doesn't state it. They haven't changed it. It derives from principles of Islam and from Arab rulers' imperialism. Here they are. In 1947, when the UNO proposed a Jewish and an Arab state in what was left of the Palestine Mandate, Israel accepted the Arab state but the Arabs rejected the Jewish state. Islam holds that any area it once had conquered but subsequently lost, it must recover. A Jewish state in the Mideast that Islam once conquered (from the Christians and Jews) is an affront to Islam. When the Jews reconstituted their state, the Palestinian Arabs and Arab states attacked Israel. As the Arabs made plain in the first few wars, their goal was to exterminate the Jews and seize their country. When the war ended, Egyptian and Jordanian forces controlled Judea, Samaria, Gaza, and the Old City of Jerusalem. Jordan wanted what it took for itself. Egypt wanted what it took as a base for attacking Israel again. They did not permit the Arabs in those areas to set up another Palestinian Arab state. The Palestinian Arabs attacked Israel which had approved the UNO plan for an Arab state, and the Palestinian Arabs rejected that plan, and the existing Arab states seized the Territories and didn't let a state form there. Therefore, Khoury has no basis for claiming that the Jews caused the wars by thwarting Palestinian Arab statehood. Let Khoury blame his fellow Arabs, not Israel! By the way, there already is an Arab state in Palestine. It is called Jordan. What then is the need for another? It is a phony pretext for attacking Israel. Imperialists make up excuses for their attacks. Americans didn't take seriously the excuses of imperialists such as the Nazis, Japanese Empire, and the Communists. Why take seriously the excuses of the Arab imperialists? The Arab war on Israel in 1967 ended with Israel in control of the Territories. Instead of expelling the Arab enemy and incorporating the Territories, Israel mostly held them in suspended status, offering them to the Arabs in return for peace. At Khartoum, the Arab League said "No." Let Khoury blame them, not Israel, for not permitting the Arabs to have the Territories! Under the Oslo Accords, Israel granted the Arabs in the Territories autonomy and an opportunity, if they ended their terrorist war on Israel, to make permanent arrangements for complete self-rule. The Arabs broke all their commitments. They teach their children that they are entitled to all the cities in Israel. So much for who is responsible for non-peace. PHONY ARAB "RIGHTS" Khoury referred to an Arab right to independence. There is no such right. The Arabs, who give few rights to their own people and fewer to minorities, talk expansively about non-existent rights for their own rulers. Another alleged right is that the descendants of Arab refugees may enter Israel. It is an option, if Israel permits, provided that the Arabs agree to genuine peace. The refugee descendants don't believe in peace. If they entered Israel by the million, they would cripple national defense in a civil war or take the country over by majority rule. They would expel the few Jews they don't murder. Nevertheless, the demand for that "right" is part of the Saudi proposal. It is a proposal for war and genocide. Khoury calls it a peace proposal, as do the Saudis. This is a deception. Deception of the infidels is a major Islamic tactic. Khoury won't tell readers that. Shouldn't the Times, which does publish other background information? PHONY SAUDI PEACE PLAN (more) Khoury admits that some Arab states did not agree to the Saudi plan. The Arabs come out with proposals that capture favorable headlines. They don't mean what they say, however. Some don't agree with the others. When one goes to war, the others usually side with it. Organizations claim they don't endorse what their supposed representatives proposed. They find pretexts for not complying. Contrary to what Khoury alleged, the Saudis did not promise to recognize Israel. Their plan asks Israel to surrender its secure borders, and then the Arabs would consider recognizing Israel. By not having those borders and having the refugees inside, Israel would be rendered helpless. Considering that the Arabs still are in an arms race, such a plan means war and genocide. Consider Muslim Arab culture. The Muslim Arabs and Iranians are ramping up holy war. They preach hatred and conquest. Since they haven't stopped calling Jews "sons of apes and pigs," how would they get their people to retract their bigotry and desire for war? Shouldn't a cultural and religious movement for peace be visible, before the blandishments of Arab leaders about peace are taken seriously? SHAME ON THE TIMES! I think the Times should be ashamed of publishing Khouri's defamation without a rebuttal or an editorial pointing out his lies and misrepresentation. Instead of fully informing readers, as the Times claims to do, it fills them with lies and vicious ones at that, leading to genocide. A newspaper that indulges in such advocacy journalism about jihad cannot be trusted on other political issues. 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 |
|
FRANK RICH GETS IT WRONG ON HAGEE
Posted by CAMERA, May 28, 2008. |
|
Bravo to investigative reporter Joel Mowbray for pointing out the absurd errors made by Frank Rich in the New York Times regarding the pro-Israel pastor, John Hagee. As Mowbray notes, "Mr. Rich branded Mr. Hagee a bigot when, in fact, he [Hagee] was actually fighting bigotry." Frank Rich's hit piece on Hagee is a classic example of taking words out of context. This article appeared in The
Washington Times
The cartoon is by Dry Bones and is on Hagee, CUFI, and Campaign 2008. Saul Goldman who submitted it writes: a cartoon is worth a gazillion. |
|
In a particularly harsh New York Times column, Frank Rich recently painted a persuasive portrayal of high-profile evangelical Christian minister John Hagee as a nutty anti-Catholic bigot who does not like Jews, either. Simply put, it is a lie. Certain facts cited are, in fact, true. The most damning "facts," however, are not. Therein lies the problem. Mr. Rich flipped the truth on its head –– and it would stretch credulity to think he made an honest mistake. In the YouTube video the Times columnist parades as evidence of bigotry, Mr. Hagee is actually doing what he has done for decades: combating anti-Semitism. In other words, Mr. Rich branded Mr. Hagee a bigot when, in fact, he was actually fighting bigotry. Describing a now-infamous YouTube video clip –– which lasts all of one minute and 17 seconds –– Mr. Rich wrote: "Wielding a pointer, [Mr. Hagee] pokes at the image of a woman with Pamela Anderson-sized breasts, her hand raising a golden chalice. The woman is 'the Great Whore,' Mr. Hagee explains, and she is drinking 'the blood of the Jewish people.' The Great Whore represents 'the Roman Church,' which, in his view, has thirsted for Jewish blood throughout history, from the Crusades to the Holocaust." What the columnist neglects to note is that "the Great Whore" is not Mr. Hagee's term, but rather the Bible's. And suffice it to say that if Pamela Anderson had the same breast size as the rather plain-looking "Great Whore," then the iconic blond never would have become, well, iconic. But those are simply deceptive tactics. This is the big lie: Mr. Hagee never said that "the Great Whore" was the "Roman Church." Certainly not in the video, and it appears, not ever. Mr. Hagee quite clearly said that she represented "the Apostate Church." Later in his monologue, Mr. Hagee cited Adolf Hitler's boast that he was merely following in the footsteps of the "Roman Church." (Many Protestants have used the "Great Whore" to further anti-Catholicism, but Mr. Hagee has not.) So shoddy was Mr. Rich's research that not only did he not call for comment, but he even declined an offer from Mr. Hagee's publicist to answer any questions –– an e-mail that was only sent the day before publication, because the publicist had heard that the column was in the works. (Mr. Rich did not respond to a request for an interview for this column.) Were Mr. Rich interested in being fair, he would have noted that Mr. Hagee, for over a decade, personally supported a San Antonio-area Catholic convent which provided free housing for retired nuns. (Mr. Rich knew this, as it was referenced in the publicist's e-mail.) His failure to adhere to basic journalistic standards might explain why Mr. Rich (perhaps unintentionally) created the impression that Mr. Hagee is, at best, no friend of Jews, or at worst, an anti-Semite. It's an ugly implication –– and dead wrong. Theologically, Mr. Hagee believes that one of the greatest sins a Christian can commit is anti-Semitism –– hence the reference in the video to the drinking of the blood of the Jews. He was reminding Christians, as he often does, of the long history of Christian anti-Semitism. Mr. Hagee wastes no opportunity to teach Christians that one of the surest ways for a Christian to become a member of the "apostate church" is to engage in anti-Semitism. For decades, Mr. Hagee has easily been one of the most prominent Christian leaders fighting anti-Semitism. To him, loving Jews as much as one's Christian neighbors is a core tenet of his faith. In his book "In Defense of Israel," Mr. Hagee wrote, "Show me an anti-Semitic Christian, and I'll show you a spiritually dead Christian whose hatred for other human beings has strangled his faith." If anything, Mr. Hagee is obsessed with purging anti-Semitism from Christendom. Thus, the book contains a lengthy discussion of the history of Christian anti-Semitism. (It is from this section that his critics have pulled quotes to argue that Mr. Hagee is anti-Catholic. The leading critic, though, the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, this week announced a truce with Mr. Hagee.) If only Mr. Rich had spent roughly 20 minutes to peruse the relevant chapter, he would have learned two important tidbits: 1) Mr. Hagee's criticism was directed solely at the Catholic Church's past deeds, and 2) Mr. Hagee also attacked Protestant anti-Semitism, with an in-depth exploration of Martin Luther's considerable influence on Nazi ideology. Throwing stones from inside his glass house, Mr. Rich wrote, "Any 12-year-old with a laptop could have vetted this preacher in 30 seconds, tops." Given how far off the mark he was, it is only fair to ask of Mr. Rich: Could he not find a "12-year-old with a laptop"?
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
(CAMERA) monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in
reporting on Israel. The website address is www.camera.org.
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: REVULSION AND TURMOIL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 28, 2008. |
|
This is what the nation is struggling with in response to Talansky's testimony yesterday. It is not simply a question of illegality, but of out-and-out sleaze. Asking for money in unmarked envelopes instead of by check over a period of many years. Requesting loans for extravagances and never repaying them, even when asked to do so. There is the sense on the left and the right that Olmert is not a man who can head this nation. The focus is quality government, which is not a political issue tilting one way or the other. A rabbi is calling on other rabbis to camp outside Olmert's home until he quits. An "Envelope Movement" has started, with people printing up "Olmert go home" on envelopes, passing them out and putting them in public places. And now I'm hearing about demonstrations in the streets. Perhaps most significantly, Barak, who is head of Labor, at a press conference this afternoon, has now called upon Olmert to step down: "In the wake of the current situation and considering the challenges Israel faces...the prime minister cannot simultaneously lead the government and conduct his personal affairs. "Out of consideration for the good of the country and the accepted norms, I believe the prime minister must detach himself from the day-to-day leadership of the country." Barak suggested that the choice of whether to resign or temporarily suspend himself remained Olmert's. He indicated that if Olmert did neither, "we will move towards early elections." ~~~~~~~~~~ From several quarters criticism is being leveled at Barak for neither quitting the coalition now, nor setting a timetable for doing so if Olmert fails to act. There is concern that his words were not strong enough, and that he may be grandstanding rather than speaking sincerely. MK Zevulun Orlev gave voice to this when expressing unease that Barak might "repeat the false promises he made at Kibbutz Sdot Yam at his infamous press conference in June 2007." That's when he promised to quit after the final Winograd report was issued, although when time came, he did not do. Part of what's going on here, of course, is Barak's fear that in elections he would be trounced by Netanyahu. ~~~~~~~~~~ Three Labor MKs, acting more decisively, moved to dissolve the Knesset. There is a process, however, and this does not automatically come to a vote. ~~~~~~~~~~ MK Eli Yishai (head of the Shas faction) is behaving in his usual pathetic manner. "I'm not going to get emotional about this," he said, while explaining that he was still backing Olmert. He will now be consulting the Council of Sages that guides Shas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Needless to say, there is a lot of backroom caucusing taking place as people try to position themselves, within their own parties and in relationship to the other parties. Early rumors have spread of a Labor-Likud national emergency government that would leave Kadima in the cold. As would be expected, tension between Labor and Kadima is considerable. ~~~~~~~~~~ And Olmert? He's a man without shame. In the face of all that was publicly revealed yesterday, he refuses to step down. Says his strategic adviser, Tal Zilberstein, this would be an admission of guilt. His lawyers are claiming that there's nothing new in Talansky's testimony and that Olmert's innocence will be proven. Ultimately it will be up to the prosecutors and court to determine legal guilt, although when one hears about more than $300,000 allegedly transferred from Talansky's corporations to Olmert's lawyer, Messer, one does begin to suspect that there was more going on than Talansky's pure love for the mayor of Jerusalem. But the other guilt –– of impropriety, of lack of ethical behavior –– is staring us all in the face. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas is worried that all of this turmoil will effect negotiations. Let's hope so. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHY THE THE UK UNIVERSITIES' WITCH-HUNT AGAINST THE JEWS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2008. |
|
Sh'lom y'all, If you recall the real bottom-line motives of the international boycott-divestment movement, this witch-hunt is not a surprise. See my four articles (blog: www.sanityandsurvival.blogspot.com; or www.frontpagemag.com, go to archive and then to contributors, and then search on my name for the divestment articles) for details. The bottom line is: the divestment movement is merely a front in order to create a podium from which to bash Israel. Thus it does not matter that such an initiative, such a witch-hunt, is likely to be voted down, or rejected, or censured.... ..........what matters is getting out there in front of the public on one occasion and one pulpit and one soap-box after another and another and another...and just keep telling the world how horrid Israel is. Eventually (per Goebbels) they will come to believe it. that's the strategy....that's the bottom line. that's why the boycott movement in the UK keeps re-surfacing...no matter how many times it is shot down, and no matter how strong the condemnation. that's why pro-palestinian spokespersons within and without various churches and church movements and universities and teachers' unions, just keep raising the issue. the unpleasant tragic reality is that those in the church and the university systems who do so are either utterly duped by the Arab propaganda, or are conscious and intentional purveyors of it. of those in church movements, it can be concluded that they hate the Jews more than they love their Savior. of those in the university organizations, it can be concluded that they hate the Jews more than they honor their commitments to academic integrity. The article below is called "The universities' witch-hunt against the Jews."
It was written by Melanie Phillips and it appeared today in the
Spectator (UK)
|
|
Today, the Universities and Colleges Union is discussing whether universities should single out Israeli and Jewish scholars for active discrimination. Yes, you read that correctly. The UCU is debating a motion which not only raises the spectre yet again of an academic boycott of Israel but demands of Jewish and Israeli academics that they explain their politics as a pre-condition to normal academic contact. The motion asks colleagues to consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions, and to discuss the occupation with individuals and institutions concerned, including Israeli colleagues with whom they are collaborating... the testimonies will be used to promote a wide discussion by colleagues of the appropriateness of continued educational links with Israeli academic institutions... Ariel College, an explicitly colonising institution in the West Bank, be investigated under the formal Greylisting Procedure. The implication is that, if they don't condemn Israel for the `occupation', or practising `apartheid', `genocide' or any of the other manufactured crimes laid at Israel's door by the Palestinian/ Islamist/neonazi/leftwing axis, they won't be able to work. Their continued employment will depend on their holding views which are permitted. The views they are being bludgeoned into expressing as a condition of their employment are based on lies, distortion, propaganda, gross historical ignorance, blood libels and prejudice. And this in the universities, supposedly the custodians of free thought and inquiry in the service of dispassionate scholarship. What makes it all the more appalling is that it is Israelis and Jews alone who are being singled out for this treatment. No other group is to be barred from academic activity unless they hold `approved' views; no state-run educational institution controlled by any of the world's numerous tyrannies is to be `grey-listed'. The UCU's own rules state that it actively opposes all forms of harassment, prejudice and unfair discrimination. Well, various Jewish groups in the Stop the Boycott campaign have obtained a legal opinion from two QCs which states that today's motion constitutes harassment, prejudice and unfair discrimination on grounds of race or nationality. It says: If the Motion is passed it would expose Jewish members of the Union to indirect discrimination... Additionally, the Union faces potential liability for acts of harassment on grounds of race or nationality. The substance of the Motion may also involve the Union in becoming accessories to acts of discrimination in an employment context against Israeli academics...No doubt, if such Israeli academics speak in favour of the Palestinian viewpoint they will be immune from further action; if they are against it or possibly even non-committal they and their institutions are to be considered potentially unsuitable subjects for continued association... The opinion is thus unequivocal. Today's motion breaks the law; it breaks the UCU's own rules; it is prejudiced, discriminatory and unjust towards Israelis and Jews. But the motion also notes legal attempts to prevent UCU debating boycott of Israeli academic institutions; and legal advice that such debates are lawful In other words, two fingers to the Jews. Such is the disgusting and terrifying state to which Britain's intelligentsia has now descended. http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/736686/the-universities-witchhunt 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-BASHING AGENDA EMERGES AS DURBAN II GETS UNDERWAY
Posted by Eye on the UN, May 28, 2008. | |
|
Israel-bashing agenda emerges as substantive discussion of Durban II gets underway in the first meeting of the Intergovernmental Working Group On May 27, 2008 states negotiating the substance and procedure of the Durban Review Conference/Durban II revealed the anti-Israel agenda in the first "non-paper" outlining issues intended to be discussed. The non-paper was released in Geneva during the first meeting of the "Intersessional open-ended intergovernmental working group to follow up the work of the Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference." Under the subject "Victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance", the "victims identified" by an intergovernmental working group include "the Palestinian people under foreign occupation." The paper suggests that the "vulnerability" of Palestinians "is connected to racial or ethnic distinction from the occupying power." In other words, Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. This is the recast UN formulation of the 1975 General Assembly resolution declaring 'Zionism is racism'. Durban II is intended to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted on September 8, 2001 and that Declaration included a statement singling out Israel as guilty of racism against Palestinians. Leading the effort to once again isolate Israel, and demonize the Jewish state as racist, are Iran and Egypt. In the section "Other contemporary forms of racism as reported by different countries" Iran pointed to "the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which constitutes a violation of a wide range of civil and political rights." As part of "Strategies to achieve full and effective equality, including...mechanisms in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance" Egypt insisted that "...Other issues to be addressed include...foreign occupation." The Durban II agenda should ring other alarm bells for democratic societies, as the non-paper declares a clear assault on the freedom of expression under the guise of combating alleged Islamophobia. Here are some of the issues and suggestions now on the table: * "Permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression should be codified." In the meantime, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the African regional group –– now controlled by the OIC and its spokesperson Egypt –– are running circles around the European Union. On the first day of the session of the intergovernmental working group, for example, Egypt spoke more than four times as often as any other state. The German delegate remarked: "I find it quite ironic that our Egyptian colleague was insisting that he wants to be heard, when he was the person that talked most –– all the time –– here this morning; he has delivered a headline for this meeting which is en attendant l'Egypt [pending Egypt]." 
Click here to watch video.
Anne Bayefsky is Editor of EYEontheUN, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust. Contact her at anne@hudsonny.org |
|
THE REAL "DELUSIONAL FANTASISTS"
Posted by Michael Freund, May 28, 2008. |
|
This past Monday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told a Knesset Committee that anyone who believes in the idea of "Greater Israel" is a "delusional fantasist". Yet, as I argue below in the column from the Jerusalem Post, the real "delusional fantasists" are those who persist in clinging to the false hope of forging an even falser peace after 15 years of ongoing Palestinian violence, terror and obstructionism. Believing in the right of the Jewish people to the entire Land of Israel is neither delusional nor fantasy. It has been the basis of our faith, and the core of our national dream, for the past 2,000 years, and over the past six decades we have seen it begin to come to pass. And soon enough, the promise of "Greater Israel" will yet come true. |
|
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a slight problem on our hands. This coming Sunday night marks the start of Yom Yerushalayim, the annual celebration of Jerusalem's liberation during the heroic 1967 Six-Day War. Normally speaking, it is a day filled with cheer. Special prayers are recited in synagogues around the world, marches, ceremonies and commemorations are held, and crowds of visitors flock to the Old City to stroll through its narrow streets, caress the gentle stones of the Western Wall, and savor the holiness in the air. But here's the glitch: just how exactly are we supposed to rejoice over Jerusalem's reunification this year when the Israeli government is now actively seeking to divide it? It almost seems like throwing a large wedding anniversary party in the middle of divorce proceedings. Sure, the negotiations with the Palestinians may or may not be getting anywhere, depending on the latest spin being circulated in the media. And the current governing coalition, along with its policy of concessions, might in any event be gone before we know it. But all that is beside the point. The very fact that Jerusalem is on the table just 41 years after its miraculous emancipation from the shackles of foreign control cannot help but cast a menacing shadow over the festivities. And yet, oddly enough, despite the uncertainty hanging over the fate of our capital, I intend to whoop it up and revel fully in the spirit of the day. And you should too. Here's why: the jig is up for the Left and its supporters.
TRY AS they might to let the air out of the balloons, those in favor of tearing apart Jerusalem cannot, and will not, succeed. They and their ideological fellow-travelers are running out of steam, and they long ago ran out of political vision and courage, so it is only a matter of time before their outmoded policies become a thing of the past. Point of fact: for the past 15 years, ever since the signing of the Oslo Accords, various Israeli leaders have been coaxing and cajoling, pleading and pressing, and even begging and beseeching the Palestinians to make peace with us. And all they have to show for it is a string of failures and half-a-dozen worthless agreements, topped off by a steady stream of Kassam rockets now raining down on Sderot and the Negev. And yet, that doesn't seem to stop the proponents of retreat from hurling invective at those of us who refuse to buy into their forlorn worldview. "Delusional fantasists." That is how Prime Minister Ehud Olmert referred to those who believe in the vision of Greater Israel when he appeared before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday. "Only fantasists," he said, "can believe that in this day and age, and in the current situation, it is still possible to cling to the vision of 'Greater Israel.' " But who is really being delusional here? Is it Israel's Right, which has warned from the start about the dangers of appeasing Palestinian terror, or those who persist in clinging to a false hope of forging an even falser peace? With all due respect to Mr. Olmert, repeatedly banging one's head against the wall of Palestinian obstructionism in the hopes of making peace, even as more and more blood pours forth with each blow, hardly seems to qualify as rational behavior or intelligent policy-making. If anyone is delusional, it is those who still think that dividing the land of Israel will appease the Palestinian appetite, and quench their thirst for dismantling the Jewish state once and for all. Believing in the right of the Jewish people to the entire Land of Israel is neither delusional nor fantasy. It has been the basis of our faith, and the core of our national dream, for the past 2,000 years. It was a Divine promise to our ancestors, and it has propelled our people over the past century to climb out of exile and to continue to strive. And over the past six decades we have seen it begin to come to pass. Herzl too was mocked in similar terms when he boldly predicted the establishment of a Jewish state. Back in 1897, the great Zionist thinker Ahad Ha'am wrote this about Herzl's vision: "only a fantasy bordering on madness can believe that so soon as the Jewish State is established millions of Jews will flock to it, and the land will afford them adequate sustenance."
GUESS WHAT? It happened. Just look around at what Israel has accomplished in the past 60 years. So in the spirit of the day, I'm going to keep right on celebrating the return of Jerusalem to Jewish control, confident in the knowledge that those who raise a hand against her will not succeed. And I take solace from a passage in the Talmud in Tractate Taanit (29a), which is well worth pondering as we mark Yom Yerushalayim. The Talmud there contains a description of how the two Temples in Jerusalem were destroyed, centuries apart, by the Babylonians and then by the Romans. In both cases, when the attackers entered the Temple grounds, it occurred on a Sunday. Nevertheless, says the Talmud, the Levites on duty were singing the Song of the Day normally recited on Wednesdays. Rabbi Nachman Kahane points out that Wednesday's song, which is Chapter 94 of the Book of Psalms, begins with the words, "O G-d of vengeance, L-rd, O G-d of vengeance, appear!" The Levites, he explains, seeing that the Temple was about to fall into enemy hands, issued a last-minute plea to G-d to avenge its capture, hence they chose Wednesday's song. But why specifically Wednesday? Jump ahead nearly 2,000 years to the Six Day War, when Israeli soldiers ascended the Temple Mount and restored it to Jewish control. The day that took place was June 7, 1967 which was, of course, a... Wednesday. And so the historical circle was closed. Go ahead, dismiss it all as a coincidence, if you wish. But don't go calling it "fantasy." The promise of Greater Israel will yet come true. Just you wait and see. Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He is a Jerusalem Post correspondent. This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1211872828857&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull |
|
NO WAY TO WIN A WAR; EUROPE'S FUTURE: OLMERT REGIME FAILS FUNDAMENTAL TEST
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 28, 2008. |
|
INDOCTRINATING ARAB CHILDREN Hamas TV tells Arab children that Tel Aviv was an Arab place and so were certain other major cities in Israel. The program accuses the Israelis of having changed the names of those cities, including Beersheba to Hebrew ones (IMRA, 5/14). Tel Aviv is a modern city. It was built by Zionists, because the Arabs harassed Jews living in Jaffa. The Arabs did not build cities in Israel, though they have illegally built houses on stolen land and gotten recent, timid Israeli regimes to grant them municipal status and subsidy, though the Arabs claim that they are discriminated against. Zionist immigrants found that the Arabs had changed the ancient Hebrew names of places into a slightly different Arabic language version. Israel may have changed those back. The Arabs did not live in Israel in ancient times, as did the Israelites, but conquered the area 1300-1400 years ago. During the Arabs' first attempt to exterminate the Palestinian Jews, in 1947, the Arabs fled, Israel demolished many of the abandoned Arab villages, and probably gave their own names to new towns there. But Beersheba is mentioned in the ancient Hebrew Bible, before the Arabs arrived. PERES' PATHETIC PRAISE OF U.S. LEADERS Pres. Peres of Israel praised Sec. Rice for helping Israel negotiate in difficult times (IMRA, 5/14). Rice constantly criticizes Israel, victim of P.A. aggression, and does not criticize the P.A.. She demands Israeli security concessions to the aggressors, and does not demand that the aggressors desist. She insists that Israel give up more and more in its negotiations. Some help to Israel! OLMERT ADMITS NOT MAKING SERIOUS DEFENSE Several others were killed in Iraq. For us Americans, better there than here. Now European Muslims are fighting abroad. How long before they fight in Europe? Is Europe waiting for that to happen? It may find that a large portion of the national armies with which it would hope to put down the rebellion is Muslim. I'll be vacationing in Europe soon. I wonder what to reply when some native starts to make fun of Pres. Bush or worse, of the US. What would Europe's economy have been like if it had to pay its share of NATO defense of Europe, mostly borne for many years by the US. NATO cost the US more than 20 times as much as aid to Israel, which held off our enemies there with its own troops. "JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED" So said my political science professor, DeHaas. PM Olmert tried to delay the testimony of Mr. Talansky (who may reveal that indeed he did bribe Olmert). The court rejected Olmert's appeal (IMRA, 5/15). Earlier, Talansky expressed fear for his own safety. Perhaps he recalls that Sharon suffered his first attack after being alone with Peres, and went into a coma shortly after being alone with Olmert and giving him a signed statement transferring office to him if incapacitated. Instead of investigating, the Attorney-General declared Sharon not permanently incapacitated. He was lying to keep the country from holding an election in which someone less leftist and less subject to prosecutorial blackmail might get the office. BUSH'S FAVORITE, ABBAS Abbas controls P.A. broadcasts in Judea-Samaria. While Bush was indulging in his usual unwarranted praise for Abbas, the P.A. broadcast a slur on the US as being the biggest Satan. The P.A. favors Cuba, Venezuela, and N. Korea, because they are anti-American. It lauds those who fight the US. A new P.A. state is likely to line up with jihad against America (IMRA,Arutz-7, 5/15). Will the US media ever question why the US helps those enemies of ours? PROMISING BOOKS The detailed reviews of Daniel Silva's half-dozen novels were exciting. All are about Islamists who gain entrée into naïve Western society posing as moderates. While the Islamists plot, the Israeli hero attempts to thwart or trap them. The stories are patterned enough after real events and characters to make them instructive and entertaining in a way that news reports are not (gleaned from MEFNews, 5/15). SHARON THE STRATEGIST A recent rocket attack on Ashkelon was launched from a former Jewish town in Gaza (Arutz-7, 5/15). The rocket that struck Ashkelon was new and improved. Inevitable and predicted. Nevertheless, the regime waited for this to happen. Then when the enemy uses the respite to build up fortifications, the regime fears to act. How ironical and revealing about the short-sightedness of Israeli policy! The policy of removing all the Jews from Gaza was bulldozed by former PM Sharon. Sharon was known as Israel's best strategist. His policy was anti-Zionist strategy. People didn't know that he always had been a leftist, but they suppose him to have been a right-winger. In that case, how come they don't wonder what turned him against Israel? Why don't they question the acquiescence of the Knesset to his intended and announced plan to expel the Jews? The answers are that the Knesset doesn't question a Prime Minister if it means they might lose their valuable legislative seats, and the media don't ask many question about policies they like. Few people think about public issues. They parrot. OLMERT REGIME FAILS FUNDAMENTAL TEST An Israeli radio announcer indicated that the rocket attack on Ashkelon did not produce enough casualties to finally get the Olmert regime to take the "serious" action against terrorism that Olmert publicly admitted he had yet to take. The government does not protect its people. Protecting the people is the fundamental obligation of government. The Olmert regime does not meet its basic obligation. It hardly is appropriate for it to be negotiating national security with the enemy whom it lets attack it national security (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRa, 5/16) and under the auspices of the US, which demands that Israel let the Arabs have the ability to attack. 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 ENVELOPE MOVEMENT: TO SEND OLMERT HOME
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 28, 2008. |
|
Israelis are wonderful! After the testimony on how PM Olmert received large sums of cash in unmarked Envelopes for many years –– a new grass-roots movement is springing up in pockets throughout Israel: "Tnuat Matafot" –– "The Envelope Movement". Some are printing up Envelopes saying "Olmert HaBayita" –– "Olmert Go Home" (signed) "Tnat Matafot" –– "The Envelope Movement" and distributing them. Others are carrying around Envelopes in a demonstrative manner –– so everyone will get the message, or posting them in obvious places. There is even talk of "Hafganot Matafot" –– "Envelope Demonstrations" where people will wave Envelopes and poster sized Envelopes and call for PM Olmert to resign. The testimony was just today. The "Envelope Movement" is just starting. Let's see where it goes and who takes it there. 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 |
|
FIRST PAKISTANI & INDIAN ISRAELITE PATHANS SIGN JERUSALEM PROCLAMATION
Posted by Root and Branch Association, Ltd, May 27, 2008. | |||
|
The Root & Branch Association, Ltd. (www.rb.org.il), "an all-volunteer, non-member organization founded by Torah-observant Jews, promotes cooperation between the State of Israel and other nations, and between B'nai Israel (Children of Israel) and B'nai Noach (Children of Noah) in Israel and abroad, to build a better world based on the universal Noahide Covenant and Laws as commanded by the G-d of Israel in the Bible and Jewish tradition." |
|
GHOST FLIGHTS FROM IRAN TO VENEZUELA
Posted by Zeev Shemer, May 27, 2008. |
|
[Editor's Note: This story is circulating the internet. It's
an interesting story. We don't know if it's true. The version here is
attributed to Maru Angarita's website: |
|
There are nine miles that separate Judea (the West Bank) from Israel's coastal line, more specifically Netanya, and 11 miles to Tel Aviv. Just a couple of miles separate Lebanese Hezbollah territory from Quiriyat Shmona, Naharia and Shlomi, and practically, Tiveria, Haifa and Afula are also a stone throw away. Across the Atlantic there are 90 miles that separate Cuba from South Florida, 120 miles to downtown Miami. There are even fewer miles separating Mexico's border from the southwestern states. If anyone had the delusion that Iran would launch a missile attack against the US once it completes its nuclear program I am afraid he either understands nothing about military warfare or he is a salesman for a Radar manufacturing company. In June 2006 the Associated Press reported that the presidents of Iran and Venezuela pledged to support one another in disputes with Washington: "Iranian's president Ahmedinejad called Hugo Chavez "a brother and trench mate." Chavez pledged that his country would "stay by Iran at any time and under any condition." He admires the Iranian president for "his wisdom and strength." He also invited Iranian oil companies to invest in Venezuela. –– Iran is the world's No. 2 oil exporter and Venezuela No. 5. "We are with you and with Iran forever. As long as we remain united we will be able to defeat (U.S.) imperialism" Chavez said. Manuel Kliese from airlines.com reported on June, 2007 shortly after Iran Air's first flight to Venezuela: "Iranian News Agency (IRNA) and German newspapers published in late 2006 that a new route "across the pond" was to be opened. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez had decided to strengthen relations between their two countries, and decided that a direct flight route between Tehran and Caracas would be the appropriate step to show Uncle Sam that they can cope without him quite well –– even transatlantic style. To complete the political puzzle, a stop in the Syrian capital of Damascus would create a proper "axis" and also generate enough payloads to make this route economically feasible, as there is quite a diaspora of Syrians living in Venezuela." Let us fast-forward to January 11th, 2008; from an anonymous source: Yesterday I arrived at Maiquetia Int'l airport in Caracas, Venezuela, and met up with a girlfriend of mine who works at the duty free shops. As I waited for my luggage I asked her about Iran Air's flight that had arrived thirty minutes prior to us and she told me the following: On April 2008 Pablo Bachelet from the Miami Herald published his story under the headline 'US faults Venezuela airport screening'. Venezuela has failed to screen passengers arriving to Caracas on its weekly flight from Tehran and Damascus, a State Department report on counterterrorism released Wednesday says. On June 1st, one of JFK Airport bombing suspects Abdul Kadir was arrested in Port of Spain, Trinidad with a ticket to fly to Tehran via Caracas, Venezuela. Adam Goldman from the Associated Press was one of the first to report on the planned bombing: New York –– Four Muslim men were foiled from carrying out a plot to destroy John F. Kennedy International Airport, kill thousands of people and trigger an economic catastrophe by blowing up a jet fuel artery that runs through populous residential neighborhoods, authorities said Saturday. To sum up, it seems that the Muslim world has a clear plan of attack. Iran will not launch a missile attack at the US nor will it strike against Israel. Iran will use its proxies and the world's media to accomplish its goals. Maybe the new sophisticated Radar system that America has pledge to Israel will allow us to see the missiles coming. And would they be launched from a considerable distance such as from Iran or Pakistan, there is a good chance to intercept. However, when they manage to transport these deadly warheads into the hands of the Hezbollah and or Hamas, the people of Israel will have a merely a few seconds to utter a prayer before they are struck. Regarding the US, although it has been shown that most ports in the US do not undergo strict inspection, an attack from across the border via Mexico, Cuba or Canada will too be unstoppable. Iran and Venezuela have countless other allies in their war against the US and Israel. Venezuela and Cuba harbor terrorists from the FARC (Colombian terrorists group). They have deep connections with terrorists and smugglers in Mexico, the government of Bolivia, a new ally in Brazil, the support of the Muslim world, mainly Saudi Arabia, a country which for oil interests the US calls its ally. And last but not least, they have pledged support to the first Arab-American candidate in the US that can once and for all, open the door for their Trojan radioactive-horse. The only solution is not a good defense but rather a strong offense. The US and Israel need to immediately take steps to remove Chavez from government. They must plan and execute a precise attack on Iran's nuclear installations. They must search and destroy all Hezbollah's terrorists roaming in southern Lebanon. They must strengthen President Uribe in Colombia to battle and destroy the rebels that have inflicted so much suffering on the Colombian people for the past 70 years. They must cut-off the so-called Palestinians form Gaza, remove the subversive populations from Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), cut-off relations with Saudi Arabia and use Iraq's oil to revive the US economy that has suffered enormously since the Islamic attacks of 9/11. None of what I just mention will happen. The leaders of Israel as well as the new presidential hopefuls in the US are characterized by their liberalism and lack of common sense. When Jabotisnsky came to Poland in 1930 to warn the Jews of the horrors he foresaw, he was met with anger and rejection. Here is to the few that listened, L'Chayim! Ze'ev Shemer lives in Ramat HaGolan in Israel and teaches at Western Galilee College and at Ort Braude Technical College. He holds a Master's Degree in Education and specializes in Judaic Studies and Language. Ze'ev is a master of Aikido and Ju-Jitsu and teaches pre-army cadets. Contact him by email at zeev.shemer@yahoo.com |
|
GOOD JIHAD, BAD JIHAD, AND THE IC
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 27, 2008. |
|
This was written by Clare M. Lopez and it was published on
the Family Security Matters website:
|
|
When the Director of National Intelligence declares publicly that "We try not to refer to 'jihad' as something that's bad," even though he knows that the United States (U.S.) and all of civilized society is engaged in an existential struggle with the forces of Islamic Jihad, it is hard to fathom what he could possibly be thinking. Only a few short weeks ago, we were told that referring to jihad might somehow legitimize our enemies. Of all of our leaders charged with the defense and protection of our Constitution, DNI Michael McConnell bears a special responsibility to understand clearly the identity of the enemy and the nature of the threat he poses. He also has a professional responsibility to communicate that honestly to the American people. The refusal of DNI McConnell and, apparently, the rest of the Bush administration, to acknowledge the obvious linkage between terror in the name of Islam, and the Islamic faith, goes beyond absurd: it is dangerous to national security because it prevents the U.S.'s top officials from crafting an appropriate strategic policy to defend us. Willful ignorance of the fundamental doctrine of Islamic Jihad, as defined by Islamic scriptures, scholarly consensus, and historians cannot change what is written, what is believed, and what is lived by those who would destroy our Constitutional system and replace it with Sharia. It doesn't matter in the end whether we agree or disagree with the doctrine of our enemies, or judge it good or evil: if that is what guides the enemy's behavior towards us, then that is what we must deal with. It is also irrelevant that more peaceful methods for propagating Islam, such as Da'wa, do exist, or that there indeed is a "Greater Jihad" (the inner struggle to better oneself). Neither Da'wa nor the "Greater Jihad" employs warfare or terror to replace liberal democracy with Sharia. But the "Lesser Jihad" does. Let it be clear: "Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion." (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, o9.0, JIHAD, pg. 599) "Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya (tribute) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." (Quran, Sura 9:29) This is Islamic law; this is sacred, non-abrogated, Islamic scripture. It is doctrine. It cannot be changed. It can be criticized or renounced –– but if Muslims do so, they are apostates, subject to the death penalty. It will take much courage and the support of free people everywhere to establish the right to leave such doctrine behind, in the dustbin of history. What is unavoidable is the current reality of this doctrine for millions of Muslims across the world, including right here in the U.S. The 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas, Texas featured a startling collection of documents entered into evidence; among them was the "Explanatory Memorandum" of the Muslim Brotherhood for the destruction of Western civilization (dated 1991). "The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands..." With such documents now in the public domain, in addition to such fine works as Andrew G. Bostom's comprehensive collection of primary source documents about Jihad through history, The Legacy of Jihad, there is simply no excuse for not understanding the systematically destructive character of Islamic Jihad for all societies that have ever attempted to stand against it. So, how could it possibly be that the head of American intelligence does not want to refer to Jihad as something that's bad? Why are U.S. government employees not allowed to speak the name of the Jihadi enemy, or the Mujahedeen troops that slaughter in the name of Islam, or the Caliphate they are fighting to re-establish? It seems that it is alright to speak of al Qaeda (but only as an "aimless death cult") –– even though al Qaeda is but one discrete organization of Jihadi terrorists and hardly "aimless." It also appears to be acceptable to speak of the "radicalization phenomenology" –– which apparently is what our government thinks is the process by which normal, everyday citizens of the world are turned into suicide bombers. But to refer to the faith-based ideology that every suicide bomber's farewell video claims as motivation for the murder they intend, that hate-filled Friday sermons cite as God-given justification, or that treatises by scholars of the Islamic faith annotate with such exactitude –– no, that is forbidden. Outreach to non-jihadi Muslims is certainly a key component of this war. But we need to show them and all who believe in the values of tolerance and civil society the respect they deserve. A misplaced concern that holds such potential allies incapable of distinguishing between the Greater and Lesser Jihad and thinks an infantilized lexicon that denies the reality we all see will somehow win over hearts and minds betrays an incompetence that is jarring to observe. Neither can fear of the magnitude of this threat be allowed to destroy our faith in ourselves, our abilities, and our values. Dhimmitude (the second-class status of people conquered by Jihad) is a status freely accepted; it does not happen overnight, but is slipped slowly, inexorably over a society that loses its will to resist. We Americans are not a people to submit, whether by infiltration, subversion, or Jihad. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: DEPOSITION BEGUN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 27, 2008. |
|
Morris Talansky began his pre-trial deposition in court today with a recounting of his personal relationship with Olmert, whom he says he loved. In order to help Olmert, when he was mayor of Jerusalem, Talansky offered to write him a check. But Olmert said that because of the way checks were routed, it was better to have cash. So Talansky gave him cash. Now, I'm not a multimillionaire financier and that request for cash smells like three day old fish to me. So what was Talansky thinking? "I didn't really grasp it. I didn't really work out how the system works over all," he claimed. Later in his testimony he admitted that, "I overlooked, frankly and honestly, a lot of things. I overlooked them, maybe I shouldn't have." ~~~~~~~~~~ Talansky says, between 2002 and 2005, he gave Olmert $150,000 from his own pocket, as well as assisting with raising funds from others. Some of this was transferred via Olmert's long-time assistant Shula Zaken, and some was handed to Olmert directly when he was in the U.S. He paid Olmert's hotel bill and covered other expenses; sometimes Olmert asked for money –– $5,000 here, $3,000 there. He admits that there are no records of how this money was spent: While a good part of the money was allegedly used for political expenses, Olmert, he explained, was fond of high living –– expensive cigars, watches, first class on flights, etc. Sometimes there were "loans" –– as for example $25,000 for a family trip to Italy. The loans have never been paid back. On one occasion, when Talansky asked for the return of money, Olmert told Talansky to speak to his son, who lives in New York, but nothing materialized. As to those campaign expenses, documents presented showed $300,000 transferred from Talansky to Olmert lawyer and associate Uri Messer from about 1999. Talansky says the last money he gave Olmert was in 2005. Olmert had asked for expenses for a primary, and Talansky confesses to being shocked at how much Olmert said he needed: some $70,000. Seems that he had become disenchanted with Ehud Olmert. ~~~~~~~~~~ Talansky, in his testimony to this point –– which is extremely damning of Olmert in several respects –– paints himself as innocent. "I was a victim," he says. "I trusted Olmert." He never had any ulterior motive or expected anything from what he gave Olmert. He did it for love of the man and for love of Jerusalem. He did it, it would seem, because Olmert hugged him and invited him to his son's wedding –– because it made him feel personally connected to what was important to him. That's how it would seem. He did acknowledge that Olmert tried to drum up business for a venture of his. (That's when billionaire Sheldon Adelson was approached and rebuffed the outreach.) The question becomes one of legality: what was pure friendship, what was bribery, when was Olmert legally justified in taking the money, what does it mean that full records do not exist, etc. The testimony will continue. When Olmert's lawyers cross examine, they will seek to discredit Talansky and to search out legal rationale for why this money would have been given. ~~~~~~~~~~ Durban II is being thus titled because it follows Durban I, which indeed was held in Durban, S.A. But this conference will be held elsewhere. From Anne Bayefsky, of Eye on the UN: The next UN racism conference –– known as Durban II or the Durban Review Conference –– will be held on UN premises in Geneva from April 20-24, 2009, a UN preparatory committee decided today. Durban II is intended to promote the implementation of the 2001 Durban Declaration, which singled out only Israel and labeled Palestinians as victims of Israeli racism For further information: www.eyeontheUN.org ~~~~~~~~~~~ Sixty-one supporters (the number required) have promised to sign on to a bill in the Knesset that would require 80 votes to give away the Golan. This is good news. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SIRHAN WANNABE WOULD TARGET MCCAIN, NOT OBAMA
Posted by Judith Apter Klinghoffer, May 27, 2008. |
|
Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy on the anniversary of the 6 Day War because he was a strong supporter of Israel. Hence, if a Palestinian would consider a similar despicable act, he would not focus on Barack Obama, the man endorsed by Hamas but on the man who could be trusted to stand up to Hamas and it's puppet masters, John McCain. But wasn't Robert Kennedy an antiwar advocate? And, therefore, wasn't the CIA the real culprit, as conspiracy theorists advocates would like to argue? The simple answer is no. Robert Kennedy (and Eugene McCarthy for that matter) was a Vietnam dove but a Middle East hawk. The Johnson administration liked to refer to them as "Dawks and Hoves." Indeed, when captured, Sirhan Sirhan was carrying an newspaper article describing Kennedy as such. Kennedy believed that American forces could not hold the containment line both in Southeast Asia and that the Middle East was the more important one. That translated into support for Israel and more specifically, into support for the sale of Phantom Jets to the Jewish state. Lyndon Johnson promised to supply the jets but he delayed acting on that promise. His envoys, Averell Harriman and Llewelyn Thompson were negotiating with the Vietnamese in Paris and they hoped they can get a better deal for South Vietnam with Israeli concessions to the Arabs. American officials, including Johnson, emphasized that the Arabs had "a unique opportunity" to deal with a president who was "beyond the domestic pressure of the Jewish vote" and who delayed action on the promised Phantom sale irrespective of the JCS analysts' conclusion that Israel was "in an inferior military position." The media was filled with speculations of an imminent package deal. It should be remembered that the Israeli air force was decimated by the 6 Day War and that the USSR was engaged in a massive rearmament of Egypt and Syria. Thus, the refusal to supply Israel with Phantoms became equated with a willingness to sacrifice Israel for a better deal in Vietnam. On May 9, 1968 both Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy called for Phantom sales. Hubert Humphrey stood by Johnson who mounted a full frontal attack on Israel by arguing that "American hopes for a reduction of world tensions and results in the Paris peace talks" depended on Israel withdrawal from the territories without a peace agreement. When asked about the assassination of Robert Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson insisted that he did not know the reasons for the attack on the Senator. "We cannot permit a wave of anti-Arab sentiment among the American public at a time when we are trying to restore good relations with our friends in the Arab world, explained a "top official" to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reporter.
Potomac Books, ISBN: 1597970794 By the way, Palestinians definitely considered Sirhan Sirhan one of them as is evident from the following report: When Yasser Arafat's Black September terrorist stormed the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum in March of 1973 and took US Ambassador Cleo Noel, Charge d'Affaires George Curtis Moore, and others hostage, Sirhan's release was one of their main demands. To sum up, appeaser Obama is not in danger. Robert Kennedy was not
an appeaser. That was the reason he was assassinated. Of course,
appeasers, then and not, try to cover up the crime.
Contact Judith Apter Klinghoffer by email at jklinghoff@aol.com
This article is archived at
|
|
OLMERT'S REMARKS, CRITICS' ANSWERS; MIXED UP ON CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 27, 2008. |
|
POLICY FROM ASSUMPTION & MISREPRESENTATION Tony Blair said peace requires "easing conditions for Palestinians (just the Arab ones) while assuring Israelis their security. How? By boosting the P.A. economy and removing Israeli checkpoints against the movement of terrorists." What about boosting the security of Israel, under daily assault from the Arabs? Nothing suggested about that (Isabel Kershner, NY Times, 5/14, A11). Phony! What did Blair say about P.A. incitement to terrorism? Nothing. He is phony! Although Blair paid lip service to Israel selecting roadblocks they find least problematic, his proposals would assure Israelis of continuing insecurity. Thus Blair misrepresents the Road Map as being for peace and security. The assumption is that without economic aid, the Arabs would resort to terrorism. What the studies validate that assumption? None cited. What is the logic behind the assumption? That unlike poorer people who are not Muslims and who are not Arabs, Muslim Arabs commit terrorism against Israelis if their standard of living is low. How absurd! Better to tell the Muslim Arabs to behave like other people, instead of rewarding them for misbehaving. Tell them that their miserable economy is their own fault, first for electing crooks and second for making war. Why should other countries give aid to Arab aggressors? Why not compensate Israel for suffering terrorism? Nor are Arab terrorists usually from the poorer class but from the educated classes, whether Palestinian Arabs or Saudis. Economics is not the motive. Religion is. Blair doesn't know that? I think it is more logical to suppose that by boosting the P.A. economy, the P.A. would be able to afford more war. Certainly an improved economy would help keep the Arabs in the area, where they are positioned to commit terrorism against Israel. Why not boost the economy of Israel? A boost would be just. Not boosting Israel's economy implies that the Quartet knows that the war is caused by the Arabs. Then why does the Quartet often malign Israel? Because the Quartet is used to making the Jews the scapegoat. OLMERT'S REMARKS, CRITIC'S ANSWERS "'We must be... strong in the face of those who murder the innocent to achieve their objectives,' –– unless, of course, they are moderate peace partners." "'... we must understand the realities of the world in which we live,' –– except, of course, the reality of what the 'moderate peace partners' really want and... do." "... when PM Olmert says the government... will 'take the necessary steps so that this will stop' –– he didn't say which year it would take those steps" (IMRA, 5/14). MIXED UP ABOUT CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION "Bush looks toward the day when Muslims 'recognize the emptiness of the terrorists' vision and the injustice of their cause.' This statement is in violation of the US Constitution requiring separation of church and state, and solicits racial and ethnic prejudice in the name of religion to promote warfare for profit. Mr. Bush is actually in trouble and needs more money for his country. NeoCon thinking believes war with Iran will improve the US economy. It may also be viewed by Muslims that US is actually at war with Muslims who do not kowtow to US interests. Mr. Bush by using these words is including all Muslims in this statement." Later in his piece, Cain blames modern Israel in its entirety because, he writes, Israel killed the Messiah ("Lazarus Cain", Soc.Culture.Israel newsgroup, 5/15.) NEOCONS: The influential neo-Cons, except V.P. Cheney, have resigned, because they lost influence to Sec. Rice and the State Dept.. Gone are Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, and Perle. Many of the neo-Cons have become critics of Pres. Bush, as he changed his outlook and made what they consider to have been mistakes. Is Cain out of touch with the political situation? I think that that is not the point with certain opponents of Pres. Bush. The neo-Cons had become a useful rallying cry against Bush's vigorous initial reaction to terrorism. They became a double scapegoat. Since some of the recognized names among them were Jewish, antisemites liked to pretend almost all were. Then they could offer this as evidence that "the Jews" control the US and blame Bush's policies on the Jews. Of course, they ignore the fact that most Jews, including US Jews, are not neo-Cons. Nor do those who use the term pejoratively define it. Although Bush no longer holds with neo-Con ideology, it remains convenient for his more radical opponents to vilify him with that old, scapegoat, rallying cry. ANTI-MUSLIM: Bush is friendly to Islam but hostile to some Islamist terrorists. He is trying to recruit what he considers moderate Muslims to oppose what he considers the imperialist "fringe" that, again in his opinion, distorts the Koran to recruit moderate Muslims against all but extremist Muslims. It is a measure of self-defense against definite attacks and jihad against the US. This is his Constitutional duty. No matter how assiduously and in how servile a manner Bush differentiates between Muslims and Islam, as he did again in the quoted statement, Islamic opponents of Bush depict him as anti-Muslim. It is a devious tactic. They want to rally Muslims against him on false pretenses. Slander is one of their tactics. It is unfortunate that many Muslims fall for slander and rumors. It would be one thing for them to defend the faith when it is attacked. It is another to allow themselves to be misled by demagogues with a sinister agenda of harm to the while world, and who exploit their credulousness. Islamists have persuaded many Muslims that the US is at war with them. Their belief is false and not the fault of the US. Masses of Muslims follow what their leaders say, true or not. They easily can be rallied against infidels and foreigners, having been taught prejudice with rancor. They blame the US for defending itself against attacks by terrorists who also are Muslims. They do not give the US credit for helping Muslims, although the US fought Serbia for the Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo, gives financial aid to some Muslim states, and is trying to make another Islamic state out of Jewish territory. Bush is not the prejudiced one, at least not against Muslims. They are prejudiced. JEWS KILLED JESUS?: So is Cain prejudiced. Although the Western Christian sects have rescinded their accusations against the Jews of deicide, Cain continues with the old canard. All contemporary Jews had nothing to do with the matter. Neither did most Jews of the time –– they weren't there. If the legends about Jesus are correct, then he was sentenced to a death he sought, by the Romans in a non-Jewish way, and was punished in a Roman way. Asserting that some Jews just in Jerusalem favored his punishment, and that some Jews in Judea favored him, even if true, by no means makes the whole Jewish people guilty then and for all time. About this, Cain is neither logical nor decent. Cain blames Bush falsely for stirring up religions bigotry, but that is what Cain attempts to do. Where is Cain's conscience? RACIAL PREJUDICE FOR PROFIT?: Racial prejudice? Hardly. Muslims are of all races. Since Bush's statement appealed to Muslims, it was not inciting prejudice against their religion but trying to rally them against Islamists who, he believes, commit war crimes using the religion as pretext. What profit? Who said neo-Cons think we can make money from a war on Iran? How could we? War has become far more expensive than to be for gain. Cain implies as much, when he said that the US needs money. In other words, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars cost the US a great deal and brought us no gain. The only value of a war for the US nowadays is self-defense. What is Iran doing that upsets the US? It sets proxies to turn neighboring countries into fanatical imperialists. It sets them to fighting against US troops. Is not that an act of war? Iran also is striving to build nuclear weapons and continental missiles. It has threatened the US, Israel, and Europe with nuclear weapons. What is Bush waiting for? What is Cain waiting for, the bombs to be delivered? What has he to say about Iranian provocations? Is war all right with him, unless the US fights back in one? Is he anti-American" CHURCH-STATE SEPARATION: As quoted, Bush was not violating principles of Church-State separation. He was not establishing religion nor was he interfering with one's practice. He was urging Muslims not to be taken in by the Islamists, who, Bush suggests, fight against us and them (latest bombing in a Gulf country) in the name of religion. He should be commended for doing that. In any case, if the whole religion made war on us, he would be commander-in-chief in defense against it. That would not violate Church-State separation. By the way, Muslims in general, not just Islamists, establish their religion and repress or destroy other religions in every country they can. Even in this country, they already are trying to curb other religions, ironically in the name of Church-State separation, while, inconsistently, striving for privileges for Islam. Those are a threat to our way of life. Does Cain care enough for our Constitutional way of life to oppose Islamic attempts to replace other religions here or in Europe? The Muslims back their demands by votes, lawyers, and threats of force. What does Cain think of Muslim death threats against rational critics? Perhaps not Cain, but Muslim opponents of the American way of life use arguments that they think will appeal to Americans but which they don't consider valid. 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 |
|
EXPERT: GOLAN WILL BECOME CROWDED TERROR BASE
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 27, 2008. |
|
Arab affairs expert Dr. Guy Bechor of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya estimates that a "Golan for peace" deal will net Israel, in the long run, anything but peace. Bechor, who authors a Hebrew-language newsblog on Israel and the Middle East, wrote an article for Ynet news in which he predicts that no matter what Syrian Dictator Bashar Assad promises, he is likely to be toppled by radical Moslem forces –– leaving northern Israel vulnerable to the terrorists on the plateau above. Bechor predicts that an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan would be followed by a three-stage process: Stage I "About a million Syrian residents will be settled in the Golan immediately.... A presidential decree has already been issued [by Bashar Assad] announcing that any Syrian resident who moves to the Golan will receive a government allowance... This will enable [Assad] to realize his dream with no interruptions: establishing a 'resistance' against Israel in the Golan Heights. Officially, Assad will argue that he has no connection to the terror attacks that would be directed at the Galilee region and northern Israel from the Golan; yet in practice, Syrian intelligence officers will do as they please vis-à-vis northern Israel, [as] they already did in northern Lebanon." Stage II Bechor argues that despite the friendly relations between Lebanon and Syria, Syria supports subversive activity against the Lebanese government: "Why wouldn't the Syrians do the same in the Golan? Would a peace deal with Israel stop them? With Lebanon they have not only peace, but even an official relationship of fraternity and friendship." Stage III "Assad's minority Alawite regime will be toppled," for the "peace deal will in fact serve to precipitate his downfall (and for that reason, Bashar won't be pursuing real peace with Israel.) His regime has no legitimacy in Syria as it is, particularly when it comes to the Muslim Brothers, whose power keeps growing." Once this happens, "the Golan Heights will turn into the radical spearhead against Israel, and not only from Syria: People will be coming from Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Terrorism will be two-pronged both from the Golan and from Lebanon. Life in the north will turn into an unbearable nightmare, yet the situation will be irreversible..." Bechor concludes that Israel's agreements in the past and future with Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority are either reversible or did not cost much. "But with Syria, the situation will be different: From being an empty buffer zone, the Golan Heights will turn into a crowded anti-Israel region for generations to come. From being a strategic asset to Israel, the Golan will turn into a burden on top of the other regional efforts to eliminate Israel. Our future generations will not forgive anyone who would do that." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
SYRIA ISN'T SERIOUS; LEBANON IS
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 27, 2008. |
|
Why is Israel negotiating with Syria and what happened in Lebanon? One of these events may be the Middle East's most important development for 2008. Hint: it isn't the first of them. Let's consider why the two sides are "negotiating" including the fact that they aren't negotiating. There isn't going to be a deal. Both sides know it, yet have good reason to be seen talking, indirectly that is. Start with six factors that account for Israeli government policy. 1. Keep Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in power. It's not the only issue but sure it's there. Olmert wants to claim he's amidst such important negotiations that it's a sin to interfere. What's more important, he says, envelopes filled with cash or peace? Olmert has used this strategy with Palestinian talks for a while and is now jumping on a different horse. This doesn't mean he's going to give away national security assets to save himself. The beauty of this strategy is that he doesn't have to do that. Just making headlines achieves this goal. Thus, Israel is doing something totally different from the ideas of Senator Barack Obama which would bring disaster if he becomes the U.S. president. If Syria is ready to move away from Iran, stop backing terrorist groups, be ready to make full peace with Israel, and meet other conditions (limiting forces in the Golan Heights, early warning stations, etc.), talks can advance. When this doesn't happen the talks will either collapse or enter a long, obviously dead, slow-motion process. This game, in my opinion, is not a good thing, since it weakens the struggle against the Iran-led bloc which is the region's most important issue, but it is unlikely to inflict material damage to Israel's strategic position. What, then, are Syria's motives? It, too, has good reasons to play the game. 1. Syria's main problem is international isolation. The alliance with Iran as well as sponsoring terror against Lebanon, Iraq, and Israel, has brought Syria serious diplomatic and economic costs. Negotiating with Israel bails it out of jail. The precedent is 1991-2000. Without concession or policy shift, the dictatorship survived a decade when it was vulnerable (USSR's collapse; America's Kuwait victory). Understandably, it wants to repeat this triumph. Of course, the idea that Syria wants real peace, will recognize Israel, move away from Iran, abandon Hamas or Hizballah, and cease terrorist meddling in Iraq is purest nonsense. All these steps are against the regime's vital interests. Yet, as demonstrated above, it can play the talks' game without doing any of these things. Meanwhile, Lebanon has fallen to Hizballah, another state added to Iran's bloc. This catastrophe is intensified by ignoring it. One day, this tragedy might be seen as equivalent to the 1938 sacrifice of Czechoslovakia at Munich to appease Germany. Bashar is no Hitler (perhaps closer in this parallel to Germany's junior partner, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini), but toward Lebanon the United States and Europe, especially France, acted like British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain at Munich. And this is even without Iran having nuclear weapons or Obama being in the White House. What could come next may be far worse unless the West wakes up. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
TALANSKY TESTIFIES: OLMERT REQUESTED CASH
Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, May 27, 2008. |
|
American Jewish philanthropist and businessman Moshe Talansky testified before the Jerusalem District Court on Tuesday that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert requested contributions in the form of cash to his various political campaigns. Talansky recounted that in 1992, he offered to write Olmert checks for his campaign, but was told to give cash instead. He said that he knew some of the money was used for "expensive cigars and expensive pens." Despite the thousands of dollars that both Olmert and Talansky admit changed hands, the New York native told the court, "I never received anything, and I never expected anything [in exchange]." During his pre-trial testimony, given before three judges, Talansky recounted meeting Olmert during the First Gulf War, when the latter was Minister of Health. "We became close," Talansly said. "I saw that he wanted to run for mayor of Jerusalem, that he believed in a strong, united city... I had great admiration for him. We used to call him 'the prince of Likud.' I truly loved him. The most important thing for me was the unity of Jerusalem." When asked why he "loved" the then-Likud politician, Talansky replied that, for him, Olmert represented someone who could unite the religious and secular sectors of Israeli society. Nissan Ratzlav-Katz is a writer for Arutz-Sheva. |
|
UN PEACEKEEPERS SEXUALLY ABUSING KIDS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 27, 2008. |
|
This appeared on Gateway Pundit
|
|
A 13 year-old girl was gang-raped in the Ivory Coast and left bleeding, trembling and vomiting
The BBC reported: Children as young as six are being sexually abused by peacekeepers and aid workers, says a leading UK charity. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
THE DECISION BY THE MILITARY APPEALS PANEL REGARDING BEIT EZRA –– THE EZRA HOUSE –– IN HEBRON
Posted by Jewish Community of Hebron, May 27, 2008. |
|
The decision by the military appeals panel regarding Beit Ezra –– The Ezra House –– in Hebron includes: 1. Heavy criticism targeted at the custodian for abandoned property concerning stolen Jewish property. A military appeals panel today publicized its decision concerning "Beit Ezra" –– the Ezra house, in Hebron. "Beit Ezra" is property owed by Mr. Yosef Ezra, whose family lived in Hebron for hundreds of years, prior to the 1929 riots, massacre and expulsion. Presently two Jewish families live on property owned by the Ezra family. During the years of Jordanian occupation this property was stolen by Hebron Arabs and used for as Arab shops. Hebron's Jewish community redeemed this property and today utilizes it in coordination with Mr. Ezra. Arab vendors, instigated by Peace Now, brought a legal suit against the community and the families, arguing that the land had been stolen from them. A military appeals panel heard the suit and today ruled. In the decision, which ranges over 30 pages, the three panel judges heavily criticize the custodian for abandoned property in Judea and Samaria. They ruled that he did not utilize proper judgment as dictated by his job, as a guardian of the property, which he is obligated to protect. He left the property abandoned, deteriorating and vacant, and was wrong to demand eviction orders for the Jews living there. The custodian did not take into account the good of the property or take into consideration the will and desire of the original owner, Mr. Yosef Ezra, as he is obligated to do. The panel also ruled that the Arab vendors haven't any legal rights to the property, and certainly not as 'protected residents.' At most, if they can prove that the property was legally rented, they may be eligible for monetary compensation due to cessation of their lease. The panel ruled that in his previous ruling, the custodian took into consideration only the rights of the former Arab vendors, when in reality, they have no legal rights whatsoever. Concerning the Jewish residents, the panel ruled that they inhabited the property without receiving permission from the custodian and as a result must evacuate the property. However, in light of the fact that their residency in the property is compatible with both the good of the property and the desires of the owner, and in reality is the only way to fulfill both these obligations, the panel outlined a method which will allow the Jewish residents to remain living in the property: 1. The residents must evacuate the property within 60 days. The custodian may not take into consideration the rights of the Arab vendors as 'protected residents,' because these rights do not exist. The custodian's decision to the request must be given within thirty days. This decision may be again appealed to the military appeals panel. The significance of this decision is that the Jewish residents will be
able to continue living in Beit Ezra. (More material is available in
Hebrew, including the full panel decision, at
In addition, the latest (Hebrew) Hebron newsletter is available at
|
|
WIESEL'S POOR LOGIC; BUSH BRINGING DOWN ISRAEL; ANOTHER "PEACE PARTNER" WITH ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 26, 2008. |
|
HAMAS VS. BUSINESS The "Defenders of Islam" organization has bombed Gaza pharmacies, cafes, and stores with Internet access. It also has committed "honor killings" of women accused of illicit relations with men (Arutz-7, 5/12). No trial necessary, under Islam. Suspicion is enough for it. Since Hamas controls Gaza tightly, one must assume its complicity in this terrorism. OLMERT BRIBED? PM Olmert denies that he was bribed. He claims the funds given him were campaign contributions. Trouble is, he wasn't running for office, when much of it was turned over. He is said to have many offshore accounts (Barry Chamish, 5/11). Is that where he keeps his campaign contributions? GOOD QUESTION; MY GUESS Israel would like Eqypt's proposed ceasefire in Gaza to include a cessation of arms smuggling and other military build-up. Dr. Aaron Lerner asks why Egypt didn't include that provision in the first place (IMRA, 5/12). My guess is that Hamas wouldn't accept that provision, because its purpose in obtaining a ceasefire is to be able to build up its forces without IDF interference and to stave off an Israeli invasion until Hamas could wreak heavy casualties upon the Israelis. I further believe that this suits Egypt's purposes, which is to dominate the region by weakening Israel, anyway, an infidel state. POOR LOGIC Elie Wiesel asks, if Israel could make peace with Germany, why can't it make peace with the Palestinian Arabs (IMRA, 5/13). Simple answer: Germany overthrew their fascists; the Palestinian Arabs elect theirs. Besides, peace requires two sides to want it. The jihadists don't want peace, they want to conquer. Couldn't Mr. Wiesel have figured that out? 60 YEARS LATER, COUNTRY CONFUSED "Israeli campuses this week are full of anti-Israel, Nakba ceremonies, organized by leftist Jewish students and faculty and Arabs, to mourn Israel's existence. All on campus facilities paid for by Israeli taxpayers and by Jewish donors from outside Israel." (Prof. Steven Plaut.) DEFAMATION BY PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Physicians for Human Rights denounced Israel's Shin Bet for letting a Palestinian Arab die by delaying his entry into Israel for chemotherapy. The organization was informed of the man's death by the grieving brother. A week later, he was found alive. The brother had lied. He didn't want the patient vetted first, since he was suspected of terrorism. Shin Bet rebuked the Physicians for not checking the story (IMRA, 5/13). NGOs and the media don't check negative stories about Israel very well. HALF-LEARNED LESSON FOR ISRAEL Hizbullah domination of Lebanon taught Hillel Halkin half a lesson for Israel. He concludes that Israel never should depend on international guarantees. They aren't enforced. He claims that Egypt honors its non-aggression pact with Israel only because it is afraid not to. He urges Israel to reject any agreement with the P.A. that depends on international observers (NY Sun, 5/13, Op.-Ed). Guarantees and pacts were violated routinely, including by the US.. Until recently, Mr. Halkin urged Israel to accept more. How many times must Israel be deceived to learn such a lesson? Nor is Halkin right about Egypt. Egypt violated its agreement as soon it got the full Sinai. Egypt reduced diplomatic relations, tourism, and trade with Israel. Egypt built tank tunnels under the Sinai and leads international diplomacy against Israel. Egypt nurtures terrorist movements against Israel, by counsel and by letting them smuggle arms through Egypt. PRAISES UNDESERVING BUSH FOR HELPING ISRAEL Former Bush advisor Jay Lefkowitz states that Pres. Bush has made the legitimacy and security of Israel a high priority. Bush's Evangelism makes him sympathetic to Israel, but he also wants to carve a second Palestinian Arab state out of former Mandate territory. However, Bush conditions that state on P.A. conduct. It must be peaceful and democratic (NY Sun, 5/13, Op.-Ed.). Bush has broken the law and lied for the P.A. about compliance with anti-terrorism, so he can continue to subsidize terrorism there. He has not demanded that the P.A. cease its incitement to violence against Israel and initiate rule of law. Instead, he has criticized Israel and demanded that it stop most defensive measures against terrorism emanating from the P.A.. Some Evangelists are anti-Israel. Bush talks nicely about Israel but demands it give up defensible borders. ANOTHER "PEACE PARTNER" WITH ISRAEL Egypt has nominated its Min. of Culture to become head of UNESCO. The Minister stated that if he found an Israeli book in an Egyptian library, he would burn it himself. Israel protested to Egypt. He opposes normalization of relations with Israel, though Egypt's treaty pledges normalization (IMRA, 5/14). Egypt did not normalize relations. That violates its treaty. Now that new, alleged peace agreements are being proposed between Arabs and Israel, it is time to review how successful the existing ones are and how the various truces worked out. Fact is that the Arabs violated almost all the truces and treaties. BUSH'S VISIT MEANS MORE ISRAELIS DIE The Olmert regime has ordered the Army to scale back its anti-terrorist arrests during Pres. Bush's visit. It wants the area to seem calmer. This means that the terrorists are not going to be held off balance during the visit. As for the Arabs, they didn't forbear. They fired a rocket into a shopping center in Ashkelon, Israel (IMRA, 5/14). Israel is currying favor with Bush. Doesn't gain favor, however. Appeasement never does. It has the opposite effect. Act contemptibly, like Olmert, and become treated with contempt, as Rice treats him. Israel is afraid that the State Dept. deliberately would misinterpret raids as making difficulty for Bush. They all prefer misinterpreting the lack of raids and of fighting in general as progress in coming to peace. Unfortunately, the Arabs have no peace movement. Israel should at least continue its anti-terrorist operations, already minimal as part of the effort to appease the State Dept.. Let Israel show how much terrorism there still is, by fighting it, thereby protecting Israelis. It won't do that, because such a demonstration would undermine the pretense that Abbas is anti-terrorist and the pretext that he is a "peace partner" with whom to sign an agreement giving up Israel's secure borders. The confusion and the legal aspects would be clarified by an Israeli declaration of war in response to the thousands of attacks. P.A. TAKING OVER MOST JENIN SECURITY, NOW Israel will give first opportunity for arresting terrorists to the P.A.. If the P.A. fails to arrest them, Israel may. Usually, the P.A. doesn't punish them but seeks out Israel's informants for punishment (IMRA, 5/14). 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 |
|
DO NOT CEDE THE GOLAN HEIGHTS OLMERT!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 26, 2008. |
|
It is the height of arrogance, indeed unscrupulous, for an unpopular national leader, his ability to govern in question, resignation looming over his head like a Sword of Damocles about to fall, to engage in major policy initiatives, especially relating to foreign policy, clandestinely, with no real authority, contrary to the will of the majority of people he was elected to serve, against the advice of his military generals, perhaps to create a diversion, perhaps to put himself in an essential position where he must remain in power and continue his quixotic quest, his fool's errand without interruption. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert now cynically so engages in peace negotiations, more aptly termed 'take a piece of Israel' negotiations, through Turkish mediators, contrary to strong exhortations by his nation's essential American ally, with Riyad Dadawi, Syrian strongman Bashar Assad's strategist for the U.N. sponsored probe and future trial in the 2005 murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri. Furthermore, Dadawi remains liaison for the Syrian army with Iran's Revolutionary Guard and Hizballah. As if dealing with questionable characters is not enough, what on earth is Olmert doing anteing up Israel's Golan Heights, land justifiably captured in 1967 from Syria when that regime along with other hostile Arab regimes attempted to annihilate the Jewish homeland, as a bargaining chip to secure a pie-in-the-sky promise of peace from Israel/Jew hater Assad? Does Olmert believe the alliance between Damascus and Tehran will be strained as a result of any peace treaty between Syria and Israel? If so, then why did Syrian defense minister Hassan Turkmani shuttle off to the Iranian capital to presumably boost military ties right after talks began? Ceding the Golan Heights to Syria would in fact be an immense strategic blunder for Israel. 'The Golan Heights And The Facts', by Yoram Ettinger, Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research, strongly supports that assertion. His Policy Paper No. 108, 2000 delivers a number of reasons why Israel must never cede the Golan Heights, as depicted below. The eastern ridge of the Golan Heights constitutes the watershed of the Lake of Galilee, which provides Israel with 30% of her water supply. Would that be safe in Syrian hands no matter what the regime's spokesmen say? Additionally and most importantly, the mountain ridges of the Golan Heights, much like those of Judea and Samaria, give Israel a topographical edge in case of war. Ceding the Golan Heights with or without a peace treaty is ceding the high ground to a neighbor that cannot be trusted, that has yet to secure peace treaties even with Muslim neighbors, that remains an abuser of human rights, that has brutally occupied Lebanon, that has hosted Nazi war criminals, that has attempted to build a nuclear reactor, that houses weapons of mass destruction, that lends financial and moral support to Hizbullah as well as kindred spirit terrorist groups, and that is ruled by a murderous autocratic government that would again attempt to destroy Israel if only it could no matter what is said for the sake of convenience! Recall that during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, control of the Golan Heights eastern mountain ridge, located just 35 miles from Damascus, a natural tank barrier (as well as a defensive missile launching site for Israel), enabled 177 Israeli tanks to thwart 1,400 Syrian tanks bearing down on the Jewish homeland with no warning. Only a traitor and fool would compromise his nation's security for effectively nothing except perhaps his own personal and political survival, using a diversionary ploy to forever in this case taint the perpetrator Olmert's legacy, a lopsided agreement if (God forbid) successfully brokered by Israel's harried elected leader that would rank among the worst historically to befall any in effect sacrificed state, especially one fated to fight for her own survival on a daily basis. It boggles the mind that under such circumstances, the non-consulted disrespected Israeli Knesset as a body does not issue a precedential 'cease and desist' letter to Olmert preventing him from perpetrating acts that betray the State of Israel, specifically consummating agreements with the hostile regime of Syria, declare agreements already consummated to be null and void, solicit a vote of no confidence for the disgraced perhaps soon to be indicted prime minister, and enact legislation to prevent any future 'rogue' prime minister from crafting foreign policy without appropriate consultation of fellow legislators. There isn't even a demographic upside to Olmert's intended folly as some might bequeath to the stupidly conceived abandonment of Gaza. Israel cannot afford to similarly turn her back on the Golan Heights, a region she must defend and nurture for the sake of future generations. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
'WE'LL KEEP FIRING UNTIL EVERY JEW CLIMBS BACK INTO THE SH---- HOLE HE CAME FROM'
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, May 26, 2008. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared yesterday in World Net Daily. |
|
JERUSALEM –– Terrorists in the Gaza Strip are rejoicing at an Israeli decision today to evacuate troops stationed at a major Gaza-Israel border crossing following repeated Palestinian attack against Israel's side of the border station. "This retreat proves the Israeli army is a paper tiger. What we proved to the world in 2005 (when Israel evacuated its Jewish communities from the Gaza Strip) we are proving once again. We are reaching a new step and proving our resistance and our rockets are working," Muhammad Abdel-Al, spokesman and a leader of the Hamas-allied Popular Resistance Committees terror group, told WND. "Just as the Zionists are running from the border, they will also run from Ashkelon, Ashdod, Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Tel Aviv ... . We will keep firing until every Jew climbs back into the sh--ty hole he came from," said Abdel-Al, whose group took responsibility for scores of recent attacks against the Israeli border. Abu Ahmed, a leader of the Islamic Jihad terror group in Gaza, called Israel's troop evacuation a "victory." "We feel proud and determined," he said. "Israelis start to withdraw from bases that are well-fortified because the Palestinian resistance proved that we are able to reach them at any point even if it is very fortified. We are proving once again that the myth of the unbeatable Israeli army is irrelevant," Abu Ahmed told WND. Under instructions from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government, the IDF announced soldiers stationed at the Gaza District Coordination Office, the army's liaison office to Gaza, were set to be transferred from their facility just outside the Erez border crossing to a base further inside Israel due to the security threat in the Gaza border area. Erez is the main commercial and humanitarian aid crossing between Israel and the Gaza Strip. It has been the target of several recent Palestinian terror attacks and attempted attacks. Last Thursday, the Islamic Jihad terror group along with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the so-called military wing of Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization, attempted to carry out a massive bombing at the Erez Crossing that, if successful, would have been the largest terrorist attack here since the Jewish state retreated from the Gaza Strip three years ago. In last week's attempted attack, a truck reportedly carrying four tons of explosives detonated prematurely as it was approaching Erez. Even though the truck exploded hundreds of feet from the crossing, the explosion was large enough to rip a hole in a pedestrian passageway leading out of the Erez terminal and into Gaza. Residents in the Gaza Strip who live more than 20 miles from the crossing told the Palestinian media they heard the blast. "In terms of the amount of explosives used, Thursday's attack was the biggest since Israel pulled its settlers and troops out of Gaza nearly three years ago," Israel Defense Forces spokeswoman Maj. Avital Leibovich said. IDF sources told WND that if last week's attack would have been successful, they estimate tens of soldiers and civilians would have been killed. In response to Palestinian attacks, defense officials here have been petitioning the government to carry out a large-scale Gaza incursion to massively dent the territory's terrorist infrastructure. An average of one dozen rockets and mortars per week are fired from the Gaza Strip into nearby Jewish communities. Earlier this month, during a visit by President Bush to Jerusalem, one terrorist rocket smashed into a large shopping mall in the coastal city of Ashkelon, seriously injuring 11 people. The new decision to evacuate Israeli troops from the border station comes as Olmert is reportedly seeking to finalize an Egyptian-brokered cease fire with Hamas and other Gaza-based terror groups. Amos Gilad, who heads the Israeli defense ministry's political-security branch, flew to Egypt today for talks with Egyptian Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman regarding the cease fire deal. Defense officials here have been warning a cease fire in Gaza will likely be used by Hamas to transport weapons into Gaza, rebuild armies and infrastructure in the territory and train in combat against future IDF operations. Alongside the evacuation of troops and brokering of a cease with Hamas, Olmert last week announced he commenced negotiations with Syria over an Israeli retreat from the Golan Heights –– strategic, mountainous territory looking down on Israeli population centers. The Golan negotiations are taking place as Olmert faces what is being described as a very serious criminal investigation in which the prime minister is suspected of bribery and corruption. Olmert has vowed to resign if he is indicted in the rapidly expanding case. A survey conducted last week by Israel's Channel 2 found 70 percent of Israelis oppose relinquishing the Golan Heights for peace with Syria, compared to 22 percent in favor of such a move. The poll found 57 percent of Israelis believe the timing of the negotiations with Syria is linked to the corruption case against Olmert. Fifty-eight percent of those polled reportedly said Olmert did not have the legitimacy to negotiate with Syria. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is
Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit
(www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet
buying facility for American visitors to Israel.
Zelasko writes, "Stop complaining and fight back!
Here's how:
|
|
WHY THE LEFT IS SUDDENLY ANTI-OLMERT
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 26, 2008. |
|
1. As you know, the Olmertocracy has an obsession about giving away national prizes to haters of Israel and anti-Zionist extremists. Here is its latest boondoggle –– handing a science prize to a pro-Palestinian moonbat professor who then sent the money to Bir Zeit "university" and to one of the extremist Israeli leftist seditious groups: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/986898.html How about if we send the entire annual allotment to Ben Gurion University to Bir Zeit, instead –– you know, for peace of course!!
2. Many people in Israel are asking why the leftist establishment is now suddenly going after Olmert with its subservient Attorney General's office and its hegemony over the media. After all, for years the Left's stooges were content to sit back and turn a blind eye to Olmert's personal corruption because he was carrying out the Left's agenda. The Attorney General and media in Israel only uncover "sleaze" and dirt and corruption in politicians whose politics they dislike. That is why they just can't ever seem to take notice of all the personal corruption of Ehud Barak and Amram Mitzna. (And we all recall the whitewashing of Ezer Weizmann!) But let Bibi and his wife remove some trinkets and ashtrays without permission from the PM's residence and the media have a field day! Or let Aryeh Deri fail to provide documented explanations for all of $40,000 out of his funds used to purchase his home.... So why the sudden determination to drive Olmert from office? It is obviously not a sudden squeamishness about bribery on the part of the stooges of the Left. One explanation being whispered about Israel, and one I find highly plausible, is that the Left and its captive institutions are upset at Daniel Friedmann, Olmert's Minister of Justice, and his determination to end judicial tyranny in Israel. The Left is in favor of judicial tyranny because it allows it to impose its political agenda on Israel through the courts without the inconvenience of actually having to win elections. The Left has placed Friedmann in its sites and is willing to topple Olmert to get what it wants.
3. Finding New Ways to Express Jew-Hatred
I am often reminded of Martin Luther King's statement about anti-Zionism: "You declare that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely anti-Zionist. And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops... When people criticize Zionism they mean Jew; we are talking anti-Semitism... .Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land... Anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic and ever will it be so. And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-Semitism." Late last year, Israeli author A.B Yehoshua observed: "Instead of attacking Jews they are attacking Zionism, and this is the way because you cannot attack Jews anymore openly." Anti-Zionism gives old fashion anti-Semitic intent a sheen of civilised discourse, but people of good conscience should not be deceived or intimidated to deal with it or let down their guard. As they say, the devil is in the details. Principally, anti-Zionism is an accurate reflection of unbridled street level anti-Judaism feeding on anti-Semitic myths that in turn nurture the battle against the existence of Israel. Obviously, it's easier to disseminate age-old anti-Jewish feeling cloaked as anti-Zionism. But in no way should Anti-Zionism serve as a convenient cover, a euphemism, a loophole for those spewing and fomenting anti-Semitic slander. For the record, not every criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. No one wants to stifle a free, honest and open debate on all sides. It's all about the pitch the criticism reaches. Moreover, there's no problem with champions of the Palestinian cause who dissent and use industrial strength criticism to make a point about the specific policy of the Israeli government. As long as they recognise Israel's right to exist, do not deny individual Jews self-determination and the right to live and do not seek Israel's destruction because it is "a racist entity' guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity" (NGO declaration before Durban). To wit, who can forget the blatantly hypocritical circus of the Durban conference where a considerable number of nations insisted that every reference to Anti-Semitism be linked with the racist practices of Zionism" while simultaneously arguing that Zionism was a movement based on racist supremacy akin to apartheid. It has been noted that the line is crossed when Israel is imbued with known antisemitic stereotypes, when Israelis and Jews are compared to Nazis and blamed for worldwide disasters (the Mel Gibson syndrome), when they are singled out and attacked in a disproportionate manner, and when Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is questioned. For Gabriel Schoenfeld, editor of Commentary, anti-Semitism is "the right and the only word for an anti-Zionism so one-sided, so eager to indict Israel while exculpating Israel's adversaries, so shamefully adroit in the use of moral double standards, so quick to issue false and baseless accusations, and so disposed to invert the language of the Holocaust and to paint Israelis and Jews as evil incarnate." In a similar vein, Ruth Wisse reveals that, "Contemporary Anti-Zionism has absorbed all the stereotypes and foundational texts of fascist and Soviet anti-Semitism and applied them to the Middle East." Swedish statesman Per Ahlmark wisely doubts that anyone would believe this declaration, "I am against the existence of Great Britain, but I'm not anti-British." History has shown us that rarely has there been anti-Zionism without anti-Semitism. Dr King named the lie, saw that anti-Zionism is often used to mask the face of anti-Semitism and so do I. Take Resolution 3379 (Zionism=racism), a strategy to de-legitimatise Israel's right to exist. Arab Historian Bernard Lewis has written that the insidious resolution was chosen as the best stand in for a vicious anti-Semitic campaign by Soviet and Arab Ideological goals. Once accepted, it erased the taboo against publicly expressing anti-Semitic sentiments in the wake of the Holocaust. And as then US Ambassador to the UN Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recalled in his book A Dangerous Place, the shameless resolution was not only aimed against Israel but also against world Jewry. Intellectual William F. Buckley observed at the time that the UN had become "The most concentrated gathering of anti-Semitism since the days of Hitler's Germany" while Lionel Trilling maintained that with this legal travesty the ghost of Hitler haunted the halls of the UN. Recognising the interdependence of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, the US Senate passed a resolution condemning the vote as an encouragement of Anti-Semitism as did the Australian Parliament. In 1991, President Bush in an address to the UN assembly, stated, "Zionism is not a policy, it is the idea that led to the creation of a home for the Jewish people in the state of Israel... To equate Zionism with racism is to reject Israel itself, a member in good standing of the UN." Even the Vatican, in its document The Church and Racism of the Holy See's Council acknowledged that, "Anti-Zionism... serves at times as a screen for anti-Semitism feeding on it and leading to it." (part II, no. 15). Consider that anti-Zionism is the first type of Jew hatred to deny that it hates Jews. Today, those who hate Jews and who fan the flames of bigotry call themselves anti-Zionists, seeking new modes of packaging their virulent ideology and knowing that "if one tells the same lies long enough" as Goebbles stated, "people will begin to believe them". Yet, it is beyond dispute that throughout the world, classical anti-Semitism is being dressed us as anti-Zionism, a more respectable, but no less poisonous and vile, type of hate. There is hard and fast evidence that all too often anti-Semitic figures brand themselves anti-Zionists. Consider Kwawe Ture. When speaking on American campuses, the Black Nationalist figure's favourite punchline is "The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist." Ture asserts he is not anti-Semitic, merely anti-Zionist although he heads the AAPRP, one of the most radical anti-Semitic groups on the left, tells audiences that Jews dominated the slave trade and that Zionists collaborated with the Nazis to create the Holocaust. Clearly, animosity towards Zionism by high profile hate mongers is always bonded to smearing against Judaism. Robert Wistrich remembers an interview with Valery Emelianov a leading member of the ultra right wing Russian group Pamyat in which Elianov kept using the word Zionists where it was plain it was a transparent codeword for Jews, also repeatedly employing the term "Jewish Nazis". And what about Syrian Defence Minister Mustafa Tlas and his 1983 book The Matza of Zion, a blood libel clocked as insight into Zionist behaviour and intention. One could also add the Peronist congressman in Argentina who classified Zionism as device for taking over Latin America and the Court in Crete that ruled in 1984 that Jehovah's Witnesses are part of a Zionist conspiracy to rule the world as prime examples. Even left-wing icon and peace activist Israeli author A. B Yehoshua has recognied the anti-Zionism agenda. In March last years he observed: "Instead of attacking Jews they are attacking Zionism, and this is the way because you cannot attack Jews anymore openly." Let us also recall that that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran spoke at anti-Zionism conference when he infamously spoke about wiping Israel off the map. The establishment of a Jewish state has not erased anti-Semitism. There is still a need for a demonized scapegoat and Israel itself has become the world's Jew, its favorite scapegoat. Anti-Zionism is an ingenious way to defame Israel and the Jewish people. And for that very reason, anti-Zionism should not lose its seat on the bus of political correctness that protects certain groups; it should never be made acceptable, tolerated, ignored or hushed up. Dr. Dvir Abramovich is Director of the Center for Jewish History and Culture at the University of Melbourne, Australia. He is president of the Australian Association of Jewish Studies.
4. Hebonics: New York City Public Schools have officially declared Jewish English, now dubbed Hebronics, as a second language. Backers of the move say the city schools are the first in the nation to recognize Hebronics as a valid language and a significant attribute of American culture. According to Howard Ashland, linguistics professor at Brooklyn College and renowned Hebronics scholar, the sentence structure of Hebronics derives from Central and Eastern European language patterns, as well as from Yiddish. Prof. Shulman explains: "In Hebronics, the response to any question is usually another question, with a complaint that is either implied or stated. Thus 'How are you?' may be answered, 'How should I be, with my bad feet?'" Prof. Shulman says that Hebronics is a superb linguistic vehicle for expressing sarcasm or scepticism. An example is the repetition of a word with "shm" at the beginning: "Mountains, shmountains. Stay away. You should want a nosebleed?" Another Hebronics pattern is moving the subject of a sentence to the end, with its pronoun at the beginning: "It's beautiful, that dress." Prof. Shulman says one also sees the Hebronics verb moved to the end of the sentence. Thus the response to a remark such as "He's slow as a turtle," could be: "Turtle, shmurtle! Like a fly in Vaseline he walks." Prof. Shulman provided the following examples from his best-selling textbook, "Switched-On Hebronics": Question: "What time is it?"
Remark: "I hope things turn out okay."
Remark: "Hurry up, dinner's ready."
Remark: "I like the tie you gave me; I wear it all the time."
Remark: "Sarah and I are engaged."
Question: "Would you like to go riding with us?"
To the guest of honour at a birthday party:
Remark: "It's a beautiful day."
Answering a phone call from a son:
5. Jewish Voice for Peace and the New Blood Libel
Jewish Voice for Peace needs a new motto, something like "We're not really anti-Zionist, but we always act that way." Their latest screed about the Palestinian Nakba reads like a textbook produced by the Palestinian Authority, full of allegations designed to incite hatred and prevent peace. It levels charges of atrocities allegedly committed against Arab civilians by the Jews of 1948 Palestine, who had the temerity to try to defend themselves not only against 5 invading Arab armies, but also against local villages that had long been launching attacks against Jewish civilians and besieging Jewish Jerusalem. Their "fact sheet" accuses Israel of war crimes, in blood-curdling detail that brings to mind accounts of the horrors of the Holocaust. This of course is not by accident. There are three themes that anti-Zionists use to try to relate the Palestinian narrative to the Holocaust. First, they attempt to present the Arabs as nothing more than peaceful innocent bystanders who became secondary victims of the Holocaust (ignoring the fact that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Amin al Husseini spent the war years in Berlin where he encouraged the Nazis to commit full scale genocide against the Jews, recruited Muslims for the Nazis, and toured Auschwitz with Eichmann, probably to help plan a similar facility should the Germans have overrun Palestine). Secondly, they insist on the false equation of the mass industrial-scale extermination of European Jewry based on a horrific racist ideology, and the dislocation of Palestinian Arabs caused by another war of extermination against the Jews.this one started by their fellow Arabs. Finally, and most outrageously, they claim that current Israeli self-defense actions against the terrorist organizations Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad are morally or legally on a plane with Nazi Germany's treatment of the Jews. The descriptions used by JVP are almost all credited to one source: Ilan Pappe's book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Pappe, for those unfamiliar with him, is a former Israeli lecturer at the University of Haifa who has since relocated to the University of Exeter in the UK. A doctrinaire Marxist who once ran for Knesset with the Communist-led Hadash party, he opposes the existence of Israel as a Jewish state but nonetheless supports "resistance" by Hamas, a radical Islamist movement that seeks to impose sharia law and at least tolerates, if not incites, violence against Christian "infidels" . Most tellingly, he also frankly admits that he is not really interested in facts: "'We do [historiography] because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers... 'there is no such thing as truth, only a collection of narratives'." This philosophy was exposed when one of Pappe's graduate students, Teddy Katz, was shown to have falsified evidence about an alleged massacre at Tantura in 1948 by claiming that his interview subjects said one thing while the tapes of the interviews proved otherwise. There are historians such as Benny Morris who have indeed documented incidents of expulsion and even murder of Arabs during Israel's War of Independence, when the Jews were fighting for their lives and the Arabs were fighting to kill Jews. Israel, no more and no less than other countries, was not born without violence, without wrongs being committed, without people being displaced. All Americans who are not part of the original Native American population live on their land by virtue of military conquest, much of it involving acts worse than anything Israel is accused of by its worst enemies –– and Americans are not returning to a homeland for which we have pined and prayed for centuries. The same holds true for Canadians and Australians. So by what moral right do those who point the finger at Israel and bellow "J'accuse!" continue to reside in their own comfortable homes? The blood libel is an old staple of anti-Semitism. Jews through the centuries have been slaughtered because of the now-rejected Catholic teaching that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus, then for the myth that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood for matzah. Now we have the new blood libels against Israel. The most prominent has been the al-Dura affair, used as a bloody shirt to create a jihadist frenzy during the Arafat's terror war.and now that the entirety of the filmed evidence has been aired in a French courtroom, the questions about what might have been a fully staged hoax are larger than ever. Other examples of media gullibility to Arab manipulation abound.the "Jenin massacre" in 2002 during which world media eagerly swallowed Palestinian claims of hundreds of deaths during Operation Defensive Shield, the doctored pictures from Lebanon, blame placed on Israel for the deaths of civilians killed by Hamas mines on a Gaza beach. Of course, while the sensationalist false reporting of these incidents makes headlines, the "corrections" are always buried in small type at the bottom of page 10. JVP has chosen to perpetuate the tradition of the blood libel, hiding behind anti-Zionism as a politically correct shield. As self-described experts on anti-Semitism, their leadership can't claim to be ignorant of what they are doing. So one can only conclude that they agree with Pappe: facts aren't important, advancing the ideology is. And the ideology, sadly, is not one of peace, but of fanning the flames of anti-Israel hatred.
Please join the battle: http://jidf.blogspot.com/
6. Store sells 'Jews Against Obama' shirt NEW YORK, May 24 (UPI) –– An Israeli immigrant says he has received death threats since he began selling "Jews Against Obama" T-shirts at his store in New York. Doron Braunshtein, who operates a boutique on the Lower East Side, told the New York Post he changed his mind about U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., because of the flap about the Democratic presidential candidate's former pastor and having discovered Obama had visited Pakistan. A T-shirt in the window of his store, Apollo Braun, has on it a yellow star with the word "Jude" inside, a checked scarf or keffiyeh like that worn by Yasser Arafat, a belt of bullets and a copy of "Survival In Auschwitz" by Primo Levi. Braunshtein said he wants to remind Jews of what can happen. "You open the door for Obama, you have no idea what can come your way," he said. Most people who saw the T-shirt disapproved with Michael Idov, a magazine editor, calling it "nauseating." One woman liked it, so Braunshtein gave her one. 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
|
|
RIVKA MEIRCHIK SENT TO JAIL FOR ANOTHER MONTH
Posted by Andras Bereny, May 26, 2008. |
|
This was written by Datya Itzhaki. |
|
Rivka Meirchik is the second young Jewish woman this year to languish in the Neve Tirza prison without trial after refusing to recognize the authority of the court and to cooperate with the prosecution. Earlier this year, 18 year-old Tzvia Sariel spent over four months in Neve Tirza until she was released in March and all charges against her were dropped. [In January, seven teenage Jewish girls were released after being held for three weeks in Neve Tirza without trial. The 13 to 14 year-olds were also arrested for Jewish settlement activities and also refused to cooperate with authorities.] On May 22, an Israeli judge sent Meirchik back to jail for another month after deeming her refusal to cooperate with authorities an ideological crime. Rivka Meirchik, 29, an anti-government demonstrator who participated in Jewish settlement and was arrested almost two months ago, is being held until the end of judicial proceedings. She has refused to cooperate with authorities, including paying a release bond and agreeing to restrictive conditions. "[For Meirchik] it's ideological," Kfar Saba Magistrate Clara Rejiniano said. "The law allows me to keep a person nine months. These are legal decisions which we must respect." Rejiniano, who ordered Meirchik remanded in custody until the end of judicial proceedings on April 21, scheduled the next hearing for June 19. Ms. Meirchik was arrested on April 2 in the Jewish community of Shvut Ami after police ordered all Jews evacuated from the area. [Shvut Ami was one of the Jewish communities established after the expulsion of 10,000 Jews from Gush Katif and the northern Shomron in August 2005.] Merichik was charged with trespassing, assaulting a police office and disobeying military orders after the area was proclaimed a closed military zone. For her part, she said that she was beaten by police. She has since been held in the Neve Tirza prison after she refused to recognize the authority of the court, refused to cooperate with police prosecutor Shir Laufer and refused to accept court-imposed conditions for her release. Meirchik, who appeared pail and frail, has also refused to be handcuffed or shackled with leg-irons with the result that prison authorities have refused to allow her out of her solitary confinement cell and have deprived her of phone and visitation rights. However, she is brought to court appearances manacled and on April 14, Kfar Saba Magistrate Nava Bechor ordered her held in leg-irons and handcuffs throughout the hearing. [Bechor is the same judge who ordered Tzvia Tsariel held for a fourth month in jail prior to her trial.] During the May 22 hearing Rejiniano said she had no authority to release Meirchik, despite the prosecution's insistence on calling an expert witness to testify on the land claims by Arabs to Shvut Ami, located near the Jewish community of Kedumim, to prove the trespass offense. Defense attorney Aviad Visoly asked that Meirchik be released from hearings as the cross-examination of the witness would be lengthy and Meirchik had already spent close to two months in prison. "I reiterate my request to free the defendant from the hearing and all other hearings," Visoly said, "in view of the fact that the prosecution witness has brought 10 pages on testimony and will be questioned on every paragraph." Attorney Rinat Levine from the military prosecutor's office presented the court with Jordanian maps and tax possession registration documents from 1933 and 1936 as evidence that the land is owned by Arabs. The judge, visibly annoyed by prosecutor Nili Dayan for bringing the witness, nevertheless castigated Visoli for a political cross-examination. "Who has sovereignty in Judea and Samaria according to international law?" Visoli asked Levine. "I will prove that according to international law that Israeli law is the law in Judea and Samaria." The judge refused to allow Levine to answer the question. "This is political," Rejiniano said as she addressed the prosecutor. "Do you understand what you have brought to this trial for an offense of trespassing?" A second witness, border policeman Nasid Sayad, testified that Meirchik had assaulted him and resisted arrest while she was sitting on the ground. Sayad, who said he bent down to touch Meirchik's bag, first said Meirchik bit him when she was sitting down and later testified that Meirchik also slapped him. Visoli asked Sayad to demonstrate how a police office, over one meter tall, with a second police officer at his side, was slapped and bitten by a very slight young woman in a sitting position. Sayad refused to cooperate with the defense's request. Visoli said he will appeal to the Supreme Court to have Meirchik released immediately. He said that it isn't a crime under Israeli law not to recognize the authority of the court. "It's shocking," Visoli said. "Her incarceration is illegal and so is keeping her in custody until the end of proceedings." The major Israeli media, particularly the state-operated radio and television, did not mention a word of this travesty of justice. So, we must turn to you, lovers of Israel, who were so effective in the case of Tzvia Sariel and who, thanks to your efforts was released from jail, and ask that you act to help defend Jewish rights in Israel . As a first step, we request that you telephone –– rather than e-mail –– the Israeli Embassy or the Israeli consulate nearest you and demand to know why Rivka is still in prison. The embassy's phone number is 202-364-5500. Stress, that as an American citizen, you can ask the State Department to investigate what you feel is clearly a human rights violation. Now, we are asking you to call your member of Congress and raise the issue of Rivka Meirchik. We also ask you to call the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and inform them of Rivka and demand an investigation. Tell the department officer you have also raised Rivka's case with your member of Congress. The State Department's main numbers are 202-647-4000 or 1-800-877-8339. The Olmert government, with an approval rating of near zero, has refused any accountability to the Israeli people and fears only the Bush administration. Unless we act now, there will be many more Rivkas in jail. If you agree with this, please act quickly. What could be more important than winning the release of a Jewish woman imprisoned for loving her country and people? With Love of Israel,
Andras Bereny lives in Kfar Tapuach in the Shomron. Contact him at bereny@tin.it |
|
ASYMMETRICAL PROPAGANDA WAR
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 26, 2008. |
|
When I started my weekly Internet editorial letters six years ago, the term Hasbara, pro-Israel propaganda, was dormant. Fighting the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda is only the first step. The main and ultimate goal is to unite Jews and our genuine friends behind the true Zionist inspiration and create a Jewish state on all Jewish ancestral land, Eretz-Israel. Generally speaking, I believe that it is a waste of time to reply to accusations and fabrications of anti-Semitic or anti-Israel bigots, if there is a difference. We must focus on our own goals and actively pursue them! At the same time, because of the use of modern communications and the Internet by Jew-haters, in addition to the traditional anti-Israel media bias, it would be foolish to ignore or dismiss the damage being caused to Israel in the area of the public perception of the Arab-Israel conflict and the right of Jews to the land of Israel. For several years, I have been watching the rise of anti-Zionist activities on YouTube, MySpace, Wikipedia as well as in many blogs and chat-rooms. Information about Israel and Jewish history has being systematically distorted by Jew-haters, who are ether twisted-minded hateful individuals or well organized campaigners of some interest groups, organizations and even governments. Propaganda is a weapon used to manipulate people's opinion. It is a very important tool of warfare. It has being successfully applied by many countries: Communists in former USSR, by Nazis in Germany, as well as by the US in order to join WW2. The Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels used to say: "The 'Big Lie' was simple –– tell the biggest, most outrageous lie; tell it often enough; tell it loudly enough –– and eventually people will believe it." That's what the enemies of the Jewish people have been doing for a long time unopposed. As a result even Jews start to believe in their lies! Jew-haters have been resurrecting the same false accusations and fabrications even after they had been proven wrong many times over. Even now, some Christians still believe that Jews use the blood of Christian babies in ritual preparation of matzos. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is still used by traditional anti-Semites and the book has successfully migrated from anti-Semitic Europe to the bookshelves of Muslim countries, where it has become a best seller and even made its screen debut as a TV serial. Enemies of Jews do not care about facts! Their brains are completely short -circuited and consumed by hate. They are not just unwilling but unable to process or accept facts. They jump from one issue to another, from country to country in their hateful asymmetrical propaganda war against Jews! The aim is to create the perception that their lies have some element of truth. They often say: "There is not smoke without fire." And, they are very good at creating lots of smoke! Surprisingly, most of the so-called independent Western press, exploiting the anti-Semitic inclination of the general population, is a willing participant in the Israel-bashing game. Journalists are only too happy to report anti-Israel information, often without checking the source and its validity. Editors use screaming headlines like: "World Bank Blames Israel for Poor PA Economy", "Olmert Ready to Give Up Temple Mount" or "Will Israel Return Golan Heights to Syria?" to increase the sale of their papers, but in the process they are creating the perception of Israel's wrong-doing and an atmosphere of uncertainty which only encourages PA terrorists to perform their blood-thirsty acts. Many of those editors and journalists are quite knowingly and eagerly participating in this scam! At present, many Jews do not believe in or even have any knowledge about the rights of Jewish people to the land called Palestine. They are even afraid to express any support for Zionist ideals. We are living in a dangerous time, when the corrupt and self-hating government of Israel is so eager to give up more of Jewish land to the enemies for the illusion of peace, but is not wiling to end Arab occupation of our land and finish Jewish suffering from terror in Israel. From a Jewish existential point of view, we can't ignore or dismiss the activities of our enemies as either naïve or harmless. That is why I implore you to participate in actively promoting and defending the Zionist ideals. By the co-ordinated effort of many supporters of Israel, we'll be able to positively refute the disinformation which Jew-haters and self-hating Jews have been spreading, and propagate the right of Jews to live in peace on Jewish ancestral land. I know, that we are facing uphill battle, but somebody must do it. It was partially achieved 60 years ago. We just have to finish the job: "If not me than who, if not now then when?" Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
OLMERT AND TREASON
Posted by Ralph's Rant, May 26, 2008. |
|
This week there were several news items that have that have questioned the sanity and the qualifications of the present government in Israel and the Prime Minister. The first instance were reports that Israel was removing soldiers and civilian staff from the Erez Base near the Erez Crossing in Israel. This action leaves the South Erez Gaza Belt very exposed to enemy attacks. This action is the same as the US pulling soldiers away from the US border with Mexico and not protect civilians or US sovereignty if the Mexicans were claiming sovereignty and firing rockets at the US. This is a very personal issue for me since I lived in the area for a few years and have many friends in the area. Failing to secure this area including the Sederot area which is sovereign Israeli territory brings up the question is Olmert is planning to give away this area to the PA as part of a land corridor between Gaza and the PA. It makes you wonder after all make the place undesirable to live in to force the civilians to move. Why in my opinion is for personal greed and ambition. Prime Minister Olmert is guilty of it in my opinion and is my opinion no beyond selling that area of Israel out. There has been talk of this type of Trans Israel corridor being given to the PA which would split Israel and give a huge blow to her sovereignty. The Prime Minister and his current government continues to give more and more away with each new map given to the PA. The PM is also talking of giving away the Golan. Again why because of personal greed and ambition. No one says that there should never be sort of negotiated agreement for peace at some stage with real secure borders that protects the religious sites secure borders and the settlements, but this is whole sale give away for nothing, and to people that want us destroyed. One of the ministers in the Likud went so far to say that this was treason. Now this MK may have gone too far in threading Olmert and that should be condemned. But is this treason that depends on the motivations of the leaders but in my opinion is that yes it is treason. The Knesset and the military needs to do something to save Israel and to restore democracy before it is too late. In my opinion the present Kadima government must be replaced and fast by the Knesset or the Military and new elections held. This article is archived at http://ralphsrant1.blogspot.com/2008/05/olmert-and-treason.html |
|
MISSING PALESTINIAN MODERATES
Posted by Daily Alert, May 26, 2008. |
|
This was written by Clifford D. May and it appeared in National
Review Online
|
|
The real reason the Arab-Israeli conflict can't be settled. To celebrate July 4th, Americans shoot off fireworks –– a colorful reminder of the nation's often explosive struggle for independence. This month, Israelis have been celebrating 60 years of independence, and any store-bought pyrotechnics are superfluous: The rockets' red glare can be seen in Israel's skies night after night, courtesy of Hamas, the terrorist organization that rules Gaza and is openly dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish state. If we want peace between Israel and the Palestinians, we need to marginalize the radicals and empower the moderates. That's the conventional wisdom. There's one problem with it: Moderates wield no power in Gaza. Meanwhile, over in the West Bank there is Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, the head of Fatah, Hamas' rival. He is reportedly furious over President Bush's recent remarks to the Israeli parliament looking forward to the120th anniversary of Israeli independence –– a time, Bush predicted, when Israel will live in peace with an independent Palestinian neighbor. Abbas told reporters: "The Bush speech at the Knesset angered us . . . I frankly, clearly and transparently asked him that the American position should be balanced." This, too, has become conventional wisdom. The problem with it: If my goal is to kill your two children and your goal is to keep them alive, a balanced position –– one midway between the two –– would endorse the murder of one of your kids. Such balance is relentlessly on view in the mainstream media. For example, to commemorate Israel's 60th year of independence, the Washington Post ran a front page feature on two men, one Israeli, one Palestinian, both born 60 years ago "into a land at war." The story neglects to mention how that war began: The U.N. passed a resolution that established Israel and called for an Arab state as well. Jewish leaders agreed. Had Arab leaders done likewise, Palestinians also would be celebrating 60 years of statehood this month –– and there would have been no war and no refugees. The Post reports that the family of Nabil Zaharan, the 60-year-old Palestinian, fled "their native Jaffa out of fear of advancing Israeli troops." This has become the conventional narrative –– Palestinians driven from their homes by Jews. But as Efraim Karsh, head of Mediterranean and Middle Eastern Studies at King's College, University of London, writes: "The recent declassification of millions of documents from the period of the British Mandate (1920 –– 1948) and Israel's early days . . . paint[s] a much more definitive picture of the historical record. . . . By the time of Israel's declaration of independence . . . none of the 170,000 –– 180,000 Arabs fleeing urban centers, and only a handful of the 130,000 –– 160,000 villagers who left their homes had been forced out by the Jews." Karsh quotes Ismail Safwat, the Iraqi general who served as commander-in-chief of the Arab Liberation Army that was attempting to "drive all Jews into the sea." Safwat noted "with some astonishment that the Jews 'have so far not attacked a single Arab village unless provoked by it.' " The overwhelming majority of those who fled, Karsh explains, were instructed to do so "by their own leaders and/or by Arab military forces whether out of military considerations or in order to prevent them from becoming citizens of a prospective Jewish state." One of those leaders was Amin al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, who had spent World War II close to Hitler in Berlin. Scholar Barry Rubin writes that al-Husseini "hated Jews, wanted to destroy them and could not envision compromise." "The key point," Rubin says, "is that in rejecting partition, in demanding everything and starting a war it could not win, the Arab side ensured endless conflict, the Palestinian refugee issue, and no Palestine. It wasn't murder –– it was suicide." Those Palestinians who did not flee are today Israeli citizens –– more than 20 percent of the population. Despite the departure of families such as Zaharan's, Jaffa remains an Arab city with minarets and mosques framing its skyline. Also unmentioned in the Post piece: Nearly a million Jews whose families had lived for centuries in such places as Egypt, Syria, and Iraq were expelled. Today, half of all Israeli Jews trace their roots to Arab countries. Israel's war of independence has never really ended. Thirty years ago, there seemed a chance: Egyptian President Anwar Sadat went to Camp David and made peace with Israel. Not long after, he was gunned down by members of an Islamist group headed by Ayman al-Zawahiri. Now Osama bin Laden's top deputy and presumed to be living in the tribal areas of Pakistan, al-Zawahiri is a living reminder of the consequences that await any moderate who would dare end this long and bloody conflict. The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
RELIGIOUS FERVOUR RISES IN EGYPT
Posted by Morris Sadek, May 26, 2008. |
|
This appeared May 18, 2008. It was written by Nadia abou el Magd
for The National. |
|
It is not uncommon to see girls as young as five veiled in Egypt. Now we have Islamic banks, Islamic fashion, Islamic TV channels, Islamic hairdressers, Islamic swimsuits, Islamic writers, Islamic everything CAIRO // Every day for the past five years, Ahmed Gamil has begun his morning shift as a taxi driver by tuning into a radio station that broadcasts the Quran. "How else would I start my day?" Mr Gamil said during a recent journey downtown. "My life is so miserable, religion is the only thing that prevents me from committing suicide." There are increasing signs across Egypt of Islamic fervour, including devotion to the Quran and outward manifestations such as women wearing veils and men growing beards. Some analysts put this down to a lack of other outlets for personal expression. Heba Moheb is veiled as she reads the Quran on the underground metro, in the car reserved for women. She is surrounded by her three children, including Faten, her daughter, who despite being only 11 wears a veil. It is not uncommon to see girls as young as five veiled in Egypt. "A Muslim woman should by definition be veiled; God didn't give us a choice in this matter," said Ms Moheb, 30. "A woman's body is a precious gift from God that we appreciate by covering it, not exposing to all." The few unveiled women in the metro were Christians. "I look like a Copt, that's why I'm spared, I guess," said Mona Eissa, 28, as she was running to catch the women's car in the metro. Another woman in a niqab was distributing flyers upon which were written slogans: "You will be questioned about the veil in doomsday" and "The veil is a religious duty". The state does not encourage veiling and has tried to bar niqab-wearing women from entering university. It is working on a law to stop nurses from wearing it while at work for health reasons. Women in the 1960s and early 1970s used to wear miniskirts on the streets of Cairo without attracting attention. Now, with millions using the underground system every day, women choose to travel in the car reserved for women to avoid harassment. "The phenomenon of the new religiosity started during late president Anwar Sadat's time and deepened during president Hosni Mubarak's era [starting in 1981] as both presidents left religion as the only sphere open for expression," said Amr Chobaki, an analyst whose doctoral dissertation is on the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. "All other fields are closed or besieged and risky." There are no real political parties, syndicates and non-governmental organisations are threatened, he said. The rise could be also attributed to a group of young preachers who are taking their sermons outside mosques and homes and reaching a new generation of Muslims on Islamic websites and satellite channels. These preachers include Amr Khaled and Yemeni Habib el Jaafry. Many Egyptians have downloaded the call for prayers in to their mobile phones to remind them of the prayer times and use Islamic songs or a recitation of God's names as ring tones. Islamic books are best sellers at the annual Cairo book fair. "Religion is an effective means of asserting identity," said Emad Shahin, a political scientist. "Religion is increasingly playing an important role in the region and will continue to play a role for quite some time." The religious phenomenon is not rooted in politics, Mr Chobaki said. "It's rather a superficial and apparent Islamisation and religiosity, an unprecedented close conservative culture that is not only not tolerant of other religions but of secular and less religious Muslims. It is causing real suffering." The phenomenon is not only Islamic. There is a similar parallel among Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 per cent of the population, but its expression is private. Many Christians now tattoo crosses on their arms. "The Christians withdrew behind their church walls, and the Church became their guardian in all aspects of life," Mr Chobaki said. "It replaced the state for them, and its discourse is also fanatic sometimes. The whole atmosphere in Egyptian society is tense. "If real opportunities emerged in Egypt to be able to express oneself without dangers, like political parties and civil society, this would start to reduce the tension and gradually defuse this superficial religiosity phenomenon. But this will take time, as the current regime has no political project [to coax people to leave] this religious sphere, which people have played havoc with it like everything else in Egypt." Not all of Egypt's population of 78 million are this devoted. Only about 80 per cent of Egyptian women are veiled. Nightclubs and bars remain popular and restaurants and hotels serve alcohol. The rise in religious devotion also crosses class. The rich wear brand name scarves as veils, and have their own spas for women and children. Some complain that intolerance has grown alongside the trend toward religiosity. "Sometimes I'm harassed and insulted at the street because I'm wearing the cross," said Heba, 35, a secretary, who would only give her first name. At Sabaya, a new hairdresser and cafe for "veiled women only", Hanan Turk, the owner and a famous actress who donned the veil last year, said she does not have non-veiled women as customers. Secularists are frustrated with what they see as an overdose of Islamisation at the expense of the more cosmopolitan Egypt they grew up in. "Now we have Islamic banks, Islamic fashion, Islamic TV channels, Islamic hairdressers, Islamic swimsuits, Islamic writers, Islamic everything," protested Mona Helmi, a feminist writer. "This is too much." Nada Mahmoud, 40, said she is the only one among her college friends at the American University in Cairo and among the mothers of her son's friends who is not veiled. "They keep trying to convert me," she said. "Somehow it's beyond their comprehension that you could be a good Muslim and don't want to take the veil. There is no talk about other spiritual or moral aspects of Islam; they are more concerned about the veil."
source http://freecopts.net/english/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=895&Itemid=9
Morris Sadek Esq is a lawyer at the Court of
Cassation, Egyptian special Legal Counsel, DC Bar, United States of
America. He is president of the National American Coptic Assembly USA.
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: STATE OF CONFUSION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 26, 2008. |
|
May 26, 2008
I would like to begin with some enlightening material regarding the al-Dura case, for we are dealing here with a pattern of inaccuracies in reporting news about the Palestinians –– either because major news outlets are naive in trusting what their Palestinian stringers tell them, or because they run information even when it is clear to them (or should be) that inaccuracies exist. Dr. Richard Landes, Professor of History at Boston University, has done groundbreaking work in researching and exposing the construction of these deliberate inaccuracies; it is he who coined the term "Pallywood." The first link below is to a video done before the appeals court decision was released in which Landes describes what is going on, and the second is after the decision.
~~~~~~~~~~ As to other "confusion" taking place here: Amos Gilad returned from Egyptian mediated negotiations on a ceasefire with Hamas totally empty-handed. Israeli officials say there has been no breakthrough on any of the major issues. Hamas will not agree to include the release of Shalit in the deal or to stop smuggling of arms. One might think that this would move us, finally, to call it quits. But that is not the case: Instead the government is "suspending" any plans for a major operation in Gaza, waiting apparently to see what else develops, as Suleiman is still trying. Said Barak at a Labor meeting: "If, indeed, a calm emerges, then we will have to examine it according to what it entails and what its results are. And our demand could not be clearer –– there can be no attacks. I say to all those who are pushing for a speedy operation: Think before you act." Speedy operation??! This has been dragging on for months. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Yuval Diskin, head of the Shin Bet, in his weekly report to the Cabinet yesterday, warned that time is on Hamas's side. Already the terrorist group has smuggled in sophisticated Iranian weapons that might reach as far as Ashdod or Kiryat Gat. He said that Israel had to act fast, because "as time goes on, a military operation will cost...more casualties... "There has been cooperation between Hamas and Iran. Time favors Hamas and the rest of the terror organizations, and the threat on the State of Israel is steadily rising." Diskin remains convinced that the chances for a truce are low. But "the Egyptians want very much to bring a truce into being. They fear a mass breakout into Egypt and [want] to keep their hegemony as a mediator. Hamas is interested in a truce but does not accept Israel's terms. They are emphasizing the removal of the siege and buying time." Hamas, he said, will demand that Egypt open Rafah if the negotiations fail. Reason enough to explain why Suleiman is working so hard. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert offered some "reassuring" words, as is his practice, saying: "...things are nearing a decisive point." Have we not heard this before? Because Israel "wants peace and security both in the short run and in the long run," he explained (thereby indirectly addressing critics who accuse the government of being myopic), "we will have to make decisions." And wait! He said more: "If this...is not reached through Egyptian mediation, we will have to [use other] means. The government has nothing more important than securing its residents' safety. Both I and the defense officials are losing sleep over this issue." Yes, undoubtedly he loses sleep over this issue... ~~~~~~~~~~ Shaul Mofaz, former Chief of Staff and Defense Minister, is currently one of those in Kadima coming out strongest for a military response, as he demanded action to regain deterrence in Gaza. "We must be the ones setting Israel's agenda –– not the terror organizations," he said on Army Radio. ~~~~~~~~~~ Many people were angered by the order of Major-General Yosef Mishlav, the coordinator of the government's activities in the territories, to pull soldiers away from the Erez Crossing, in the wake of the truck bombing at Erez just days ago. In what MK Zevulun Orlev (NU/NRP) referred to as a "cowardly act," soldiers of the Coordination and Liaison Authority, who had been near the Erez were "temporarily" moved to the Julis base 17 kilometers away. Some of the harshest criticism of this decision came from within the IDF. Said one army officer: "[This] is an admission of our failure to protect the lives of our citizens and soldiers. The army... should be at the front and serve as a buffer between the enemy and our civilian population. It is wrong to evacuate them because of a threat. What will the residents of Netiv Ha'asara, who live near the base, say? They will justifiably demand that the State evacuate them as well." ~~~~~~~~~~ "Theoretically and realistically, Israel can get along without [former chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen.] Dan Halutz," intoned MK Arye Eldad (NU/NR) after Shabbat. He was mocking a statement made by Halutz: "The thought of ceding the Golan Heights gives me a bellyache, but for real peace one must be willing to pay a real price. Theoretically, Israel can do without the Golan." Explained Eldad, "Israel must pay heed, and do something if it doesn't want to return to the failures of the Second Lebanon War. In that war, Halutz was exposed as someone who does not understand anything of the basic principles of war, and accordingly Israel saw that it didn't need his advice." ~~~~~~~~~~ But, in the face of vast confusion, Olmert's talk about proceeding with the negotiations with Syria persists. Iranian officials, who were greatly irked by Israel's demands that Syria cut Iranian connections, have gone out of their way to emphasize their strength: Iran's foreign minister is referring to "strategic ties" with Syria. Those who imagine that Assad will break that connection totally in order to regain the Golan are dreaming. This was made clear even in a Damascus-run newspaper on Saturday, when an editorial (that reflects government policy) said that Syria's relationships with other nations were not on the table and that there were no preconditions (by which was meant imposed on them). ~~~~~~~~~~ Of additional concern is the fact that Syria is stalling on permitting representatives of the International Atomic Energy Commission to visit the site where a reactor was allegedly bombed by Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ And Barak, even though he really recognizes the realities, persists in dreaming anyway: At yesterday's Cabinet meeting, he explained that, "The Syrians have a different agenda than Israel," and that peace is not their priority. Assad's priorities are: survival of his regime; getting the international tribunal into the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri canceled (as that is expected to point an accusatory finger at the highest echelons of the Syrian government); securing a "special status" for Syria in Lebanon; and getting into the good graces of the US and the West. Yet, said Barak, Israel should try to pull Syria from the orbit of Iran, even though efforts will have to be complicated and lengthy. What he fails to perceive (or willfully ignores) is the vast likelihood that if Syria does pursue negotiations it is not out of a desire for peace, but rather an attempt to achieve those priorities listed above. ~~~~~~~~~~ Within the coalition, there is from my perspective no one more hypocritical with regard to negotiations with Syria than MK Eli Yishai, head of the Shas faction. Meeting yesterday with representatives of communities in the Golan, he delivered a promise to stand by them in their efforts to prevent their evacuation from the Golan. What unmitigated nonsense! If he wanted to help them prevent this, he should withdraw from the coalition and make it difficult or impossible for the government to proceed. But then, a new government might not continue with the building of those housing units that Olmert has promised him. And so he settles for words regarding not abandoning Israel's security to Syria. ~~~~~~~~~~ Minister Shaul Mofaz was also at that meeting. His response, designed to reassure, was fairly ludicrous. It's wrong to turn the Golan over to Syria now, he declared, as this would be tantamount to giving it to Iran. So, we need creative solutions, such as giving the Golan to Syria but leasing it for 25 years so our people can stay there for now. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are unsubstantiated reports –– coming from Palestinians close to those doing the negotiations –– that Israel is now offering a withdrawal from all but 8.5% of Judea and Samaria (with control of Jerusalem not yet discussed). This would be less than the 12% Israel had reportedly sought to hold on to previously, but more than the Palestinians find acceptable. Abbas has just told a meeting of the Fatah Revolutionary Council that there has been no progress in the negotiations since the beginning. ~~~~~~~~~~ Talansky has been questioned again, prior to his forthcoming court testimony that is scheduled for tomorrow. Olmert's lawyers will cross-examine him subsequently –– precisely when is unclear. Talansky, who is very restive and eager to return to the US, has had the hold on his travel extended until the testimony is given. There is now talk about allowing him to go, as he is scheduled to return for the wedding of his grandson on June 11. The rumors keep flying: NY State Assemblyman Dov Hilkind says he saw Olmert, when he was mayor, receive envelopes of cash. Talansky's driver said he transported cash for Olmert. On it goes. There was a leak indicating that an indictment would be served by the end of the summer, and then that was quickly denied. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
50,000 ARABS HAVE LEFT GAZA SINCE LAST JUNE
Posted by Carl in Jerusalem, May 25, 2008. |
|
This was published May 22, 2008 on my website and is archived at
|
|
Suit-and-tie clad unelected 'Palestinian' President Salam Fayyad told a Bethlehem conference on economic development in the 'Palestinian' territories on Tuesday that some 50,000 Arabs have left Gaza since Hamas took over last June and many times that number would like to leave. Fayyad linked the exodus to the fighting between Hamas and Fatah, which resulted in the Hamas take-over of Gaza and a sharp decline in international aid to Gaza. PA sources admit that the clash has caused a great rift among the Arabs of the PA-controlled areas (Gaza, Judea, and Samaria), weakened the PA's international status, shaken internal security –– and brought about increased emigration. Conference organizer Hassan Abu Libdeh agreed: "There is a Palestinian brain drain [a WHAT? CiJ] caused by the difficulties of living here," he said. A year ago, in May 2007, the Mufti of Jerusalem for the PA, Sheikh
Muhammed Amin Hussein, issued a religious ruling banning emigration
In April, I reported that some 80% of Gaza residents want to leave, but this is the first time that the 'Palestinian Authority' admits it. Of course, we have to keep in mind that this is Hamas' rivals speaking and they have an interest in making Hamas look as bad as possible. Still, I have no reason to doubt the report. In fact, I wonder what percentage of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria would like to leave. Don't expect anyone to tell us that one anytime soon. 50,000 in less than a year? Not bad |
|
FATAH AND HAMAS USE IDENTICAL SYMBOLS TO TEACH CHILDREN HATRED OF ISRAEL
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 25, 2008. |
|
Teaching children that all of Israel is occupied "Palestine" is a backbone of Palestinian Authority education for both Fatah and Hamas.
Both Hamas and Fatah recently broadcast TV programs featuring children with giant keys hanging from their necks, and names of Israeli cities written on the keys. The key, a symbol of ownership, is a prominent Palestinian symbol indicating their claim of ownership over all Israeli cities and all of Israel. It also represents their demand that residents of refugee camps be settled in these Israeli cities. The Fatah children's keys include the names of Israeli cities Haifa, Ramla, Acre, Jaffa, Beer Sheva. The Hamas children's keys include the names of Israeli cities Haifa, Ramla, Acre, Beit Shean, Jerusalem. VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES
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.
|
|
ABYSMALLY CLUELESS BIDEN SAYS: "TO COMPARE TERRORISM WITH AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING IDEOLOGY..."
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 25, 2008. |
|
Start giving IQ tests to people who are in Congress. Just because people get degrees doesn't mean they have an IQ over 90 because they can skate through some colleges. This was posted by Robert Spencer on Jihad Watch and
is at |
|
Abysmally clueless Biden: "to compare terrorism with
an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of
profound confusion"
This is the fruit, of course, of talking about terrorism rather than jihad. In "Republicans and Our Enemies" in the Wall Street Journal, May 23 (thanks to George), Senator Joe Biden shows that he, like almost everyone else, still has no idea of the ideology motivating jihad terrorists: The intersection of al Qaeda with the world's most lethal weapons is a deadly serious problem. Al Qaeda must be destroyed. But to compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion. "If they can't identify the enemy or describe the war we're fighting, it's difficult to see how we will win." That is true. But if Biden can't see the ideology unifying significant numbers of Sunnis and Shiites, Persians and Arabs, people in Iraq and Iran, and al Qaeda and Shiite militias, he is just as clueless as those he is criticizing. Here, Senator, is a good recent capsule description of that
ideology.
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
EVEN THE LEFT IS GETTING TIRED OF THE 'PALESTINIANS'
Posted by Carl in Jerusalem, May 25, 2008. |
|
This was posted today to my website:
|
|
Haaretz to 'Palestinians': 'Look in the mirror. Time is running out' Anyone who has read this blog for any period of time has seen me
refer to Haaretz as Israel's 'Hebrew 'Palestinian' Daily' (a
term which was not coined by me, but by Steven Plaut). Bradley Burston
is one of Haaretz's most left-wing writers. But look what he's
telling the 'Palestinians' now
We in the post-modern West have spent years educating ourselves to believe that all cultures are equally valid –– with the possible exception, of course, of our own. We have taken it on faith that to criticize the culture of an indigenous people is obscenely imperialist, paternalist. Read it all. There's a lot that Burston says with which I don't agree (for example, he defines the 'Palestinians' as 'indigenous' when the historical evidence shows they are not). But that's not really the point. What this shows is that even the Israeli left is beginning to see through the sham of a 'Palestinian state' and that it is nothing more than an excuse to extirpate the Jewish state. If our leftists can see it, maybe they will stop working at cross-purposes against us and maybe the world will see it too. Even the left is getting tired of the 'Palestinians.' |
|
THE SECRET OF LAG B'OMER
Posted by Avodah, May 25, 2008. |
|
This was written by Tzvi Fishman and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
I wasn't intending to write a blog this evening, but it is impossible to keep silent at the incredible wonder of Lag B'Omer. Not only are the hillsides of Jerusalem ablaze with towering bonfires in tribute to the secrets of Torah that Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai revealed; not only are the streets of Jerusalem inundated with the smoke of burning embers; the hillsides and streets of all of the country are lit up with the fire of Torah. Not only the streets, my friends, but the smoke of the holy fire penetrates into every single apartment and house, like the aroma of havdala after Shabbat, penetrating through windows and concrete walls to reveal the inner spirit of every Israeli soul, of Israeli house, to reveal the inner holiness of the entire country of Israel whose national soul is completely Torah, no matter how secular its surface appearances seem. This is what Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai taught us. The great wisdom of patience. To see below the surface appearance to the inner reality, where the light of Israel shines in an eternal, unquenchable blaze. Inspired by the light of the Zohar, Rabbi Kook writes: "Out of the profane, holiness will also come forth, and out of wanton freedom, the beloved yoke (of Torah) will blossom. Golden chains will be woven and arise out of secular poetry, and a brilliant light of t'shuva will shine from secular literature. This will be the supreme wonder of the vision of redemption. Let the bud sprout, let the flower blossom, let the fruit ripen, and the whole world will know that the Spirit of G-d is speaking within the Nation of Israel in its every expression. All of this will climax in a t'shuva which will bring healing and redemption to the world" (Orot HaT'shuva, 17:3).Rabbi Kook writes: "Occasionally, a concept falls from its loftiness and its original pureness after it has been grounded in life, when unrefined people become associated with it, darkening its illumination. The descent is only temporary because an idea which embraces spiritual goodness cannot be transformed into evil. The descent is passing, and it is also a bridge to an approaching ascent" (Orot HaT'shuva, 12:12). Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
TRANSFER TERRORISTS; OLMERT PLAYS SYRIAN CARD; TODAY'S JEWISH REFUGEES; ARABS REJECT 2-STATE SOLUTION
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 24, 2008. |
|
Transfer of Terror is Required. Two days after the Jaipur serial blasts that were allegedly masterminded by the Bangladesh-based terror outfit HuJI (Jamaat-e-Islami), the Rajasthan government has decided to identify and deport Bangladeshi immigrants, even those with valid documents who are presently residing in the state. India will launch a drive this year to deport more than 20 million illegal immigrants from Bangladesh because they pose a serious security threat. The decision was taken at an internal security meeting of state police chiefs, senior state bureaucrats and federal security officials who agreed to conduct the drive between April and June. "The presence of a large number of illegal foreign immigrants, particularly from Bangladesh, poses a serious threat to the internal security and needs to be tackled with utmost urgency and seriousness that it deserves," a statement from the ministry said. Indian security agencies have in the past accused illegal Bangladeshi immigrants –– most of them Muslims –– of committing crimes, and say some of them work for Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency. (Bangladesh was created at the time when Indian peninsula was divided by the British and over 12,000,000 people were transferred between the newly created countries. After Jordan was illegally ceded from Palestine, allocated for the Jewish state, Arabs were not removed from Israel. Even after 60 year of terror, inflicted by Arabs, Israel is still unwilling to transfer the terror-infested population from Jewish land. But, nothing has stopped the Israeli government from carrying out the self-humiliating, forceful removal of 8,500 Jews from Gaza!) Another Gesture of Peace. A powerful truck bomb with four tons of explosives was detonated on Thursday at the main pedestrian crossing between Israel and the Gaza Strip by PA terrorists, causing extensive damage that dealt a serious blow to Gazans' hopes of opening up their sealed-off territory. –– It is time to implement the Sinai Option! French Court: Al-Dura Report Was Faked. A French appeals court has overturned the libel conviction of Philippe Karsenty, who claimed that the 2000 France-2 TV report of the death of Muhammad Al-Dura was staged. Karsenty said France-2 should acknowledge that it "created and is continuing to perpetuate the worst anti-Semitic libel of our era." So far, despite access to Reuters and Associated Press wire reports, only Jewish and Israeli media have published the trial verdict. The mainstream media has symptomatically remained silent. (Jews still remember the Dreyfus Affair and the waves of anti-Semitism that followed!) Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak The United Nations can't be called 'Useless Nothing' anymore. After so many years of doing nothing about genocide in Sudan, occupation of Tibet by China and even ethnic cleansing of Sunnis from Iraq by Shiites during the last 5 years, the only name that is appropriate for this useless organisation is "Ugly Nothing". The definition fits right on! If Olmert does not Respect Israel Why Must Others! Israeli Vice Premier Haim Ramon said week a ago that the Jewish state is holding talks directly with the Palestinian movement Hamas, despite a government decision forbidding such moves. The talks are in direct defiance of the government's resolution. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that a rigid timetable for Israel and the Palestinians to forge a peace agreement may lead to negative results. (What results? Hudna is not peace!) Egyptian officials have asserted that Israel will agree to a version of a ceasefire in Gaza without demanding the immediate release of kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. Olmert is Playing Syrian Card. Ehud Olmert said that more tough concessions may be in store for the Israel public, this time due to negotiations with Syria, due to begin within the next two weeks. Mayors of communities in the Golan Heights held an emergency meeting following the announcement. The head of the Golan Regional Council, Eli Malka, commented, "We will not let a Prime Minister who is motivated by foreign considerations to hand over a stretch of land to the Axis of Evil and endanger our very existence." (Like an animal, trapped in the serial corruption investigations cage, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is trying to save his political skin and avoid criminal prosecution by conducting negotiations with Hamas and even proposing that a naval blockade be imposed on Iran to try to curb its nuclear program, which will not work!) More PA Police Needed? The PA/Fatah special police force that was trained by the US to fight terrorists has turned out to be a failure. So far the force's contingent in Jenin has been running scared from the terrorists it was supposed to bring under control. In a first test of their mettle, 300 of the PA's US-trained 'elite' policemen were unable to defeat 13 terrorists and had to call in the IDF. (The game of pretence is exposed again. The core problem is the PA's complicity in terror, not a lack of police!) Quote of the Week-1: "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is –– the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." –– President George Bush –– Nice words George, but why do you send Condi to Israel so often? One message in Jerusalem, another in Riyadh and Cairo. Present-day Jewish Refugees. Forty percent of Jewish families who were forced out of the Gaza region by the government almost three years ago still are waiting for lots where they can build permanent homes. The expellees are suffering from unemployment and the lack of adequate temporary housing. (No aid from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)! And, as usual throughout history, there is no international outcry or even interest about plight of Jewish refugees!) Delusional Progress Reports. A senior Israeli negotiator quoted in Yediot Acharonot said that reports of progress in talks with the PA have been greatly exaggerated. "What progress are they talking about? It's clear that there are serious conflicts on all of the 'core issues!'" PA: Most Reject Two-State Solution. Most Arabs, 57.6 percent, living in the PA controlled territories reject the two-state solution, according to a new poll carried out by the Al-Najah University. However, more than two-thirds support a new Arab state based on the 1949 Armistice Lines. (This is not news. 'Palestinians' want it all! The plan is to destroy Israel by taking it a part, piece by piece.) Olmert and His 'Bribe Diet'. A former New York limo driver, Avi Sherman, came forward to make the claims that he's the bagman who delivered suspected bribes to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Manhattan and Jerusalem –– including cash hidden in cases of Slim-Fast given to him by the founder of the diet-food empire. Israeli police expanding probe of allegations that Olmert received $480,000 in bribes from a Long Island businessman, Morris Talansky, and others over a period of several years. (Any self-respecting and decent person would have resigned a long time ago!) Quote of the Week-2: "After 15 years (since the Oslo agreement), billions of dollars in aid, massive international attention and unlimited diplomatic support, what do the Palestinians have to show for it?" –– US Senator Sam Brownback asked, and answered –– "Nothing." –– Good answer, but he made the wrong conclusion as he thinks that a confederation with Jordan is a solution to the conflict. It had already been tried! The transfer of fake Palestinian people to Sinai is the only way to stop terror attacks in Israel. Arabs Set Fire to Wheat Field. Arabs have once again set fire to the wheat fields of Yitzhar, residents of the town said. The fields were not planted this year due to the farmers' observing Shemitta, a sabbatical year when the land of Israel enjoys a "Sabbath rest". Arabs have been doing this for several years, in the fall and the spring, with no action by the authorities. Bin Laden Seeks Cheap Publicity. In the recording for "Nakba Day," which marks Israel's founding, Bin Laden said that "the Israeli Palestinian struggle" is the heart of the Muslim war against the West, and inspired the 9/11 attackers. "Jihad is compulsory for liberating Palestine," Bin Laden said. "We shall continue fighting the Israelis and their allies with Allah's permission. We shall not give up a centimetre of Palestine as long as there is at least one Muslim in the world." (The aim: world domination by Islam! Even long after the 9/11 attack Al Qaeda did not care about so-called Palestinians. Only after their defeat in Afghanistan did the organization start to back the 'Palestinians' in order to boost its recruitment campaign and popularity.) Despicable Animals Israel has been Tolerating. Jordanian Professor Dr. Ibrahim Alloush said on Al-Jazeera TV that suicide bombers should be equipped with small nuclear bombs: "... consider how to get martyrdom-seekers into Dimona and elsewhere armed with non-conventional explosives and perhaps even small nuclear bombs." (Dr. Alloush lived for 13 years in the United States. –– We educate our own enemies and pretend that they are kidding. One can't change the nature of the ugly beast!) Welcome Back to Middle Ages. New terrorist groups calling themselves defenders of Islam began attacking cafes, pharmacies, and businesses with Internet access in Gaza. In addition, women's groups say the new terrorist groups have carried out several "honor killings," murdering women accused of 'immodest' behaviour. Gaza police said cafe in Dir el-Balah was targeted because it used to contain a large television set. Hamas protesters in Gaza accused the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria of kidnapping political prisoners' wives. "... it a cowardly act and departure from the ethics and traditions of the Palestinian people," a Hamas web site reported. (I was not aware that Hamas was so ethical. Hamas kidnapped and is still refusing to return an Israeli soldier! Isn't that "a cowardly act"? Fatah's action is precisely in line with the traditions of the 'Palestinian' people!) Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
CAN'T BELIEVE ONE WORD THEY SAY
Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), May 24, 2008. |
|
'Can't believe one word they say'... by now it's clearly applicable to our own governments... OUR LEADERS AND OUR MEDIA have been lying to us CONSTANTLY at least since they told us that PLO terrorists, who worked and trained all of their lives to murder Jewish babies, had become from one day to the next peace "policemen" to be given weapons. TWO THOUSAND DEAD JEWS AND 19.000 INJURED JEWS LATER they still lie to us...and they will do it more and more on the Golan issue with the help of THEIR TOTALLY CONTROLLED media...which, in fact, do not represent the public's positions AT ALL... Here the media are NOT the watchdog of democracy, as is taught and practiced in democratic countries; here they are the watchdog of the government and of the powerful ruling élite. This is entitled "Losing our credibility. Arab credibility has always
been questionable, but what about us?"
It was written by Jackie Levy and was published yesterday in Ynet
News
|
|
I was three and a half years old when I saw my grandfather sitting outside the trench, listening to his small radio, and being very concerned. We spent the Six-Day War with grandpa and grandma at an immigrant transit camp north of Tel Aviv. There were no bomb shelters in the transit camp, of course, so my grandpa, like all other men, dug a trench for us. My grandpa, just like many other grandparents at the time, used to listen to Arabic-language stations, mostly because of the music. Yet now, at the edge of the trench, the radio was talking about war, and the newscaster's voice had a loud and festive quality to it that was difficult to define as "pleasant." Grandpa tried to tell us that he doesn't believe a word, but everyone heard him choke up when he informed us that the Egyptians already conquered Tel Aviv, and that we shouldn't think about traveling north, because the Syrians are already in Tiberius. There's something odd about thinking that an Arab army conquered Tel Aviv while you lie in a little pit in Herzliya, surrounded by aunts, some reading material, and piles of Tunisian sandwiches (which were prepared, as was customary in my family, based on the assumption that the war would last two years.) In retrospect, this event was entrenched in my memory and in that of my family not as a time of terror and fear, but rather, as the ultimate proof of the dubious credibility (some will call it shameless tendency to lie) of our enemies. Since then we've had quite a few opportunities to remember that war, in the trench, with the horrifying chatter of Voice of Cairo. So every time some Arab newscaster or spokesman boasts or whines, every time some Arab political leader or sheikh speaks with the familiar exaggerated passion, and again every murderer on their side becomes a noble hero and every move we make is akin to spreading uranium at the homes of babies, I recall that moment where grandpa finally allowed himself to switch to a different station. That was a beautiful moment. 'Can't believe one word they say' So why am I telling you about the history of my family? Well, it appears that over the years, the problem of Arab credibility has turned from folklore to a strategic question and one of the main issues in the political debate on the question of peace. Regardless of whether it is nice to talk like that or not, or whether the words are uttered explicitly or not, the sentence "we can't believe one word they say" keeps on hovering above the question of price tag, future, and borders. And now, again we hear talk of a peace initiative, and again we see winds of hope, but also fear and anxiety. As usual. Yet it appears this is the first time when even naive civilians, Zionist patriots, mostly fear the credibility problem of the Israeli side. You can't believe one word they say, we tell each other, but this time we're looking inside, into our own home. Or in other words, had my grandpa still been alive, and had his small radio still been working, I would have asked him to switch back to Voice of Damascus. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. |
|
THE FALL OF LEBANON
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 24, 2008. |
|
"If you have tears, prepare to shed them now....
Oh, what a fall was there... Then I, and you, and all of us fell down." –– William Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1. May 21, 2008, is a date –– like December 7 (1941) and September 11 (2001) –– that should now live in infamy. Yet who will notice, mourn, or act the wiser for it? On that day, the Beirut spring was buried under the reign of Hizballah. Speaking on October 5, 1938, after Britain and France effectively turned Czechoslovakia over to Nazi Germany, Winston Churchill said, "What everybody would like to ignore or forget must nevertheless be stated, namely, that we have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat...."[1] In contrast, Assistant Secretary of State David Welch said that the agreement over Lebanon was, "A necessary and positive step." At least when one sells out a country one should recognize this has happened rather than pretend otherwise. But this is precisely what took place at Munich, when the deal made was proclaimed as a concession that brought peace and resolved Germany's last territorial demand in the region. Churchill knew better and his words perfectly suit the situation in Lebanon today: "The utmost [Western diplomacy] has been able to gain for Czechoslovakia...has been that the German dictator, instead of snatching the victuals from the table, has been content to have them served to him course by course." Yes, that's it exactly. On every point, Hizballah, Iran, and Syria, got all they wanted from Lebanon's government: its surrender of sovereignty. They have veto power over the government; one-third of the cabinet; election changes to ensure victory in the next balloting; and they will have their candidate installed as president. The majority side is not giving up but is trying to comfort itself on small mercies. The best arguments it can come up with are that now everyone knows Hizballah is not patriotic, treats other Lebanese as enemies, and cannot seize areas held by Christian and Druze militias. It isn't much to cheer about. Nevertheless, as in 1938, a lot of the media is proclaiming it as a victory of some kind, securing peace and stability in Lebanon. Not so. If Syria murders more Lebanese journalists, judges, or politicians, no one will investigate. No one dare diminish Hizballah's de facto rule over large parts of the country. No one dare stop weapons pouring over the border from Syria and Iran. In fact, why should they continue to be smuggled in secretly? No one dare interfere if and when Hizballah, under Syrian and Iranian guidance, decide it is time for another war with Israel. This defeat was not only total, it was totally predictable. Just as Churchill said: "If only Great Britain. France and Italy [today we would add the United States, of course,] had pledged themselves two or three years ago to work in association for maintaining peace and collective security, how different might have been our position.... But the world and the parliaments and public opinion would have none of that in those days. When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have affected a cure." Instead there was a lack "of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong...." Actually, though, as Churchill knew, when he spoke these faults were still not corrected. The folly continued. And so is what comes next? Back to Churchill: "All is over. Silent, mournful, abandoned, broken, Czechoslovakia recedes into the darkness." That country suffered because it put its faith in the Western democracies and the League of Nations (now the United Nations). In particular, she was betrayed by France whom the Czechs then, and the Lebanese today, trusted to help them. The UN Security Council on May 22 endorsed the Lebanon agreement even though it totally contradicted the Council's own resolution ending the Hizballah-Israel war, thus betraying the commitments made to Israel about stopping arms smuggling, disarming Hizballah, and keeping that group from returning to south Lebanon. The UN's total reversal of its demands from two years ago –– constituting a total victory for Hizballah –– did not bring a flicker of shame or even recognition that this in fact had happened. All this is a victory for terrorism. It is quite true that the Lebanese Shia –– like the German minority in Czechoslovakia which Hitler promoted –– has genuine grievances and that Hizballah has real support in its own community. But how did it overcome the other communities, the other political forces in Lebanon? Through assassination and bombing albeit done by Syria's surrogates rather than directly), by intimidation and fear, by demagoguery and war. Iran and Syria help their allies; the West doesn't. And so the message was: We can kill you; your friends cannot save you. Look at their indifference! Despair and die. And here, regarding the future, we can only quote Churchill's speech extensively: "In future the Czechoslovak State cannot be maintained as an independent entity. I think you will find that in a period of time which may be measured by years, but may be measured only by months, Czechoslovakia will be engulfed in the Nazi regime. Perhaps they may join it in despair or in revenge. At any rate, that story is over and told. But we cannot consider the abandonment and ruin of Czechoslovakia in the light only of what happened only last month. It is the most grievous consequence of what we have done and of what we have left undone in the last five years –– five years of futile good intentions, five years of eager search for the line of least resistance...." Lebanon will not disappear as a country on the map, of course –– contrary to the Iranian alliance's intentions toward Israel –– but it is now going to be part of the Iranian bloc. This is not only bad for Lebanon itself but also terrifying for other Arab regimes. The Saudis deserve credit for trying to save Lebanon. But what will happen now as the balance of power shifts? They are less inclined to resist and more likely to follow the West's course and adopt an appeasement policy. Again, Churchill in 1938: "Do not let us blind ourselves to that. It must now be accepted that all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe will make the best terms they can with the triumphant Nazi power. The system of alliances in Central Europe upon which France has relied for her safety has been swept away, and I can see no means by which it can be reconstituted. The road down the Danube Valley to the Black Sea, the road which leads as far as Turkey, has been opened. In less than four years, that is where German armies were marching, thankfully a situation far worse than we can expect in the Middle East. Yet the trend toward appeasement and surrender could well be similar. Churchill said: "In fact, if not in form, it seems to me that all those countries of Middle Europe... will, one after another, be drawn into this vast system of power politics –– not only power military politics but power economic politics –– radiating from Berlin, and I believe this can be achieved quite smoothly and swiftly and will not necessarily entail the firing of a single shot." His specific example was Yugoslavia whose government within three years was ready to join Germany's bloc. (It was prevented from doing so only by a British-organized coup but was then invaded and overrun by the German army.) Only the names of the countries need be changed to make Churchill's point apply to the present: "You will see, day after day, week after week [that]...many of those countries, in fear of the rise of the Nazi power," will give in. There had been forces "which looked to the Western democracies and loathed the idea of having this arbitrary rule of the totalitarian system thrust upon them, and hoped that a stand would be made." But they would now be demoralized. Churchill knew that his country's leader had good intentions but that wasn't enough. His analysis of British thinking applies well both to Europe, to President George Bush's current policy, and very well to the thinking of Senator Barack Obama: "The prime minister desires to see cordial relations between this country and Germany. There is no difficulty at all in having cordial relations between the peoples. Our hearts go out to them. But they have no power. But never will you have friendship with the present German government. You must have diplomatic and correct relations, but there can never be friendship between the British democracy and the Nazi power, that power which...vaunts the spirit of aggression and conquest, which derives strength and perverted pleasure from persecution, and uses, as we have seen, with pitiless brutality the threat of murderous force. That power cannot ever be the trusted friend of the British democracy." Churchill understood that his nation's enemies took their ideology seriously and that their ambitions and methods were incompatible with his country. And finally, Churchill understood the trend: things will get worse and would even make it politically incorrect to criticize the enemy: "In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. Those demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the press, for it will be said –– indeed, I hear it said sometimes now –– that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticized by ordinary, common English politicians. Then, with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed into acquiescence, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey." In short, what could be called "Germanophobia" or seen as war-mongering in resisting German demands and aggression would be...verboten, something often seen in contemporary debates when political correctness trumps democratic society and pimps for dictatorial regimes and totalitarian ideology.. Churchill predicted victory but only if the free countries –– and even some not so free whose interests pushed them to oppose the threat –– were strong and cooperated: "Do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time." Wow. Well if you don't see yet the parallelism with the current time let me continue on my own. Lebanon's brief period of independence has ended. Lebanon is now incorporated –– at least in part and probably more in the future –– into the Iranian bloc. Only three years ago, after the assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, almost certainly ordered at the highest level of the Syrian government, a popular mass movement called the Beirut spring helped push out the Syrian military. The resulting government was called "pro-Western" in the newscasts, but it might have well been called pro-Lebanon. Forget about the Israel-Palestinian (and now Israel-Syrian) negotiations or the latest reports from Iraq or Afghanistan. What has happened in Lebanon is far more significant. When all these other developments are long forgotten, the expansion of the Syrian-Iranian zone of influence to Lebanon will be the most important and lasting event. Basically, the supporters of the Lebanese government –– the leadership of the majority of the Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Druze communities –– capitulated to the demands of Hizballah. And who can blame them? With a steady drumbeat of terrorist acts and assassinations, with the Hizballah offensive seizing Sunni west Beirut, with the lack of support from the West, they concluded that the battle was unwinnable. Politicians, intellectuals, academics, and officials in the West live comfortable lives. Their careers prosper often in direct relationship to their misunderstanding, misexplaining, and misacting in the Middle East. Then, too, all too many of them have lived up to every negative stereotype the Islamists hold of them: greedy for oil and trade; cowardly in confronting aggression, easily fooled, very easily divided, and losing confidence in their own societies and civilization. In a statement of almost incredible stupidity, the New York Times stated: "Everybody knew President Bush was aiming at Senator Barack Obama last week when he likened those who endorse talks with 'terrorists and radicals' to appeasers of the Nazis." During the Cold War, I remember that it was said that if a Soviet official or supporter began a statement like that –– everyone knows –– what followed invariably is a lie. So it is in this case. For several years, the main criticism of Bush has been his strategy of pressure and isolation on Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and assorted terrorists. There have been hundreds of op-eds, eds, speeches, reports, and other formats on this point. It is the administration's number-one problem. Suddenly, it applies only to Senator Barack Obama. What rubbish. Equally, the principle issue is not just one of contacts with extremist forces but how much toughness, pressure and isolation as opposed to concessions (of which negotiations are one) and compromises are offered. For example, there have been numerous ongoing contacts with Iran over the nuclear issue for years, supported by the Bush administration. They have all failed. For someone to come and say that negotiations have not been tried is pretty ridiculous. The hidden element there is really as follows:
In this context, what better example could there be of this dangerous malady than Obama, the apparent Democratic nominee and possible future president of the United States? According to Obama at an Oregon rally, Iran does not "pose a serious threat" to the United States. His reasoning is as disturbing –– or more so –– than his conclusion. Obama explained that Iran has less to spend on defense and if it "tried to pose a serious threat to us they wouldn't ... stand a chance." We can now feel secure that the Iranians won't load their soldiers onto landing craft and storm the New Jersey beaches. Unfortunately, that isn't their military strategy. Perhaps Obama doesn't understand that the average B-1 bomber costs less than a suicide bomber. Has he heard about asymmetric warfare? Forget that. Has he heard of terrorism, the Marine barracks' bombing, or September 11? According to Obama: "Iran they spend one one-hundredth of what we spend on the military. I mean if Iran tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance. And we should use that position of strength that we have to be bold enough to go ahead and listen. That doesn't mean we agree with them on everything. That doesn't, we might not compromise with them on any issues. But, at least we should find out are there areas of potential common interest and we can reduce some of the tension that have caused us so many problems around the world."One cannot pretend away the implications of this paragraph. Let's list them:
Make no mistake, Obama is channelling Neville Chamberlain –– precisely because what he says shows his parallel thinking. Many people may get a chill listening to Obama but it certainly isn't a Churchill. Apologists, sympathizers, and wishful-thinkers keep endowing this would-be emperor with beautiful suits of clothes. He doesn't have any. And at present, even more if Obama wins, the threat is of an Iran that's aggressive precisely because it knows that it will not have to confront U.S. forces. Tehran knows that it can sponsor terrorism directly against U.S. forces in Iraq, and also against Israel and Lebanon, because that level of assault will not trigger American reaction. Yet anyone who doesn't want to get into war with Iran should be all the more eager to talk about sanctions, pressures, deterrence, building alliances and backing allies; in short, combating Iran indirectly to avoid having to confront it directly. All the more so now, however, Syria won't split away from Iran; Iran won't give up on its nuclear program; Hamas won't moderate; Hizballah won't relent. Why should they when they not only believe their own ideologies but also think they are winning? In each case, too, they are banking on an Obama victory –– whether accurately or otherwise –– to bring them even more. There are too many Chamberlains and not enough Churchills, perhaps none at all. Things are bad, very bad, for the West right now. The beginning of repairing those strategic fortunes is to recognize that fact. [1] All quotes taken from the full text at
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
EXCLUSIVE: SERIOUS FALLING-OUT WITH WASHINGTON OVER OLMERT'S SYRIA TALKS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 24, 2008. |
|
Allmerde, our prime inmate, knows how to screw things up while diverting attention from his misdeeds..... Aren't there enough inmates left that can settle this nation's headaches? |
|
DEBKAfile's Washington sources report that the Bush administration is "reassessing" its relations with Jerusalem over Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert's decision to embark on peace talks with Syria through Turkish mediators. One US official called the move a "slap in the face" two weeks after President George Bush declared that America stood by Israel in opposing negotiations with "terrorists and radicals." Our sources report fears that Israel may find some of the benefits of America's closest regional ally withheld for the remainder of Bush's term in office –– direct dialogue between the White House and prime minister's office, intelligence-sharing, diplomatic coordination on Middle East strategy and other urgent business. Israel's defense establishment and military high command are concerned about possible delays in the flow of essential supplies of equipment. Olmert's close aides, especially those involved in the peace talks with Syria, may no longer enjoy a warm top-level welcome in Washington. According to a US official, who asked to remain unnamed, the decision to cool ties with Jerusalem followed the discovery by American agents in Turkey that Olmert's senior advisers, Yoram Turbovich and Shalom Turjeman, and a Syrian delegation arrived in Istanbul for indirect peace talks. The two delegations stayed at the same hotel for three days and a Turkish go-between shuttled between their rooms. Since 2003, it has been administration policy to isolate Syria and boycott its top officials for facilitating the flow of terrorists into Iraq, its efforts to destabilize the pro-Western Lebanese government and its close ties with Iran. The Americans were particularly displeased when they discovered the identity of the Syrian negotiators: Riyad Dadawi, legal adviser to the foreign ministry and president Bashar Assad's strategist for the UN-sponsored probe and future trial in the 2005 murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri; and the colonel who liaises for the Syrian army with Iran's Revolutionary Guards and the Lebanese Hizballah terrorists. Three days after Jerusalem, Damascus and Ankara announced that peace talks had begun, the Syrian defense minister Hassan Turkmani landed in Tehran to boost military ties with Iran. The American official commented dryly that if the Olmert government is prepared to consort with such characters, it should not be surprised by the administration's Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
WHO (REALLY) SPEAKS FOR ISLAM?
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, May 23, 2008. |
| This essay was redacted from a book review by Robert Satloff in The Weekly Standard, May 12, 2008. Robert Satloff is the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. |
|
Who Speaks for Islam is written by John L. Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University's Prince Aiwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim -Christian Understanding, and Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. As the authors state at the outset, the book's goal is to "democratize the debate" about a potential clash between Western and Muslim civilizations by shedding light on the "actual views of everyday Muslims" –– especially the "silenced majority" whose views Esposito and Mogahed argue are lost in the din about terrorism, extremism, and Islamofascism. This majority, they contend, are just like us. They pray like Americans, dream of professional advancement like Americans, delight in technology like Americans, celebrate democracy, like Americans and cherish the ideal of women's equality like Americans. In fact, the authors write, "everyday Muslims" are so similar to ordinary Americans that "conflict between the Muslim and Western communities is far from inevitable." Similar arguments have been made before; some of this is true; some is rubbish; much is irrelevant. The real debate about the "clash of civilizations" is about whether a determined element of radical Muslims could, like the Bolsheviks, take control of their societies and lead them into conflict with the West. The question often revolves around a disputed data point: Of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims, how many are radicals? If the number is relatively small, then the fear of a clash is inflated; if the number is relatively large, then the nightmare might not be so outlandish after all. What gives Who Speaks for Islam its aura of credibility is that its answers are allegedly based on hard data, not taxi-driver anecdotes from a quick visit to Cairo. The book draws on a mammoth, six-year effort to poll and interview tens of thousands of Muslims in more than 35 countries with Muslim majorities or substantial minorities. The polling sample, Esposito and Mogahed claim, represents "more than 90 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims." To back up the claim, the book bears the name of the gold-standard of American polling firms, Gallup. The answer to their poll's self-determined, all important question as to the percentage of Muslims who told pollsters that the attacks of September 11, 2001, were "completely" justified and who said they view the United States unfavorably was seven percent. That is the double-barreled litmus test devised by Esposito and Mogahed to determine who is radical and who isn't. The authors don't actually call even these people "radicals," however; the term they use is "politically radicalized," which implies that someone else is responsible for turning these otherwise ordinary Muslims into bin Laden sympathizers. By contrast, Muslims who said the 9/11 attacks were "not justified," they term "moderates." More than half the book is an effort to distinguish the 7 percent of extremist Muslims from the "9 out of 10," as they say, who are moderates and then to focus our collective efforts on reaching out to the fringe element. With remarkable exactitude, they argue: "If the 7 percent (91 million) of the politically radicalized continue to feel politically dominated, occupied and disrespected, the West will have little, if any, chance of changing their minds." There is no need to worry about the 93 percent because, as Esposito and Mogahe have already argued, they are just like us. There is much here to criticize. The not-so-hidden purpose of this book is to blur any difference between average Muslims around the world and average Americans, and the authors rise to the occasion at every turn. Take the very definition of "Islam." From Karen Armstrong to Bernard Lewis and that's a broad range, virtually every scholar of note (and many who aren't) has translated the term "Islam" as "submission to God." However, "submission" evidently sounds off-putting to the American ear. Therefore, Esposito and Mogahed offer a different, more melodious translation preferring, "a strong commitment to God" –– that has a ring to it of everything but accuracy. Or, take the authors' cavalier attitude to the word 'many'. How many is many? At the very least, one might expect a book based on polling data to be filled with numbers. This one isn't. Instead, page after page of Who Speaks for Islam contains such useless and un-sourced references as "many respondents cite" this or "many Muslims see" that. Or, take the authors' apparent indifference to facts. Twice, for example, they cite as convincing evidence for their argument poll data from "the ten most populous majority Muslim countries," which they then list as including Jordan and Lebanon, tiny states that don't even rank in the top 25 of Muslim majority countries. Twice they say their 10 specially polled countries collectively comprise 80 percent of the world Muslim population; in fact, the figure is barely 60 percent. These problems would not matter much if the book gave readers the opportunity to review the poll data on which Esposito and Mogahed base their judgments. Alas, that is not the case. Neither the text nor the appendix includes the full data to a single question from any survey taken by Gallup over the entire six-year period of its World Poll initiative. We, the readers, either have to pay more than $20,000 to Gallup to gain access to its proprietary research or have to rely on the good faith of the authors. Or, more accurately, we have to rely on Gallup's good name –– the integrity, trust and independence" cited above. As to the precision of the data classifications and how the information was compiled and classified, therein lies the smoking gun. Mogahed publicly admitted they knew certain people weren't moderates but they still termed them so. She and Esposito cooked the books and dumbed down the text. Apparently, by the authors' own test, there are not 91 million radicals in Muslim societies but almost twice that number. They must have shrieked in horror to find their original estimate on the high side of assessments made by scholars, such as Daniel Pipes, whom Esposito routinely denounces as Islamophobes. To paraphrase Mogahed, maybe it wasn't the most technically accurate way of doing this, but their neat solution seems to have been to redefine 78 million people off the rolls of radicals. The cover-up is even worse. The fill data from the 9/11 question show that, in addition to the 13.5 percent, there is another 23.1 percent of respondents_...300 million Muslims –– who told pollsters the attacks were in some way justified. Esposito and Mogahed don't utter a word about the vast sea of intolerance in which the radicals operate. Then there is the more fundamental fraud of using the 9/l1 question as the measure of "who is a radical." Amazing as it sounds, according to Esposito and Mogahed, the proper term for a Muslim who hates America, wants to impose Sharia law, supports suicide bombing, and opposes equal rights for women but does not "completely" justify 9/11 is "moderate." Could the smart people at Gallup really believe this? Regardless, they should immediately release all the data associated with their world poll and open all the flies and archives of their Center for Muslim Studies to independent inspection. With a dose of transparency and a dollop of humility, the data just might teach something useful to the world's six billion citizens. Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org). |
|
THE SAUDI SPELL
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 23, 2008. |
|
In the first article below, Rachel Ehrenfeld has both the intellect and instincts to forecast matters of national importance. As you read the following, think of the time when the Muslim Brotherhood and other "Jihadist" (Holy Warrior for Islam) organizations will overthrow the Saudi monarchy and own one of the largest stockpile of advanced weapons in the world. The same is true for Egypt –– birthplace of the Muslim Brotherhood and now the military colossus of the Middle East with more than $60 Billion of American tax-payers' money invested in high tech arms. Pakistan has built the "Islamic Nuclear Bomb". Iran is well on the way to becoming a nuclear power. Islamic fanatics will threaten and will use such weapons while the West thinks that negotiating will change their ways. Any of the above, once they achieve deliverable Nuclear Weapons, will NOT negotiate or compromise but, will dictate how other nations are to live or die under Sharia Law. The Ehrenfeld article is archived at Also below is an essay by Ali Alyami Executive Director, of The Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia. Contact him at ali@cdhr.info |
|
1. The Saudi Spell
As if Saudis flying civilian airplanes into buildings in New York and Washington, DC, were not enough, the Bush Administration is now supporting the development of " civilian nuclear power" in Saudi Arabia. In a feeble attempt to deflect criticism, the Administration published its agreement with the Saudis to "Improve Peace And Stability In The Region Through Nuclear Cooperation," detailing the kingdom's commitments to participate" in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI)." This agreement, according to the While House press release (May 16), is to "ensure a smooth supply of [Saudi} energy to the world." Judging by previous Saudi compliance with and adherence to agreements with the U.S. (like stopping funds to terrorist organizations such as Hamas), expect a Saudi nuclear weapon as fast as their trillions of petrodollars (your money) can buy. Instead of neutralizing Iran's nuclear facilities, the U.S. now openly contributes to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. What remains to be seen is who will use its nuclear weapons against the U.S. or Israel first, the Saudis, or Iran? 2. by Ali H. Alyami
This –– the nuclear energy pact between US and Saudi Arabia –– is a colossal blunder. In the past, prince after prince insisted that Iran nuclear program is for peaceful energy only. Now they are saying Iran poses a threat to them with its nuclear program and want the US to help them build their own. How could we expect the international community to support our efforts to force Iran into quitting its nuclear program? Not too long from now, two additional unstable and dictatorially ruled Muslim states, Saudi Arabia and Iran (Pakistan has nukes) will have the means to make nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons in the hands of irrational and unstable dictatorial regimes can be used against states in the Middle East and beyond. Muslims are not likely to use nuclear weapons against each other. What we are doing here behooves me. Ali "Kingdom, US sign nuke energy pact"
Saudi Gazette report JANADRIYA, Riyadh –– US President George W. Bush held talks with King Abdullah Friday. Bush, on his second visit to Saudi Arabia this year, discussed with the King aspects of cooperation between the two countries and ways of enhancing them in a way to serve the two countries' mutual interest. The two leaders also discussed the developments sweeping the Middle East –– especially the Palestinian issue and the situation in Lebanon and Iraq. The Kingdom and the US signed cooperation pacts in the presence of King Abdullah and President Bush. An agreement on technical cooperation was signed by Interior Minister Prince Naif Bin Abdul Aziz and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The two countries also signed a memorandum of understanding to cooperate on a peaceful nuclear energy program. The agreement was signed by Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal and Rice. "This agreement will pave the way for Saudi Arabia's access to safe, reliable fuel sources for energy reactors and demonstrate Saudi leadership as a positive non-proliferation model for the region," a statement earlier issued by the White House said. The White House said Saudi Arabia had also agreed to two global initiatives, one to combat nuclear terrorism and another to combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Earlier, King Abdullah greeted President Bush and first lady Laura Bush on the Riyadh airport tarmac. They then rode together in a limousine to the King's horse farm outside Riyadh, the center piece of a visit the White House says is mostly to pay tribute to 75 years of formal ties between Washington and the Kingdom. "We're honored to be here," Bush told Abdullah as they sat side by side inside an elaborate tent. The King presented a pair of Arabian Oryx to Bush. President Bush presented a model of a falcon to King Abdullah. As Bush arrived in Riyadh, oil prices hit a new record high near $128.00 a barrel in a volatile global market. Light, sweet crude for June delivery rose as high as US$127.82 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange during the afternoon in Europe, before retreating to US$126.28, up US$2.16 on Thursday's close of US$124.12. In London, Brent crude contracts were also higher, up US$2.52 to US$125.15 a barrel on the ICE Futures exchange. Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told reporters that the Middle East peace process will be "discussed in depth" during Bush's second visit to Riyadh since January. He said the Saudis will also raise "Israel's ongoing policy of imposing collective punishment on the Palestinian people and its continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip." Bush travels on to Egypt at the weekend to meet Palestinian leaders. 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 |
|
OLMERT TRAPPED ISRAEL; BOUND BY TRAITORS' PROMISES?; WHY A CEASEFIRE?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 23, 2008. |
|
WISDOM WITH WIT "... Jimmy Carter, just returned from his squalid suck-up junket to Hamas,... said "triumphantly that he has secured the usual (off-the-record, highly qualified, never to be translated into Arabic, and instantly denied) commitment from the Jews' enemies acknowledging Israel's 'right to exist.'" A major notion in Europe is that Israeli statehood, due to demographics and an evil Jewish disposition towards the Arabs, should be rescinded. During the centuries' sojourn of Jews in Europe, they were not accepted as part of the nations there. [Then who is evil?] For that, the Jews "had to move to the Middle East. Reviled on the Continent as sinister rootless cosmopolitans with no conventional national allegiance, they built a conventional nation state, and now they're reviled for that, too. The 'oldest hatred' [antisemitism] didn't get that way without an ability to adapt." Ironically, Europe's birth rate is so much below Israel's, that its civilization may be absorbed within the rising Islamic demographic there (Mark Steyn, NY Sun, 5/12, Op.-Ed.) LAWSUITS AGAINST TERRORISTS Israelis of Iranian descent, whose relatives were harmed by terrorists sent by Iran, are suing the United Bank of Switzerland for damages. The bank knowingly provided Iran with the dollars need by the terrorists for acquiring arms, for eight years. The bank had admitted to laundering $4-5 billion to regimes designated as sponsors of terrorism, after its greenbacks were found in Saddam's custody. It was fined $100 million by the Federal Reserve (IMRA, 5/12). Why should class action suits be used only to loot corporations? THE POSITION THAT OLMERT PUT ISRAEL INTO The policies of Olmert and his Foreign Min. Livni let Hamas bring rockets and mortars into Gaza and let Hizbullah accumulate thousands more in Lebanon. Now, if the IDF were to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, Iran could get its Hizbullah and Hamas proxies to fire at Israeli cities (Benny Livni, NY Sun, 5/12, p.5). So, whom do they suggest would replace Olmert when and if he is indicted? Livni. It is like a death wish. In many countries, deranged people having a lust for power take charge. In Israel, crooks and fools take charge. BOUND BY TRAITORS' PROMISES? Olmert's proposed declaration of principles for a P.A. state is said to bind Israel for decades. Typical commentary. Why don't Arab declarations bind them? Such a declaration would lack legal standing, harm Israeli national security, and contradicts the national purpose. An honorable successor would repudiate it. Sure, the State Dept. would cluck that a Prime Minister had promised it. So what! He had no right to make that promise. WHY WERE PEOPLE SURPRISED IN LEBANON? Western journalists described the Lebanese Army as neutral. They and the people of Lebanon were surprised that the Lebanese Army did not stand up against Hizbullah's intimidation of the country and its attacks on other militias. Indeed, the Army countermanded the government's orders to dismantle Hizbullah's illegal communications system and to face it down in Beirut and elsewhere and protect the people from Hizbullah. I wasn't surprised. The Army had many Shiites in it, not that that is necessarily a deciding factor. More significant, the Army assisted Hizbullah during the war with Israel and later allowed Hizbullah to smuggle in weapons and to fortify southern Lebanon. Under the ceasefire agreement, the Army was to coordinate with UNIFIL's 20,000 troops against such moves. The Lebanese Army never did, and UNIFIL averted its eyes from smuggling. Years before this war, the Lebanese Army did not patrol southern Lebanon and separate Hizbullah and Israel. Christian and Druse factions that side with Hizbullah will find themselves isolated and driven out as much as the other Christians. They needed unity. Appeasement by the US and Israel abandoned the patriotic Lebanese forces to Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran. Were they blind to the build-up? Or have the Democrats made US military action unacceptable except later and at high cost? DENY TERRORISTS "CREDIT" Don't you find it annoying that the newspapers put it that some terrorist organization "claimed credit" for a particular attack? What kind of a people are those Arabs that consider war crimes against Jews creditable? Better language would be "admitted perpetrating." Controlling Gaza, Hamas sometimes lets other groups claim responsibility for an attack by Hamas or with Hamas rockets. Few major media explain that. Why should the media report which groups perpetrated war crimes? Why give them the publicity they seek? OLMERT'S BRIBES PM Olmert is suspected of having accepted bribes and of peddling influence as Mayor and Cabinet Minister, in half a dozen cases. Meanwhile, he is setting up terrorists in positions to inflict heavy casualties upon Israel. Perhaps he is being bribed by the Arabs, the way the Chinese bribed Bill Clinton into giving them US military secrets. It more likely is blackmail by the leftist Attorney-General, who keeps Olmert and had kept corrupt Sharon in power and subservient to the leftist program for appeasing the Arabs, by refraining from indicting them. Now, however, Olmert is so disreputable, that the Left may have to find another agent. WHY A CEASEFIRE? PM Olmert says he would accept a ceasefire with Hamas, if one can be worked out. I think it would be worked out –– the Muslims would lie and falsely promise enough for Olmert to pretend he is getting something. He and Foreign Min. Livni claim to have gotten security from Hizbullah by letting the UNO take charge of keeping it from re-arming. Hizbullah is taking over Lebanon and also fortified the southern area against Israel, in violation of the ceasefire rules for it. Military experts and many others warned Olmert to reject a Gaza ceasefire. Hamas and the government use the Arabic word for the kind of ceasefire that lasts until military forces, in this case, Hamas', are built up enough to be able to resume the war more successfully. Why then does Olmert want a ceasefire? Why, you mean, aside from his usual, eventual acceptance of almost anything the Arabs or their ally, the State Dept., demand? During a ceasefire, there would be less pressure on him to invade Gaza and destroy Hamas. The US, would not like an invasion. For one thing, it claims to worry about civilian casualties. Then why doesn't the US worry more about the greater civilian casualties when the war resumes but on a grander scale? For another thing, the US claims that the war would make Abbas less popular. Let us understand the US line of reasoning. On the one hand, the US arms Abbas' forces to fight against Hamas, which they never get around to doing [because they'd lose], and it asks Israel to ease off on terrorism coming from Abbas' area, lest its counter-attacks cost him popularity he never had and doesn't know how to develop. On the other hand, if Israel destroyed Hamas for Abbas, his forces would dominate the P.A. without further Israeli help. But the doesn't want Israel to do that, lest he be unpopular. Unpopular? Who would challenge him, after rival militias were destroyed? The common element in US reasoning apparently is to oppose anything beneficial to 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 |
|
WHOSE LENS: MCCAIN'S OR OBAMA'S?
Posted by Judith Apter Klinghoffer, May 23, 2008. |
|
This was published today in http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/50716.html |
|
FT columnist Philip Stephens writes: Mr Obama describes the world as is; Mr McCain as it seemed to be during that fleeting unipolar moment. America's voters will decide in November which of these lenses they prefer to look. Well, this voter prefers to look at Obama's lens. It is prettier and more comforting. But I knows that taking my eyes off the McCain lens will put my life in jeopardy. For the world is not as Obama describes it and Islamist terror has nothing to do with the fleeting unipolar moment. If the US and Israel disappeared tomorrow would Jihadist stop their terror campaign agaist India where they only last week they killed 80 in Jaipur in order to "blow part of your tourism structure" and, second, to "demolish your faith in the dirty mud, in the name of Hanuman, Sita [and] Ram".?! Stephens is not alone in his wish to make the world go away. Rather, his mood is representative of that of the liberal/leftist transnational elite that believes it found a champion in Obama. If avoiding reality means expunging the historical record and making mass executioners like Che Guevara into heroes, wannabe Hitlers like Ahmadinejad into a trustworthy negotiating partners, and putting up with a "reasonable number" of terrorist attacks as India has been so virtuously been doing, it is a price they will gladly pay. After all, what are the chances that they personally will be the victims?! Moreover, they resent Bush for selfishly keeping terror away from America. So doing merely is increasing terror elsewhere, they argue. They also insist that war in Iraq created more terrorists and so has the war on terror as a whole. Evidence to the contrary be damned or at least covered up. For it, like progress in Iraq, will merely strengthen the hands of inconvenient realistic like McCain and his old fashioned patriotic supporters. Already, these appeasing transnational elites have succeeded in convincing the British government not to use the term "war on terror" anymore and the American government not to talk of Jihadists. President Obama, Europeans believe will enable them to be the Swisstype free riders, another FT columnist Gideon Rachman explains Europeans so yearn to be and, indeed, already are. Moreover, Obama will not challenge the morality or wisdom of their choice. If anything, he will hold them up as the example America should follow. The trouble, Kishore Mahbubani of Singapore notes is that reality bites: The Swiss can feel secure because they are surrounded by Europe. The Europeans can only feel insecure because they are surrounded by an arc of instability, from north Africa to the Middle East, from the Balkans to the Caucasus. ... while America is protected by the vast Atlantic ocean, Europe feels ... Islamic anger directly because of its geographical proximity to the Middle East and its large domestic Islamic populations. In other words, the average European like the average American has reasons for feeling insecure. They have real enemies, of the kind the "annoying" McCain worries about. But do not assume that Kishore wants Europe to join the war against terror. No, he wants Europe to rely on Asia instead of on the US because Asia is will solve Europe's Jihadist problem. All it would take is patience and forgetting (at least for the time being) about such unimportant issues as democracy or human rights: The real irony here is that Asia is doing much more to enhance long-term European security than America is. The Asian march to modernity, which began in Japan and is now sweeping through China and India, is poised to enter the Islamic world in west Asia. When this march enters the Islamic world, Europe will be surrounded by modern, middle-class Muslim states. Sounds very convincing, doesn't it? The trouble is that no where is Jihadism as strong and virulent as in West Asia. Moreover, Singapore where Kishore lives borders Muslim Malaysia and Indonesia both of which have strong Islamists movements. In other words, Asian Kishore is just as blind as European Rahman and American transnational supporters of Obama. They all deserve the "disrespect" with which David Brooks complains we treat them. For they are not real Alpha Geeks. Real Alpah geeks are mathematicians and physicists like Einstein, pacifists who do not shirk reality but write a letter to FDR warning him not to stand idly by while Hitler may be developing a nuclear weapon. As Israel's founding father, David Ben Gurion said and as I believe American John McCain, though not Barack Obama, would second though replacing Israel with the US, national security trumps all: I have many values I hold dear, some are Jewish and others universal. ... I care about literature, philosophy, science and social science. But I have to confess to my narrow point of view: Nothing is more important to me than national security. If they give me a choice between the highest human ideals and the national security of Israel, I will choose unhesitatingly Israeli security and not because I do not believe in ideals but because "not the dead will praise Thee." We have the right to live and that I consider the primary right and the primary concern." For the first time in American history we may elect a president who does not share Ben Gurion's view and that is scary.
Contact Judith Apter Klinghoffer by email at jklinghoff@aol.com
|
|
STAGED PALESTINIAN HOAXES IN THE FIRST LEBANON WAR
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, May 23, 2008. |
|
[Editor's Note: What makes Safir's account of particular interest is that fact that Arab photo hoaxes aren't recent –– they didn't invent them with the Al-Durah hoax or in the second Lebanon War (cf. doctored pix of Beirut; Qana hoax, etc.)] It only takes one person. If one person fights with all his might to tell the truth, (and today that person is Philippe Karsenty), if he or she risks everything to expose the Big Lie, takes on The Very Naked Emperor, then, one by one, others also start speaking out. I have been writing about the doctored footage and staged photos
that characterize the propaganda war against Israel and the Jews since
2001. Most recently, see "Photos That Lie: Building the Case Against
Israel, Article by Article, Day After Day" at
I have known the prominent Israeli academic, Dr. Marilyn Safir, of Haifa, for 36 years. She is an American-born left feminist psychologist who moderates a major Israeli feminist academic listserv group. I have written about her experiences of anti-Semitism in both The New Anti-Semitism and in The Death of Feminism. Nevertheless, Marilyn never disconnected from the international feminist movement for this reason-and I am not suggesting that she should have. When the Kassam rockets literally began falling on her head in Haifa she invited me to come to Israel to talk about anti-Semitism in general and among intellectuals and progressives in particular. I agreed-but then, alas, could not go. With her permission, I am sharing what she has just told me about her personal eye-witness experience of Palestinian faux-tography in the first Lebanon war (1981-1982). She writes: |
|
Hi Phyllis: In the first Lebanon War, just before I left for that feminist conference in Montreal, we saw two news reports on Israel TV. In one, the Israel news team followed a French film crew. The French media put several young children in a burnt out car and lit a fire on the far side of the car and then filmed the children in the "burning car" screaming and crying with the smoke and flames billowing in the background. Two days latter I saw this clip broadcast in Montreal. If I hadn't seen them staging it, I would have believed these were kids who were directly attacked (by Israelis) and left to burn to death. The other clip –– was of the Israeli air force attacking a "hospital" with a big red cross on the roof. We could see that the "hospital" was actually a base of the PLO who were (engaged in) shooting from it. That, too, appeared on the news. Interestingly, the Lebanese Government took out a big paid ad stating that the (so-called) Hospital was PLO Headquarters and was headed by Arafat's brother. (The Montreal feminist ) conference was the one that the PLO tried to take over to pass anti- Israeli Resolutions –– and that I more or less single handidly fought to prevent –– successfully –– I might add. Marilyn Chesler responds: Thank you Marilyn. I wonder how many more such incidents people know about and when will they come forward? But as important: Will the mainstream Western and Arab language media ever cover this? Will the liberal blogosphere cover it? And, if not, what do we propose to do? Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and s co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/ |
|
JUSTICE IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Rachel Kapen, May 23, 2008. |
|
My native State of Israel which celebrates these days it's 60th birthday doesn't have the death penalty except for Nazis and their collaborators, and Adolph Eichmann, the Nazi arch-war criminal who is mostly known in Israel for sending the hundred of thousands Hungarian innocent Jews to their death, clearly fits into this category. Escaping justice at Nuremburg, he managed to find haven in Argentina –– like other Nazis –– where he lived peacefully with his family under the assumed name of Ricardo Clement. That is, until the Israeli Mossad, a world-known spy agency, after years of hunting him, found him, abducted him, and brought him to face justice in Israel. This took place in May of 1960. I'll never forget how on May 23, our then Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion announced his capture in the Israeli Knesset, the parliament. Eichmann's trial took place in a makeshift courtroom in Jerusalem, in a town hall named: Beit Ha'am –– home of the people. And it was a huge sensation. Hundreds of journalists from all over the world came to cover the sensational trial of a Nazi arch war criminal brought to justice by his victims or in their name. There were about 100 witnesses who arrived from all over the world or living in Israel who told the hair-raising horrors inflicted on them and which they miraculously survived by the man who sat emotionless in the glass cage in the middle of the room. One of these journalists found his way one morning to our neighborhood in Jerusalem, not far from Yad VaShem, the world known memorial to the Shoah –– the Holocaust, and as I was hanging diapers on our front porch he began shouting at me questions about my reaction to the trial. Instead of shouting back I asked him to climb up the flight of stairs to our small apartment where I lived with my American-born husband, Shelly, then an assistant in the physiology department of the Hebrew University-Haddassah Medical School and our first-born, nine months old Gilead, and I told him how as long as I can remember I knew about the Shoah yet only now, after listening to the witnesses I am really beginning to understand the awfulness and the enormity of what happened. After all, for me and for my contemporaries who grew up in a country of much less than one million Jews, the mind-boggling number of 6 million murdered Jews was beyond comprehension. However, I was not the only one who as a result of the Eichmann trial became aware of the enormity of the Shoah. For many years Shoah survivors who reached the safety of the Jewish homeland refused to talk about the horrors they went through, trying to rebuild their shattered lives but the Eichmann trial opened floodgates. Adolph Eichman was found guilty on all counts and was sentenced to death. After the Israeli Supreme Court rejected his appeal, he was executed by hanging, his body cremated, and his ashes scattered at sea, far from the territorial waters of the Jewish state. As Israel celebrates its 60th birthday, it is time for soul-searching and taking inventory, and in my opinion bringing Eichmann to justice was one of the State's crown achievements. The Torah exhorts us to: Tzedek tzedek tirdof –– justice, justice thou shalt pursue, and pursuing Adolph Eichmann and bringing him to justice in the names of the 6 million was an apt fulfillment of the commandment. Contact Rachel Kapen by email at skapen285466MI@comcast.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: ON IT GOES
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 23, 2008. |
|
The responses to/analysis of Olmert's bid to negotiate with Syria. Touching briefly on what's happening: –– Olmert attempted to give a talk at a Jewish Agency ceremony last night and was booed down by protesters carrying "The people are with the Golan" signs. Seems Livni's detailing of expectations may have been an attempt to soften the blow to the US: "See, we won't deal while they are still part of the Axis of Evil." This helps explain why these expectations weren't spelled out specifically before any agreement to negotiate took place, as, of course, they should have been. All of this merely highlights the ludicrousness of the situation. (The damage done to attempts to isolate Syria by Olmert's willingness to confer legitimacy on Assad must be taken seriously.) –– MK Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud head) has declared that Likud would not abide by any agreement made with Syria by Olmert. Shai Bazk of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzlyia has written an opinion piece on Syrian negotiations that concurs in the opinion that there will be no deal because what is wanted is only the process. His take involves analysis of Assad's precarious position as a member of the ethnic minority Alawite.
~~~~~~~~~~ Good news here: A French appeals court has overturned an earlier ruling of libel with regard to the al-Dura case. This is the case of the libel against Israel constructed by a Palestinian stringer in Gaza working for France 2 TV, who claimed to have filmed Israeli soldiers shooting down the boy Muhammad al-Dura in 2000. This was broadcast by the station's Jerusalem correspondent Charles Enderlin, causing an enormous furor and even becoming a rationale for terrorism. French Jew Phillipe Karsenty, who maintains a media watchdog website, became convinced that the entire thing was a hoax and charged that the station had knowingly misled the world on this issue. France 2 and Enderlin sued him for libel, and won. Now in the appeal, this has been overturned. Says Karsenty, "The verdict means we have the right to say France 2 broadcast a fake news report that was a staged hoax. Among the reasons that Karsenty became convinced it was a hoax: No footage was shown of the boy being killed; first he is alive, then he is lying on the ground apparently dead. Only seven bullet holes were in the wall behind the boy even though the claim was that he had been subjected to a 45 minute hail of Israeli bullets. Israeli soldiers stationed in the area testified that they did not participate in a gun fight that day. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert was questioned by police again today, and a final decision is being made on when Talansky will be deposed, or if he is deposed on Sunday, when he will be cross-examined by Olmert's lawyers. ~~~~~~~~~~ I believe it is official now that Hamas has rejected Israel's ceasefire terms, as conveyed by Egypt's Suleiman. Hamas officials are expressing anger at Suleiman for pushing them to accept Israel's offer rather than leaning on Israel to be more forthcoming with Hamas. Hamas officials are angry about two things: They wanted immediate relief from the blockade, while Israel said this would come as a later part of the process, and then within parameters agreed upon earlier, which include European monitors at the Rafah crossing. They also didn't find it acceptable that Israel insisted on making sure that Hamas was truly abiding by the ceasefire before stopping all operations. Sources close to Hamas have reported, as well, that Hamas rejected Israeli demands that weapons smuggling be stopped. Israel's terms, said a Hamas representative, were "completely unacceptable" and were aimed at "further humiliating the Palestinians and aggravating their suffering." This scenario, I believe, reveals a good deal about the Hamas mindset and how they view Israel. They have an exaggerated sense of their own power and obviously saw Israel as weak and accommodating; they thought they could make arrangements on their terms because launching of rockets at us had beaten us down. That they wouldn't agree to stop smuggling (even if they intended to continue covertly) tells the whole story. ~~~~~~~~~~ An explosive-laden truck blew up yesterday at the Erez crossing. The driver was the only casualty. Other terrorists fired mortars at the crossing at the same time that the truck exploded. As a jeep accompanied the truck, it is thought that the intention may have been kidnapping of a soldier. One of the groups that took credit is Fatah's Al Aksa Brigades. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE GOLAN, LOGIC, AND THE TURKISH PRECEDENT
Posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, May 23, 2008. |
|
This article appeared in Insrael Insider and is archived at http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/12875.htm |
|
"I do not know how to work out a security arrangement if Israel actually withdraws from the Golan Heights. To the best of my knowledge there is no solution to this. And in the absence of a solution to this matter, we could find ourselves in the situation that you are basing yourself only on the good will of the other side. And in the Middle East, with the kind of regime of Bashar Assad, and also with the problematic nature of that regime –– that it could be replaced by a Sunni regime within a relatively short period of time, you are taking an unreasonable level of risk.
Unfortunately, Eiland has many former colleagues who suggest doing just that: "The support of Israel's defense establishment of the talks with Syria is based on the ... view that when Assad gives his word he keeps it."
Simply put, elites in the defense establishment support a deal with Syria on the basis of reasoning that has absolutely nothing to do with their area of expertise. Many of these same people seriously erred in previous predictions regarding developments in the region in general and Syria in particular. But that doesn't stop them from religiously supporting withdrawal from the Golan. Many of them were convinced, for example, that Syria's billions of dollars of unpaid bills to the Russian arms industry would prevent them from acquiring any substantial or significant new weapons systems for the foreseeable future. Oops. They were dead wrong. Many of them cited various and sundry gizmos that could take the place of the Golan. Gizmos that have since been addressed by other gizmos. And of course, many of them assumed absolute best case scenarios when considering how post withdrawal security arrangements would play out in the event of an emergency. If nothing else, the Second Lebanon War sent an expensive reminder that reality rarely is the best case scenario. Is a peace treaty impossible without leaving the Golan? Interestingly, the very same country acting as go between in the Syria-Israel talks, proved that it is indeed possible for Syria to forego what it considers to be sovereign Syrian territory. [Wikipedia: "Under the leadership of Syrian President Bashar al Assad from 2000 onwards there was a lessening of tensions between Turkey and Syria over the Hatay issue. Indeed, in early 2005, when visits from Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Turkish prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan opened a way to discussions between two states, it was claimed that the Syrian government announced it had no claims to sovereignty concerning Hatay any more."] As Channel 2's analyst for Arab affairs, Ehud Ya'ari, asked Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul at a Jerusalem press conference in early January 2005: "Can Syria's recognition last month of full Turkish sovereignty over the Hatay province [Alexandretta] be seen as a precedent for the case of the Golan Heights?" Indeed. Dr. Aaron Lerner is co-founder of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Contact him at imra@netvision.net.il |
|
JEWISH ACTIVISM IS NOT DEAD!
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, May 23, 2008. |
|
Last night Ehud Olmert got what was coming to him –– not from scandal-weary, cynical Israelis who no longer believe that protests achieve anything, but from idealistic young Zionists who have just concluded long-term programs in Israel. Just one day after news surfaced of a proposed Golan giveaway –– Olmert's latest desperate act to hold on to power –– participants at the mega-event in Latrun, just outside Jerusalem, roundly booed the Prime Minister as he rose to address the crowd. A more impassioned group ran toward the stage wearing T-shirts with the slogan, "The People are with the Golan," and yelling anti-withdrawal slogans. The action drew major news coverage on every Israeli TV and radio station and on the front pages of today's weekend papers. Let's hope their action will inspire the silent majority of Israelis who share their views to return to the streets to preserve a semblance of defensible borders. 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. Contact her at judy.balint@gmail.com |
|
THE GOLAN HEIGHTS AND THE SYRIAN-ISRAELI NEGOTIATIONS
Posted by Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA), May 23, 2008. |
|
This was written by Dr. Dore Gold, Israel's ambassador to the UN in 1997-99, is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and author of Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (Washington: Regnery, 2003) and The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City (Regnery, 2007). This article was published by ICA as Jerusalem Issue Brief Vol. 8, No.1 22 May 2008. Contact the ICA at http://www.jcpa.org |
Despite advances in military technology, the Golan Heights remains a vital strategic asset for the defense of the State of Israel. True, this week Israel and Syria have re-opened their diplomatic dialogue after a hiatus of eight years. But negotiators will soon find that there are three clusters of issues that they will not resolve easily: delineation of an agreed boundary, security arrangements, and the Syrian-Iranian alliance. And to a large extent, these issues have become even more difficult since negotiations were held back in the 1990s. Israel captured the Golan Heights in the 1967 Six-Day War, after years in which the Syrian armed forces positioned there pounded Israel's farms and towns below with artillery attacks. In the western Golan, there are a series of steep cliffs reaching a height of 500 meters that dominate the Sea of Galilee, which Syria exploited to attack Israel from 1949 to 1967. Eastward, the Golan plateau continues to rise to a maximal height of 1,200 meters above sea-level –– at Har Avital –– close to the Syrian border. This provides Israel's numerically inferior standing army a clear topographical advantage against the masses of Syrian armor that are deployed in the plain below –– stretching back to Damascus, Syria's capital –– until Israeli reserve forces arrive. Just prior to the outbreak of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Syria deployed 1,400 tanks in this area against a total Israeli force of 177 tanks (a force ratio of 8 to 1 in favor of Syria). In the early 1990s, it was estimated that Syria generally deployed a standing force of five to six divisions in this area against an Israeli force of one division.[1] It is incorrectly assumed that with the proliferation of ballistic missiles, the initial terrain conditions of conventional warfare are less important. In fact, should Syria's considerable rocket and missile forces be used to delay Israel's reserve mobilization, then the importance of the Golan terrain will increase as Israel's small standing army will have to fight for more extended periods of time without reserve reinforcement. Whether the Israeli Air Force can supply close air support during this critical period will depend on how preoccupied it becomes with suppressing Syrian ballistic missile attacks against Israeli cities. In short, the Golan Heights remains an essential strategic asset for Israel's defense. Israeli negotiators will quickly discover three core areas in their discussions with the Syrians over which there has been considerable Israeli-Syrian disagreement in the past. 1. Delineating an Agreed Boundary: Implications for the Sea of Galilee The basis of Syrian-Israeli negotiations will be the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference invitation that included UN Security Council Resolution 242 from November 22, 1967. Resolution 242 called for the "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict." By not requiring a withdrawal from "all the territories" Israel captured, the resolution left open the possibility that the future border between Israel and Syria will be negotiated as part of the termination of ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂbelligerency and establishment of peace between the two countries. When Israel reached its Treaty of Peace with Egypt in 1979, it agreed to fully withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula to the international border between the two countries. If Syria argues that it too is entitled to the pre-1967 lines, there is a fundamental problem, for Syria itself illegally occupied Israeli territories during the 1950s that were within Israel's international borders: the southern demilitarized zone at al-Hamma, the Banias area, and the strip of coastal territory along the northeast shoreline of the Sea of Galilee. If Israel were to agree to the June 4, 1967, line, it would essentially be rewarding Syrian aggression from the 1950s. But if it offers the international border between Israel and Syria, that dates back to 1923 during the Mandatory period, then the Syrians would be obtaining less than the Egyptians. Moreover, after Syria encroached on Israel's coastal strip in the 1950s along the northern shoreline of the Sea of Galilee, it proclaimed at that time a 250-meter belt of the lake as Syrian territorial waters. Damascus even denied Israel fishing rights in this part of the Sea of Galilee.[2] Thus, an Israeli agreement to the June 4, 1967, line can compromise Israel's control of its largest fresh water reservoir. In reality, Israel should not have to be arguing with the Syrians over the question of whether a future Israeli-Syrian boundary should correspond to the June 4, 1967, line or to the older international border, for neither of these lines is defensible. Moreover, the U.S. has given Israel diplomatic assurances in the past that Israel will not have to come down from the Golan Heights. On September 1, 1975, President Gerald Ford wrote to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin: "The U.S. has not developed a final position on the borders. Should it do so, it will give great weight to Israel's position that any peace agreement with Syria be predicated on Israel's remaining on the Golan Heights." The Ford letter might be thought to be a subject of interest to diplomatic historians alone. However, prior to the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, Secretary of State James Baker renewed the U.S. commitment on the Golan to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir on October 18, 1991. During the Clinton administration, Secretary of State Warren Christopher also renewed the Ford commitment in a letter dated September 19, 1996, to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[3] Christopher, moreover, added in his letter that whatever conditional statements Israel might have made during past negotiations about the Golan Heights (the reference was to the "Rabin Deposit") could not be considered as a legally binding commitment.[4] Israeli is thus still in a strong position to insist on a final boundary that reflects its security interests and is not bound to the negotiating record from past diplomatic contacts. 2. The Limits of Demilitarization and Security Arrangements The fundamental security problems between Israel and Syria –– the asymmetry of their standing conventional armies –– has been a problem Israel once faced with Egypt. But when Israel withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula, it compensated for its loss of control of the Sinai with "security arrangements" that fundamentally restricted Egyptian forces through demilitarized areas and limited forces zones that were a part of their Treaty of Peace. But while these "security arrangements" were instituted in the area of Sinai, which is roughly 220 kilometers wide, the territory of the Golan Heights is largely only 25 kilometers wide and is just 12 kilometers wide at its narrowest point. In order to create sufficient security for Israel, it is necessary to institute force limitations on the Syrian Army beyond the Golan Heights, well into southern Syria.[5] Given the proximity of Damascus to the Golan Heights, it is likely that Israel's security needs for demilitarized zones will require Syria to pull back its armored forces behind its own capital. This problem is exacerbated by Syria's massive acquisition of ballistic missiles and rockets, especially after the 2006 Second Lebanon War. Israel must seek to place limitations on these missile forces and on their location close to the Israeli border. Syria will have to make hard choices regarding what are its paramount interests and the extent of the concessions it will have to make: will Syria be willing to accept intrusive security restrictions near its capital or will it prefer to leave the territorial status-quo in place? 3. Neutralizing the Syrian-Iranian Alliance In Israeli diplomatic circles, the main demand that is voiced today concerning the renewed negotiations on the Syrian-Israeli track is the separation of Syria from its alliance with Iran and from what President George W. Bush called "the Axis of Evil." But is it reasonable to assume that Syria, indeed, will be willing to distance itself from its ally in Tehran? The Syrian-Iranian alliance was in fact born in 1980 and had nothing to do with Israel: at the time, it resulted from the Iran-Iraq War and the antipathy of both countries to the regime of Saddam Hussein. Today, the Syrian-Iranian alliance is based on other Syrian interests, as well, that have little to do with Syrian-Israeli relations. For example, a clear priority for Syria's foreign policy is its hegemonic position in Lebanon. The main vehicle for the Syrians to dominate Lebanon is their close alliance with Hizbullah, which, as was recently proven, is the strongest faction in Lebanon. Were Syria to cut itself off from Iran, it would lose its special relationship with Hizbullah, which is funded and controlled by Tehran. As a result, Syria's control over Lebanon would diminish and the anti-Syrian coalition of Sunni Muslims, Druze, and Christians would become predominant. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that Syria would halt its strategic ties with Iran and adopt a pro-Western orientation instead. Moreover, even if, by prior agreement with Tehran, the Syrians would take steps that appeared as though they were downgrading their relations, it is important to realize how temporary such changes might be. While Israel's concession of the Golan Heights would be irreversible, the political orientation of states in the Middle East is notoriously changeable. An Israeli negotiator would be hard-pressed to hammer out an agreement that would provide any permanence to a break between Damascus and Tehran. There are many other daunting subjects that negotiations will face. Israel, for example, expects "full normalization" of relations with Syria, while Syrian spokesmen carefully used the term "normal relations" for the quality of their future ties to the Jewish state. "Normalization" implies the kind of relations enjoyed today by former adversaries like France and Germany in the context of the European Union. "Normal relations" is an alternative term that suggests the most minimal of ties; it provides a kind of formalization of the idea of a "cold peace." Given these fundamental differences, there are serious risks emanating from the current effort of Israel and Syria to re-engage diplomatically. If expectations are raised that a peace agreement is imminent, but no treaty is finally concluded, then the political environment after a failed negotiation can be full of real escalatory potential. For Israel it is particularly critical to take into account the interests of its American ally. On April 28, 2008, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, slammed the Syrians for their destabilizing role in Iraq. He disclosed that 90 percent of foreign fighters in Iraq came across the Syrian-Iraqi border. Moreover, al-Qaeda's "facilitators" in Iraq "operated inside Syria."[6] Entering a negotiation when such broad differences of substance exist is highly problematic. Given the continuing strategic importance of the Golan Heights, it would be a cardinal error for Israel to put into jeopardy its own security by agreeing to come down from this dominant terrain. Finally, such an initiative could also jeopardize Israel's ties with its most important ally, the United States. NOTES 1. Aryeh Shalev, Israel and Syria: Peace and Security on the Golan (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, 1993), p. 124. 2. Meron Medzini (ed.), Israel's Foreign Relations –– Selected Documents, 1947-1974 (Jerusalem: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1976), p. 271. 3. Eli Kamir, "The Secret Negotiations Between Netanyahu and Assad," Ma'ariv, December 31, 1999. 4. Itamar Rabinovich, The Brink of Peace: The Israeli-Syrian Negotiations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), pp. 3-13. The "Rabin Deposit" was a theoretical exercise during which the U.S. was told that if Israeli requirements were met for security arrangements, sequence of implementation, and normalization, then Rabin was willing to withdraw from the Golan. The Clinton administration was supposed to put this conditional statement in their pocket and take it out if Syria met Israel's other conditions. 5. In past negotiations these zones of demilitarization were call "the relevant areas," and Israel made it clear they would need sufficient depth for them to provide security. See Uri Sagie, "The United States and the Israeli-Syrian Dialogue," The Israeli-Syrian Dialogue: A One-Way Ticket to Peace? (Houston, TX: Baker Institute, October 1999), Chapter 3. 6. "U.S. Envoy Slams Iran's Alleged Destabilizing Role in Iraq," AFP, April 28, 2008, http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g6gHdkw33tAceBTnP8yQB3lg2Ybw. |
|
IS THE 'TWO-STATE-SOLUTION"REALISTIC?
Posted by Moshe Dann, May 22, 2008. |
|
"No," insists Gen (ret) Giora Eiland, former head of Israel's National Security Council. In a bold critique of current Israeli policy, Eiland said that negotiations to achieve a Declaration of Principles based on the "two-state-solution" plan could not work. "The concept is wrong." These views seem to be shared by most Israeli military and security experts not serving in the government or IDF and many who are, but can't speak out. Yet, no major media will cover the story. Eiland, one of Israel's top strategic and intelligence advisors, was responsible for implementing Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. Today, however, he readily admits that it was a mistake. Despite warnings at the time from the entire military and intelligence community, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon went ahead with the destruction of 21 Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip, and total withdrawal, including the critical border area with Egypt –– a narrow strip called the Philadelphia Corridor riddled with smugglers tunnels. The vacuum was filled by the Iranian-backed terrorist organization, Hamas. The decision to end Israel's presence in the Gaza Strip, Eiland said, was made by Sharon's political advisors, but would not identify them. "And we keep making the same mistakes," he noted. A "shelf-agreement" now under discussion by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Mohammed Abbas would also fail, Eiland indicated, for the following reasons:
"The concept of a two-state-solution, with an independent Palestinian is naïve," Eiland stated. "It's not about details; those have been well-known since the negotiations during Clinton's presidency. The problem is that it's impossible to guarantee what will happen if the PA violates the agreements." The obsession with the "two-state-solution" in its current form, moreover, prevents the emergence of any other option. "There are other possibilities, but they aren't being considered," Eiland suggested. "For example, Jordan and Egypt could be involved." "Two-thirds of Jordan's population considers themselves Palestinian," Eiland elaborated. "Jordan would be the logical partner in any solution, especially because a Hamas dominated state would present a direct threat to its existence." "Similarly, Egypt does not want a terrorist-run state on its border, since it would probably ally with the radical Moslem Brotherhood, a terrorist group in Egypt." "A Palestinian state, as envisioned is not viable or stable economically, politically, or militarily. It will, inevitably, become radicalized, dominated by the most powerful groups." "Most important, the Palestinians don't want a 'two-state solution.' They rejected it in 1947/48, again in 1967, in 2000 and today. They prefer to be seen as 'victims,' and seek revenge. Given the choice between no Palestinian state and no Israel, on one hand, and being divided among neighboring Arabs states, on the other, 80% would choose the latter." "As long as Israel exists and refuses to agree to the 'Palestinian Right of Return' no solution is possible." "There is no basis for the illusion of a 'two-state solution' as now being presented," Eiland concluded. "The Arab world isn't interested in resolving the conflict, and the risks Israel faces in this scenario are too great." "We need to think more creatively, and be open to more options, especially a regional approach." Moshe Dann is a former ass't professor of History, is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem. Contact him at moshedan@netvision.net.il |
|
EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT: 'A GREAT ASSEMBLY SHALL RETURN HERE'
Posted by Michael Freund, May 22, 2008. |
|
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia –– It is nearly 11 p.m. one night last week in Addis Ababa, and large parts of the Ethiopian capital are bathed in darkness, the result of increasingly frequent power shortages in recent months. Soldiers and policemen stand guard on the road in front of the Israeli Embassy, as Kalashnikov rifles hang precariously across their chests. As they adamantly turn away traffic from both directions, a large bus pulls up and is waved through, before parking on the dusty thoroughfare. While its noisy engine takes a much-needed respite, Israeli officials review an assortment of paperwork as they prepare the vehicle's prospective passengers for the short ride to the airport. It is from there that they will board an Ethiopian Airlines flight to complete the millennial-old journey home to the land of their ancestors, the Land of Israel. Meanwhile, inside a neighboring compound, 42 Falash Mura (descendants of Ethiopian Jews who converted to Christianity in the 19th century) sit quietly and patiently on wooden benches, waiting to board the bus. Their features betray a silent dignity, but little else. There is no trace of excitement or exhaustion on their faces.
Only Yossi, a charming three-year old with an infectious grin, dares to beam with enthusiasm, as though he can sense the momentous nature of what they are about to undertake. Ten days ago, Yossi and the others arrived in Addis Ababa after a two-day bus journey from Gondar in Ethiopia's north. After recuperating from the arduous trip, they were put through an intensive mini-seminar by Israeli officials to familiarize them with the ins and outs of aliya. This group, which numbers 38 adults, two children and two babies, is among the last batch of Falash Mura that the Israeli government plans to bring to the Jewish state. According to embassy officials, another 300 or so Falash Mura will be brought to Israel by the end of June, and then the operation will be complete. Embassy staff have already begun seeking employment elsewhere, as rumors of impending cuts in personnel make the rounds. It is the end of an era, one official says, proudly adding that the ancient community of Ethiopian Jewry has at last found its way home. Activists in Israel and the United States disagree, saying that there are at least 8,700 Falash Mura in the Gondar region whose eligibility for aliya has not even been reviewed by the Israeli government, which they accuse of wanting to shut down the process in haste. And they vow to press on until every last member of the Falash Mura who wishes to return to Judaism and the Jewish people is allowed to do so. But such disputes seem far from the minds of everyone present, as the group of would-be Falash Mura immigrants noiselessly makes it way to the bus after getting the go-ahead from the organizers. Even the most cynical of observers cannot help but be moved by their solemnity and poise, as they leave behind everything they know and head off in Abrahamic fashion into the uncertain future that beckons them. Upon reaching the airport, they disembark from the bus, calmly helping one another. A mother carries a baby, gently rocking her to and fro as she settles into a peaceful slumber. An elderly woman, barely able to see or walk, is escorted across the parking lot by two young men as she determinedly makes her way to the terminal. Behind her, a man on crutches struggles along, keeping up with the group, each tedious step bringing him closer to his goal of reaching Jerusalem. Watching the scene unfold, the verse from Jeremiah (Chapter 31) quickly came to mind: "and I shall gather them from the farthest parts of the earth, and with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child; a great assembly shall return here." Indeed, it is easy to imagine that this is how the Exodus from Egypt must have appeared, as these remnants of Ethiopian Jewry walk out of the pages of history, and head to the Promised Land. There are those who see the Falash Mura as economic migrants, or even hitchhikers taking advantage of the Zionist dream. After all, say the critics, their motivation is simply to improve their lives and escape to the West. But all the cynicism in the world can't take away from the fact that these precious souls, these "lost Jews," are at last returning to their people and their land. It is surely a cliché, but what other country would go to such efforts? At a time when America is clamping down on Mexican migration, and France and Spain battle to contain a flood of North Africans, little Israel reaches out across kilometers of desert and centuries of travail to bring thousands of black Africans in as equal citizens. As they make their way through Ethiopian airport security, with their meager belongings in hand, one cannot help but see in the fulfillment of their dreams that of ours, too.
Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu. He is a Jerusalem Post correspondent.
This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at
|
|
AL-DURA TRIAL: KARSENTY WINS IN PARIS
Posted by Honest Reporting, May 22, 2008. |
The iconic images of Mohammad al-Dura's alleged death in Gaza inflamed Palestinian sentiment and provoked terrible bloodshed. Despite the evidence that Israel was not responsible for firing the bullets that hit al-Dura, and doubts as to the credibility of the footage taken from the scene, this libel has continued to prevail. HonestReporting has brought you the news directly from the trial of Philippe Karsenty, who accused France 2 and its reporter Charles Enderlin of knowingly broadcasting doctored footage of the al-Dura incident. To recall, France 2 successfully sued Karsenty who then appealed against the verdict. At the appeal trial, some of the raw footage taken during that fateful day in Gaza was aired to a packed courtroom that witnessed numerous examples of "Pallywood" staging of events. France 2, however, only made available some 18 out of 27 minutes of footage that apparently exists. Evidently, these scenes and the unreliability of France 2's cameraman Talal Abu Rahma has convinced the French appeals judge. Philippe Karsenty has won the appeal against his libel conviction. Media commentator Tom Gross, who has previously reviewed (see our exclusive video) the al-Dura affair for HonestReporting, said in response to the verdict: Today's ruling shows there are serious doubts about France 2's version of events, and that the entire world press –– including the American TV networks –– were irresponsible in being so quick to take at face value the claims of a local Palestinian cameraman working for France 2, a cameraman who has admitted his partisanship. Karsenty said in a statement released after his victory: The al-Dura lie is an assault on our ability to think, to criticize, to evaluate, and finally to reject information –– especially the right to reject information on which we base our most cherished assumptions. One of Europe's most cherished assumptions is that Israel is a vicious Nazi-like entity that deliberately murders Palestinian Arab children. Moreover, polls conducted in Europe have identified Israel as the greatest threat to world peace, greater than Iran and North Korea, Pakistan and Syria. The al-Dura hoax is one of the pillars on which these assumptions rely.... WHAT DOES IT MEAN? At the time of writing, the full judgment had not been released to the media. However, Take A Pen's Endre Mozes was in the courtroom delivering firsthand accounts of proceedings to HonestReporting. Mozes spoke with some of the lawyers involved who had seen a copy of the judgment prior to its forthcoming release. Amongst his observations and the comments from these lawyers was the court's acceptance of the argument that protagonists operating in non-democratic regimes such as the Palestinian areas are inherently less reliable and should be carefully scrutinized as should have been the case with Talal Abu Rahma. Essentially, the court decided the level of doubt associated with the al-Dura footage warrants deep analysis. It is perfectly legitimate to question it, not libelous. Philippe Karsenty's efforts have opened up France 2 to scrutiny and serves as an example of how the media should be held accountable for their material and the consequences of their reporting. France 2's al-Dura footage has been shown in court to be unreliable and possibly fake. Along with a number of investigations concluding that Israel was not responsible for the bullets that allegedly killed the boy, the icon that is al-Dura –– the edifice upon which so much hostility has been directed at Israel, aided and abetted by a willing media –– comes toppling down. WHERE IS THE COVERAGE? So far, despite access to Reuters and Associated Press wire reports, only Jewish and Israeli media have published the trial verdict. The mainstream media has regrettably remained silent. Is the same media that did so much to propagate the al-Dura libel without verifying the facts now too embarrassed to admit that they may have erred? If your local media outlet has not covered this story, write to it and ask why not. While Philippe Karsenty has had his day in court, the State of Israel and all of those victims of the terror and violence fueled by images of al-Dura deserve nothing less. Some of our own subscribers were not even in their teens in 2000 when the al-Dura case occurred and may not even remember it. Some of those who do remember have questioned why we should continue to pursue this case several years later. We believe that, irrespective of how long it may take, the truth
will emerge. Accountability and justice do not dissipate over time.
HonestReporting will continue to hold the media to account and to
revisit those cases where an injustice has been done.
Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness
in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is
http://www.honestreporting.com. Contact them by email at action@honestreporting.com
|
|
THE HOAX THAT LAUNCHED THE AL-AQSA INTIFADA: MAINSTREAM MEDIA COMPLICITY AND SILENCE
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, May 22, 2008. |
|
The same mainstream media that ran front page photos of the Palestinian boy, Mohammed al-Dura, allegedly being murdered in his father's arms by Israeli soldiers-are, shamefully, not running any stories about the hard-won Karsenty decision in Paris. Thus, as of this writing, the hardcopy of the New York Times has not covered the story. Surprisingly, the New York Sun didn't either, nor did the hardcopy of the Wall Street Journal. According to my online survey, there is no coverage in the Philadelphia Inquirer, The Detroit Free Press, The Miami Herald, The Los Angeles Times, the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, the Washington Post, The Minneapolis Star Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The San Francisco Examiner or the Toronto Globe and Mail. Well, maybe they're working on huge weekend stories. If so, I look forward to reading them. However, a brief mention would be in order. Naught but chaos rules. Google Mohammed al-Dura and you will find 111,000 references to the case-although there were probably millions of references to the case between the fall of 2000-2003. Google the case at the New York Times today and you will get 24,800 references to it. Google the Los Angeles Times and 11,400 references to al-Dura are listed. The Washington Post has 23,300 references to the al-Dura case listed. When will they come clean, play fair, report the truth? Never? Or when it is too late? Brian Rohan of Reuters covered it, ("French Court Cancels Libel in Intifada Video Case"), Melanie Phillips of Britain's Spectator covered it ("A Milestone Victory"), as did the Jerusalem Post ("Court Overturns al-Dura Libel Judgment") and other Israeli media. Of course, Pajamas Media published a statement by Karsenty and pieces by Richard Landes and myself. The online version of the NY Times did cover the French decision-and, as one of my readers has pointed out, although the article gave equal "voice" and equal weight to both sides in the dispute, the headline itself was clear. "Critic of Palestinian Video Wins French Case." (I literally did not see the headline, I only saw the "iconic" photo and the text beneath the headline. I apologize). The International Herald Tribune ran yesterday's AP dispatch: "Paris Court Acquits Media Watchdog of Libel Over Footage in Boy's Death." This story essentially takes the same line as the Times, namely, that the court merely ruled that Karsenty was entitled to voice his opinion without that opinion being deemed "libelous." This view of the court decision (which, as of this writing, has still not been released), does not admit that there is actual footage in which the presumably dead boy is seen alive after he has been pronounced dead. It also does not present background or context for the dispute. No other instances of staged Palestinian fauxtography are brought to bear e.g. the Palestinian lawmakers forced to work by candlelight-while it was still daylight; the same woman or the same man telling the same (false) story in Lebanon or Ramallah or Gaza to the same grateful and gullible western media. There are no stories (at least, not yet), in which the mainstream Western media admit that in the past, they have allowed themselves to be fooled, over and over again, by the narrative of Palestinian Victimhood and Israeli Evil because it suited them-the facts be damned. Please let me know what the media in your state is saying-or not saying. I hope that MEMRI is checking the Arab language media to see what they print, if anything. Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and s co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/ |
|
DIVERGENT REPORTING OF REALITY!
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 22, 2008. |
|
This is from the Solomonia website:
|
|
The IDF downs a bomber at a checkpoint: IDF kills terrorist at West Bank checkpoint A 20-year-old Palestinian carrying four pipe bombs was shot dead Monday evening at an IDF checkpoint located south of Nablus in the West Bank. At around 7 pm soldiers manning the Hawara checkpoint spotted the Palestinian as he was making his way toward them in a suspicious manner with wires protruding from underneath his clothes. Corporal Michal Ya'akov of the military police recounted the incident: "A young Palestinian who seemed confused arrived at the checkpoint. When he reached the turnstile I stopped him and asked that he pass through the metal detector. The apparatus beeped when he went through. I asked him what it was that he had on his body." According to Ya'akov, the Palestinian responded by saying 'nothing' in Arabic while lifting his shirt and exposing the pipe bombs, which were strapped to the right part of his body. "I identified the explosive devices and yelled 'explosives in the checkpoint' and cocked my rifle. Everyone (soldiers) aimed at Palestinian's head and neck so as not to set off the explosive device," she said... Results were predictable. Yet here's how the other side reports the same incident: Israeli soldiers shoot dead young Palestinian at Huwwara checkpoint ...Israeli military sources said the young man refused to comply with soldiers who ordered him to stop and raise his hands. They then opened fire on him, thinking he was wearing an explosive belt. Eyewitnesses told Ma'an's Nablus correspondent that Israeli soldiers manning the checkpoint fired a volley of six shots at the young man, who appeared to be around 16 years of age, hitting him several times in the back. They then completely closed the checkpoint preventing anyone from passing through. According to the eyewitnesses, the Israeli soldiers at the checkpoint had asked the young man to lift up his shirt and when he refused they immediately opened fire on him. Divergent portrayals of reality make peacemaking not only difficult but a waste of time. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: EVER ELUSIVE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 22, 2008. |
|
Genuine peace here, that is. Or even the hint of such a genuine peace. The stage is not properly set. What we have are actors making a pretense of seeking it. We can look northward first with regard to this. In the 24 plus hours since the big announcement was made regarding peace negotiations with Syria, I've only become more convinced that the government isn't serious, but is playing a game. Take Livni's comment to the press yesterday: "Israel's primary goal has always been peace with its neighbors. The Syrians have to understand that entails giving up their support of terror, of Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah." Those are the stipulations that I alluded to yesterday. But you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know Syria is not about to surrender all these things now. And so, if you were serious about peace, you would not announce negotiations now. But if what you were interested in was simply being engaged in a peace process, that is something else all together. ~~~~~~~~~~ This is precisely what Barry Rubin said, in a TV interview. He believes that the process serves both sides, but that both sides know a real peace will not come from this. Says Rubin, with all of the ways that Olmert is served by engaging in the process now, the key one is a message that says: "You have to keep me in office, because of what I'm dealing with." Aaron Lerner refers to this as the "etrog effect" –– the tender handling that a political leader suspected of wrong-doing may be given by left wing press and law enforcement officials if that leader is involved in an ostensible peace process that is pleasing to them. ~~~~~~~~~~ A host of politicians –– except for those on the left –– responded to Olmert's announcement with precisely the same suspicions. From the Likud faction came a statement that Olmert was carrying out "a cynical and transparent stunt in order to deflect attention from his personal problems." Gideon Saar, faction head, observed that Olmert "has no moral and public mandate to hand over the Golan and bring the Syrians back to the Sea of Galilee." MK Zevulun Orlev (NU/NRP) charged that "without a doubt," negotiations with Syria "are causing Israel grave damage, because in order to save his skin [Olmert] is prepared to make far-reaching diplomatic concessions." And yet, Olmert has the unmitigated gall to declare that the negotiations are a "national obligation" and that the contacts with Syria represent "an historic breakthrough." He actually says all of this with a straight face. ~~~~~~~~~~ As expected, the response across the nation with regard to surrendering the Golan has been negative. Some 70% of our population is opposed. The mayors and regional heads in the Golan held an emergency meeting to decide how to deal with this. And there is action taking place in the Knesset to spur legislation previously in process that would require 80 votes (out of 120) before the Golan could be given to Syria in any peace deal. MK Eliahu Gabbay (NU/NRP) has announced that he has already secured 57 votes out of 61 necessary. ~~~~~~~~~~ We all need to laugh when we can, in the face of all that's going on, in order to stay sane and balanced. And so, I off the following from the Post, without comment: "Kadima officials celebrated the fact that the opening of diplomatic negotiations with Syria dwarfed the news coverage about Prime Minister Ehud Olmert allegedly receiving massive sums of money for his private use from American Jewish financier Morris Talansky on Wednesday's nightly news broadcasts. "They denied charges from opposition MKs that the decision to reveal the negotiations on Wednesday had been made to distract the public from the corruption case against Olmert on the night that the gag order preventing the publication of the most damning information was lifted." ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, as to that other "'peace process" with the Palestinians, allow me to offer two news items: Mahmoud Abbas opened an economic conference in Bethlehem yesterday by saying, "East Jerusalem is ours and it's an occupied territory. It must be returned." This is a fairly typical indication of the rigidity of the PA position. Note that he doesn't even speak of sharing the eastern part of Jerusalem with Israel. What he advocates is total PA control both of the Kotel and Har Habayit (the Temple Mount). In his dreams... ~~~~~~~~~~ Totally aside the intransigency of his statement is the fact that it is in error historically. No part of Jerusalem EVER was in the possession of the Palestinians. One does get weary of the lie repeated so often that it is widely believed. After Britain relinquished the Mandate for Palestine, and Israel declared independence, the Arab states promptly responded by declaring war on Israel. By the end of the war, Jordan had captured the eastern part of Jerusalem. It remained in Jordanian hands until the war in '67, at which time Israel took it, subsequently declaring it to be, according to Israeli Basic Law, part of the unified capital of Israel. It is not "occupied," and, as it never belonged to the Palestinians, cannot be "returned" to them. ~~~~~~~~~~ Just one day before this happened, Abbas had dedicated a statue of a "Return Key," the largest key in the world, in the refugee camp of Aida, near Bethlehem. He declared that it was "the symbol of our return, our hopes and our dreams. This key will remain alive until we return home, God willing, nothing will hinder us and we will not abandon our dream." According to the PA news agency WAFA, "[the] President made it clear that we are determined in every word and phrase on the right of refugees to return which is a sacred right, and never be delayed or postponed." ~~~~~~~~~~ Before we move on to other situations, a look at an analysis from the Institute of National Security Studies of what may or may not have been agreed upon so far in our negotiations with the Palestinians. In a nutshell: There is an attempt to deal with borders first, as this is seen as least problematic. The idea is that if borders are agreed upon then it will be known which settlements will have to be dismantled and that process can be begun. But the PA wants us to retain only some 3.5% of Judea and Samaria, with other lands given to them to compensate, while Olmert and Livni are talking about retaining 8-10%. No deal even here yet, never mind on refugees or Jerusalem. What is most significant to me in this report is the suggestion that if he is given the gift of an agreement this will "make it easier for Bush to take a harsher stance with regard to Iran before the end of his term, perhaps even including a show of force." It's not the first time I've encountered a link. This analysis states that "the weakness of the agreement lies in its being a 'shelf' agreement." We would, in essence, be signing on in principle to certain parameters when we don't know what the situation on the ground might be at time of implementation. One of many weakness, to say the least.
~~~~~~~~~~ Let us look then at the situation to our west. Hamas has not quite declared negotiations on the ceasefire to be a failure, because Egypt is still pushing, but they're close. They see Israeli terms as completely unacceptable. Terms such as insisting that the blockade will not be lifted until the ceasefire has been put into effect and it is clear that all factions are cooperating. I love this statement from a Hamas official: "Israel wants a free truce. They don't want to offer anything in return. They want an end to the rocket attacks in return for an end to their aggression." So be it. ~~~~~~~~~~ Going full circle in our analysis, I want to return to the Barry Rubin interview. What Assad wants most, he suggests, is Lebanon, not the Golan. For him the process of negotiating peace with us would take some of the heat off of him with regard to Lebanon, and Syrian involvement there. Rubin made it very clear that in his opinion the big news is what's happening in Lebanon, which will have repercussion long after the issue of peace negotiations between Israel and Syria has disappeared. The Arab-mediated settlement made in Lebanon with regard to power and control was a victory for Hezbollah (and thus for Syria and Iran). The US, foolishly pre-occupied with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, failed to support the government of Lebanon. The embattled Lebanese prime minister, Fuad Saniora, seeing his government had little choice, caved to Hezbollah. The arrangements that were made give Hezbollah veto power over any government decision. (There is even concern now that Hezbollah could veto renewal of the UNIFIL mandate.) And what did Condoleezza Rice say about this? "We view this agreement as a positive step toward resolving the current crisis." She ought to hang her head in shame. ~~~~~~~~~~ The US, while giving tacit approval, is very lukewarm about our prospective negotiations with Syria. They're not eager to have us take the heat off of Assad. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert has approved construction of 286 new housing units in Betar Illit, a haredi community. This is a move, hardly the first, to keep Shas in the coalition. And it works every time. Faction head Eli Yishai has declared that as soon as anything he disapproves of with regard to talks with Syria happens (i.e., we give them the Golan), they'll leave. But so far nothing is happening, so they can stay. This is his refrain, and he, too, should hang his head in shame. If he had a smidgen of integrity he would declare the obvious –– that the announcement to negotiate with Syria presupposes surrender of the Golan –– and then leave to preclude it from happening. ~~~~~~~~~~ I end with this shocking report on the alleged training of PA security forces in Jordan. Steven Smith, writing in the International Herald Tribune, has shared the story of the failure of that training. He begins his article: "The first graduates of General Keith Dayton's Palestinian police-training program will soon hit the hard streets of the West Bank. Unfortunately, they will do so without the firearms, radios and first-aid equipment that they have been promised after graduating from a training program so fraught with problems that it can hardly be called a training program at all. "I was part of that program and watched as nearly a thousand young officers were being put through the motions of an effort that was dominated more by political pressure than by the need to produce well-trained graduates." I ask that each of you read this in its entirety and share it with others.
Then I ask that you, and everyone else in the US you will share this with, do something else. Contact your senators and congresspersons and share the link with them. Tell them briefly what it describes. Ask them what the hell is going on. Demand that they do an inquiry into this situation. Stir things up. Even those in favor of training PA forces would want to know that genuine training is being done. You can find contact information for senators and congresspersons at: http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/media/contacts_congress.php Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ISRAEL'S MISSED BOAT IN LEBANON
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 22, 2008. |
|
The DEBKAfile report entitled: "Israel's Missed Boat In Lebanon" is a critical insight into a vital missed opportunity by the Olmert government. That's to be expected, given that their Kadima Party is undoubtedly the worst, weakest, most indecisive, corrupt government that Israel ever had. But, in fairness to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, we must recall that it was the U.S. government under President George W. Bush and his U.S. State Department run by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who chose to use and support Olmert like dog on a short leash. Recall that in prior years a continual parade of Leftist Prime Ministers, similarly on short leashes to the Arabist U.S. State Department, Israel's IDF (Israel Defense Force) was once eminently capable and feared by her adversaries. But, the U.S. foreign policy, run by the State Department, was to appease the Arab and Muslim nations by restraining and dumbing down the Israeli forces. First, they had to recruit Leftist leaders who would accept U.S. orders to restrain the IDF from boldly striking down Muslim Arab Palestinian Terrorists while they were attacking Israeli civilians or pre-emptively when their Intel found the Terrorists preparing their attacks. Slowly, the efficiency of the IDF was eroded. Less training; a too slow response by the civilian leaders to Terror attacks; those leaders ordering the removal of patrols and checkpoints; a biased judiciary who sided with the Arab Muslims and –– slowly the citizens and our Army became accustomed to being harassed like the Hebrew slaves in Egypt. The Israeli Leftist Doctrine of using PC (Politically Correct) officers raised in an "incubator", designed to develop future Politically Loyal politicians resulted in such leaders with immature, and faulty judgement –– such leaders as Ehud Barak and Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin was always a lost cause and did pretty much what was expected of him by a string of U.S. Presidents who were linked to the Saudis oil tit and a U.S. State Department who favored the many Arab and Muslim countries over the Jewish one country –– which they sincerely wanted gone. While Olmert was quickly identified as a sniveling, nail-biting, obedient Quisling, to be easily controlled, the betrayal by Ariel Sharon still shocks the nation and those who believed Sharon was the builder of the country and defender of the pioneering settlers. Arik told them to claim every hilltop! The Washington Arabist bureaucrats in "Foggy Bottom" but also in or out of current government positions, were instrumental in weakening the Israeli officer corps and partially responsible for degrading the "Esprit d'Corps" for which they were famous. When Olmert, Livni and Barak bumbled their way through the first Hezb'Allah Lebanon War in July 16 to August 18, 2006. By ordering confused restraint on orders from Condoleezza Rice, the collapse of the IDF against a minor Terrorist enemy was complete. What the U.S. demanded of Israel degraded a great military force. As has been said many times, by emasculating the IDF through its pacifistic leaders, the Israeli forces were not there in training or in spirit when America asked them and needed them to attack Hezb'Allah again –– to save Lebanon itself. No, Sharon and Olmert used the IDF for evacuating pioneering settlers from 21 Jewish communities in Gush Katif/Gaza and 4 Northern Samarian communities, evicting more than 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from their flourishing homes, farms, businesses, factories, schools, synagogues and cemeteries. So, the IDF was used to brutally uproot Jews, NOT to prepare for the real wars which face it continually from hostile Muslim and Arab neighboring states and from hostile internal "Fifth Column" Arab Muslims who vow to destroy the Jews and wipe the Jewish State off the face of the map. Now, thanks to their poor training courtesy of Olmert and the U.S. State Department orders, the IDF is NOT prepared to defend Northern Israel –– let alone Lebanon –– from the stockpiled Katyusha Missiles Hezb'Allah supplied from Iran and Syria. The IDF has NOT been allowed to destroy the active threat of Hamas from the Gaza that has become a Global Terror Base –– as we and many other writers forecast. Hamas has smuggled in an untold numbers of Rockets –– even Grad missiles from Iran –– that can reach as far into Israel as Ashkelon. But, instead of abandoning Olmert, Livni and Barak, President Bush and Sec. C. Rice continued to support the Kadima gang, delighted that Olmert was complying with the State Department wishes to appease the Muslim Arab Palestinians –– and by extension the oil rich Arab countries. When the U.S. wanted Israel to strike Hezb'Allah in a bold, decisive manner to save the Lebanese Government, Olmert, Livni and Barak only did what the U.S. State Department had trained them to do. They cowered and refused to take the field when Hezb'Allah might have been defeated as it left its dug-in positions in South Lebanon to attack the capital of Lebanon –– Beirut. Why should Bush and Rice rage against Israel and her currently weak leaders, given that they were only doing what the U.S. trained them to do? What was needed was an Arik Sharon as he was in his time of power and charisma. When he did not take orders from incompetent leaders and when he pushed ahead to win the fights Israel was forced into. Then Sharon became a politician and he was put on a short leash. He too betrayed his people, first in evacuating Yamit, then Gush Katif/Gaza –– with plans to make Judea and Samaria his next evacuation –– like Gush Katif. His good friends who loved and respected him when he was the defender of Jews, say Sharon is in a vegetative state because the ground of Israel would spit him out if he died and had to be buried in it....because he was a betrayer of the People and the Land. He, too, became the Bush, Rice, Baker plaything –– which spawned the Olmert creature. President Bush, if you want Israel to once again become a land-based aircraft carrier that America can rely upon, then GET OFF THEIR BACKS!! Cage Rice and send Baker back to the Rice Institute spy school in Texas. Israel needs an immediate new leader who could be Bibi Netanyahu. But, of course, he too might be easily harnessed –– like you did to Sharon and Olmert. But, then you would still have a weak Israeli military if you played with his mind as was done with Rabin, Barak, Sharon and Olmert. If you want a fighting Israeli team with the old spirit, TAKE OFF THE LEASH!! Let Israel be the strong Lion of Judah she can be! Hit Iran while you still can. Don't use Israel as your bait so it would justify a strike after Israel was devastated by a saturation missile attack. Stop listening to Rice, Baker and the other pacifists mostly inhabiting the bureaucracies of State, Defense, the Intel Agencies, etc. With a series of real dangerous wars coming up, you don't want the likes of Olmert and his failing regime, ready to retreat, leaving the field of battle to the Terrorist Regimes. Start to think about the U.S. State Department Doctrine of deliberately weakening Israel's Defense Force and appeasing Arab Muslims who can never be appeased. |
|
From the DEBKAfile:
Hizballah special forces in Beirut Sunday night, May 11, the Israeli army was poised to strike Hizballah. The Shiite militia was winding up its takeover of West Beirut and battling pro-government forces in the North. When he opened the regular cabinet meeting Sunday, May 11, prime minister Ehud Olmert had already received the go-ahead from Washington for a military strike to halt the Hizballah advance. The message said that President George W. Bush would not call off his visit to Israel to attend its 60th anniversary celebrations and would arrive as planned Wednesday, May 14 –– even if the Israeli army was still fighting in Lebanon and Hizballah struck back against Tel Aviv and Ben-Gurion airport. American intelligence estimated that Hizballah was capable of retaliating against northern Israel at the rate of 600 missiles a day. Olmert, defense minister Ehud Barak and foreign minister Tzipi Lvini, the only ministers in the picture, decided not to intervene in Lebanon's civil conflict. Iran's surrogate army consequently waltzed unchecked to its second victory in two years over the United States and Israel. DEBKAfile's US and military sources disclose the arguments Washington marshaled to persuade Israel to go ahead: Hizballah, after its electronic trackers had learned from the Israel army's communication and telephone networks that not a single troop or tank was on the move, took the calculated risk of transferring more than 5,000 armed men from the South to secure the capture of West Beirut. This presented a rare moment to take Hizballah by surprise, Washington maintained. The plan outlined in Washington was for the Israeli Air force to bombard Hizballah's positions in the South, the West and southern Beirut. This would give the pro-government Christian, Sunni and Druze forces the opening for a counter-attack. Israeli tanks would simultaneously drive into the South and head towards Beirut in two columns. 1. The western column would take the Tyre-Sidon-Damour-Beirut coastal highway. 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 |
|
A NEW ISRAEL FUND SUPPORTEE; EGYPTIAN COPTIC PATRIARCH ON ISRAEL; RELIGION IN POLITICS; POLITICS IN RELIGION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 22, 2008. |
|
WHERE YOUR DONATIONS TO NEW ISRAEL FUND GO Adalah, an Israel Arab NGO that claims to support civil rights for Arabs, receives a subsidy from the New Israel Fund. Adalah calls the 10,000 security prisoners of Israel "political prisoners." Is terrorists' attempt to murder Jews an expression of political views. Adalah further accuses Israel of segregation, in separating out the security prisoners from the other prisoners. It calls this racism (IMRA, 4/17). If Israel didn't separate the terrorist prisoners from Jewish prisoners, the terrorists would be able to do in jail what they had attempted to do outside –– kill Jews. According to Adalah, protecting likely Jewish victims is racism, but seeking out Jews to attack is not. See how donations to the New Israel Fund are employed? The Fund's tax deductible status should be repealed and the Fund should be banned for being somewhat of a terrorist front. ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT The current head of Israeli military intelligence declared these the main threats to Israel: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. The general admitted that the key terms of the UNO ceasefire have not been kept. UNIFIL troops are in place, but have not kept Hizbullah from rearming, from re-fortifying the border, and from a significant presence along the border, even if not, in daytime, in uniform. Hizbullah has been getting rockets that, unlike those that couldn't fly far, now can reach almost all of Israel. Hizbullah is stronger than before, but so is Israel. Hizbullah's strength grew exponentially right after Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the southern Lebanese security zone. (Ah, the folly of repeated withdrawal!) For those who suppose that Iranian nuclear weapons would pose a threat only to Israel, the general points out that Iran is developing missiles that could carry the bombs to Europe and America. Being a Sunni and (relatively) secular state, Syria doesn't belong in the evil axis, but is dependent upon Iran, now. Abbas and Syria might make a peace agreement with Israel, but there is no indication that they would implement their side of it (IMRA, 5/17). Yes, they'd get the land and then be in a stronger position to attack Israel. Giving up land doesn't beget peace. What good is it to consider those specific threats, without considering that in a war, Egypt, S. Arabia, and possibly Jordan may weigh in against Israel, and with US weapons that are the equal or superior of what Israel has? FINANCING IRAN The US has demanded that foreign banks stop doing business with Iran. Some German banks gradually have complied. Iran threatened not to let them return to business there, in future (IMRA, 8/24). It would be better if the West acted in concert and promptly, not giving the enemy time to adapt to straitened circumstances. This is more exhortation than expectation. DENMARK ENCOURAGES PIRACY Piracy is increasing in the waters off Somalia, near S. Arabia. It threatens Saudi shipping. Therefore, Arab News is upset with Denmark. Denmark not only paid pirates ransom for the release of a seized Danish crew, it publicly announced the payment. Denmark broke with the international "convention" (I think it means custom) of not publicly announcing payment of ransom. Informed what they can get from Danish ships, Pirates are likely to ply those waters more (IMRA, 8/24). What do the maritime powers intend to do about piracy? Are the pirates based where they can be located easily and attacked? CALLING GOD "ALLAH" A Christian clergyman urged his fellow worshippers to use the term, "Allah," for God. He meant to promote harmony with Muslims. Instead, he stirred controversy all around. Some of the reaction was severe. Prof. Steven Plaut advised being less politically correct and more relaxed about this. He cited some Jewish authorities and Jews from some Mideastern countries who already used that recommended term. Linguistically it is close to a Hebrew one. It doesn't matter which word people use for the same God. I posited two other considerations, with which Prof. Plaut concurs. One is that the Christian clergyman's suggestion to switch to "Allah" may be part of the creeping, one-way Western accommodation to Islam, in an effort to gain Muslim good will. In this futile effort, more and more Westerners become like dhimmis. Second, although the three Abrahamic faiths are monotheistic, they define the supreme creator and his requirements of humans differently. The differences are more significant to humankind than the similarities –– they can cost you your life. Islam, alone of the three faiths, holds that God wants them to impose their rules on others, by force, if necessary. In contending that they worship and obey the same God, Westerners may reduce their guard against jihad. ARAB MK ACCUSED OF ESPIONAGE Now that Israeli police have finished their work, the gag order is lifted and the charges against Arab MK Bishara are revealed. Hizbullah paid him several hundred thousand dollars last summer, for intelligence of use in its war on Israel. The Jerusalem Post further describes this intelligence as helping Hizbullah select targets in Israel. Other, unnamed countries' intelligence services were in touch with him, too. MK Bishara also is suspected of stealing millions from Arab aid organizations, and laundering the funds through money changers in Jerusalem. One of the money changers agreed to testify. Bishara heads an anti-Israeli, Stalinist party. Nevertheless, Israel's leftists demanded that he be allowed to participate in the Knesset intelligence committee. How that would have facilitated his espionage! The anti-Israel Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem named him to its board. The anti-Zionist New Israel Fund tried to get him to be Israel's official representative to a Smithsonian fete for Israel. After the charges were aired, "An ad was run in Haaretz this week declaring 'Azmi Bishara you are our Brother,' and signed by a handful of Israeli anti-Israel leftists and communist moonbats, including Anat Biletzki, professor of philosophy at Tel Aviv University." Holocaust-denier, Prof. Neve Gordon, supports the accused traitor, too (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/2). The combination of Holocaust-denying and anti-Zionist totalitarianism by Prof. Gordon is no coincidence. How shameful of those fellow Jews of mine! I meant to send this out a couple of months ago. Bishara was not indicted yet! EGYPTIAN COPTIC PATRIARCH ON ISRAEL Patriarch Shinoda III thought that the Vatican should not have apologized to contemporary Jews for the accusation that their forebears killed Jesus. He said the apology contradicts the Christian Testament. Pope Shinoda also said he is keeping tens of thousands of Copts from visiting Jerusalem, lest they be influenced by the Israeli media and their tourism assist Israel's economy and public relations (IMRA, 5/2 from MEMRI). He makes it difficult to sympathize with the Copts, oppressed by the Muslims. He needn't worry much about the Israeli media. Being mostly leftist (and in Hebrew), it is anti-Israel. RELIGION IN POLITICS & P0LITICS IN RELIGION Israel and the US exemplify the need to separate politics from religion. In the US, leftist secularists have turned many State educational systems against Christianity, in the name of separation of Church from State, but give Islam special study and understanding. What should Americans do about their failing schools? First ask why they are failing. Society is too consumer-oriented; America rests on its laurels; the Left has theories about leveling downwards and methods that don't instruct; the curriculum is dumbed down for political correctness; discipline is lax; parents do not prepare their children for education; political correctness obstructs analysis. Teachers and unions are blamed for the whole mess. States are urged to throw good money after bad, though they already outspend successful schools. Meanwhile, Catholic schools do well with black and Hispanic children. Should they get government funding to expand? Or should politicians become realistic about what holds the public school system? If Catholic schools were subsidized, why not anti-social Muslim schools and cults? The government of Israel subsidizes religions [but doesn't recognize Reform and Conservative sects]. It lets Islam and Christianity practice freely, but restricts Jewish worship on the Temple Mount and lets the Waqf destroy ancient Jewish artifacts. Why? Fear of Muslim riots and government antipathy to Judaism. History is taught in Israel with a bias against Zionism and Judaism. Again, leftist influence at work. Especially during Rabin's tenure, the government played dirty tricks against the Orthodox, so as to weaken its appeal for retention of the Territories. Politics against religion. In Israel, lobbying gets subsidy more than in the US. The Orthodox set up political parties for the purpose. Those parties became thoroughly corrupted. The Shas Party shores up regimes that are anti-religious and that betray national security, so long as those subsidies keep coming in. The country is collapsing, militarily, but Shas keeps Olmert's coalition going. Periodically it threatens to resign if Olmert gives up Jerusalem, while he plots to give that up and more. They did not quit when the Jews were ousted from northern Samaria and Gaza. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MUSLIM MODERATE & EXTREMIST The extremist assassinates an infidel and then the moderate dances in the street. This is said tongue-in-cheek. Whether there is a significant number of moderates in a fundamentally intolerant and imperialistic religion, I can't tell. 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 |
|
"TINY IRAN" –– OBAMA'S BIG LEARNING CURVE.
Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 22, 2008. |
|
Friends, This was written by Anne Bayefsky, qho has been covering the U.N. and world politics for years. There is no one whose opinion I respect more. She is senior fellow at the Hudson Institute (http://www.hudson.org/). She also serves as the director of the Touro Institute for Human Rights and the Holocaust (http://tourolaw.edu/academic_programs/institutes/IHRH) and as the editor of EYEontheUN.org (http://www.eyeontheun.org/). Naomi |
|
'It's terrorism, stupid." Nothing short of blunt talk will do in light of Sen. Barack Obama's comments this past week on Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah. They are the most significant indication to date of the looming catastrophe for American national security posed by an Obama presidency. Here is Obama in his own words, speaking in Pendleton, Oregon on Sunday night: "Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. In Iran they spend 1/100th of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance." How does one begin a course for a presidential candidate in Terrorism 101? Where has Obama been for the past three decades during which the greatest threats to peace and security have moved beyond the sphere of state actors operating alone? After 9/11, why doesn't Obama recognize the capacity of relatively small entities to wreak havoc, at comparatively little cost, on a nation as large and strong as America? Despite Obama's claim to be a foreign-policy realist, his fancy foreign-policy footwork contains as much realpolitik as a dancing sugar-plum fairy. Obama is keen to explain his hankering for an early heart-to-heart with Iranian President Ahmadinejad –– with whom he would "be willing to meet separately, without precondition during the first year of [his] administration" or his desire to engage in "direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions." His strategy so far has been to deny the undeniable transaction costs of an unconditioned presidential get-together: the undeserved legitimacy conferred on a would-be mass murderer, the time lost while a nuclear-weapons program continues in full swing, and the betrayal of brave local dissenters. "Tiny" and not "serious" move us another step closer to the edge. The unfortunate reality is that Iran not only poses a serious threat already, but it does stand a chance of carrying out its dire program. Ahmadinejad, in addition to his professed affinity for genocide, is funding terrorist proxies in Lebanon and Gaza who believe they have started the job and are committed to finishing it. The message Obama sends in denying that Iran has "tried to pose a serious threat to us" is that a grave threat to the peace and security of Israel is not a threat to the peace and security of the United States. Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, of "Israel Lobby" fame, would be proud. But even the anti-nuclear-anything activists in the Democratic party should begin to worry about a president who thinks the consequences of an Iranian nuclear strike on Israel can be confined to the locals. Official U.S. policy holds Iran to be a state sponsor of terrorism, along with Cuba, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria. Not only has Iran tried, and is trying, to pose a serious threat to us, in some ways it is a greater threat than that posed by the Soviet Union. The terrorist organizations or non-state actors whom these rogue states sponsor are not subject to the same economic and political pressures that could be brought to bear on the Soviet Union. Madmen and religious fanatics driven by a belief in the imminent reappearance of the 12th Imam following worldwide chaos, or visions of virgins in post-suicidal heaven, or who just hate us more than they love their children, are not susceptible to the rational calculus of Mikhail Gorbachev. But according to his recently reported conversation with New York Times columnist David Brooks, Obama believes the problem with Hamas and Hezbollah is that the poor things don't "understand that they're going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims." We need to hear more about where in the governing Hamas Charter (with its overt anti-Semitism and manifest dedication to the destruction of Israel), and Hezbollah's takeover plans for Lebanon, Obama finds legitimate claims. And the solution according to Obama? "The U.S. needs a foreign policy that looks at root causes of problems and dangers." Hezbollah Leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah couldn't have said it better himself. Oh, wait: He has said it himself. Remember Iranian proxy Nasrallah in Beirut on September 30, 2006, just after he sent 4,000 rockets into Israel: "This experience of the resistance, which must be transferred to the world, relies on faith, conviction, trust, and the moral and spiritual willingness to give sacrifices. Also, it depends on the thinking, planning, organizing, training and armament, and as is said: dealing with the root causes." Surely, Obama ought to know that invoking the language of "root causes" to illuminate the behavior of Hamas and Hezbollah plays into the nefarious strategy of these terrorist organizations and their sympathizers. How about the tiny factor? On the one hand, we could all hum tip-toeing through the tulips along with Obama and Tiny Tim. On the other hand, we might cast our minds back to "tiny" anthrax envelopes or think about "tiny" suitcase bombs or "tiny" nanotechnology innovations in chemical and biological weapons. I also wonder how all those developing countries, allegedly ready to embrace us once again with a President Obama, will enjoy the big boy's view of their tiny status. Coming from a man who aspires to bear the single greatest responsibility for the peace and security of the free world, the resemblance to "peace for our time" is the least of Obama's problems. The real problem is a book with a name like "Terrorism for Dummies" would have to become bedside reading at the White House. 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. |
|
THE ULTIMATE STALLING TACTIC
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, May 22, 2008. |
|
Now that Olmert's doctors have not significantly stalled the police investigation into his highly-suspect activities, we must brace ourselves for the prime minister's next delay gimmick. What will it be this time? Destroying some settlements? A peace treaty with Hamas? Surrendering the Golan? Olmert has been trying all of that for a long time –– thank G-d without much success. It is not so simple to move ahead with peace agreements anymore. The Israeli public has become highly suspicious of "peace" treaties that bring its cities closer and closer to missile range. No, Olmert likely has a different plan up his sleeve –– no less dangerous. If he gets desperate to diffuse the pressure seething around his corruption cases he will simply send the army into Gaza. Olmert and his ministers have been talking for as long as we can remember about the army incursion that is getting ever closer, about the sand in the hour glass that is almost spent and all the other empty words. Everybody understands that Israel does not have a real military option in Gaza for a very simple reason. We were already there and we ran away. In other words, if Israel does not intend to encourage the Arabs to emigrate from Gaza, to annex the Gaza Strip to sovereign Israel, to build 100 Gush Katifs there and to destroy all those who try to fight against us –– then there is no reason for us to enter Gaza. Israel's current Oslo mentality will not allow it to follow the above route. So until there is belief based leadership in Israel, it does not have a military option to solve the Gaza problem. If the problem isn't Gaza, though, but rather the investigations against Olmert, then a military incursion into Gaza becomes a very logical option. Please take note, dear readers, that there is a very good chance that your sons will be sent to be killed capturing Gaza just to ease up the pressure on the prime minister. After some time goes by, the IDF will retreat from Gaza once more. The missiles will return to Ashkelon, nobody will remember Talansky and nobody will remember our sons who paid with their lives to save Olmert. Shabbat Shalom,
Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside
the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character.
Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a
theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The
Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org.
To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read
their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org.
Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922
(cell)
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: AND THIS TOO?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 21, 2008. |
|
Three countries –– Israel, Syria and Turkey –– released the announcement at the same time: Israel and Syria have begun peace negotiations, mediated by Turkey: "The two sides have declared their intention to hold the negotiations in good faith and openly, and hold a serious and continuous dialogue in order to reach a comprehensive peace deal in accordance with the framework set at the (1991) Madrid Conference." The talks (which are not face-to-face) apparently began Monday. Following this announcement, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said that Israel had agreed to fully concede the Golan Heights. Sources from Olmert's office responded to this: "The negotiations are being held on the basis of the Madrid Conference principles. We do not recall an Israeli commitment at the conference to fully cede the Golan Heights." ~~~~~~~~~~ The Madrid Conference of 1991: Hosted by Spain and co-sponsored by the US and the USSR after the Gulf War (which was the impetus). After three days of meetings, there were two sorts of negotiations planned. One was a multilateral track in which nations of the Middle East were supposed to discuss issues such as economic development and water. The other was bi-lateral talks between Israel and Syria, Israel and Lebanon, Israel and Jordan, and Israel and the Palestinians. In subsequent years meetings at the ambassadorial level took place between Israel and Syria in Washington DC. Within the Madrid framework, there was Israeli acknowledgement of a willingness to do some withdrawal from the Golan, but the depth of that withdrawal was not spelled out. Additionally the Israelis had stipulations regarding the need for full normalization of relations (establishment of embassies and open borders) for a protracted period of time before the agreed upon withdrawal would take place in stages. (The authoritarian Syrian regime –– whether under the father, Hafetz Assad, in 1991 or the son, Bashar Assad, now –– has shown itself to be vastly resistant to openness and full normalization.) Then too, there was an Israeli stipulation about security arrangements. ~~~~~~~~~~ Ultimately, all of the various negotiations –– the last upgraded round in January 1999 with US President Clinton, Israeli PM Barak and Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk a-Shara –– came to naught. ~~~~~~~~~~ Only recently government officials were saying that Syrian would have to throw out the terrorist groups such as Hamas from Damascus, stop assisting Hezbollah in Lebanon, and break with Iran before we'd negotiate with them. Not only is there not a snowball's chance in hell of all of this happening, we now know that Syria was building an atomic reactor with N. Korean assistance. So what is going on and what is one to make of this? ~~~~~~~~~~ The first thing this suggests is that negotiations with the Palestinians are not going well. Olmert is looking for a "success" somewhere, and if one track slows the pattern is to turn to another. There have been feelers and off-again on-again announcement for some time, but now it is being made public. If there is a reason to be just a bit alarmed, it has to do with whom Olmert sent to do the negotiating in Turkey: Yoram Turbowitz, Olmert's chief of staff, and Shalom Turgeman, a foreign policy advisor to Olmert. Two men whom I understand to be far left and willing to cross red lines. ~~~~~~~~~~ But there are many reasons to not be alarmed. An announcement from the Prime Minister's office says that the return of Turbowitz and Turgeman from Ankara is awaited in order "to learn of the achievements in the attempt to launch a communication channel with the Syrians mediated by Turkey." "An attempt to launch a communication channel" does not exactly represent a done deal. This is, one might guess, largely in the nature of a trial balloon. ~~~~~~~~~~ While we will have to await responses, my best guess is that this will not be received well. The nation is not in favor of surrendering the Golan. Not only are we speaking of a much loved and beautiful region of the nation, there are tremendous implications with regard to security because of the heights and –– perhaps even more importantly –– water. Significant headwaters for the Jordan originate in the Golan, and whatever deal might be struck, turning those headwaters over to Syria is asking for trouble. The Golan, in contrast to Judea and Samaria, is considered part of Israel proper today, and is governed under Israeli civil law. The Golan is defined within Jewish law as being part of the Land of Israel, so that laws such as shmita that apply in the land apply there. It was originally part of the Mandate for Palestine (which meant intended for the Jewish homeland) but Britain traded the area to France. It has been under Israeli control now longer than it was ever under Syrian control. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is understood that we would need to surrender all of the Golan for a peace treaty with Syria: this is Syria's upfront bottom line. The only thing that might be negotiated is a small area at the foot of the heights that would determine whether Syria came all of the down to the shore of the Kinneret. I thus see as disingenuous the statement from the prime minister's office that negotiations are being done ('would be done'?) under the terms of the Madrid conference, which doesn't require full surrender of the Golan. This is accurate, in so far as it goes: Madrid understandings did not call for this. But as negotiations progressed over the years, the direction in which they went was towards full surrender. What is troublesome is that each time after negotiations were broken off, when they were renewed again, they picked up from where they were left off. This, clearly, is what the Syrians expect now. And so Olmert and company must be asked if they are being less than forthcoming, and if an understanding regarding full surrender has been made behind closed doors that we're not being told about. There is very good reason to think this is the case, because Syria would not be interested otherwise. If the prime minister is not committed to relinquishing all of the Golan under the right circumstances, it suggests posturing that is not serious –– a bit of diplomatic game playing. ~~~~~~~~~~ One other factor must be mentioned here: that of the vulnerability of Olmert's position because of the specter of an indictment that hangs over his head. Repeatedly I've heard people refer to him as 'wounded' –– with the follow-up observation that a wounded animal is dangerous. He has less to lose if he realizes he likely has no political future, and so he might be more reckless. On the other hand, even within his own party his support is fading. ~~~~~~~~~~ As the media is now permitted to reveal more details of the Olmert investigation, we're being told that he made "personal use" of funds given to him by Talansky. Said one official: "Since Olmert became prime minister, and up until this day, he has failed to register or declare the funds he received from Talansky." Police found Olmert's accounting of the use of the funds "unconvincing." "Olmert said the money went to cover [campaign] deficits, but he has shown no proof of that." Olmert is supposed to be questioned on Friday, and then Talansky on Sunday. Olmert's lawyers are seeking a delay in the deposition to be taken from Talansky, to permit them to better review the evidence so they can properly cross-examine. A team from the National Fraud Unit will be flying to the States to continue the investigation there. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
DISCRIMINATION SEEN IN MICHIGAN SPY CASE: TENENBAUM FALSELY ACCUSED AS SPY FOR ISRAEL
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 21, 2008. |
|
This was written by Eli Lake and it appeared today in The New York Sun
|
|
WASHINGTON –– For the past 11 years, Army tank engineer David Tenenbaum has been trying to undo the damage the government did to him in four days in 1997, when he was accused of being a spy for Israel. It started with a polygraph test administered February 13, where one interrogator yelled epithets about how they knew how to deal with Jews. The next day, Mr. Tenenbaum arrived at work and found his computer gone and his name erased from the classified e-mail system at the Tank Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, Mich. He was then asked to enter a conference room, where agents from the FBI informed him he should confess to the crime of espionage. When Mr. Tenenbaum learned he would not be arrested, he walked out of the room and to his Toyota Camry parked on the base outside of Detroit. A guard asked him for his badge and proceeded to use it to scrape away the parking decal on his windshield. Then the Jewish Sabbath came and the investigators he met in his office the day before began ransacking his home and confiscated this amateur violinist and guitarist's music books as well as the coloring books that belonged to his 4-and-a-half-year-old daughter. The ordeal was complete on the following Monday. Mr. Tenenbaum read in the Detroit Free Press that he was an alleged spy and learned later that the FBI had forgotten to seal the court request for the Eastern District Federal Court of Michigan asking for a search warrant of his home. Some newspapers even began to call him the next Jonathan Pollard, the Naval officer who was sentenced to life in prison for stealing technology for Israel in 1986. "It was like the twilight zone," Mr. Tenenbaum said. The U.S. attorney ultimately declined to prosecute the case, stating in a letter that the government failed to produce enough evidence to warrant prosecution despite a thorough investigation. This month, new details emerged when an independent watchdog organization called the Project on Government Oversight published new internal documents relating to the Pentagon inspector general's investigation into the handling of the Tenenbaum case. Among the documents is a presentation laying out the inspector general's findings. The presentation's third slide says, "Mr. Tenenbaum experienced religious discrimination when his Judaism was weighed as a significant factor in the decision to submit him for an increase in his security clearance." The investigation then went on to quote several Pentagon officials involved in the case against Mr. Tenenbaum acknowledging that his religion and his contacts in Israel were grounds at least in part for launching the investigation against him. A discrimination suit brought by Mr. Tenenbaum was thrown out of federal court after the government requested the judge acknowledge that the Army would need to disclose state secrets in order to mount its defense. According to a sworn affidavit of Mr. Tenenbaum, when he took his first polygraph test in 1997, his questioner said to him: "I have done other Jews before and gotten them to confess and I'll get you to confess too," and, "I can tell you are lying by looking into your eyes." Jewish community leaders and former Defense Department officials say Mr. Tenenbaum's case represents a disturbing phenomenon. "There are other cases that have been brought to our attention over the years. Often people are afraid to go public for fear of further retribution, but there clearly has to be a systemic approach to this and let justice be done for those who have been discriminated against," said the executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Malcolm Hoenlein. "This case is a blatant example of discrimination that is tolerated within the system against Jews and perhaps others. For 11 years this innocent man has suffered and paid a heavy price, personally, financially, socially. There is no compensation that is adequate for that suffering." A former chairman of the Defense Policy Advisory Board and a senior Pentagon official in the Reagan administration, Richard Perle, said, "There is no balanced commitment to a sense of judgment from the people who are responsible for conducting these investigations. They fix on a target. They are disappointed if they cannot establish wrongdoing. And they resist fairness when they fail to show wrongdoing." He added, "There is a wholly unjustified suspicion of Jews in sensitive positions, and especially Orthodox Jews." Internal Pentagon documents indicate a fight has now broken out between the Pentagon's lawyers and the Pentagon inspector general that concluded the case against Mr. Tenenbaum exhibited the hallmarks of employment discrimination. That conclusion, a potential embarrassment for the Army, has yet to be published, in part because the Pentagon's general counsel has launched its own investigation into the case, which the inspector general's office complained was intended to undermine the findings of the report. According to the inspector general's presentation, "OGC objections centered on undermining evidence presented above as either 'opinion' or circumstantial (indirect) evidence." A spokesman for the Pentagon Thursday declined to comment for the story. The lead investigator for the Project on Government Oversight, Beverly Lumpkin, said the case underscores the need for the Pentagon to allow its inspector general its own independent legal counsel. "We are not taking a position on the underlying case," Ms. Lumpkin said. "We would like to see justice done for Mr. Tenenbaum. Obviously we do care what happens to him. Our focus is not on him personally. We think his story is a good illustration of the larger systemic problem with the inspector general at the Pentagon." Mr. Tenenbaum said he is not surprised that the military would try to suppress the report. "For almost 12 years I have been fighting for justice," he said. He added that many of the security officials he regards as his tormentors have been promoted in the military. Meanwhile, he is still seen as something of a pariah in his office. He is no longer allowed to work on his favored project of designing armor for Humvees. In the interim, he has earned a doctorate in chemical engineering. "For 11 years I have been waiting for vindication," he said. "You have to imagine this, I was wrongfully accused of espionage. The punishment is either death or life in prison. I believe the only worse crime is assassinating a U.S. president." He went on: "My father was a Holocaust survivor. He was the only one who survived. He passed away a year before this happened. Can you imagine him seeing his only son being singled out for the same reason he was, being a Jew?" Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com For information about Pollard and the struggle: see www.jonathanpollard.org for English, or www.FreePollard.org for Hebrew. |
|
WILL OLMERT SACRIFICE A NATION TO SAVE HIS OWN SKIN?
Posted by Delta Vines, May 21, 2008. |
|
This was posted on my website:
|
|
Something is afoot. I'm not speaking of rockets from Gaza Strip being launched into Israel; although that is a continual occurrence. Always the treaties and talks of a "Palestinian state" and the final status of Jerusalem are worrisome indeed. This time, however, there is a "stinky feet" syndrome which has a stench that is impossible to ignore. The reports of P.M. Olmert's personal and legal scandals are getting too close to scorching Israel's leader. In order to throw the legal investigator and reports off the scent, Olmert's office has done a masterful PR release. Israel and Syria have been having negotiations regarding the Golan Heights for over a year –– via Turkish intermediaries. Syrian officials have gone as far as to say Olmert has promised them Israel will retract to the 1967 borders; a report which Israeli official deny. Enter into this "mix" of scandals and scenarios is a danger which signals the need for keeping the Golan more than ever: Russian media has revealed a delegation led by Syrian Air Force commander Gen. Akhmad al-Ratyb is meeting with Russian Defense Ministry and Air Force officials. These meetings are to "focus on arms sales –– including submarines, anti-aircraft missiles, the latest model MiG fighter jets and advanced surface-to-surface ballistic missiles", according to a website belonging to Al-Manar TV. The Jerusalem Post has shared a similar report. Even as Olmert has said Israel needs to prepare for "tough concessions", (another way of saying "I'm giving away the country"), in negotiations to begin in two weeks –– Syria is stockpiling weapons. This is the same Syria which has strong ties with Hezbollah, declared to be a terrorist organization by the United States. This is the same Syria whose nuclear power plant was destroyed by the Israeli Air Force in September of 2007. This is the same Syria which is aligned with Iran, whose President (Ahmadinejad) has vowed to "wipe Israel off the map". For Olmert to even consider any negotiations with Syria, let alone under these conditions, is criminal. It is unconscionable to sacrifice people in order to save himself from imminent incarceration. It is a brilliant insanity. I shudder to think of the consequences to mankind as a result. I tremble when I think of the consequences before G-d. If the Knesset does not block these actions, they will have no country to govern. A no-confidence motion needs to pass in order to start immediate preparations for new elections. If not, with Syria as his puppet, and without doing anything which would point directly to himself, Ahmadinejad may well come close to getting his wish. Contact Delta Vines by email at delta_vines@sbcglobal.net |
|
WAR –– NOW OR LATER?
Posted by Steve Kramer, May 21, 2008. |
|
It's not pleasant to speak of war as inevitable. But given the present circumstances in the Middle East and recalling recent history, I can come to no other conclusion. Let's review Israel's dilemma. Iran is fast approaching nuclear weapons capability, which only requires a requisite amount of enriched uranium. They already have delivery systems in the form of ballistic missiles, which they happily exhibit to the world. It is well known that the step from enriched uranium to actual weapons is not so difficult, especially considering the number of nuclear scientists who are eager for employment. Nor is Iran hiding its intentions towards Israel. Not only the clownish Ahmadinejad, but also his presidential predecessor and his superiors, screech vile epithets and call for the destruction of Israel in the most heinous language since the Nazi regime. The only question mark concerning Iran is whether their leaders will actually push the button, knowing that many Muslims would die alongside of Jews and that massive retaliation from Israel is almost certain. While Iran is roughly a thousand miles from Israel, its threats are not only from the homeland. Gaza, which is adjacent to targets inside Israel, is ruled by the Iranian proxy Hamas, which was formed expressly to fight and destroy Israel. This is made clear in an excerpt from their charter of August 1988: "Our struggle against the Jews [not just Israelis] is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realized." Hamas is financed and armed primarily by Iran and it already targets nearby farm communities in the western Negev, Sderot, and Ashkelon. In the near future, more advanced weapons smuggled in from Iran will allow Hamas a much wider range of cities in Israel, perhaps the Tel Aviv metropolitan area itself, where nearly half of Israel's population resides. In Lebanon, just across Israel's northern border, the Iranian proxy Hizbullah has demonstrated its mastery of the country by totally humiliating the "government" there. Its intentions towards Israel were made clear in its charter of February, 1985: "We see in Israel the vanguard of the United States in our Islamic world. It is the hated enemy that must be fought until the hated ones get what they deserve. This enemy is the greatest danger to our future generations and to the destiny of our lands ... . Therefore our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease fire, and no peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated." When Israel pulled its troops out of northern Lebanon in 2000, stranding its Christian allies, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak expected that Hizbullah would end its attacks against Israel. Instead, Hizbullah became the recipient of thousands of rockets and other weapons from Iran and Syria (itself an Iranian puppet). It didn't take long for Hizbullah to use them in the Second Lebanon War of 2006, in which Israel's already degraded deterrent factor was further diminished due to poor planning by both government and military leaders. Since the UN-brokered ceasefire ended the war, Hizbullah has completely recovered and now has an estimated forty thousand rockets aimed at Israel's heartland. Plus, Hizbullah can quickly field an army which conceals itself among the civilian population. The Lebanese Army is relatively ineffectual, but whatever capabilities that it has are in the service of Hizbullah. Completing a semi-circle around Israel is the West Bank, which has only been kept under control by constant Israeli military actions. These are carried out by the Israeli Defense Forces, who maintain a strong presence there. But Israel is under constant pressure from America and others to alleviate the "plight of the Palestinians" by ceasing nightly raids and removing roadblocks/checkpoints which are an impediment to terrorist activities. If Israel's present government acquiesces to demands from America to ease up on the West Bank, the relatively impotent Fatah ruling government will likely be replaced by Hamas, as happened in Gaza. The United Nations and the Western nations have done little to prevent Iran from continuing its preparations to become a nuclear power. Even mild economic sanctions have been ignored, most recently by Austrian and Swiss energy deals, not to mention Germany, Italy, and Spain, who are among Iran's largest trading partners. America, under the leadership of George Bush, has dialed back its threats against Iran, reversing the policy of "Speak softly and carry a big stick" to "Speak loudly but never mind the stick". Israel cannot depend on anyone to come to its aid except perhaps when it is too late. The country that has vowed "Never Again" countless times, faces multiple threats from Muslim Nazis. Despite the peace front's willingness to believe in fairy tales, many Israelis feel that they are being cornered and that a preemptive strike against Iran must be made while there is still time. When that attack is carried out, it will not happen because Israel wanted to start a war or because its sure that it will be a success. War will come because Israelis remember the 1930s and are not willing to take a chance that Iran and its proxies are bluffing. Israelis can only hope that a preemptive attack against Iranian nuclear sites, and the ensuing war against Iranian allies in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank will be successful. Israel's enemies only get stronger as time passes. They won't be pacified with bits and pieces of land nor will they be cowed by meek responses to their provocation. While the thought of another war is horrendous to Israelis, waiting to be attacked is even worse. Given more time, our foes will only grow more formidable. There is always the possibility that America and other Western powers will recognize the danger that Iran and other Muslim jihadists pose to them, causing the West to join Israel in the battle against militant Islam. Then again, they might not. In any case, Israel cannot just stick its head in the sand and hope that the jihadists will fade away. Again recalling the 1930s, Israel needs a leader closer to Churchill than to Chamberlain leading the government. It's imperative that Israelis stop worrying about what the world may think or say when it comes to Israel defending its existence. The time has come to preserve the only Jewish state with maximum force and vigor. Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes-sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me." |
|
HEAR, HEAR CARTER! DO SOMETHING GOOD FOR A CHANGE –– SAVE AN ARAB'S LIFE
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 21, 2008. |
|
Hear, hear, Carter. Instead of inciting the Arabs to murder innocent Israelis, YOU should man up and use your X-POTUS-influence to stop "your people" from murdering a courageous Arab policeman who provided info that blocked a terrorist attack against Israeli women and children. The "court" referred to in the article below is an Arab-Islamic court operating in Israel's territory. We are the NON-evangelical Christians for Zion. We stand by the Patriots of Israel who are battling against foreign invaders and their criminal element. Read this: NEWS ITEM: Human rights organization Shurat Hadin –– Israel Law Center (http://www.israellawcenter.org), representing former Soviet Prisoner of Zion Ida Nudel, has petitioned the Israeli High Court of Justice to compel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to do all in his power to save the life of Imad Sa'ad, 25, a Palestinian police officer condemned to death by a court in Hebron for the crime of helping Israeli security forces eliminate four fugitive Palestinian terrorists and save Israeli civilian lives. BACKGROUND: On April 28, 2008 Ima'ad Sa'ad (25), an officer in President Mahmoud Abbas' National Security Forces and the sole breadwinner for his wife and children, was found guilty of working with Israel by the "PA Military Court in Hebron." Their are no appeals from these Palestinian kangaroo military tribunals. The case has been passed to the Jerusalem Mufti to decide if he will approve Sa'ad's death sentence. If he authorizes the execution, PA leader Abu Mazen will then sign the order to have Sa'ad brought before a firing squad. The execution could take place as early as next week following the closing of the Palestine Investment Conference being held in Bethlehem. Shurat HaDin and Ms. Nudel have led successful prior campaigns to save the lives of other convicted Israeli agents facing execution by the Palestinian Authority. IMPORTANT NOTE: Letters dispatched on Ms. Nudel's behalf to the Prime Minister on May 3, to the White House on May 5 and the Vatican on May 7 have, as of now, gone unanswered. Copies of the letters can be found at: http://www.israellawcenter.org/articlenav.php?id=260" Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
SAVE THE TREES: STOP THE MISSIONARIES
Posted by Ellen Horowitz, May 21, 2008. |
|
Penina Taylor of Jews for Judaism in Jerusalem sent me the following in response to headlines reporting: Orthodox Jewish youths burn New Testaments in Israel. It is entitled "Taking Out the Trash." Contact Jews for Judaism at PO Box 47, Jerusalem 91004 Israel. In Israel, call 02-622-1926. From the USA, call 212 444 1979. |
|
It was reported yesterday by several major news outlets that recently the religious Jews of Or Yehuda set fire to hundreds of copies of the New Testament. Ha'aretz called it "the latest act of violence against Christian missionaries in the Holy Land." Calev Myers, attorney representing the Messianic communities of Israel called for the people who did it to be brought to trial. But brought to trial for what? The people who burned these books broke no law. Despite the allusions being made to the burning of Jewish holy books during the times of the inquisition or the holocaust, there is absolutely no comparison here. The New Testaments had been basically thrown out –– they were garbage, and there is no law against incinerating garbage, even by religious Jews, even in public. First let's look at the whole story. The town of mostly religious Jews had recently been targeted by missionaries, a form of harassment. The missionaries were not invited to come, they invaded, and in the wake of their invasion, they left hundreds, maybe even thousands of New Testaments and other missionary literature. The townspeople were in a quandary –– what to do with this heresy that they did not want in their homes? So, the Deputy Mayor came up with a solution. He offered to take the unwanted trash off the residents' hands and dispose of them in such a way that made it clear and in no uncertain terms that such literature was not only unsolicited, but unwelcome. Like a modern day King Josiah, Deputy Mayor Uzi Aharon set out to unburden the citizenry he was sworn to serve, and they gave him the unwanted materials willingly. In the book of 2 Kings, chapter 22 and in 2 Chronicles 34, we read the story of King Josiah who took the throne at the age of eight years old. It is said of him, "And he did what was right in the sight of the Lord, and walked in all the ways of his father David; he did not turn aside to the right hand or to the left. " (2 Kings 22:2) –– a claim that no Christian would deny. And yet, we read in 2 Chronicles 34:33 that "Josiah removed all the abominations from all the country that belonged to the children of Israel, and made all who were present in Israel diligently serve the Lord their God. All his days they did not depart from following the Lord God of their fathers." Now, King Josiah removed the objects of heresy and idolatry forcibly, he did not give the citizens a choice in the matter, including regarding their service to God and this is where the two stories diverge. Truth be told, we could go on about how the burning of the New Testaments was simply an exercise in freedom of expression or even freedom of religion, which Israel claims to be why proselytizing is no longer illegal in the land. But the bottom line is this: there was no persecution or violence against Christians here, and no one was forced to do anything he/she didn't want to do. If anything, it is the missionaries who are guilty and deserve to be brought to trial for mass harassment, not to mention the countless number of trees who senselessly gave their lives for the printing of the unwanted material and the ridiculous amount of space this story is now taking up on web pages and newspapers the world over. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, an author and a columnist for Israelnationalnews.com. Email her at ellenwrite@bezeqint.net |
|
SHMUEL KATZ'S LEGACY
Posted by Moshe Phillips, May 21, 2008. |
|
Shmuel Katz, a former legislator in Israel's Knesset and a longtime leader of Israel's nationalist camp, passed away in Israel in early May at the age of 93. Katz died on the Fourth of Iyar, the traditional Memorial Day for Israel's fallen soldiers (Yom HaZikaron) and the eve of the traditional date of Israel's Independence Day (Yom Ha'Atzmahut). The timing of Katz's death is reminiscent of the passing of other great patriots. Presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both died on the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1826. Katz served in the Herut party's first Knesset delegation and had helped Menachem Begin create Herut. Earlier he had served the cause of Zionism as an assistant to Zev Jabotinsky, an emissary for the Revisionist Zionist movement in London on the eve of World War Two, as a member of the Irgun's High Command and as the Irgun's last operational commander in Jerusalem. As other commentators have mentioned in their tributes to Katz, he was a leader of the effort to retain the lands Israel liberated in the 1967 Six Day War. It was through the Land of Israel Movement, as it was known, that Katz came to the attention of many Zionist activists in America. Here, I would like to quickly survey half a dozen of the books that Katz, a native of South Africa, wrote in English. Days of Fire: The Secret Story of the Making of Israel (1968) This book provided perhaps the first, solid overall history of the Irgun's Revolt against the British. Katz was a direct participant in many of the events he writes and this along his unique access to dozens of other Irgun veterans makes Katz's perspective on this topic hard to match. The inspiring stories of the valor of the Irgun soldiers and the goals they fought for are just as relevant today as they were in the 1940s. Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine (1973) Written after the Six Day War, here Katz lays out the historical and strategic reasons for Israel to retain control of the lands liberated in the war. Battleground works as an encyclopedic sourcebook for those involved in Israel's hasbara (public relations) effort as well as a quick way to get a firm grounding in the ins and outs or the Arab-Israeli conflict. This is the book that Americans For a Safe Israel (AFSI) and other groups distributed thousands of copies of for decades to Pro-Israel activists across America. With the publication Battleground alone Katz could have earned the title of the father of Hasbara in America. Katz, however did much more guiding the founders of AFSI, writing for The Jerusalem Post, speaking and counseling many other researchers and writers. The Hollow Peace (1982) Here Katz attacks the folly of Camp David and exposes the dangerous situation President Jimmy Carter was creating for Israel decades before most woke up to just what Jimmy Carter was really all about. Katz permanently broke with Menachem Begin over Camp David and here he sets out the details of his objections. The ongoing missile attacks Israel now faces from Gaza, could not be occurring without the non-stop smuggling from Sinai. Katz's warnings were clear. Battletruth: The World and Israel (1983) This is the only published collection of essays and articles by Katz. It covers the Camp David Accords, the retreat from Sinai and other issues. The Lone Wolf: A Two-Volume Biography of Vladimir (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky (1996) Katz's two volume masterful work is a breathtaking effort. So much information about Jabotinsky and his tremendous impact on Zionism is related that it causes a new appreciation of the man and his ideas, even from individuals that already consider him the greatest Zionist leader after Herzl. Unfortunately, Katz mostly ignores many to his own right that were important to Jabotinsky's movement and that should have been given more attention here such as Israel Eldad, Hillel Kook, Abba Achimeir, Yirmiyahu Halpern and Uri Zvi Greenberg. The Aaronsohn Saga (2007) Katz's last book was about the NILI intelligence network that aided the British against the Ottomans during World War One. The remarkable story of these Zionist heroes and their pure sacrifices is exciting as well as emotional. Most of the young group lost their lives. Here Katz allowed a nearly 100 year old story of bravery to be accessed by today's readers. A comprehensive history of NILI had never been written and Katz's final years were occupied with this noble deed. "I have never felt so downhearted about Israel as I do now. We're in a terrible state." Katz told journalist Judith Miller in a February 11, 2008 New York Sun interview shortly after The Aaronsohn Saga was published. Surely, without Katz's direct help that "terrible" position becomes that much harder to remedy. However, it is fortunate that Katz left a body of valuable literature that Pro-Israel advocates will continue to look to for generations to come. Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For a Safe Israel –– AFSI. The chapter's new website is at: www.phillyafsi.com. |
|
US-TRAINED FATAH FORCE PROVING IMPOTENT
Posted by Gil Ronen, May 21, 2008. |
|
The Palestinian Authority / Fatah special police force that was trained by the US to fight terrorists has turned out to be a failure, according to recent reports. The US-backed police force was supposed to enable Israel to turn over security control of Judea and Samaria to the PA, as a prelude to a possible retreat from its biblical heartland. But so far the force's contingent in Jenin has been running scared from the terrorists it was supposed to bring under control. According to WorldNetDaily, the Jenin unit's first mission was to clear out a section of Kabatiya, a neighborhood south of Jenin which is considered the main base for the Islamic Jihad terrorist group. About 200 policemen attempted to engage members of Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Fatah's own "Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades." But witnesses, including members of Fatah and Israeli security sources, said that within less than 30 minutes of the start of the clashes, the elite PA police force retreated from the scene. "The security men ran away scared. They didn't arrest anyone," said one witness. "The security men ran away scared. They didn't arrest anyone." "No chance for the troublemakers" The PA's special force has been undergoing training under the supervision of US Middle East envoy Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton since late 2006. An initial contingent of 500 police officers was deployed in Shechem, in northern Samaria, in February of 2008, and another 480 members of the elite force deployed in Jenin in early May. The Jenin force's commander, Suleiman Amran, announced to the media that following the deployment, there is "no chance for troublemakers to return to Jenin." Gen. Dayton personally oversaw the Jenin and Nablus units' training at US-operated bases in Jordan and in the Judean city of Jericho, and his office has been closely monitoring the police force's deployment. The budget for the force's training and arming was reported to be in the millions of dollars. However, an Israeli security official closely monitoring the progress of the Shechem and Jenin forces said that they could not fight terrorism. "The Israel Defense Forces must do most of the work for them in that regard. When it comes to public security, they can block off streets and create a perimeter and carry out other basic duties, but beyond that, fighting crime isn't going well," the security official said. Helpless in Shechem In Shechem, the new police force proved helpless against 13 senior leaders of the "Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades" who were pardoned last June by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on condition they disarm and refrain from attacks, but who nonetheless publicly took up arms and vowed terror attacks against Israel. They then created a stronghold in the Old City of Shechem, calling themselves the Night Warriors of Al Aqsa. According to informed security sources, among the Brigades leaders rejecting the agreement were Hanni Ka'abe, Mahdi Abu Jazaleh, and brothers Omar and Amer Haqube. The US-backed Shechem police unit was called upon to eject the "Night Warriors" from Shechem's Old City. "They couldn't even get near the stronghold without being heavily fired upon and then retreating." A large force attempted to raid the terrorists' stronghold several times, but according to security officials, the assaults repeatedly failed. "We are talking about six attempts so far, five of the attempts utilized more than 300 policemen against the 13 terrorists and all attempts failed miserably," said a security official. "They couldn't even get near the stronghold without being heavily fired upon and then retreating," the official said. In the end, the IDF raided the Brigades' stronghold, killing Brigades terrorist leader Ka'abe in a shootout and sending at least five other rebel Brigades terrorists into hiding. "Israel had to come in and do the work for the Palestinian force," said a security official. "I don't know how they can handle security without Israel backing them up." Dayton blames Israel Dayton was recently quoted as blaming Defense Minister Ehud Barak for the police force's failures, according to the PA's Ma'an News Agency. Dayton reportedly praised the PA in meetings with foreign consuls in Ramallah, but criticized Barak and the IDF. The PA, he said, is "acting with great seriousness in the realm of security as part of its responsibility to secure its territories." However, he said, Israel causes the PA to fail, in part by refusing to grant PA officers free access to areas under Israeli control. Meanwhile, US training of elite PA security forces continues. A new, three-month course began in March at US-controlled bases in the Jordanian village of Giftlik, according to Israeli security officials. More than 600 "elite PA soldiers" are enrolled in the current course. The plan of instruction calls for a 1,400-hour curriculum that includes human rights law, defensive tactics, first aid, urban and rural small-unit tactics, firearms, mounted- and foot-patrol techniques, crime scene investigations and more. Cigarette lighters for handguns However, according to a recent report in the Herald Tribune, the force's instruction has been inept to the point of being pathetic. In its poorly translated instruction manuals, for example, the words "cover fire," a term to describe small-arms fire to pin down the enemy, was translated as "extinguish a burning fire." "Instruction in defensive tactics for hundreds of students was taught with three practice batons, a few handcuffs, and dummy pistols that were actually novelty cigarette lighters. The students had none of the safety equipment normally associated with police work," wrote a Tribune reporter. "In the classrooms, I watched as students were taught radio communications without radios, driving and vehicle maintenance with no vehicles, foot-patrol tactics without weapons or radios, and mounted-patrol tactics without vehicles." In addition, fully 10 percent of the students were reported to be functionally illiterate. Gil Ronen writes for Arutz Sheva, where this article appeared today. |
|
TERRITORIES FOR TERRORISTS?; IS ISRAEL A SUCCESS?; FOLLOWING THE CAMPAIGN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 21, 2008. |
|
OLMERT AGAIN THREATENS GAZA "In the long run," PM Olmert threatened, Israel will take drastic measures against Hamas in Gaza, if it continues terrorism (IMRA, 5/11). Since Israel is not taking drastic steps, but has been threatening to do so for years, without acting on it, why wouldn't Hamas continue terrorism? What would persuade it to desist? It's doctrine of holy war has not changed. Moreover, Hamas has built up an efficient military. It doesn't care about casualties received, just casualties inflicted. It is looking forward to a major clash. It's only concern is to be ready for it. Since Israel has been threatening invasion for months or is it years, what does he mean by "long run?" Why don't the media ask him to define it" They don't, because the favors his appeasement and don't want to embarrass him over it. BUT GIVES EGYPT & ABBAS A FREE PASS In an interview, PM Olmert said Israel doesn't blame Egypt for failing to stop arms smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Dr. Aaron Lerner condemns Israel for failing to press Egypt to perform [or take over the border from the Gaza side]. As for negotiations, he gave away part of his hand by acknowledging he would cede a major part of the Territories (IMRA, 5/11). Israel never has been good at bargaining. It is too appeasement-minded. Olmert doesn't even try to hold on to much. He makes it seem as if the Arabs are entitled to something from Israel and encourages the Arabs to demand more. ISRAELI BLASTS AMERICAN JEWISH INFLUENCE SEEKERS He said that Israel has enough money, now, to pay its own way. It should stop American Jews from seeking influence by donations. He denounced American Jews for financing settlements, which he calls disastrous. [Apparently he'd rather have terrorists running the Territories.] He condemned CAMERA for slandering Israeli media and for censoring the US media in behalf of the Right. [Sounds like Mearshammer's & Walt's old-fashioned antisemitic rant about Jewish control.] The tirade was set off by the scandal of a fortune donated to Olmert by an American Jew. But Olmert is a leftist. The denouncer, Gideon Levy, failed to denounce US Jewish donations to leftist groups, such as New Israel Fund. Dr. Aaron Lerner reports that Levy gets free trips from foreign donors (IMRA, 5/11). IS ISRAEL A SUCCESS? Yes, writes Prof. Efraim Inbar, Director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies: 1. Israel parried several attempts to destroy it militarily. It will reduce Hamas in Gaza, and it learned what to do with Hizbullah. 2. Its regional military power has grown in relation to its enemies', except for Iran. The Arab world is weak, not democratic, and stagnant. Maybe Israel will strike out Iran's nuclear facilities in time. 3, Israel is recognized as a permanent state, even by its enemies. The Israeli Left now realizes that Israel will have to keep defending itself. 4. Israel has demonstrated social cohesion. The Sephardim have been integrated with the Ashkenazi, though the Orthodox and secularists still have their rift. The ideological debate over borders has ended. Sinai was ceded. Gaza was evacuated. Two-thirds of Israelis wish to retain the Golan. Most are willing to divide Judea-Samaria, Israel keeping the large settlement blocs, Jerusalem, including the Temple Mt., and the Jordan Valley. The public no longer opposes establishment of an Arab state in the rest and Gaza. 5. "An analysis of the political, social and economic dynamics within Israel indicates that time is on Israel's side." [I don't know what this means.] 6. The economy was reformed and grew, persuading even the Left that capitalism is best for the country 7. The US considers Israel a valued ally, and supports it. That makes other countries favorable to Israel. Some have sent ambassadors to Israel [to Tel Aviv, that is]. Starting with the Madrid conference, the Arab countries have come to accept Israel. The rise of Hamas and the 9/11 attacks have gotten other countries to understand Israel's position better. 8. "If the country successfully continues to inculcate the Zionist ethos into the next generations, its future looks bright." (IMRA, 5/11). I think that the opposite is true: 1. Military successes. Past military successes were limited by the US. They failed to extricate Israel from the problem. Those victories bred complacency and military budget cuts, leaving the IDF with older equipment and insufficient training. Past successes do not guarantee future ones. The argument that Israel is secure because it might destroy Hamas and knows what to do with Hizbullah is invalid. The IDF may know what to do, but the appeasement-minded government does not. Hamas and Hizbullah have built up strong forces. If Israel pursued them, the enemy could inundated it with thousands or tens of thousands of missiles, etc.. Prof. Inbar substitutes claims about Israel being secure for Israeli action to make itself secure. That is a fatal flaw in a strategist. 2. Regional power –– Israel might destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, but that is wishful thinking, leaving Inbar's happy conclusion unjustified. Nor are Israel's other adversaries weaker, as claimed. Egypt has built up military parity with Israel. The Egyptian navy is superior. Egypt built tunnels under the Nile that its mobile forces can cross before Israel can fully mobilize. That mobilization could be impeded by uprisings by the Palestinian Arabs. S. Arabia has become another front line power, thanks to its new air base and US planes. S. Arabia coordinates militarily with Egypt. Syria has a strong missile force and is rebuilding its other forces, financed by Iran. Oil price increases allow the Muslims to buy out Israeli land and strategic Western companies. It is a myth that Israel is democratic, but there is little publicity to expose the myth. Israel is not democratic for about eight reasons that I have explained a few times, before. 3. Israel is recognized –– Not by its enemies, including Egypt and Jordan, which have no ambassadors in Israel. Hardly by Western Europeans, who increasingly think Israel should be de-recognized. The Arabs continue to work at eradicating the Jewish state, according to Arafat's phased plan for the conquest of Israel. That is what the negotiations are to advance. Egypt's military doctrine posits Israel as the enemy to invade. 4. Social cohesion and borders –– As Dr. Aaron Lerner remarks, it is no mark of success if many Israelis are amenable to statehood for the P.A., an irredentist, terrorist stronghold. It may be a mark of Inbar's appeasement-mindedness to interpret polls as showing that the people accept P.A. statehood, when poll respondents stipulate, provided terrorism is eradicated, which the people do not anticipate happening. The social conflict between Jewish secularists and religious has produced governmental oppression and anti-Zionism. The government and its leftist allies defame the settlers. It is not true that Israelis now agree upon what should be the borders. It is misleading to state that the people want to keep the Golan. The government does not care what the people want. It is nearly all-powerful. It has put over other unpopular moves, such as evacuation of Gaza, without a referendum. Thus PM Olmert, like PM Barak, offers some or all of Old Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley to the Arabs, and has taken some action signaling that intent. 6. Israel now capitalist, and the people accepts that –– The government still owns, subsidizes, or overly regulates many industries. There are almost no checks on the government. Reform has a long way to go, but it seems to have stopped. 7. Israeli self-defense is respected and the US considers it a valuable ally –– The rise of Hamas shows the foolishness and lethargy of Israeli policy. If foreign governments are rational about that, they must lose respect for Israel. In any case, they increasingly subsidize Hamas' Gaza and suggest negotiations with it. Sending ambassadors to Israel does not mean favoring Israel. Enemies usually send ambassadors abroad. The Madrid conference does not prove acceptance of the legitimacy of a Jewish state. Abbas rejects such legitimacy. Rather, the conference is part of a series of diplomatic moves to pare Israel down to what Sadat called "insignificance." The US is part of that movement. Although Israel has been of incalculable service to the US, the US does not publicly acknowledge it. The Olmert regime's failure to destroy Hizbullah in the Lebanon war disgusted the Bush administraiton with its value. Perhaps other countries understand Israel's position better, but the Quartet still denounces Israel more than Hamas. Sec. Rice insists that Israel refrain from most of its defensive measures. 8. Israel secure if it passes its Zionist ethos on –– True, but did Inbar miss the anti-Zionist education policies of recent leftist governments? The current government gives equal time to claiming that the founding of Israel was a catastrophe. Far Left university professors dominate Israeli college humanities departments, where they preach Jewish guilt and support for terrorism My conclusion: Inbar's thesis rests upon wishful thinking, naivete, and falsehood. Israel remains close to extinction. It has some assets and advantages, but it is betrayed by its leftist leadership. The current regime is trying to give away Israel's strategic borders to an unrepentant enemy. How come Inbar failed to mention that? His assessment had almost no negative insights. FOLLOWING THE CAMPAIGN Sen. McCain is pandering away his otherwise more sensible platform. His opponents go further. They egotistically take personal offense and make nasty retorts and picayune complaints, and they lie as much as Pres. Nixon did. The pair of them make a sorry spectacle, zig-zagging about what they had said, contradicting the taped records. I'm reading Judge John Sirica's book about Watergate. I mentioned to some friends its reminder of Nixon's assault on civil liberties and his constant lying about Watergate. A Democrat asked me, didn't Pres. Bush assault civil liberties and lie to get us to war just as much? No, Bush didn't assault civil liberties. He tried novel approaches to the novel form of warfare jihad takes. It takes time to sort out which methods are effective and which go too far. The courts are helping resolve that. Congress, including the Democrats who noisily criticize Bush, carps but doesn't help formulate rules. Their duty is to define the law. It ill suits them to complain when the President goes beyond what they feel comfortable with. No, Bush didn't lie to get us into the war. Democrats conveniently forget the other reasons for the war, legal ones. They conveniently forget how much latitude the US gave Saddam and the UNO. They lie that the UNO did not authorize force. They assume that Bush knew that Saddam had no weapons, forgetting, and now my friend even denies. that all the intelligence services thought that Saddam still had nuclear weapons. They forget Saddam's tactics that indicate he had the weapons, such as lying about what he had, removing evidence before inspectors arrived, etc.. They also seem unaware that Saddam still had his weapons development team on the payroll, doing what, do you suppose? Bush might have been mistaken, but he was not lying. Bush's critics ought to be more careful about their own ethics in whom they accuse of what. I've posted a couple of revelations that Saddam did have the weapons or materials for them, and they were found, but the US lost track of them. Bush doesn't want to admit he lost what may destroy our national security, though it would vindicate his war. The Democrat officials don't want to admit what he lost, because it would vindicate his war. About that there is plenty of lying. Bush gave a speech in Israel against terrorism and appeasement of it. I thought it was a great speech. I'm proud an American delivered it, but sorry that foreigners don't seem capable of doing likewise. What makes me angry at Bush is his flouting of its principles, when it comes to Abbas and his fellow terrorists in the P.A. and Fatah. Them he appeases, and he even demands that Israel hardly defend itself from them. From what I gather, noted Democrats and liberal newspapers haven't the grace, or is it the intelligence, to praise Bush's great speeches and to detect where he departs from their principles. Sen. Obama immediately jumped on the part about appeasement, saying it was directed personally at him. To be personal and an affront, it would have to refer to him and in an unfair or nasty way. It didn't. It would have been proper to have named him as one of the appeasers. But he isn't the only one. Most leading Democrats and liberal papers constantly and deceitfully rebuked Bush for not negotiating, but he did. They all had notions of appeasement. It isn't just Obama, despite his oversized ego. Obama still talks about running away from a war the fanatics would pursue us over. He has nerve to complain about criticism he richly deserves. The national security that he would risk is ours! At a party, another friend made a joke about Bush's intelligence. Let's compare the intelligence of Bush with that of his critics. He knows there is a world war. They don't. He knows that if we don't fight the Islamists in Iraq, they would gain a victory and present even more of a threat elsewhere, perhaps here. They don't. Where is their supposed superior intelligence? Consider global warming and lay aside Bush's recent pandering on it. Democrats complain that he didn't endorse Kyoto. (I thought it was up to Congress to ratify it, after Clinton signed it.) Nobody explained Kyoto well, but it got to be one of those emotional issues beyond reason, part of the liberals' religion. Kyoto, however, gave a free pass to pollute to China and India, the two biggest, growing economies. It put the brunt of the costs on the US. Nevertheless, without regulations, US industry has cut emissions by double the percentage that the European signers have, with their adherence to Kyoto. (According to economists at the NY Sun.) I find Democrat leaders too simpleminded to play a constructive role on the issues. They leave leadership to Bush, by default. Obama also was indignant about criticism of his wife's statements. He called it harassment of his family. Nonsense, she made those statements in public, at his side, while campaigning. If she can make such statements in behalf of his campaign, then opponents may judge them. She and, I think, he, must take responsibility for them. The statements were unpatriotic. Reminder: Our country has many faults, but it also has certain good qualities rare in this world, qualities of which we can be proud. She, however, said she never was proud of this country until it let her husband run for the Presidency. Shame on her! Her remarks warranted criticism. So does he, for being so thin-skinned. He may be clever, but he is not very intelligent about issues. I'd be prouder of this country if it defeats him. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
BBC: BETHLEHEM 'FIGHTS' FOR TOURISTS
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 21, 2008. |
|
Once again Al Beeb shows its bias... This was written by Carl in Jerusalem and it appeared on
his website:
|
|
Hey Brits, these are your tax schillings at work. Al-Beeb produces yet another piece of blatantly biased media in Israel.
This one is called 'Bethlehem fights for tourists.' If you watch this
video and know nothing about what goes on in this country, you come away
with the impression that the poor hoteliers of Bethlehem can't attract
any tourists and it's all because those mean, cruel Israelis put up a
wall and make people walk through gates and turnstiles (ominously called
a 'military checkpoint') to get into the city. Let's go to the videotape
and then we'll try to point out some of the ways in which this report
could have been less biased.
How could we make this report somewhat fair? For starters, we could say that the 'wall' (which is really nothing more than a fancy fence in much of the country) is there because it has reduced terror attacks outside it by a huge percentage over the last four years despite the fact that it is not yet complete. We could tell the folks at home that the reason it's a wall and not a fence in the Bethlehem area is because 'Palestinian' terrorists used Bethlehem's suburbs to shoot at the Jews of the Jerusalem suburb of Gilo during the early part of this decade, and that in Gilo they also have a wall where the 'Palestinian' gunfire most often hit. It's much easier to shoot through a fence than it is to shoot over a wall, although shooting over a wall is also not impossible. Just go visit Gaza. We could cite some other reasons why those who might otherwise be most likely to visit Bethlehem may be put off. For example, some Christians might remember the siege on the Church of the Nativity that was carried out by 'Palestinian' terrorists from the 'moderate' Fatah organization and how they held hostages inside the church and trashed it. A Christian who might otherwise visit Bethlehem might keep that in mind when weighing the risks of a visit. They also might remember the IDF's anti-terror operation in Bethlehem in March and wonder how many more terrorists are lurking in the city's alleyways. And given that all but one of Bethlehem's main tourist attractions are Christian (and the one that is not Christian is Jewish), and that most of the tourists the Arab population is targeting are Christian, those tourists may be put off by the fact that Bethlehem was 90% Christian (and the area was 60% Christian) when the 'Palestinian Authority' took over in 1995, and now has less than 20% Christians. Maybe the town isn't hospitable to Christians? (More on the treatment of Christians in the Bethlehem area here). Finally, there is the practical question of how attractive Bethlehem would be as a tourist destination even if it were easier to reach. Note the hotelier's complaint that most tourists only stay 2-3 hours and don't spend any money. Is there really more there than what the average tourist could see in 2-3 hours? Does the average tourist really feel obligated to sit down and eat lunch in overpriced restaurants and shop in overpriced gift shops? And why would the average tourist want to stay in an overpriced hotel in Bethlehem, when he could stay in a hotel in Jerusalem and have a much wider selection of hotels, restaurants and tourist sites? Maybe things would be better if the 'Palestinian Authority' were allocating money to developing tourism instead of spending it on weapons for its oversized 'police force.' Those are the questions the BBC and the 'Palestinians' in Bethlehem ought to be asking. When they answer them adequately, Bethlehem may not have to 'fight' for tourists anymore. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
|
|
SYRIA, ISRAEL ANNOUNCE: WE'RE TALKING UNOFFICIALLY
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 21, 2008. |
|
Israel and Syria issued similar announcements almost simultaneously around noon today (Wednesday), declaring the opening of unofficial talks between them. Israel and Syria have never had diplomatic relations, and have been in a state of war ever since 1948. In 1967, Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria, which had used the area for years to pound Israeli towns below with deadly rockets. These attacks killed 140 Israelis, wounded many more, and inflicted heavy property damage. Since 1967, Syria has always demanded the full return of the Golan as a precondition for peace. The Syrian declaration today that it has begun unofficial talks with Israel under Turkish auspices, with "the goal of reaching full peace in accordance with the principles reached at the Madrid Conference [in the mid-1980's]," is seen as an indication that Israel has, in fact, agreed to withdraw to the pre-1967 border. This jibes with Olmert's lack of denial, last month, of Turkish reports that he had agreed to give over the entire Golan to Syria. Such a withdrawal would mean that Israel would lose not only the strategic depth and water sources of the Golan, but would not even control the northeast perimeter of the Kinneret Sea (Sea of Galilee). "The Nation is With the Golan" –– by 4-1 The War and Peace Index of last month –– a survey of 600 Israeli adults conducted by the B. I. Cohen Institute of Tel Aviv University –– found that a whopping 75% of Israelis oppose an Israeli withdrawal from all of the Golan Heights for a full peace treaty with Syria, whereas only 19% favor this. Governmental talk of giving away the Golan in 1996 and 1999-2000 was repressed by widespread popular national campaigns against it. In the mid-90's, thousands of banners and a million stickers reading "HaAm Im HaGolan" (The Nation is With the Golan) graced porches, billboards and cars throughout the country. In January 2000, some 300,000 people took part in one of the largest demonstrations in Israeli history, calling on then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak not to withdraw the IDF from the Golan Heights. It is known that United States is not enthusiastic about bringing terrorism-backing Syria into the circle of accepted nations. U.S. President George Bush visited Israel last week, and Prime Minister Olmert is set to pay a return visit two weeks from now. it is assumed that the topic of Syria is a signficant issue on their joint agenda. Israeli negotiators Yoram Turbovitz and Shalom Turjeman have been meeting in Turkey with senior Syrian officials for the past three days. Olmert Under Political Attack The political establishment attacked Olmert for the timing of the announcement, as he is currently under intense political investigation for possible major financial crimes. Even Deputy Prime Minister Eli Yishai (Shas) said, "Syria is still the seat of the axis of evil, and I'm not certain that it's a good idea to give Israel's northern front over to the axis of evil... Olmert himself said in the past that as long as Syria continues to hold its same positions, we shouldn't talk with them –– so what has changed now?" Likud MKs, predictably, were much harsher. Together with the National Union and Israel Our Home, they demanded an immediate Knesset session on the matter, even as early as today. Likud MK Gilad Erdan said the Prime Minister "is prepared to sell everything" in order to protect himself from police investigation. MK Yisrael Katz stated there is a clear majority in the Knesset against surrendering the Golan Heights, and MK Limor Livnat said Olmert has no "moral mandate" to conduct such talks with Syria. "There are no limits to [Olmert's] cynicism," charged Likud faction chairman MK Gideon Saar. "He is playing around with the security of the country by agreeing to indirect talks with Syria." On the political left, Meretz MK Zahava Gal'on said she supports talks with Syria, but agrees that Olmert does not have the mandate to do it. Labor MK Shelly Yechimovitch expressed similar sentiments. Labor's Eitan Cabel said talks with Syria must be held no matter who the Prime Minister is. MK Nissan Slomiansky (National Religious Party ) asserted that the Prime Minister's statement proves that the criminal probe is reaching a critical stage. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
HALAMISH BROTHERS SENT TO PRISON! PLEASE PROTEST!
Posted by AFSI, May 21, 2008. | |
|
This account was written by Datya Itzhaki. | |
|
Dani and Itzik Halamish were jailed on May 20 despite a final plea to the Supreme Court to grant a stay of sentence while a presidential pardon is under consideration. The Supreme Court failed to answer the final appeal by the brothers and they began their respective sentences of seven months and eight months. "The implementation of the sentence without allowing enough time for the president to complete the pardon process harms the standing of the president of the state," defense attorney Dov Even Or said. "The jailing of the brothers today despite the consideration of a presidential pardon, a process which takes six months, makes a mockery of the [court's] decision if the pardon is accepted." Dan and Yitzhak Halamish, two members of an Israel Army-sponsored unit have been abandoned by the military and sentenced to jail for protecting a Jewish community in Judea and Samaria. The Halamishs, as part of their reserve military service, were members of a security response team organized, equipped and trained by the Israeli Army to help protect their community and surrounding region from Arab attack. On Feb. 21, 2004, the brothers were summoned by another security officer, Baruch Feldbaum, to help expel Bedouins who trespassed into the Jewish community of Sdei Bar and were encamped near a student dormitory. Bedouin tribes in the area had been deemed responsible for the killing of several Jews in the area in previous years. Under the direction of Feldbaum, the Halamish brothers ordered the Bedouin squatters to leave. The Bedouins refused, and about 20 of them approached the Jewish security officers with sticks and rocks. Feldbaum shot toward the ground when the Bedouins continued to move closer. The response team later said that it shot in self-defense. An army medic who arrived at the scene determined that nobody was struck by the gunfire, an assertion disputed by the Bedouins. At that point, the military abandoned its own security team and allowed a police investigation. Although police refused to conduct ballistic tests or even a lineup of suspects, the brothers were convicted of shooting toward the Bedouins. Dan was sentenced to seven months in prison; Yitzhak, to eight months. An Israeli appeals court said ballistic tests or a lineup weren't necessary. The word of the Bedouins –– who refused to show up to police headquarters to identify their purported assailants –– was enough. The court also rejected a recommendation by the probation officer for community service. The three-judge panel said it wanted the Halamish brothers to go to jail to serve as a lesson to others. Since then, at least 1,000 people have either telephoned their outrage to the Israeli military or signed a petition for the suspension of theit sentences. Call the Israel Embassy [telephone 202-364-5500] and ask to speak to the military attache. Express your outrage that the Israel Army abandoned its fighters for protecting Jews. Don't argue. The military attache's office knows exactly what you're talking about. Stress that you are an American citizen whose support for the Israeli military is based on its protection of Jews. Say that you also plan to discuss this case with your member of Congress who decides on U.S. military aid to Israel. Ask you member of congress to convey your message to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who is meeting with Israeli leaders. The Olmert government, with an approval rating of near zero, has refused any accountability to the Israeli people and fears only the Bush administration. Unless we act now, there will be many more young Jews in jail. Since Passover, the government has gone a rampage to destroy synagogues and structures in Jewish communities all over Judea and Samaria. Call your local synagogue or community center and demand that they cancel all invitations to government members or military personnel to address your communities. Stress that they are no longer welcome in American Jewry. With Love of Israel,
Editor's Note: Lee Caplan writes I just called the Ambassador's office. I was told that they have received a lot of calls about this today, so please, keep the calls coming. I have also taken the liberty to include the contact information for the local consulates. This abuse of good Jews, members of the IDF, can not continue. It is unconscionable that Jews in the State of Israel be punished for protecting Jews! Please call and call and call and/or fax! Tizku lemitzvos. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. |
|
GOOD MORNING, ELIJAH: AMOS OZ DOES THE PEACE TOUR
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 21, 2008. |
|
I posted this today in the Jewish Press
|
|
I have long believed the world would be much better off if Hollywood airheads would stick to entertainment and never pretend to be intellectuals, spouting off with their "ideas" about politics, diplomacy, etc. I am no less convinced that popular literary figures do little more than embarrass themselves when they attempt to serve as political commentators. Amos Oz is arguably Israel's best-known writer and at the same time the leading member of Israel's Literary Left. Proudly declaring himself a major thinker in the "peace movement," Oz celebrates his political biases openly. I am in the large hall of a Belgian university to listen to a speech by Oz, who is to receive an honorary doctorate and meet with students and faculty. Oz's books have been translated into many languages and he is well known in Europe. He has been invited to speak about literature to the university audience, but devotes the entire speech to politics, without mentioning literature even once. Oz is an eloquent speaker, but there is an enormous gap between his command of words and images and the depth of his understanding of political reality. There is an old saying that a shallow moral symmetry is the hobgoblin of small minds. Oz is the master of shallow moral symmetry. The Arab-Israeli conflict (which he invariably calls the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which it is not) is neither black vs. white nor good against bad, he tells his listeners, but rather a conflict between two goods, even if the behavior of both sides is often that of two bads. He condemns Israeli "oppression" and mistreatment of Palestinians as morally symmetric to Palestinian terrorism and xenophobia. Oz is at his silliest when he tries to distinguish between stark unequivocal moral choices and complex ambiguous ones. "You Europeans have a tendency to frame everything in simplistic good vs. bad terms," he says. "This is OK for some conflicts, like that between fascism and anti-fascism, or that between colonialism and anti-colonialism, or that between the U.S. and Vietnamese, but the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not that." Of course, the allegedly simple moral conflicts offered by Oz tell us more about him than about the conflict. Anti-fascists have at times been worse than fascists; anti-colonialists generally were far more savage and brutal than European colonialists; and Oz's insistence that the U.S. was the unambiguous evil power in Vietnam is little more than the attempt of an Israeli leftist to pander to fashionable anti-Americanism, to ingratiate himself with those who imagine Europe is the moral superior of the U.S. –– something Oz tries to do repeatedly throughout the evening. The other problem with Oz's silly characterization of moral clarity vs. ambiguity is that the Arab-Israeli conflict is actually as morally unambiguous as was World War II. Yes, Allied troops sometimes conducted acts of injustice and, yes, German and Japanese civilians were often killed as the war was fought out, but that changes nothing about the moral unambiguousness of that conflict. The Arab-Israeli conflict exists because the Arab world, controlling 22 states and territory nearly twice that of the United States (including Alaska), is unwilling to allow the Jews to enjoy any self-determination or control over even a tiny piece of territory. Ultimately, the tremendous damage that Oz and his kind have done has been in muddying what should be a clear moral understanding of the Middle East war, all in the name of the sanctity of moral symmetry, and this muddying has undercut Israeli willingness to resist and fight. Oz devotes his entire speech to promotion of the "two-state solution," by which Israel will withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, removing nearly all settlements, making way for a Palestinian state. This solution is not liked by either side, says Oz, but perhaps 80% of those on both sides declare they expect that this is what in fact will happen. That of course is not exactly the same as accepting a plan or policy as legitimate, and Oz diplomatically skips over the inconvenient fact that nearly all Arabs see this "solution" as a temporary stage in the process of destroying Israel. Oz declares over and over that the bulk of Palestinians understand that Israel is "here to stay" –– something that would come as a great shock to them. In reality, Israel's decades-long pursuit of a national policy of surrender, cowardice and weakness has convinced virtually all Palestinians that the Jews are on the run and that achieving their dream of exterminating Israel is now within their grasp. Oz declares that less than 30% of Palestinians support Hamas, and the audience smiles approvingly at this complete lie. Very few in the audience know that two partitions for the purpose of creating "two states for two peoples" have already been attempted. The first was the detachment of Eastern Palestine in 1921 to form Transjordan, a step that was supposed to make a Jewish homeland in all of Palestine west of the Jordan possible. Then, in 1947, the UN proposed a new partition of Western Palestine, creating an Arab Palestinian state in one half and a Jewish one in the other. The Arabs reacted by attempting to commit genocide against the Israeli Jews. No one in the audience thinks to ask Oz about the total failure of his "ideas" in the Gaza Strip (in a sense, a third partition). Almost immediately after Gaza's Jews were expelled and the territory turned over to the Palestinians, Sderot became the first Israeli Guernica, bombarded daily by rockets; Ashkelon is now well on its way to becoming the second. In other words, Oz's lovely "two state solution" was already implemented in part in Gaza, and it produced the worst terrorist bombardments of Israeli civilians in history. Oz is at his most "Peresian" (Peres-like) when he insists over and over that history is irrelevant, that there is nothing to be gained by trying to dredge up the past, to draw lessons from it. An inverse of George Santayana, who wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,"Oz tells the audience that his dream is to disconnect all the microphones whenever Arabs or Jews start to mention the past. "I refuse altogether to look at history," he says. Of course, learning from the past might allow naïve audience members to pick out Oz's factual errors or to understand how his "two-state partition" will achieve nothing more than a new all-out Arab war against Israel. A few years back, a group of Israeli Jewish literary figures met in Haifa with Arab writers to discuss politics. Each of the Jewish writers –– good doves all –– got up and declared that he accepted the legitimacy of the Palestinian people, supported their right to a state, and acknowledged their having as much moral right to independence as that of the Jews. (I believe Amos Oz was one of the people present.) They waited for the Arab writers to get up and make similar statements about the legitimacy of Zionism and Jewish self-determination. Not a single one did. A slang expresion among Israelis is "Good Morning, Elijah." It is a sarcastic statement, roughly analogous to the American "Well, duh!" It is a wonderful literary summation of Israel's obtuse literary leftists. 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
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: CEASEFIRE?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 20, 2008. |
|
It made the news today that Olmert is dubious as to whether a ceasefire will work. However, he's willing to let the process play out because of his respect for Omar Suleiman, Egypt's intelligence chief and the negotiator in the matter. A splendid reason, is it not? ~~~~~~~~~~ If quiet comes, it will, as I indicated yesterday, be of an informal nature and follow a progression. We'll stop attacking them if they stop launching rockets. Apparently the release of Shalit would not be made formally part of an agreement (which is what our demand was only days ago), but there would presumably be an understanding that negotiations on Shalit would accelerate after the quiet was in place. If this happened, then Israel would lift the siege. Israel is also, according to Haaretz, demanding that "Hamas cease smuggling weapons, funds and persons trained in paramilitary activities." This is a joke, as I have not noticed of late that Hamas is a reliable organization that will honor commitments in this respect. There is not the slightest doubt that smuggling will continue as they can get away with it. Only the most stringent monitoring and policing of the situation would intervene. What we're hearing is that the Egyptians said they will "step up efforts." ~~~~~~~~~~ Now Egypt will be consulting in Cairo with a delegation led by Moussa Abu Marzuk, deputy head of the Hamas's political bureau, to see if they're willing to go along. As they're hurting badly, they will likely agree. But we should not ignore the words of Osama Hamdan, a senior Hamas official in Lebanon, that we are mistaken if we think a truce with Hamas would mean that the "resistance operations" would end. That very attitude is what makes it obvious that they will continue smuggling to the best of their ability. ~~~~~~~~~~ A word of explanation: What we will have, if Hamas agrees to terms, is a tahdiyeh, which is a period of calm, as compared to a hudna, which is a formal ceasefire agreement. It should be noted, as well, that this tahdiyeh would not apply to Judea and Samaria, where we would continue anti-terrorist operations. ~~~~~~~~~~ It should also be noted that Haim Ramon, deputy prime minister, yesterday charged that the government was secretly negotiating directly with Hamas despite government policy that prohibits such contact until Hamas recognizes Israel, renounces terrorism, and agrees to abide by former agreements. There has been no official statement refuting this, and the guess is that he knows exactly what he's talking about. ~~~~~~~~~~ Well, that was fast... Earlier today Army Radio here in Israel cited an unnamed top Israeli official as saying that behind closed doors a senior member of the Bush entourage here last week had said that Bush and Cheney favored military action against Iran but were holding back because of "the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice." Makes one wonder exactly how much damage Rice is capable of. This story was picked up by The Jerusalem Post and circulated widely. Reportedly, Hezbollah's actions in Lebanon of late –– clearly instigated by Iran –– reinforced the inclination within the US administration to attack. Bush was said to be of the opinion that "the disease must be treated –– not its symptoms." ~~~~~~~~~~ But now Bush has moved to squash this report, which probably should never have seen the light of day. A statement has been released saying that "[the US] remain[s] opposed to Iran's ambitions to obtain a nuclear weapon. To that end, we are working to bring tough diplomatic and economic pressure on the Iranians to get them to change their behavior and to halt their uranium enrichment program. "As the President has said, no president of the United States should ever take options off the table, but our preference and our actions for dealing with this matter remain through peaceful diplomatic means. Nothing has changed in that regard." ~~~~~~~~~~ I'm going to make a guess here and say that there was truth in the report from Army Radio but that Bush would rather not publicly appear to be going the military route or to be at odds with members of his administration. He has taken no options off the table and his months in office are limited. Let's give him the encouragement that might help move him in the right direction: I ask you to contact the president. In a brief and to-the-point message let him know that you support him in taking all necessary measures to stop Iran from going nuclear –– that the world now depends on his courage to act as necessary –– that you know he understands that Iran absolutely cannot be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. As a final reinforcement, let him know that his preventing the disaster of a nuclear Iran will be a blessing to all the world and absolutely the greatest legacy of his presidency. Use your own words, please. Remember that a phone call or fax is best. As always, numbers count, so please ask everyone you can to participate here. President George Bush
~~~~~~~~~~ A rare moment of truth. Palestinian Media Watch has provided a translation of a piece written by Palestinian journalist Jawad Al Bashiti inAl-Ayyam on May 13, 2008, with reference to "Nakba" –– the "catastrophe" of the founding of Israel, which is allegedly responsible for the refugee situation. Wrote Bashiti: "The reasons for the Palestinian Catastrophe are the same reasons that have produced and are still producing our Catastrophes today. During...the Palestinian Catastrophe the following happened: the first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the 'Arab Salvation Army' came and told the Palestinians: 'We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission [to destroy Israel] in the best way and so you won't be hurt.' It became clear already then, when it was too late, that the support of the Arab states was a big illusion. Arabs fought as if intending to cause the 'Palestinian Catastrophe.'" This refutes charges that Jews forced Arabs out of the land. ~~~~~~~~~~ A terrorist attack of major proportions was averted today when a Palestinian going through a checkpoint was found to have four pipe bombs on his person. He was shot dead when he attempted to detonate them. Evidence, once again, of the need for checkpoints. The checkpoint where this happened –– Hawara –– is one where there have been multiple incidents. ~~~~~~~~~~ At the northern end of our border with Gaza, the IDF caught gunmen attempting to plant explosives at the fence, and took them down. ~~~~~~~~~~ The police have announced that Olmert will be questioned again on Friday. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
NY TIMES- –– WRONG AGAIN
Posted by Batya Medad, May 20, 2008. |
|
"President Bush's visit to the Middle East last week offered a graphic primer on his failed policies –– and the many dangers his successor will face." At first I thought that there would be some common sense in this New York Times editorial, but then I continued reading. The writer/s has/haven't a clue. I'm sick and tired of this attitude that Israel and the Arabs are just bickering kids who need a firm hand to "make peace." Now, I'm a mother, grandmother, teacher etc. I've spent close to 40 years living in Israel, and I didn't come here as a toddler. The Arabs here are blood-thirsty terrorists. That's the truth. There's no way to sugar-coat it, when the proof is dripping with blood and gore, not Al. Take off those rose-colored goggles and unplug your ears. This is no computer game. It's real life! The Arabs here, cheered on by the world, want us gone, dead, banished –– they're not fussy. Bush's dream/goal of another Arab terror state, shared by almost the entire world, is the key to Israel's destruction. You don't have to read "fine print;" the Arabs are very blunt about it. I hope that the next US President will just busy him/herself with American problems, like the economy, health care for all, better education, safer roads, etc. And butt yourself out of my neighborhood! Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at
Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il
This article is archived at |
|
IRANIANS WOULD WELCOME US AIRSTRIKES, SOURCES SAY
Posted by Kenneth R. Timmerman, May 20, 2008. |
|
As Barack Obama and John McCain thrash it out over how they would deal with Iran, voices from inside Iran are weighing in with an unusual message: If the United States strikes hard and fast, we will support you. Emissaries from inside Iran have been meeting with Iranian exiles in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere in recent weeks to deliver this provocative message, which they claim comes from pro-U.S. dissidents at the upper-most levels of the regime. "U.S. airstrikes must be powerful and sustained enough to break the myth of the regime's absolute power and reveal the weakness of the leadership," a former official who traveled outside of Iran recently said. The United States should target the office of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as well as the headquarters of the Revolutionary Guards Corp, the offices of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and that of his predecessor and rival, Mullah Hashemi-Rafsanjani, Iranian sources say. The goal should be to carry out sustained airstrikes over a 48-72 hour period that would "decapitate" the regime. Such a strike would send a clear message to the Iranian people and to disgruntled officials throughout Iran's faction-ridden government that the United States is serious about confronting the regime over its bad behavior in Iraq and is willing to strike the leaders responsible for that behavior, the Iranian sources argue. Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton has urged the administration to launch airstrikes against Quds Force bases and facilities in Iran that have been used to support Iran's campaign to help terrorist groups in Iraq to kill Americans. But many Iranians contend that limited strikes would have a limited usefulness, and might even be counter-productive. "The conventional wisdom is that limited strikes will allow the regime to rally the people around the flag," says Mohebat Ahdiyyih, an Iran media analyst at the office of the director of National Intelligence. "However, if the U.S. launches a major strike that goes after the leadership in Iran, that's different," he told Newsmax. "Most Iranians hate the regime. People would be very happy to see a major strike that took out the leadership." Mr. Ahdiyyih and other Iran analysts speaking at an American Enterprise Institute conference on Monday painted a picture of a bitterly-divided regime in Tehran that is "unstable" and fighting for its survival. "The situation is so bad that former president Mohammad Khatami has said that the hard-liners [close to president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] are worse than al-Qaida," Ahdiyyih said. Mr. Ahdiyyih regularly scans the Iranian media, including Web sites close to Ahmadinejad and his rivals, to find clues about the factional infighting in Tehran. Mullah Hashemi-Rafsanjani, a rival to Ahmadinejad who is often mistakenly portrayed in the U.S. media as a "moderate," has been warning that Iran "faces a serious threat of being attacked by the United States," Ahdiyyih said. "Ahmadinejad's people say it's just a psychological war. But if Iranians found out the risks of their nuclear program, the regime would face serious problems" from opposition inside Iran, he added. Ahmadinejad has boasted frequently that Iran's nuclear program "is like a locomotive with no brakes," said Alex Vatanka, an Iran analyst with Jane's Information Group. Iranians interpret that to mean just one thing: that Iran is very close to acquiring nuclear weapons capability, if it hasn't done so already. It is the real possibility that Iran already could have nuclear weapons or be on the verge of acquiring them that has given a sense of urgency to such discussions in Washington, Jerusalem, and Tehran. While the hard-liners are convinced that the U.S. is "bluffing" about putting any real pressure on Iran, Vatanka noted that the escalation of U.S.-led sanctions on Iran includes efforts to ban Iran from the international banking system, which would seriously complicate Iran's efforts to get paid for its oil. "The United States hasn't put this type of pressure on Iran ever," he said. The popular Tabnak.ir Web site in Iran translated a report from Israel Army Radio on Tuesday claiming that a U.S. military strike on Iran was imminent. "Based on the statements of senior Bush administration officials, Israeli Army Radio reported today that the possibility of a U.S. attack on Iran in the coming months is more likely than ever," Tabnak reported. President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have become convinced since the Iranian-backed takeover by Hezbollah in Lebanon that "the head of the snake must be struck," Tabnak quoted Israeli Army Radio as saying. Tabnak.ir is the mouthpiece of former Revolutionary Guards commander Gen. Mohsen Rezai, who is widely seen inside Iran as one of the guiding powers behind the newly-elected, anti-Ahmadinejad majority in the Iranian parliament. The parliamentary faction, known as the "principalists," is led by former Revolutionary Guards officer Ali Larijani, who was fired by Ahmadinejad as his chief nuclear negotiator because the president considered him too conciliatory. Another key figure in the new anti-Ahmadinejad faction is Tehran mayor, Mohammad-Baqr Qalibaf, a Revolutionary Guards general and former commander of the Rev. Guards Air Force, who ran against Ahmadinejad in the 2005 presidential elections. "The Revolutionary Guards is not a unified political party," said Mohsen Sazegara, one of the founders of the Rev. Guards who has broken with the regime and now lives in the United States, "They are like the rest of Iran. You can see many people [inside the Rev. Guards leadership] who are not satisfied with the present situation" and are seeking a change, he added. The White House went to great lengths on Tuesday to deny the Israeli Army Radio report, which quoted President Bush as telling Israeli officials that "the disease must be treated –– not its symptoms." In a statement issued on Tuesday afternoon, the White House said that Bush believed that "no president of the United States should ever take options off the table, but our preference and our actions for dealing with this matter remain through peaceful diplomatic means. Nothing has changed in that regard." Some Washington, D.C. analysts take the White House at its word. "The Bush administration has decided that the nuclear issue [in Iran] should be decided by the next administration," Patrick Clawson, deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy told the conference at AEI. On Monday, the USS Ronald Reagan and its carrier strike group steamed out of San Diego for a six month tour of the Persian Gulf. The Reagan will join the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, which entered the Gulf late last month. The United States frequently has had two carrier strike groups in the region over the past two years, so the arrival of the Reagan is not a reinforcement. Together, the two carriers can launch 144 strike aircraft and hundreds of cruise missiles against ground targets inside Iran, while ship-board helicopters, U.S. Marines, and naval artillery can destroy Iranian oil platforms and cripple the Iranian navy. U.S. airstrikes that target the top leadership of Iran and refrain from extensive damage to civilians or religious targets, could win strong support from the Iranian people for a pro-U.S. coup by the security services, many Iranians in positions of responsibility believe. "Anything that hurts the regime will make the people of Iran happy. The young people in Iran see the U.S. as the only country that can help them," former regime official, Dr. Mohsen Sazegara, told Newsmax this week. Dissidents within the Iranian military and the Revolutionary Guards believe that U.S. air strikes that take out the leadership will open the doors to a coup led by the military that would put an end to the Islamic Republic. But some Iranian pro-democracy activists fear that air strikes will only perpetuate the tyranny of the Islamic Republic. "Military strikes, as limited as they may be, will allow the regime to repress Iranians even more, because Iran will be at a state of war where dissent will simply not be tolerated," former student leader Roozbeh Farahanipour told Newsmax." Rather than promote military strikes on Iran, Farahanipour believes the United States should be backing pro-democracy groups inside Iran to carry out a systematic campaign of civil disobedience against the regime. "The speed with which we can organize Iranians depends on the amount of resources at our disposal," he said. "Marze Por Gohar, with a molecular-sized budget, has been able to organize Iranians to conduct non-violent campaigns inside Iran. Certainly if we received more help from the international community we could be even more potent then we already are." Marze Por Gohar is a small nationalist party that is calling for Iran to become a secular republic. Dr. Sazegara, the former Revolutionary Guards founder, would also prefer to see the United States engage in a serious and sustained "Helsinki process" that would impose crippling international banking sanctions and diplomatic sanctions on Iran, and only lift them in exchange for real concessions. "The first demand should be a general pardon, a general amnesty against political dissidents," Sazegara told Newsmax. But even Sazegara doubts that the current leadership will ever engage in a serious dialogue over its nuclear weapons program or political freedom. "The regime knows very well that the first step back [from repression] will set off a chain reaction that ultimately will lead to their collapse," Sazegara said. The unwillingness to compromise, and the belief that the United States is only bluffing, is encouraging Ahmadinejad and Khamenei to stand firm against U.S. pressure, Sazegara and other Iran analysts believe. "My biggest fear is that the Iranian leadership will miscalculate, just as Hezbollah did in 2006," says AEI Middle East analyst Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official who served in Iraq. Rather than softening the tough talk toward Tehran, the White House should "make the red lines as clear as possible so we don't stumble into war," Rubin said. - Kenneth R. Timmerman is President of Middle East Data Project, Inc. and author of Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran. Visit his website at www.KenTimmerman.com and contact him at timmerman.road@verizon.net This article appeared in NewsMax and is archived at
|
|
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, ISRAEL AND SHALOM
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 20, 2008. |
|
What a world! Just imagine our neighbors would have a peaceful relationship, and leave Islam and Judaism out of the equation, what this would do for the benefit of all. The possibilities would be endless, and the entire world would benefit. All the funds now being wasted would be invested in projects beneficial to all. The Bushies best friends, the Saudis, are behind most of the problems, as is the Muslim brotherhood, and the other religious fanatics that control many millions of lives. ...while the world still denies that it's the religion of death that's behind most of the problems. The facts speak for themselves. Just add up the amount of damage, death, fighting, explosions, has been caused, just over the last several decades, not by Buddhists, nor Jews, nor Christians. Not very often one sees an article like this one in the British press! A beacon of truth in the British media –– this was written by Andrew Roberts (Daily Express). |
|
The State of Israel has packed more history into her sixty years on the planet –– which she celebrates this week –– than many other nations have in six hundred. There are many surprising things about this tiny, feisty, brave nation the size of Wales, but the most astonishing is that she has lived to see this birthday at all. The very day after the new state was established, she was invaded by the armies of no fewer than five Arab countries, and she has been struggling for her right to life ever since. From Morocco to Afghanistan, from the Caspian Sea to Aden, the 525 million square miles of territory belonging to members of the Arab League is home to over 330 million people, whereas Israel covers only 800,000 square miles, and is home to seven million citizens, one-fifth of whom are Arabs. The Jews of the Holy Land are thus surrounded by hostile states 650 times their size in territory and sixty times their population, yet their last, best hope of ending two millennia of international persecution -the State of Israel -has somehow survived. When during the Second World War, the island of Malta came through three terrible years of bombardment and destruction, it was rightly awarded the George Medal for bravery. Today Israel should be awarded a similar decoration for defending democracy, tolerance and Western values against a murderous onslaught that has lasted twenty times as long. Jerusalem is the site of the Temple of Solomon and Herod. The stones of a palace erected by King David himself are even now being unearthed just outside the walls of Jerusalem. Everything that makes a nation state legitimate –– blood shed, soil tilled, two millennia of continuous residence, international agreements –– argues for Israel's right to exist, yet that is still denied by the Arab League. For many of their governments, which are rich enough to have solved the Palestinian refugee problem decades ago, it is useful to have Israel as a scapegoat to divert attention from the tyranny, failure and corruption of their own regimes. The tragic truth is that it suits Arab states very well to have the Palestinians endure permanent refugee status, and whenever Israel puts forward workable solutions they have been stymied by those whose interests put the destruction of Israel before the genuine well-being of the Palestinians. Both King Abdullah I of Jordan and Anwar Sadat of Egypt were assassinated when they attempted to come to some kind of sane accommodation with a country that most sane people now accept is not going away. The process of creating a Jewish homeland in an area where other peoples were already living –– though far fewer of them than anti-Israel propagandists claim –– was always going to be a complicated and delicate business, and one for which Britain as the Mandated power had a profound responsibility, and about which since the Balfour Declaration of 1917 she had made solemn promises. Yet instead of keeping a large number of troops on the ground throughout the birth pangs of the State of Israel, Britain hurriedly withdrew all her forces virtually overnight on 14 May 1948, thus facilitating the Arab invasions the very day, one of which was actually commanded by a former British Army officer, John Glubb (known as Glubb Pasha). Less than 4 years earlier, Britain had landed division after victorious division in Normandy. Now 'Partition and flee' was the Attlee government's ignominious policy, whose consequences are still plaguing the world half a century later in Kashmir and the Middle East. 'We owe to the Jews,' wrote Winston Churchill in 1920, 'a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of mankind, worth in fact the fruits of all wisdom and learning put together.' The Jewish contribution to finance, science, the arts, academia, commerce and industry, literature, philanthropy and politics has been astonishing relative to their tiny numbers. Although they make up less than half of one per-cent of the world's population, between 1901 and 1950 Jews won 14% of all the Nobel Prizes awarded for Literature and Science, and between 1951 and 2000 Jews won 32% of the Nobel Prizes for Medicine, 32% for Physics, 39% for Economics and 29% for Science. This, despite so many of their greatest intellects dying in the gas chambers. Civilization owes Judaism a debt it can never repay, and support for the right of a Jewish homeland to exist is the bare minimum we can provide. Yet we tend to treat Israel like a leper on the international scene, merely for defending herself, and threatening her with academic boycotts if she builds a separation wall that has so far reduced suicide bombings by 95% over three years. It is a disgrace that no senior member of the Royal Family has ever visited Israel, as though the country is still in quarantine after sixty years. After the Holocaust, the Jewish people recognised that they had to have their own state, a homeland where they could forever be safe from a repetition of such horrors. Putting their trust in Western Civilisation was never again going to be enough. Since then, Israel has had to fight no fewer than 5 major wars for her very existence. She has been on the front line in the War against Terror and has been fighting the West's battles for it, decades before 9/11 or 7/7 ever happened. Radical Islam is never going to accept the concept of an Israeli State, so the struggle is likely to continue for another sixty years, but the Jews know that that is less dangerous than entrusting their security to anyone else. Very often in Britain, especially when faced with the overwhelmingly anti-Israeli bias that is endemic in our liberal media and the BBC, we fail to ask ourselves what we would have done placed in their position? The population of the United Kingdom of 63 million is nine times that of Israel. In July 2006, to take one example at random, Hizbullah crossed the border of Lebanon into Israel and killed eight patrolmen and kidnapped two others, and that summer fired 4,000 Katyusha rockets into Israel which killed a further 43 civilians. Now, if we multiply those numbers by 9 to get the British equivalent, just imagine what WE would do if a terrorist organisation based as close as Calais were to fire 36,000 rockets into Sussex and Kent, killing 387 British civilians, after killing 72 British servicemen in an ambush and capturing eighteen. There is absolutely no lengths to which our Government would not go to protect British subjects under those circumstances, and quite right too. Why should Israel be expected to behave any differently? Last month I visited Auschwitz-Birkenau, researching a book about the Second World War. Walking along a line of huts and the railway siding where their forebears had been worked and starved and beaten and gassed to death, were a group of Jewish schoolchildren, one of whom was carrying over his shoulder the Israeli flag, a blue star of David on white background. It was a profoundly moving sight, for it was the sovereign independence represented by that flag which guarantees that the obscenity of genocide –– which killed 6 million people in Auschwitz and camps like it –– will never again befall the Jewish people. Happy birthday, Israel and Shalom.
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il
|
|
THE EVOLVING PALESTINIAN NARRATIVE: ARABS CAUSED THE REFUGEE PROBLEM
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 20, 2008. |
|
font size=4 color=gray>PA daily: Arabs left homes on their own to facilitate destruction of Israel –– and thus became refugees >The Arabs who became refugees in 1948 were not expelled by Israel but left on their own to facilitate the destruction of Israel, according to a senior Palestinian journalist writing in a Palestinian daily. This plan to leave Israel was initiated by the Arab states fighting Israel, who promised the people they would be able to return to their homes in a few days once Israel was defeated. The article in Al-Ayyam concludes that these Arab states are responsible for the Arab refugee problem. A backbone of Palestinian English-language propaganda is the myth that Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel and created Arab refugees. But in recent years, PMW has documented an increasing willingness among Palestinians to openly blame the Arab states and not Israel. Following are five such statements of blame, starting with this most recent article and including testimony from refugees themselves and corroboration by Palestinian leaders. Clearly, there is a growing Palestinian willingness to blame the Arab leaders, which corroborates Israel's historical record. 1. Jawad Al Bashiti, Palestinian journalist in Jordan, writing in Al-Ayyam, May 13, 2008 "Remind me of one real cause from all the factors that have caused the "Palestinian Catastrophe" [the establishment of Israel and the creation of refugee problem], and I will remind you that it still exists... The reasons for the Palestinian Catastrophe are the same reasons that have produced and are still producing our Catastrophes today. During the Little Catastrophe, meaning the Palestinian Catastrophe the following happened: the first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the "Arab Salvation Army" came and told the Palestinians: 'We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission (destroy Israel) in the best way and so you won't be hurt.' It became clear already then, when it was too late, that the support of the Arab states (against Israel) was a big illusion. Arabs fought as if intending to cause the "Palestinian Catastrophe". [Al-Ayyam, May 13 2008] 2. Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Palestinian Journalist in PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006 "...The leaders and the elites promised us at the beginning of the "Catastrophe" in 1948, that the duration of the exile will not be long, and that it will not last more than a few days or months, and afterwards the refugees will return to their homes, which most of them did not leave only until they put their trust in those "Arkuvian" promises made by the leaders and the political elites. Afterwards, days passed, months, years and decades, and the promises were lost with the strain of the succession of events..." [Term "Arkuvian," is after Arkuv –– a figure from Arab tradition –– who was known for breaking his promises and for his lies."] " [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006] 3. Asmaa Jabir Balasimah, Woman who fled Israel in 1948, Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006 "We heard sounds of explosions and of gunfire at the beginning of the summer in the year of the "Catastrophe" [1948]. They told us: The Jews attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and return, after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few hours." [Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006] 4. Son of man who fled in 1948, PA TV 1999 An Arab viewer called Palestinian Authority TV and quoted his father, saying that in 1948 the Arab District Officer ordered all Arabs to leave Palestine or be labeled traitors. In response, Arab MK Ibrahim Sarsur, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, cursed those leaders, thus acknowledging Israel's historical record. "Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]. I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [in 1948], our district officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [near Ashkelon –– Southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor." Response from Ibrahim Sarsur, now MK, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel: "The one who gave the order forbidding them to stay there bears guilt for this, in this life and the Afterlife throughout history until Resurrection Day." [PA TV April 30, 1999] |
|
THE PEACE PROCESS IS DEAD. NOW WHAT?
Posted by Ted Belman, May 20, 2008. |
|
In my article Refefining "What it means to be pro-Israel" I suggested that my definition of it is to advocate abrogating the peace process and annexing Judea and Samaria. Ami Isseroff commented that the problem with that solution was that no one will take the Arabs in. I agreed to the extent that to achieve such a solution would be extremely difficult. The world will vociferously oppose it. Ami then referred me to his article Zionism and Israel: Ideological
house cleaning Solutions –– Whatever solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we support, we need to re-examine all the arguments for that solution, because all of them were born in different circumstances, "a long time ago on another planet." It is easy to see that there is not much chance for a "bi-national state" (born in the 1920s) or that a "one state solution" (a favorite of the Nazi Mufti, Hajj Amin el Husseini) would result in an explosion no matter who was in charge of that state. But the two state solution (born in 1937, revised in 1947, revived more recently in a new context) may need rethinking as well. Here is one very pessimistic take on the two-state solution I agree. That's the dilemma. Neither the solution I propose, nor the two state solution can work. That leaves us with managing the status quo. We must decide if we can manage it better by going through the motions of the peace process or abrogating it. In the first option we are pressed to make concessions yet we put facts on the ground in fits and starts. As for ending the peace process, we would continue putting facts on the ground. Rather then contend with the pressure to make concessions, we would have to contend with demands that we enter another peace process. I prefer the latter. We would also have to contend with pressure for a bi-national state. This Israel would reject outright. We would also have to contend with renewed charges of being an apartheid state. Effectively it would be because Israel would be fully in charge of Judea and Samaria as though it was sovereign and thus it would be argued that full rights should be offered the Palestinians. Don't get me wrong. Israel, behind the greenline, is not an apartheid state, but if Judea and Samaria are considered part of Israel due to annexation or occupation such a charge would be levied. That issue will ultimately have to be resolved. In the annexation framework I, and others, have suggested offering citizenship subject to certain prerequisites, namely, all citizens must take a loyalty oath and pledge allegiance, all citizens must preform national service in the IDF or elsewhere, all citizens must speak and read Hebrew. These rules would also apply to Arab Israelis. This can't be done in the occupation framework. Whether we reject the peace process or redirect it to negotiating terms of annexation, we should start pushing in this direction. Obviously the Arabs will reject it, demanding a bi-national state and the international community will do likewise. Thus endless negotiations. For my part, I would rather have endless negotiations over the terms of annexation rather than over the terms of a two-state solution. At least we would be offering citizenship under certain terms. And of course, continue putting facts on the ground. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
GAZA SAYS IT ALL
Posted by Daily Alert, May 20, 2008. |
|
This was written by Michael Coren of the Sun Media.
It appeared in the Toronto Sn
|
|
The Gaza Strip probably receives more media attention per square metre than any other slice of land in the world. Journalists abound in this overcrowded territory with its underemployed population. Hence our media are full of reports from generally biased reporters who know that if they ever did present a more pro-Israel position their ability to function, if not their lives, would be in acute danger. What is seldom revealed to the general public is the often unethical closeness between Palestinian spokespeople and foreign correspondents. Anyone who has spent any time covering the region knows of the private abuse thrown at Israelis by reporters who are supposed to have open minds. One prominent BBC reporter openly wept when Yasser Arafat died and a British documentary maker was recorded on camera ordering someone out of her room because he was Israeli and then demanding to know if another man was Jewish. Attacking Israel is seen as a way to attack the United States indirectly and as so many media types are anti-American it falls nicely into place. Mingle this with a degree of latent anti-Semitism –– some people still prefer Jews as cringing victims rather than as mighty warriors –– and you have the press corps in Israel and Palestine. And in Gaza. Which is an icon of the failure of peace as Israel celebrates its 60th anniversary. The country is stronger and wealthier than ever before, but peace is just as unlikely. Gaza says it all. Israel occupied it when it dared to win a war with Arab neighbours dedicated to wiping the Jewish state off the map. It wanted to hand it back to Egypt, but Cairo wanted no part of it. They still don't. Even so, Israel withdrew. It was painful, risky and divisive. Only a fool would believe that they did this because they cared about the Palestinians. They did it because they hoped it might lead to peace. However, instead of viewing this as a gesture of goodwill, Hamas saw it as weakness and stepped up its military campaign. Israel left an entire economic infrastructure, much to the chagrin of more hawkish Israelis. It was smashed apart by the Palestinians within hours. Within days the shower of rockets began to descend on Jewish civilians living close to the border, in towns that had never been Arab and had been built from nothing by Jewish labour. Since then legions of women, children and families have lived in shelters. This, the Israelis are being told, is what happens if you return land. Gaza itself is hellish. But it has been given billions of dollars in foreign aid and the money is still being pumped in. Tragically, it goes to buy guns, rockets and explosives rather than food, oil and books. As a consequence Israel has tightened the border to protect its citizens. It is then accused by the media and its enemies abroad –– often dictators and torturers –– of being cruel. EGYPT STRICTER Little is said about Egypt being far stricter on its side of Gaza with its Palestinian cousins or how Hamas directly has prevented a million litres of fuel being distributed to its people. Double standard and unfair criticism. Nothing new. Israel knows it is badly treated and knows that whatever it does, some people and groups will always hate it. Yet it still celebrates its birthday. As it should. Sixty glorious years. The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
NY TIMES UNACCEPTABLY BIASED AGAINST ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 20, 2008. |
|
TIMES SUNDAY OPINION LOPSIDED AGAINST ISRAEL The NY Times 5/18 "Week In Review" had three articles on the Arab-Israel conflict. All were anti-Zionist, par for the Times' advocacy journalism. They were written by a Palestinian Arab, by Thomas Friedman, and by Jeffrey Goldberg. Friedman and Goldberg profess sympathy for Israel, but urge Israel to cede defensible borders in a policy that has gotten thousands of Jews killed or wounded and fits the Arab plan for conquering the rest. Pretending sympathy for Israel is an old tactic by the traditionally anti-Zionist Times and the customarily anti-Zionist Friedman. FRIEDMAN'S ESSAY Friedman started by quoting Pres. Bush: "'There has to be 'an end' to the Israeli occupation' of the W. Bank 'that began in 1967.' Israel must be secure and a final agreement 'must establish Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people.'" "'The establishment of the state of Palestine is long overdue. The Palestinian people deserve it.'" Friedman upholds the statements by noting that Bush is "long hailed as a true friend of Israel." NO FRIEND Of ISRAEL Friends can be mistaken, so their reputations prove nothing. Nor is Bush's reputation as a friend of Israel deserved, as you will see, below. Bush got the reputation because he smiled at Israeli leaders, the media does not inform people about this issue, and the leftist Israeli media is unable to contrast what leaders say with what they do and with enemy ideology. Such Jews take seriously the false flattery by diplomats and wily opponents. NO OCCUPATION Is there an occupation? Jordanian and Egyptian aggressors seized the Old City of Jerusalem and the Territories in 1948. The West did not complain about their control of the Territories as an occupation. This inconsistency indicates a double standard. Ordinary people have not read international law and scholarly commentary about occupation. Occupation means controlling part or all of a sovereign state belonging to another nationality, not one's own homeland. Mandatory Palestine was not a sovereign state belonging to another nationality. Hence, not occupied. Neither is the ordinary person familiar with the Palestine Mandate. The Mandate recognized the whole of Palestine as the homeland of the Jewish people. The Mandate listed what had to be done to prepare it for Jewish statehood, by implication. A major requirement was "close settlement of the land by the Jews." How can the Jews be occupiers of an area recognized as the Jewish homeland to be restored to the Jewish people as a matter of historical justice? This return was endorsed by the non-partisan League of Nations, and initially by the UNO, which incorporated the Mandate into its Charter. How can the Jews be occupiers of an area requiring "close settlement of the land by the Jews? The ordinary person, unversed in such matters, depends on his newspapers and Presidents to inform him. They don't. They have access to the facts, but lie about them. Bush does. Friedman does. The Times does. Those are no friends of Israel, taking the side of the Muslim Arab jihad against the Jews. "RETURN" LAND THEY NEVER RULED "Give back" to the Palestinian Arabs, "give back," "give back," three times Friedman uses that phrase. This makes it seem as if the fair thing is for Israel to "return" the Territories to the Palestinian Arabs. But it didn't belong to them. They never controlled it. One can't "give back" what someone never had. This is another example of the propagandistic use of language to fabricate a case for the non-existent "Palestinian" nationality. Bush said that "Palestine" should be established as a homeland for the Palestinian people. What does he mean? Is it a homeland or only first to be established as one? Remember that about three-fourths of the Arabs in it are of relatively recent immigrant families. This area is not their ancestral homeland, though it is of the Jews. What does Bush mean by "Palestine?" Objectively, it is the area of the ancient Jewish kingdom, which the British marked on their maps when setting up the Palestine Mandate. It was renamed Palestine from Judea by the Romans, in an attempt to disassociate it from the Jewish people. At that time, most of the residents were Jews and the Arabs had not turned Muslim and had not conquered the region. There was no "Palestinian people," although up to the establishment of modern Israel, the Zionists there were called "Palestinians" and the Arabs there were not. Up to the 1960s, most Arabs there had no sense of nationality. Those who did considered themselves Syrians. Then they called themselves Palestinians, the people naming themselves after the area, rather than the area being named after the people the way Judea was named after the Jewish tribe of Judah. Samaria is from the Hebrew word for guard. Samaria, was said to guard the approach to Judah. The ancient state of Israel was named after the Israelites. By "Palestine," the PLO means the Territories for now, Israel later, and then Jordan. What does Bush mean? What will the State Dept. mean when and if the Arabs get the Territories and then demand more of "Palestine?" Will the State Dept. continue appeasement of the Arabs a Israel's expense? The State Dept. never wanted Israel to come into existence. The change in name from Arabs to Palestinians was a deliberate ploy to make Arabs seem entitled to the land. Along comes Bush, saying, in effect, "Palestine for the Palestinians." I say, Judea for the Jews. Perhaps you now guessed why Bush did not define "Palestine." If one defines it, Jewish entitlement to it becomes clearer. Keeping the meaning vague and flexible allows the Arabs and Bush to expand it to include more areas later that the Arabs would demand. According to their ideology, they would demand still more, when and if they get some. That's part of Arafat's phased plan for the conquest of Israel. This is a plan that Bush, Friedman, and the Times also don't mention. If they did, they would deflate their premise that peace is made by giving the Arabs another state there. UNDESERVING OF SOVEREIGNTY Then there is the notion that statehood for the western Palestinian Arabs is long overdue and they deserve it. Where did that notion originate? Deserve it on what basis? Based on their phony claim to being a separate nationality, while the PLO Covenant admits they are not a separate nationality? Based on terrorism? Deserving because of their other war crimes? For fostering bigotry? Desire for conquest? Wholesale corruption? Being part of the Arab nationality possessing more than 20 states and more land than does the USA? Being anti-American? Incidentally, Friedman stressed loyalty to the US over loyalty to Israel (of which I see none, especially when he urges making stronger the mass-murderers of Israelis). Then why does he support the Palestinian Arab people, whose media and leaders encourage Muslims to fight against US troops in Iraq and who hate America? The stronger our ally Israel is, the better it can help us against the Islamists the way it helped us keep the USSR out of the Mideast. (He really is hostile to Zionism. I think he was conjuring up an image of dual loyalty, to intimidate American Jews, so they would be afraid to have their American patriotism doubted when the champion Israel. This is scurrilous. Just as he claims his anti-Israel policies are good for the US, I claim that pro-Israel policies are good for the US. After all, the P.A. is part of the anti-Western jihad, affecting both the US and Israel.) It boils down to Bush et al proposing to give traditionally Jewish territory affording Israel secure borders to enemy terrorists pledged to conquer Israel by violence, and calling this peacemaking and telling us that Bush et al are friends of Israel. Who needs such "friends!" US JEWRY'S PRO-ZIONISM ACTUALLY HURTS ISRAEL? That is the thesis of Jeffry Goldberg's article. He puts the burden of keeping the US government from pressing Israel for agreement with the P.A. upon US Jewry's opposition to major territorial concessions to the Arabs. The US already presses Israel. It has been pressing Israel for decades and interfering in its internal affairs. This is the sneaky kind of imperial behavior that Democrats perceive the US doing with other countries but fail to see it doing with Israel. Israel has conceded much. Mr. Goldberg is mistaken. What he really must want is the US to force total Arab demands upon Israel. Since the Arab demands are unjustified, since their demands keep growing, since they keep violating their peace commitments, since it is the Arabs who start the wars, and since the Palestinian Arabs align with the holy war against the US among others, why doesn't Goldberg propose some US pressure upon them? Would that US Jewry were more influential upon the US government and more staunch about the territorial integrity and security of Israel! OLMERT A MOST MYOPIC LEADER Goldberg urges US Jewish leaders to see the bigger picture, as, he claims, PM Olmert does. Olmert? The problem with Olmert is that, judging by his statements and actions, he does not see the big picture nor does he plan ahead. One day Olmert removes checkpoints, at the behest of Israel's ostensible friend, Bush. Couple of days later, the inevitable terrorist attack through those checkpoints prompts Olmert to restore the checkpoints. A month later, having learned nothing, and not seeing the bigger picture, but heeding State Dept. demands, Olmert starts the removal-restore cycle again. Olmert releases terrorists for goodwill. In return, he gets terrorism instead of goodwill. Unable to learn in behalf of Israel, and unable to see the overall jihad, Olmert then plans to release more terrorists for more non-forthcoming goodwill. Olmert thinks that Abbas is a peace partner, while Abbas says he refuses to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state and if negotiations don't give him what he wants, he'll go to war Olmert was unable to plan the big picture for the war in Lebanon. He failed to destroy Hizbullah there, and his regime put pro-terrorist UNIFIL in the way of Israeli action against Hizbullah. UNIFIL let Hizbullah regain its military strength there. Result now is a major threat to Israel, in behalf of Iran. Olmert is so blind to the issues that he thinks his Lebanon policy was a success. Same for his Foreign Minister Livni. Olmert also was involved in expelling the Jews from Gaza. The result is Hamas bombardment of Israel. He couldn't foresee that, though all his critics did. He failed to retain control over the Gaza-Egypt border, allowing arms smuggling to accelerate. He praises Egypt, which allows smuggling from its side. Olmert also succumbs to many US demands for not pursuing Hamas hard. Meanwhile, Abbas encourages terrorism against Israel. The Israeli people have lost their patience with, and respect for, Olmert. US Jewry needs to become more of a counter-balance to him. DISPROVED DEMOGRAPHIC THREAT STILL CITED Olmert pretends to be looking ahead, by arguing that unless Israel sets up a separate P.A. state, the rest of the world would claim Israel is ruling another people and would demand it combine with the PLO, making the Arabs a majority. He also claims that the Arab population is increasing faster than the Jewish population. That is not true. The claim rests upon P.A. population figures shown to be false. Many Arab residents were counted twice; others were counted even after having moved out. Many do leave. The Arab birth rate is declining. The proportion of Jews in the area is growing. WHAT OLMERT SHOULD HAVE DONE If Olmert were patriotic, had foresight, and were not a hypocrite about demography, then instead of expelling Jews, he would have expelled illegal Arab aliens, stopped admitting foreign Arabs who wish to marry ones in Israel, would have begun annexing parts of the Territories not populated by Arabs, and would stop subsidizing the P.A. and Israeli Arabs, so that more Arabs would leave. That would address the demographic question favorably for the Jews. ISRAEL UNWISE TO LISTEN TO REST OF WORLD Worrying about what the rest of the world would do, and giving in to their immediate demands because of that worry, is not wise. It merely encourages the world to demand more. Appeasement does not work. The world will stay hostile no matter what Israel does. Israel should learn how to do what is in its own interest, not the Arab enemy's. Israel also should learn how to answer hostile claims. For example, a patriotic and sensible Israeli regime would point out that it is not ruling the Arabs in the Territories. Attacked by them, Israel takes security measures. If that harms the P.A. economy, let the Arabs stop their terrorism. INCONSISTENT ON CONTIGUITY Goldberg advocates a contiguous Arab state, from Gaza to Judea-Samaria. That means running a corridor connecting the two parts of the P.A.. The corridor would bisect Israel. Then Israel no longer would be contiguous. What happened to Goldberg's value of contiguous state? Why is contiguity important for the Arabs but not for the Jews? Goldberg seems biased in favor of the Arabs. He suggests expelling the Jews from Judea-Samaria. In other words, reward Arab aggression and cede the cradle of Jewish civilization to the enemies of civilization. Bad idea. Unjust. Harms America. FAVORING OTHER TERRORISTS Obama's opposition to the terrorist organization, Hamas, is mentioned. Why doesn't Obama oppose the PLO terrorist organization and its Fatah component? Because Obama and Bush and Olmert pretend that Fatah is not terrorist, so Israel would have some group with whom it could pretend to be making peace and could make territorial concessions to. Territorial concessions to terrorists, however, would have deadly consequences. "Friend" Bush gets Jews killed. The next US President, writes Goldberg, should press Israel to make peace with the moderates before the extremists become too strong. This suggestion erroneously implies that Israel is the obstacle to peace. Does Goldberg not know that the Arabs started all these wars primarily out of religious intolerance that continues? Is he unaware that Israeli school children are taught about peace while the Arab children sing of war and of killing Jews? What moderates, among the Palestinian Arabs? Like all the other advocates of that supposed piece of wisdom, he doesn't identify those moderates or at least doesn't explain specifically what is moderate about them. Among the Palestinian Arabs are no moderates in power or who dare propose a genuine peace. In talking about the alleged moderates, Goldberg contrasts these nameless ones with "fundamentalists of Hamas." Just as Hamas believes in the fundamentals of intolerant Islam, so do Fatah and Abbas. Goldberg does not understand Islam and the people involved. A PALESTINIAN ARAB'S DAMNING OF ISRAEL If one hadn't already concluded that the Times caters to views based on lies, the final article is a Palestinian Arab's barrage of dissembling. NO MASS-EXPULSION; ARABS MADE THEIR OWN CATASTROPHE The Arab, Elias Khoury, calls the establishment of Israel a catastrophe for his people. He claims they had been living there for centuries but were expelled by a comprehensive plan of ethnic cleansing, exposed by "courageous" new historians such as Ilan Pappe. The new historians are anti-Zionist propagandists who lack academic standards of historians. They quote out of context to mislead and libel. They have been exposed, themselves, as frauds. Pappe was a Communist. Communists lack integrity. There was no plan of ethnic cleansing. Almost all Arabs who wanted to, were allowed to stay and urged to stay. Unfortunately, many did and many others were invited back. That was Ben-Gurion's biggest mistake. Instead of blaming him for going to far, which he did not, I blame him for not going far enough. The growing Israeli Arab struggle to capture Israel is strong evidence for my view. Most of the Arabs fled before Jewish forces arrived. Indeed, the Arab leaders and many others fled before the war started. Whose fault is that? Only a few were forced out, and that was for strategic reasons in a war for survival (a war still running). The evidence in broadcasts, newspapers, and British documents (and in my memory) is overwhelming. Like the notion of Palestinian nationality, the notion of an expulsion was fabricated later, for propaganda. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WARS? Prof. Khoury places responsibility for the wars entirely on the Jews. But the Arabs started the wars. They didn't have to. They wanted, however, to exterminate the Jews. They were genocidal. For decades, they wouldn't negotiate and most still won't. Khoury does not mention that. Hmm. 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 |
|
MORE GOOD NEWS FROM ISRAEL
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 20, 2008. |
|
This comes from the JoshuaPundit website
|
|
No wonder the Arabs are in such a hurry to destroy Israel! First a major breakthrough in solar energy, and now a revolutionary discovery in producing synthetic fuels...using algae!: {Israeli scientist Dr. Isaac Berzin] discovered that "green slime" contains one of the keys to the alternative fuel the world is seeking. His company is the first ever to develop and produce biofuels from algae that are bred on gases emitted by power plants. This is by no means just theoretical: Berzin has registered 12 patents that enshrine his rights to the technology connecting an energy farm to a power plant. In 2005, in the heart of the Arizona desert, he chalked up another achievement when he set up the world's first trial project adjacent to a power plant of APS, Arizona's largest electrical utility company. The director of the advanced fuels program of APS, Raymond Hobbs, relates that his Ford has been cruising the streets of Phoenix on green fuel since 2006. "My mandate is to burn fuel and produce electricity, but we have a problem called CO2," he notes. "The good thing about Itzik's [Isaac's] technology is that we are recycling the toxin and creating a new industry. It's a win-win situation for everyone. It's not every day that you make a hole in the smokestack of a power plant that is worth billions of dollars and start to grow algae. I did it because I believed in Itzik. The first time we met, he showed up at my office with three people and said that was his whole company. I say that the size of a company does not determine the size of the head. One person's idea can bring about tremendous change. I am certain that his technology will bring mankind lots of fuel, food and peace." Even more interesting, the process doesn't interfere with the food supply or take up valuable land and is actually more efficient than synthesizing fuel out of plants used for food crops: "It turns out that the biofuels produced from corn or soy seeds –– fuels that are considered the future substitute for pollutant fuel –– cause environmental damage themselves. It is also not economically viable: to grow the soy beans you need leaves and roots, a whole system that supports the beans from which the oil is produced. No such system is required to grow algae. Their rate of growth is 10 to 100 times that of any other biological system. So if you have a unit of land, you can achieve orders of production that are many times higher. This is a process that does not compete for land and water resources –– algae can grow in saltwater and in sewage." Dr. Berzin, who made TIME magazine's list of 100 most influential people this year, is also aware of the implications this could have for the War On Jihad: " After all, those terrorists are funded by fuel powers...As soon as one energy farm proves itself economically –– and that will happen within a year and a half –– we will be able to establish similar farms all over the world. If an energy revolution of this kind occurs in China, it will foment a strategic change in the division of the political forces on a global scale. A world in which China will not be dependent on Iran will be a different world. Some countries will lose part of their power. The message is one of energy freedom. If you have land, sun and CO2, you can grow your own energy. A revolution like this will make the world free." And just maybe, that's how G-d intended it. Or as Dr. Berzin puts it, when modestly downplaying his achievement "... it was mostly the finger of G-d. I am not a religious person, but I have a feeling of divine providence. G-d is not mentioned in the Book of Esther, but from the events you understand that He is behind the scenes, that He exists. In my story, too, what I dreamt of came to be, and I often had the feeling that someone behind the scenes was helping me." Just another major benefit to humanity provided by Israel...as opposed to what their Arab adversaries have contributed to the world. Posted by Freedom Fighter at 10:47 AM 6 comme Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
RUSSIA WANTS CONTROL OF DOWNTOWN JERUSALEM
Posted by Dawn Treader, May 20, 2008. |
|
This was a news item in Israel Today
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=12910 |
|
Moscow is in negotiations to purchase a large section of downtown Jerusalem once controlled by the Russian government prior to Israel's rebirth in 1948. The 17-acre Russian Compound is today home to a large police facility and detention center, numerous pubs and restaurants and a large Russian Orthodox church. The Russian government built up the area in the 1860s to accommodate the large number of Russian pilgrims who were visiting Jerusalem every year, particularly around the time of Easter. Negotiations over the land has been ongoing since the premiership of Ehud Barak some seven years ago. The Russians are reportedly prepared to pay $100 million for the prime real estate. Speaking to Israel National News, an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman stressed that Israel is not "selling" the land to Russia, but rather "returning" the area to its former owners –– a very dangerous way of putting things considering the Arab claim to all of what is today the Jewish state. Contact Dawn Treader at dawntreader3@yahoo.com |
|
MY VERY SPECIAL MOMENTS WITH THE ISRAELI FLAG
Posted by Laureen Moe, May 19, 2008. |
|
The Lord blessed what I was doing. When I was in Israel I went up to the area that they called THE GOOD FENCE. It was at the Lebanon border. That was in the 80's. I bought an Israeli flag –– - it did not have the usual stick with it that allows you to hold it up and display it. I have had the flag folded in my home since then. I attend the Church of Zion in B.c. and although they are pro-Israel I don't believe they own an Israeli flag. So recently when other members of the Church were dancing around with their banners I started to bring my flag and several times just opened it and spread it out over the chair in front of me..and at other times I hold it up in front of me. One time Pastor Gideon's wife Mai came over to me and held the flag in her arms as if it was precious to her and she took it down to the stage area where the dancers were and gave it to one girl to display as she danced. Another time when I opened my eyes as I was praying a dear older member of the congragation appeared in front of me and asked me to bring the flag down to the front of the auditorium (this is our temporary church home) because they were going to pray for Israel. But the most blessed moment that I had came a little later..One day as the others were displaying their banners I just thought "well why don't I go up on the stage also and bring the flag." I did not want to disturb the worshipfull atmosphere that was evident so as quietly as I could (without being a spectacle with my cane) I moved toward the stage and from the stairway at the right I went on the stage and held the Israeli flag in front of me (you could not see my face).I neared the back of the stage and because I was not well and could not stand for a long time I didn't expect to be there long.. In a few moments I felt a woman behind me who was joining me by praying over me and then the most Magic momeht of my life occurred –– -I felt my arms being raised the way the biblical Moses had his raised when it was evident that He was tiring from praying...
Two young men had come up on the stage to help me hold up the Israeli flag...that to me was a miracle...I don't know their names and I don't even know if they know each other.... What a blessing they were to me......and I am sure the Lord was thrilled that they obeyed his prompting to go and assist.. I have had those wonderfull moments in my memory as I entered in to a 6 month period of one ailment after another...the hardest thing being that I could not get back to Church for about 8 weeks.. those moments will as long as I live be a treasure. We don't have to do great exploits for God –– He honors little things ... Laureen Moe is a Christian Zionist and lives in Canada. Contact her at meadow-lark@telus.net and visit her website, http://www.laureenmoe.org |
|
PALESTINIAN ARABS DON'T WANT HOSPITALS OR SCHOOLS OR FACTORIES.
THEY WANT AN ARMY
Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), May 19, 2008. |
|
The corollary of the so-called "peace process" was to be a demilitarized palestinian state...or so at least those who were favourable to such a process asserted without any real element of support except their own delusions. NOW, THE CHICKEN ARE OFFICIALLY COMING HOME TO ROOST...if the experience of 15 years, with billions spent by the arabs in weapons and explosives rather than in social infrastructure, had not been enough. This was written by Roni Sofer and published today in Ynet
|
|
Optimistic developments touted after Olmert-Abbas meeting prove to hold little water as gaps between Israel, PA only seem to widen as negotiations go deeper. Behind closed doors, Israeli and Palestinian officials have confirmed to Ynet, PA negotiator Ahmed Qureia is demanding an army be built for future Palestinian nation Despite previous understandings that a future Palestinian state would be demilitarized, Ynet has learned that in talks held behind closed doors, the top negotiator for the Palestinian Authority, Ahmed Qureia, is demanding the establishment of a regular army. High-level Israeli and Palestinian officials confirmed the newly revealed developments on Monday night. According to the information obtained by Ynet, the new and surprising demand first emerged as the negotiations teams sat down in Jerusalem last Sunday to discuss security arrangements. Qureia told Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni that the Palestinian state would require a regular army to defend itself. Livni, though perplexed by the sudden demand, made clear that all previous accords specifically spoke of a demilitarized Palestinian state. A senior Israeli source said that Livni sought to clarify if perhaps Qureia had meant a Palestinian police force, but the latter was reiterated that it was a proper regular army the PA was after. The source added that the new Palestinian stipulation incensed Livni, who ardently rejects the idea of such an army.
A very senior Palestinian source close to Qureia confirmed the exchange. "At the meeting in question we raised the demand for a regular army, meant to defend the independent state," he told Ynet. "This isn't an army intended to launch an attack against Israel. We are not asking for F-16 jets but rather a force that would be able to defend the nation from threat and realize its basic right to exist in security." The source said the situation had changed greatly since the days of the Oslo Accords in 1993. "Oslo spoke of an intermediary entity. Now we are talking about a Palestinian state born out of a permanent agreement. There is no clause in any of the understandings that denies the Palestinian state an army to defend itself with, to defend its borders and citizens with," he said. 'What significant progress, exactly?" Following the most recent meeting between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, a senior State official declared that "significant progress" had been made in negotiations on the final borders and security arrangements. An Israeli official well-informed of the proceedings rejected that statement. "What significant progress are they talking about exactly?" he wondered. "It's very clear that there are complex disagreements on all the core issues. Up until now the points of contention have been the borders and the matter of the refugees. And that was before you even got to Jerusalem. But now the Palestinians want an army of their own, without regard to any of the previous accords. This isn't progress, it's backtracking. Reports of progress in the negotiations are misleading the public." But other officials connected to the talks taking place in backrooms think little of the Palestinians demand for a regular army. The Palestinians, they said, were well aware that in the event a Palestinian state will indeed be established, it will undoubtedly be demilitarized. Disagreements are an inherent part of negotiations, they said, but this does not mean the talks are stalled. In her speech at the president's conference last week, Livni determinedly broached the subject: "Yes, it is important to set recognized borders, but that is not enough. We must determine what will be on the other side of that border. "We are talking about a demilitarized state here (...) we will not
stand for a terror state or an extremist Islamist state. There are
conditions that will have to be met, before and after. I don't hold by
just tossing the keys over the border and hoping for the best. There
will be no agreement over the future territory if there won't be
satisfactory assurances regarding what its nature will be."
Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.
|
|
UK POISED TO BECOME FIRST WESTERN COUNTRY TO ISSUE ISLAMIC BONDS
Posted by Marc Samberg, May 19, 2008. |
|
This was published by David Oakley, Capital Markets
Correspondent and published today in The Financial Times |
|
Britain will announce today its determination to launch the first Islamic bonds by a western government, in the clearest sign yet that long-running doubts over costs and pricing have finally been put to rest. Kitty Ussher, the UK's economic secretary to the Treasury, will say there is a "powerful momentum" behind the plans, which will cement London's position as the leading western centre for Islamic finance. The government unveiled hopes to issue Sharia-compliant bond, or sukuk, to much fanfare in April 2007. Since then, the initiative has been hotly debated, with some civil servants raising concerns over the costs of issuing sukuk, which are far higher than for conventional bonds because of the complexity in the way they are structured to avoid paying interest in line with strict religious laws. The government is convinced the political and financial benefits far outweigh worries about cost. It also believes the bonds can be priced competitively to attract buyers, another concern of some civil servants. Ms Ussher spoke to the Financial Times ahead of a seminar on Islamic finance today, where she will outline the government's position. "This is an important market for Britain, which we are committed to growing," she said. "Although we don't see this as a competition between financial centres, London is now established as the most important western centre for Islamic finance. New York has missed the boat. "We are determined to issue Islamic bonds. It will bring money to London and send out a strong positive signal to the Muslim community." Bankers say a sovereign UK Islamic bond would be a milestone for the $80bn sukuk market, one of the fastest-growing in the world, as it would boost liquidity and encourage other western governments and institutions to follow suit. So far, the only western issuers of sukuk are a Texas-based oil group, a German state and the World Bank, collectively representing a tiny fraction of the market. The bulk of issues have come from the Middle East and Malaysia, making up about 90 per cent of the market. Bankers predict the bond will be launched next year and be of benchmark size, which means about £500m. A bond of this size would help Islamic banks by giving them the ability to buy safe triple A rated paper, which will improve their balance sheets and provide them with collateral for other lending operations. Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
WHEN 'CRAVEN' BECOMES 'BOLD'
Posted by Martin Sherman, May 19, 2008. |
|
This appeared in Ynet
|
|
There seems no limit to the perils to which the lunatic Left is prepared to expose Israel and its citizens –– or impose on them –– in pursuit of its delusional and dangerous designs. This was vividly highlighted recently by Emmanuel Rosen's outrageous article "The power of weakness" in which he urges Ehud Olmert to exploit the fact that he has totally lost public confidence and trust in order to concoct a hurried accord with Assad over the evacuation of the Golan. According to Rosen's torturous logic, the fact that Olmert is beset by a maelstrom of grave suspicions of public deceit and private graft is somehow ... a political advantage? Because allegedly now he has nothing to lose! The article is especially troubling since it is penned by such high-profile media personality as Rosen –– and reflects a disturbing and unflattering picture of the mindset of many Israeli opinion makers –– in terms of both their perception of morality and their grasp of reality. Rosen totally misrepresents past events, stating that "prime ministers gained political calm when they did nothing (Shamir) but were ousted (Barak) or killed (Rabin) when they gambled on doing something." Is Rosen seriously suggesting that the crescendo of suicide bombings that characterized the Rabin era, or the Palestinian violence that erupted during Barak's term should serve as model to be emulated by Olmert? But aside from the distasteful deception that Rosen urges in his blatantly undemocratic recommendation that Olmert use (or rather abuse) his lack of public endorsement to undertake a measure that too has no public endorsement, his proposal is dangerously detached from reality –– particularly after the recent exposure of the Syrian regime's nuclear aspirations. Indeed rather than "bold" and "courageous" as Rosen would have us believe, the notion of relinquishing the Golan could be more aptly described as "rash", "irresponsible" and "shortsighted". After all, the severe hazards to Israel's vital security interests implicit in Rosen's suggestion are –– or at least should be –– starkly obvious to any one with even minimal regard for the nation's well being. Even if Assad was totally sincere in his recent proclamations, who can be sure how long his minority-led regime of tyranny will endure? Indeed, the very agreement with the "Zionist entity" may hasten his overthrow by more radical opponents. How would Israel react if an extremist successor regime were to abrogate the agreement –– especially those clauses which relate to demilitarization of border areas? What if Assad himself did not honor the terms of the agreement; did not dissociate himself from Iran or did not terminate his support for the Hizbullah? Strategic Sanity Rosen implies that "most members of the defense establishment" back the idea of handing over the Golan to Assad." This is a claim that is totally bewildering if it is true –– and totally scandalous if it is not. One hardly requires the military acumen of Clausewitz to appreciate the huge military value of the Golan that gives Israel command over the approaches to Damascus and precludes Syrian command over the entire northern portion of Israel. This provides Israel with unequivocal deterrence, which has ensured that the Syrian frontier has been the most peaceful for over third of century –– without Israel yielding a centimeter of territory. Only the moronic or the malicious could suggest that Israel would be better off militarily without the Golan. If widespread support for withdrawal does indeed prevail among Israel's generals, then it is based on a political assessment of the potential benefits should the Syrians honor their commitments and not a military appraisal of consequences that would surely arise should they not. And when it comes to the appraisal of political risk (as to whether Arab commitments will be honored or not), the military has no special professional proficiency or inherent advantage over any other informed citizen –– whose evaluations are not clouded by career considerations that dictate deference to political masters. Apart from the clear operational advantage that the Golan's topography provides the IDF, the intelligence gathering value of the area –– particularly the ridge of hills on its eastern fringes and from atop Mt. Hermon (aptly dubbed "the eyes of the country") is indispensable. There is wide agreement among experts that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to find adequate substitute to compensate for the loss of the intelligence installations stationed there. Economic Expenditure Moreover, the estimated direct cost of evacuation of the Golan runs in to the tens of billion of dollars with some estimates exceeding one hundred billion. It is unlikely that a US administration –– manifestly unenthusiastic about any dealings with the regime in Damascus –– will contribute generously to defray these expenditures. Moreover, Israel will have to undertake huge investments in security and dramatically increase the defense budget to compensate for the relinquishing of the strategic advantages its presence in Golan provided. One wonders where Rosen would suggest Israel find the resources to cover these gargantuan costs and what sacrifices he proposed should be made for them. Also, the Golan constitutes a vital portion of the drainage basin for the Sea of Galilee (Kinneret), and crucially affects both the quantity and the quality of its waters. Experts have warned consistently of the catastrophic consequences for the national water supply if the Syrians prevent the waters of the Golan from reaching the Kinneret, or if they pollute them before they do. Finally, the detrimental social effects of the prospect of a withdrawal from the Golan would manifest themselves in three distinctly separate groups: The evacuation of the Golan –– a region far more part of the national consensus than Gaza –– would be far more divisive than the Disengagement. It would cause exacerbated polarization, deepening despair and disillusionment in significant segments of the Jewish population and growing sense of alienation and disillusionment with the Israeli state and its leadership. The inevitable result of this would be an accelerated unraveling of the social fabric and disintegration of social cohesiveness, gravely undermining the country's ability to contend with the daunting challenges it would still have to face after such a withdrawal... or because of such a withdrawal. Meanwhile, the looming prospect of the return of Syrian rule will be a powerful inducement for the local Druze population to show their loyalty and allegiance to their new masters, and to endeavor to dispel any hint of suspicion of collaboration with the Zionist foe. It needs little imagination to realize that such a desire is easily likely to translate in acts of hostility against Israel and Israelis in order to prove their bona fide to their future rulers. The withdrawal of the IDF from the Golan will compel it to redeploy in northern Israel, and particularly in the Galilee. Clearly this will require the expropriation of large tracts of land to accommodate new bases, installations and training areas. Inevitably much of this land will be in rural areas populated by the large Arab community. One hardly needs great powers of prediction to foresee the consequences of seizure by the IDF of land which the Arabs see as their own and which they depend on for their livelihood. The foregoing list of the crucial advantages the Golan provides Israel, and the perilous dangers that relinquishing it would expose it to, is in no way exhaustive, nor adequately detailed. It should however suffice to demonstrate decisively that any initiative to withdraw from it would not be "bold" but "barmy", not "courageous statesmanship" but "craven capitulation." Dr. Martin Sherman is in the Department of Political Science at Tel Aviv University. He has written extensively on water, including "The Politics of Water in the Middle East," London: Macmillan, 1999. He was a senior research fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya, and served for seven years in Israel's defense establishment. He is Academic Director of the Jerusalem Summit. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: A GLIMMER OF HOPE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 19, 2008. |
|
Let me begin with a link to my latest report on Fatah as moderate. No, this is not the glimmer of hope, although you can perhaps help expand that glimmer by sharing this information with those who still need to "get it":
~~~~~~~~~~ As to the glimmer: As more people are seeing the government as just too shaky and vulnerable to function properly, there is increased talk of the possibility of elections –– with the move to go to elections happening either during the summer Knesset session (which is just starting) or the winter session. Likud faction chairman Gideon Sa'ar expressed hope that "for the good of the state, it will be in this session, because it is impossible to maintain a stable government under the current conditions. "If we can actually push the government to elections, that will be enough of an achievement for us during this session. We plan to act to widen the cracks within the coalition, and will work to shorten the term of this government and to get elections before the end of 2008." While MK Zevulun Orlev (NU-NRP) observed that "I really hope that there are coalition parties like Labor that will demonstrate that they are more concerned about Israeli democracy and the public's faith in the government than about furthering their own political careers. "...the topic of elections and instability will lie just under the surface during every hearing about every subject. It simply cannot be that this kind of government can be responsible for life-and-death decisions." ~~~~~~~~~~ As for the major coalition faction, Labor, there is movement in the same direction, although perhaps a bit more slowly. MK Danny Yatom is reported to have held a Labor gathering at his home, at which Barak, party chair, said that elections would likely be held at the end of this year or the beginning of 2009. He said they had to keep their cool and that there was no reason to rush, but that people were beginning to take it all seriously and it was becoming obvious that early elections would be held. Yatom observed, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, that "With all the suspicions against [Olmert] the public's trust in him has been completely shattered. Since the public cannot be replaced, the prime minister must be replaced." ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert, of course, is telling members of his Kadima party that they must all stay unified. He shouldn't count on it. As the mood shifts, there are likely to be defections. Even now, several party members held a meeting that they termed a "conceptual forum" –– in order to decide where they were going. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, you may be wondering if this talk of elections coming perhaps at the end of the year means that Olmert will not be indicted before then (assuming that he will be indicted). It's an important question. The investigation is forging ahead. Olmert's lawyers are fighting for all they're worth to prevent Talansky from testifying before an indictment –– claiming that it would infringe on Olmert's basis rights. The State prosecutor, Moshe Lador, is insistent that Talansky must testify –– that this is not an unusual procedure and that it can be done in a manner that is appropriate within the law. Meanwhile, Olmert is demonstrating a distinct reluctance to answer more questions. So matters are plugging along. What had at first promised to be a speedy event is now slowing down to a process of some many weeks or even months. We are reminded that it remains in Attorney General Mazuz's hands to decide exactly when to indict (even if it is decided that indictment is the way to go). ~~~~~~~~~~ Just a brief note here regarding some political matters. Once Avigdor Lieberman pulled his party out of the coalition some months ago, the majority Olmert was working with was reduced. What has now threatened to reduce it even further, down to 64 seats (with 61 required) is a potential split within the Pensioners party. The smaller the majority the easier to find sufficient number of defectors to bring it all down. But the Pensioners split, which was thought to be a done deal, is now in question with regard to its legality, as those splitting were going to join with millionaire Arkady Gaydemak, who had pledged money to get them going because he wanted a party base. ~~~~~~~~~~ A barrage of Kassams was launched at Ashkelon to day and one narrowly missed what is being called "a strategic site." (Better if those doing the launching are not helped by news reports that tell precisely what they almost succeeded in doing.) ~~~~~~~~~~ And still there are the mixed messages regarding what is happening with Hamas: According to Haaretz, Barak, who is headed to Egypt, is prepared to tell Mubarak that we'll accept an unofficial ceasefire that comes about slowly, with a cessation of Israeli military operations if the rocket launchings cease, with the blockade of Gaza then lifted if progress is made on Shalit. According to this version of the situation, Israel has softened just a bit on the matter of what terrorists to release in a Shalit deal, with a readiness to release some with blood on their hands, while Hamas is still demanding terrorists who were involved in "mass casualty" terror attacks. What is extremely troublesome here is that there is no clear stipulation about the cessation of weapons smuggling being a necessary component of our readiness stop operations: "Israel will also try to get Egypt to step up efforts to stop weapons from being smuggled into Gaza" just isn't good enough! What is more, this is a backtracking from what had been said previously. ~~~~~~~~~~ What Haaretz is reporting is this: "Government officials are slowly coming to realize that a large-scale military operation in Gaza does not serve Israeli interests right now. "It appears from talks which Olmert and senior cabinet ministers held recently with representatives of the Bush administration and key European Union states that Israel will not have international support if it organizes an assault on Gaza now. However, Israeli sources said they think if it turns out, in a few weeks or months, that the cease-fire has failed because of Hamas, the U.S. and some European states might be more understanding about an attack." This is how the government operates? Making decisions on whether to protect Israeli citizens dependant upon whether the international community will understand? ~~~~~~~~~~ With all of this, it is being said that Barak, Olmert and Livni are all skeptical about the chances for a long term quiet with Hamas. "The Israel Defense Forces will receive an order to begin an operation only if the Egyptian proposal fails, and Kassam fire from Gaza intensifies to the point of incurring serious losses in the western and northern Negev. As the politicians talk about a cease-fire, the IDF is preparing for the chance that the security situation in the South will worsen." Intensifies to the point of incurring serious losses? How many lives have to be lost before it's serious? As Aaron Lerner, director of IMRA, wrote, on this issue: "The Arabs can murder Israelis, but shouldn't overdo it." ~~~~~~~~~~ The communities situated near Gaza are working on a PR effort that will push the government to take action against rocket attacks. Every community will donate a portion of its budget to hiring of professional PR persons who will publicize what is taking place in these communities. More power to them! ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Al Quds Al Arabi in London, Abbas is prepared to declare the peace talks a failure. This is because of reports that Olmert has promised Shas that he will permit thousands of apartments to be built in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria. And because Abbas was informed by Europeans that the US does not intend to pressure Israel. This declaration is supposed to be made in a speech Abbas will give in Ramallah. We shouldn't hold our collective breath. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, according to YNet, PA negotiator Ahmed Qurei is demanding that the Palestinian state, rather than being demilitarized, have a full regular army (as compared to police). Livni was said to be incensed. Said an Israeli official: This isn't progress, it's backtracking. Reports of progress in the negotiations are misleading the public." For some of us, this, too represents a glimmer of hope. ~~~~~~~~~~ For those who might like to see a video of Bush's amazing talk in the Knesset:
|
|
CORRUPTION AND THE PEACE PROCESS
Posted by Devin Sper, May 19, 2008. |
|
Israeli police recently began yet another investigation into the latest accusations of corruption against Israeli Prime Minister Olmert. In response, Olmert rushed to offer new unilateral concessions to Syrian Dictator (and ally of Iranian President Ahmedinijad) Assad and PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas. In so doing, Olmert follows a long established pattern going back to the very origins of the peace process. Since the first Olso Accords of 1993, whenever a new corruption scandal threatens an Israeli leader, he diverts public attention by offering dramatic concessions to Israel's enemies. Israelis elected Benjamin Netanyahu Prime Minister primarily on the strength of public sentiment rejecting the Oslo accords, copies of which Netanyahu famously tore up during campaign rallies. For seven months Netanyahu stood firm on the principles for which he was elected, winning him increasing support in Israel and a standing ovation in the U.S. congress. In January 1997, Netanyahu suddenly and inexplicably reversed course and signed the protocol giving away Israel's claim to Judaism's second holy city: Hebron –– a concession even his labor predecessors had refrained from making. Just as suddenly, three months later, Israel's attorney general announced that Prime Minister Netanyahu, his aide Avidgdor Lieberman and Justice Minister Tzachi Hanegbi (all previously staunch opponents of Oslo) would not be charged in the influence peddling scandal involving former interior Minister Aryeh Deri. In January 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak's One Israel Party was fined 14 million shekels ($3.2 million) and placed under criminal investigation for campaign finance illegalities during their election the previous year. Six months later, Prime Minister Barak offered Yasser Arafat unprecedented concessions including virtually all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, including East Jerusalem and the Temple mount. All charges against Barak were subsequently dropped. Most dramatic of all was the reversal of Ariel Sharon's lifelong support for the Jewish settlement movement, whose followers considered him its founder. When Sharon first proposed dismantling the Jewish towns of Gaza and expelling their inhabitants at the Herzlia conference in December of 2003, neither his supporters, nor his detractors, could understand the motives behind his radical reversal. What they may not have known is that only a few weeks earlier the Israel police had questioned Sharon (for seven hours) in connection with two investigations into possible cases of political corruption involving Mr. Sharon and his two sons. In June of 2004, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz dropped all charges, including illegal campaign financing and bribe taking, against Prime Minister Sharon. The list of Israeli leaders who have continued to tout a failed peace process to divert attention from their own corruption continues through the current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who has so far weathered 11 separate investigations for corruption, with no charges having been filed. None of this is to suggest that corruption was always the sole motivation behind the peace process. In its inception there were many naïve, albeit well meaning, Israelis who actually believed that Arafat was their partner in peace and that giving away land was the road to Israel's salvation. Even the most starry eyed among them however, became increasingly disillusioned following the second intifada, the election of Hamas and its continued rocketing of Israeli cities from Gaza and the unprovoked attack on Israel by Hezbollah across the internationally recognized Lebanese border. If the majority of Israeli peaceniks now recognize the failure of land-for-peace, hard-nosed politicians like Peres, Netanyahu and Sharon must surely be aware of it. Corruption, caustic in any polity, will be fatal to a country in as precarious a position as Israel. Recent statements by Assad and Abbas demonstrate that Israel's enemies recognize and exploit the connection between the corruption of Israeli politicians and their weakened bargaining position. Assad added the amazing (and probably true) detail that only President Bush's concern for Israel's long-term vital interests prevents Omert's surrender of the strategic Golan Heights. Unfortunately the Israeli elite led by the judiciary and the media continue, for reasons known only to themselves, to advocate more of the same failed policy of land-for-peace. They are willing to overlook corruption in politicians who continue to promote land-for-peace and vilify the brave few who point out its failure to bring peace, after three decades. It is striking the way in which the peace process has failed to bring peace, and equally striking in how it enables each of the scandal ridden Israeli governments to remain in power. And therein lays the secret to the longevity of so obviously failed a policy. During the decline of Rome corrupt emperors would draw attention from their negligent administration by distracting the people with free bread and grand spectacles in the coliseum. Bread and circuses however, did nothing to save Rome from her Barbarian enemies, nor will more land-for-peace save Israel from hers. Devin Sper is a senior fellow at the Center for Advanced Middle East Studies and author of "The Future of Israel, winner" of a 2005 GLYPH award. He lives in Scottsdale, AZ. Contact him by email at devinsper@yahoo.com and visit his website: www.devinsper.com |
|
U.S. AMBASSADOR TO YEMEN IN 2000 HINDERED FBI INVESTIGATION INTO USS COLE BOMBING
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 19, 2008. |
|
This comes from
|
|
Former FBI supervisory agent: U.S. ambassador to Yemen in 2000 hindered FBI investigation into USS Cole bombing A naive and muddleheaded multiculturalist ambassador impedes anti-terror efforts. "Coddling Terrorists In Yemen," by Ali H. Soufan, an FBI supervisory special agent from 1997 to May 2005, in the Washington Post: Seven years after al-Qaeda terrorists Jamal al-Badawi and Fahd al-Quso confessed to me their crucial involvement in the bombing of the USS Cole, and three years after they were convicted in a Yemeni court –– where a judge imposed a death sentence on Badawi –– they, along with many other al-Qaeda terrorists, are free. On Oct. 12, 2000, when I flew to Yemen to lead the FBI's Cole investigation, I had no idea how uncooperative the Yemeni government would initially be. Nor could I have imagined how disconnected from reality the U.S. ambassador to Yemen then, Barbara K. Bodine, would prove. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
BUSH: DEMOCRACY IS NOT HOSTILE TO ISLAM BUT
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 19, 2008. |
|
Bush claimed that democracy wasn't hostile to islam. Robert Spencer noted: One important weakness of his argument here, however, is that it is one-sided. Democracy may not be incompatible with Islam, but is Islam incompatible with democracy? Does Islam contain within it a supremacist imperative that would destroy democracy once it attains sufficient power to do so? If Sharia is the law of the supreme deity, and Islam teaches Muslims that they have a responsibility to work to impose it, might there be some believers in Islam who are working in the West to destroy democracy?Other comments on the http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021068.php Does Bush know what dhimmi, takiyya, jahiliya and kaffir mean? Hugh Fitzgerald's comment is below. |
|
Another part of Bush's speech dealt with the supposed spread of "democracy" in the Muslim world: "He [Bush] also offered plenty of praise for democratic advances, naming countries like Turkey, Afghanistan, Iraq, Morocco and Jordan. 'The light of liberty is beginning to shine,'he said." Is he crazy? In Turkey, the so-called "light of liberty" is undoing Kemalism, putting the securalists in the universities, the judiciary, and the army, under great pressure, and bringing Islam back, step by grim step, as Erdogan and now Gul, cleverly backed by all kinds of people, including the shadowy millionaire Fethullah Gulen, probe and prod at every possible weak point in the Kemalist system. Is this "liberty"? Is this the goddam "light of liberty"? In Afghanistan, after all the vast American and NATO effort, the Taliban are back, and even without the Taliban, the democratically-elected members of the Afghani Parliament have shown, very step of the way, that they are mostly moved by the ideals of the Sharii'a, and are happy to punsih "blasphemes" with death, are happy to deny women equal rights, are happy to undo every bit of the reforms that Westerners initially managed to accomplish, in the legal rights of women and non-Muslims. The notion that "liberty" has come to Afghanistan is false. Indeed, had the Soviets won their war, and installed a puppet Communist regime, and had that regime acted with the kind of ruthlessness that the Soviet authorities did toward Islam during the 1920s and 1930s, that might have done more in the vein of Ataturk to eventually make Afghanistan a plausible candidate for democracy. Iraq? Does anyone think Iraq is a place where "liberty" has arrived? It's a place whee, at the moment, no one sect can arrogate complete power over the country to itself, but it is also a place where a Sunni despotism has been replaced by a Shi'a despotism, and the Shi'a, whatever their party, have no intention of sharing power in any signficant way (a cosmetic compromise may be possible, in order to extract more weapons and money, over the next few years, from the Americans, but that's it) with the Sunni Arabs, or indeed to allow the Kurds to continue to dream of independence. Morocco? If anything, the current king is worse, when it comes to pan-Arab hostility to the West, either than his father or than Mohammed V. The ballyhooed "reforms" are nothing at all. He still retains his position because, as a Sherifian, he possesses the prestige to withstand an outright assault by the most militant Muslims. But try to find that "light of liberty" Bush prates about, in Rabat, or Sale, or anywhere else in dismal Morocco, from which, every day, hundreds or thousands set out, determined to make it to Spain or to Italy, and from there, once they are safely in the E.U., to its farthest reaches. The same is true with Jordan, the last country on Bush's list of places where, he claims, the "light of liberty" is spreading. Jordan remains a police-state, and thank god for that, because bad as it is, what might follow the overthrow of thick-necked Abdullah and his photogenic bride would be far worse. But there have been no reforms, so spirit or light of liberty. Bush is a hallucinator. He talks, he likes the sound his words make, he thinks they must conform to some higher reality, and he has convinced himself they must be true. He's messianic, and also a marxist, because he believes that economic well-being, or lack of it, explains the behavior of people, and that by improving the lot of Muslims, or "ordinary moms and dads" in the Middle East, we will do away with the "root causes" of all the distempers, and all the craziness, and all the hatred directed at Infidels. He's still unclear about Islam, about the simplest things about Islam. He asked the Arab students whom he saw in Israel if they attended dances with Jews. The American ambassador, Jones (himself someone with deplorable views on Israel, and also exhibiting a failure to grasp the Islamic roots of the war against Israel because if he grasped those roots, he could not possibly be such a promoter of further surrenders of territory or territorial control, by Israel), explained to Bush that such mixed dances were not exactly possible, and indeed, the very idea of such dances, among Arab boys and girls, also impossible. That Bush did not know this, that he has no real idea of what Islamic societies are like, shines from his every innocent word. We don't want innocents running us. We want people who may not be nice, many not have such touching faith in "democracy" or any other ideal, for that matter, except the ideal of keeping us, the Infidels, from succumbing to the many-pronged assault of Islam. We can't afford the naive and sentimental lovers of something they thing is swell, something they call –– a bit too enthusiastically and too unthinkingly and too inaccurately –– call "democracy." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
PERES ADMISTS LACK OF FORESIGHT; WHAT POLLARD COULD KNOW VS DID KNOW; PESSIMISM & RACISM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 19, 2008. |
|
HAMAS CREATES SHORTAGES Hamas attacks entry points for humanitarian supplies into Gaza, steals most of what gets through, and complains that Israel causes shortages. The EU condemned Hamas over it (IMRA, 5/8). Most of the world condemns Israel, which is partly why Hamas does this. PERES ADMITS LACK OF FORESIGHT He said, "I believed the separation between the W. Bank and Gaza would make things easier, not harder. I did not imagine that we would leave Gaza and they would fire Qassams from there; I did not imagine that Hamas would show so strongly in the elections (one of my usual sources). He doesn't understand the fanatical drive of Israel's enemies. He's been too busy weakening the patriotic element in Israel, in favor of a utopian impression of Israel's neighbors, such that boundaries would not matter. They matter. Israel could have some secure borders, if Israel retained the Territories. POOR NEWS ANALYSIS A "News Analysis" by Ethan Bronner of the NY Times discusses first that Israelis are losing patience over PM Olmert's continual investigations for corruption, second that Foreign Min. Livni may replace him as prime minister, and third that Israelis are concerned that not only did Olmert allow Hamas to build up a terrorist army in Gaza, but he let Hizbullah build up another, pro-Iranian army and state in Lebanon. There was some speculation that out of desperation to gain more time in office and to unify the country around him, he might launch the long-awaited offensive into Gaza. On the other hand, his position is too dubious for him to be a unifying leader that others would have confidence following into war (5/10, A7). Like most Times "news analyses" about Israel, puts events out of sequence and omits more significant considerations, especially ones requiring analysis. These pieces seem to me biased, to distract from the failure of appeasement of Arabs. The electorate lost confidence in Olmert before the latest corruption scandal and some of the others. His policy to evacuate from Gaza dismayed many Israelis and then proved to be a blunder. He and Livni touted the war in Lebanon as a success, but so mismanaged it that Hizbullah revived and expanded. The people consider him a fool. The news analysis should have speculated on why the country would accept Livni, when she has the same foolish policies. It should have asked whether the leftist Attorney-General's failure to indict corrupt leaders confirms suspicion it is to keep them subservient to his appeasement policy. WHAT POLLARD COULD KNOW VS. DID KNOW The US still accuses but doesn't prosecute Pollard for crimes they know he did not commit. It claimed he gave the USSR a list of all the US spies there. That list is in a safe that requires a higher clearance than Pollard had. Governmental insiders continued to accuse him of that crime even after both arrested double agents confessed. They continue with other baseless accusations. Why? Because they want him never to get out, because he knows of their blunders. Israel won't assist him, because some of its officials betrayed him to prosecutors by giving them documents with Pollard's fingerprints on them. They don't want their role exposed. They include Peres, Barak, and Min. Rafi Eitan. Pollard knows that certain US officials arranged to finance al-Qaeda against the USSR in Afghanistan, and that S. Arabia continued afterwards to support al-Qaeda, which then destroyed our World Trade Center. Pollard warned against al-Qaeda, but the US officials ignored him. They are afraid he will expose them. Pollard also new that the USSR had shipped weapons to almost all Mideastern terrorist organizations. The US President had signed an order to the US intelligence agencies to inform Israel of it. They didn't. They would be embarrassed at being identified as violating orders so as to favor terrorists over Israel. Pollard also knew that arms were being shipped to the PLO from Greece. Pollard warned Israel, which tipped off Greece. Greece confiscated a shipload. The arms were paid for by the US Vice-President, as ransom for American hostages in Lebanon. This was the precursor to the Iran-Contra deal, whereby the US sent arms to Iran and the PLO. The Sec. of State was sentenced to 24 years in prison, but received clemency. Our officials do not want Pollard proving this to the public. Although the US declaimed against Iraq's development of chemical weapons, the US secretly assisted Iraq. Pollard warned Israel [saving countless Israeli lives]. The US supplier was owned by the Vice-President and the Sec. of State! (John Loftus in IMRA, 5/6). Note that titles are used but not names of people. BAD DECISION CITED AS PRECEDENT The family of the slain murderer of the yeshiva students complained that the government of Jordan banned their public mourning, although Israel permitted it (IMRA, 5/9). Arab mourners predictably become mobs. Jordan doesn't want riots. Israel is meek and doesn't stand up for itself. Its letting the mourners celebrate the murder of Israelis makes a poor precedent. VACATIONED IN ISRAEL, YET? In the past 37 years, I have visited Israel eight times. I enjoyed each visit. I have had a couple of dozen wonderful vacations touring various parts of the US. Many of my Jewish friends and relatives toured many countries, but never Israel and seldom in the US. One man explained that Israel was too far for him. He visited China, which is further. I don't understand the reluctance to vacation in Israel and within the US. Both countries with great variety and the source of our history. The US spans a continent and poses no language, custom, or currency difficulties for us. What do you think accounts for the reluctance? Perhaps people don't realize America's diversity and don't know how to compose a tour from travel guides mentioning other than national sites. They may think it sounds more impressive to name their vacation spot as some exotic country. They are not above spending their money in a dictatorship that engages in the kind of mass-murder that they condemn our governments for condoning. I suspect that many Jews have neuroses about visiting Israel, the same as the formerly Jewish publishers of the NY Times were anti-Zionist out of fear of being identified as Jews. It doesn't help the Israeli tourist business that the Times continually though falsely depicts Israel as an oppressive country and has puff pieces encouraging tourism of Arab countries, which actually are oppressive. PESSIMISM & RACISM Which is it better to be about politics, optimistic or pessimistic? I think that judgment about political issues should be objective, not swayed by emotional tendencies. PM Olmert's optimism oils his movement to appeasement and covers it up. Pessimists fail to see turning points, such as our winning in Iraq. They assume that Israel must depend on the US, which is not dependable. Having a Republican as President, the Left makes propaganda by painting things worse than they are. When our economy had low inflation and unemployment, liberals complained unreasonably that inequality of income was a national problem. They should have celebrated the economy's performance and thanked Pres. Bush's for his tax cuts. The Right refuses to admit to certain problems. Racism has died down more than complaints about it. A 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 |
|
IN MEMORY OF TALI HATUEL AND HER 4 GIRLS
Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, May 18, 2008. |
|
The Gush Katif refugees are still in temporary dismal quarters, jobless and hopeless. The Government is doing very little. To help them, please donate to In Israel: The Gush Katif Committee
This was sent to me by Dror Venunu of the Gush Katif Committee: |
|
4 years ago Tali Hatuel and her And her daughters –– Hila, Hadar, Roni, and Merav –– were massacred And her daughters Hila, Hadar, Roni, and Merav
May 2, 2004 –– Tali Hatuel, 34, and her daughters –– Hila, 11, Hadar, 9, Roni, 7, and Merav, 2 –– from Moshav Katif in Gush Katif were brutally assassinated when two Palestinian terrorists shot on an Israeli car at the entrance to the Gaza Strip settlement bloc of Gush Katif.
They were on their way to campaign against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan. Their white Citroen station wagon spun off the road after the initial shooting, and then the attackers approached the vehicle and shot the occupants dead at close range. The Hatuels' car was riddled with bullets, and the carpet inside was stained with blood. The girls were killed hugging one another. On the car was a bumper sticker saying, "Uprooting the settlements, victory for terror." In spite of the terrible tragedy, David Hatuel has decided to overcome the trauma and dedicate himself to education in Israel and build again a new family. Recently David got married and had a baby girl. See these on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPnyGCoeIXc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhQ_JTDbgls
Contact Eugene Narrett at culturtalk@aol.com
|
|
THE OTHER BURNING BUSH
Posted by Yaaqov Ben Yehudah, May 18, 2008. |
|
The essay below is from the Esseragaroth website
http://esseragaroth.blogspot.com/2008/05/other-burning-bush.html |
|
Who remembers the scene in "The Fiddler on the Roof" when the rabbi was asked, "Rabbi, is there a blessing for the Tsar?" And the rabbi responded... "Yes. May the Almighty bless and keep the Tsar,...far away from us." Well, this is the perfect model for what I believe to be the most appropriate blessing for U. S. President Bush. Unlike the Divine words Moshe Rabbenu heard emanating from a burning bush, not consumed, President Bush is burning (click here for photo) because his pants are on fire,...as in "Liar, Liar." President Bush received praise from "right-wing" Members of the Kenesseth [MK] for his address to that body on Thursday. Meanwhile, Rabbi MK Me'ir Porush (UTJ/Agudas Yisroel) is engaging in settlement activity,...sort of.... Huh? But, I digress.... The President's words which caught my attention in particular were these: "...Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. ...We have an obligation to call this what it is –– the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WORDS, WORDS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 18, 2008. |
|
For about the 100th time, Mahmoud Abbas has threatened to resign his position as PA president. This time –– at the World Economic Forum at Sharm el-Sheikh –– it's if there's no peace agreement with Israel this year. "Israel will not have a better partner than the group leading the PLO today, which believes the Palestinian interest is a historic reconciliation with Israel and a Palestinian state alongside it," he said, warning that if there is no agreement, "Israel will find itself with no partner at all." Actually, that's pretty much where we are now –– with no partner at all. In spite of his attempt to intimidate us –– he says failure of negotiations will return us to "the tragedy of 2000 which followed the failure at Camp David" –– it he who has the most to lose. We won't return to the terrorist horrors of 2000, because –– unless the government agrees to something totally idiotic regarding a ceasefire in Judea and Samaria –– we are in a far better position with regard to our intelligence and our actions against terrorists than we were eight years ago. ~~~~~~~~~~ For a clear vision of just how much of a non-partner Abbas is, you might like to see my latest piece, which discusses his unswerving commitment to "right of return":
~~~~~~~~~~ This has been reinforced by yesterday's statement by Abbas's spokesperson, Nabil Abu Rdeina, that Israel's request that the "right of return" be abandoned serves as an obstacle to negotiations. ~~~~~~~~~~ Of course Olmert, who is a master at it, is continuing to offer his own words, words. This time on Gaza Today he told the Cabinet: "We are very close to a decision point regarding every issue in Gaza. The present situation cannot continue. "Our hope is that one day the residents of the South will be able to live a tranquil life." Which day would that be? ~~~~~~~~~~ There were members of the Cabinet who were not satisfied with those words, and expressed anger that until now the Security Cabinet has not even been convened to discuss the way to deal with the situation. In addition, mayors of communities near Gaza met today and are demanding a meeting with Olmert and with the chair of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. A great many people have simply had it with the delays. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee was also in the news today in a different context, as 15 members of the committee are demanding that it be convened in special session and that Olmert and Livni report on what is going on with core negotiations with the PA. In a letter written to Committee Chair, Tzachi Hanegbi, they said they were speaking out because "of concern for the Knesset's position as supervisor of all government activities and out of a sense that the prime minister, unlike his predecessor, is dictating an approach that ignores the committee in everything related to foreign affairs. "For months, negotiations have been conducted with the Palestinians over issues affecting Israel's existence and future, with no parliamentary oversight. In addition, a negotiations department has been created with dozens of employees. It too does not report to the Knesset and has no parliamentary supervision of its composition, budget and methods of operation." What can legally be achieved is perhaps questionable as the prime minister has considerable –– many say too much –– latitude. But this certainly is an issue that cries out for public attention, and it does put pressure on Olmert. Hanegbi, in a radio interview today, said he thought a possible alternative was having the details of negotiations shared only with the secret service subcommittee, as it has a leak-proof record. MK Yuval Steinitz, Hanegbi's predecessor, pushed instead for an overview to be provided to the whole committee, with some details, and only sensitive material to go exclusively to the subcommittee. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are conflicting reports coming from various sources regarding the status of ceasefire negotiations in Gaza, mediated by Egypt. To the best of my understanding, the scenario goes something like this: Egypt's Suleiman, returning from Israel, read the riot act to Hamas and told them that if they didn't include release of Shalit in their terms for the ceasefire, Israel would hit them hard with a major ground action. And so Hamas appeared to soften, saying they were now considering including Shalit in the deal. However, it's clear when that statement is studied carefully that what is being said is that they'll include him, but they have not softened their demand for close to 300 prisoners to be released by Israel, including some who were directly involved in terrorist acts. Israel, Hamas say, has agreed to the release of only 71. ~~~~~~~~~~ Leaks and small bits of information regarding the Olmert investigation are likewise hard to pin down in all specifics. Before Talansky is called to testify in court in a week, Olmert's lawyers are to be given information on what they have regarding the case, so that they can cross-examine Talansky. The police, however, are eager to question Olmert again before turning information over to his lawyers. That's the only way to insure that Olmert's answers, when questioned, will be spontaneous and not planned out according to what it is suspected the police are seeking. There has been no response from Olmert, however, on where or when he would be available for such questioning. Needless to say, he is less than eager to participate. Talansky's lawyer is saying that his bond to Israel is such that there should be no question about his returning to testify, if needed, after he goes back to the US. The police, however, are not relying on any such assurances, especially as he is suspected of participating in illegal actions. Right now Talansky is being kept in the country, but by the end of the month his lawyers will be petitioning the court to allow him to go. Thus, time is of the essence here. There is also talk about evidence of yet another charge of bribery against Olmert, this one having nothing to do with Talansky. ~~~~~~~~~~ The threat of civil war, which seemed so imminent, cooled down in Lebanon last week, as the Lebanese government rescinded anti-Hezbollah measures that had triggered the violence and Hezbollah pulled out of Beirut. The Arab League then stepped in to do negotiations. But those negotiations are stopped dead in Qatar now, as Hezbollah refuses to surrender weapons. Make no mistake about it: Hezbollah was the big winner here, and I offer Caroline Glick's assessment of how this is so, and why Hezbollah didn't simply overthrow the government when it was in control in Beirut: "...one of the main advantages that insurgents have over the governments they seek to overthrow is their lack of responsibility for governance. Far from seeking to govern the local population, the goal of insurgents is simply to demonstrate through sabotage, terror and guerrilla operations that the government is incapable of keeping order. "...Nasrallah and his Iranian bosses have no interest in taking on responsibility for Lebanon. They don't want to collect taxes. They don't want to pick up the garbage or build schools and universities. "Hezbollah and its Iranian overlords wish to have full use of Lebanon as a staging area for attacks against Israel and the US. They wish to maintain and expand Hezbollah's arsenals. For this they need unfettered access, and if necessary, control over Lebanon's borders, its seaports and airport. "They need to raise and train Hezbollah's army and cultivate Hezbollah's loyal cadres among Lebanon's Shi'ites to fight Israel... "Over the past week, Hezbollah secured this freedom through its successful attack on the Saniora government. Today no one will utter a peep of complaint as Hezbollah imports ever more sophisticated weapons systems from Syria and Iran. No one will say a word when Hezbollah openly asserts control over the border with Israel, or places its commanders in charge of Lebanese army units along the border."
~~~~~~~~~~ A poll just carried out by the Maagar Mohot Survey Institute indicates that 56% of Israelis would prefer that the government continue war against Hamas and 33% that a deal be reached. 51% think a large scale ground operation should be launched and 49% think the Hamas leaders should be physically destroyed. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
COUNTER-CELEBRATION OF ISRAEL'S 60TH ANNIVERSARY –– YITZHAK LAOR DELIVERED ISRAEL-HATING LECTURE
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, May 18, 2008. |
|
This was written by Edward Alexander and it appeared May 16, 2008 in the
University of Washington's The Daily.
Edward Alexander is a U of Washington professor emeritus of English. |
|
Since it is now a core belief of academic "progressives" that Israel is the world's most wicked country, responsible for all the globe's miseries except (perhaps) avian flu, it's hardly surprising that the very day of that country's sixtieth birthday should, in an act of depraved malevolence, have been marked at UW by the appearance, courtesy of the Simpson Center and the Graduate School, of two Israel-hating lecturers. We were treated to both Norman Finkelstein, the failed academic and beloved dream-Jew of all the world's antisemites, and Yitzhak Laor, a second-tier poet who specializes in depicting Israel as the devil's experiment station. Laor delivered the (once prestigious) John Danz Lecture. A few people at UW may remember that the Danz lectures were founded to deal with "the role of science in society and in understanding a rational universe." Since the UW Graduate School long ago decided to disregard the intentions of the Danz family and bring an endless parade of distinctly non-scientific but very leftist lecturers –– Edward Said, Angela Davis, Naomi Wolf –– the appearance of Yitzhak Laor, who is less a scientist than any twelve-year old with a chemistry set, is also unsurprising. But Laor's appearance raises another question. Since UW president Mark Emmert last year issued a ringing denunciation of the Nazi-style movement to boycott Israeli universities and scholars, how is it that the Graduate School (at the urging of the departments of Comparative Literature, English, and Near Eastern Languages) brings to campus, and at considerable expense, one of the promoters of that boycott? President Emmert showed a clear understanding that the boycott of Israel is antisemitic because it uses a double standard: if one thinks that Israeli policies toward Palestinian Arabs are objectionable, are they really worse than Russian actions in Chechnya, Chinese actions toward Tibetans, Turkish actions toward the Kurds? But where are the boycotts of Russia, China, and Turkey? What President Emmert needs to do is require the Graduate School (also the Simpson Center, etc.) to boycott the boycotters. Words of condemnation are not enough. If boycotters of Israel are not given a taste of their own medicine, the highly organized international assault on Israel, in which Laor and Finkelstein are devoted functionaries, will grow by the weakness it feeds on. Contact Israel Academia Monitor at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com |
|
CHIEF PA NEGOTIATOR: JERUSALEM ON THE TABLE
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 18, 2008. |
|
Contrary to denials by top Israeli officials, the future of Jerusalem is being discussed in top-level negotiations between Israel and Palestinian Authority officials. So says Abu Ala, who heads the PA's negotiating team with Israel. Ahmed Qurei, also known as Abu Ala, told the Al-Quds newspaper in eastern Jerusalem over the weekend that the talks are "difficult," and include all the issues in dispute. These include: Jerusalem; the future of the "refugees"- those Arabs who left Israel in 1948 and 1967, as well as their millions of descendants; borders; Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria; and security. Abu Ala said he does not know of any secret channels of negotiations. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has often said that Jerusalem is not being discussed at present, and that it will be left for a later stage of talks. The Shas party has said even more often that it would quit the government coalition if it learned that Jerusalem was on the table. The departure of Shas would topple the government, for all intents and purposes. Livni Admitted Abu Ala's revelation is not the first one of its sort. Even Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has admitted that Jerusalem was being discussed. Speaking with foreign diplomats in early February, Livni said that all the core issues, including Jerusalem, were being discussed with the PA, and admitted that this was in contradiction to the promise Olmert gave the Shas party a few days earlier. Yisrael Beiteinu Quit, Shas Still In In addition, four months ago the Yisrael Beiteinu party quit the government in protest of the beginning of talks over the "core issues" –– including Jerusalem. Prime Minister Olmert did not, at the time, deny that the division of Jerusalem was being discussed, and said only, "I have a national responsibility" to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority, and "there is no alternative to conducting serious diplomatic negotiations in order to reach peace." Knesset Members Demand Status Report Some 15 members of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee signed a letter demanding that Olmert and Livni present them with details of the negotiations with the PA, as well as of the secret contacts with Syria. "We cannot agree to have the government conduct important talks without proper parliamentary monitoring," the MKs wrote. Kadima Party MKs are currently not signed on the letter. Abu Ala also told Al-Quds that the Arab view is that the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem is a "certainty, whether it happens this year, next year, or the year after." However, he admitted that he is not optimistic –– presumably for the short-term –– in light of the opposing positions between Israel and the PA regarding Jerusalem and the refugees. Islamic Jihad spokesman Abu Hamza took the opportunity reiterate that the "Palestinian people" [sic] would never cede even one inch of its land, and that "resistance" –– the codeword for terrorism –– "is the only guarantee for the return of Palestinian rights." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
BIN LADEN'S RABID BOASTS
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 17, 2008. |
|
Bin Laden boasts about bringing "holy" war to Israel. OK, then Israel should bring Holy Hell to the Islamics. More to the point: the Islamics have no claim to Jewish Palestine. They never did. A few Arabs once traversed Jewish Palestine on their way to Syria. They refused to settle or even claim Palestine. Palestine never was "their homeland" and that is the truth regardless of how many times Carter spins his lies. We Americans must face up to and deal with the fact that our X-POTUSs, namely Carter, Clinton, and Bush, happily sold themselves to the Saudis and foolishly endanger Americans when they "stay bought". Carter blathers about "peace" in the ME, then sucks up to terrorists. He is a treacherous, glib dhimmi. Americans must ask themselves just who benefits from Bush and Powell's war with Iraq. The answer is clear: Saudi Arabia ... and Dubai hedge funds manipulating the oil market. Viva to the Patriots of Israel who are battling against islamic imperialism without and the morally corrupt (Olmert, Beilin, Peres) within. Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
MY VISIT TO EGYPT
Posted by Morris Sadek, May 16, 2008. |
|
This was written by Jesse Petrilla and it appeared in
Front Page Magazine. IT is archived at
Jesse Petrilla is the founder of The United American Committee (UAC), a federation of concerned Americans promoting awareness of threats to Homeland Security, primarily focusing on Islamic extremism in America. |
|
I have recently returned to the United States from Egypt where I was on a fact-finding mission to see what life is like for non-Muslims who live under Islam. What I saw was a dire situation of oppression and discrimination that many in America and the West have all but ignored. I went to Egypt because I wanted to learn what life would be like if our enemies and their allies succeeded in getting their way. What I saw was an example of the harsh life in store for future American generations in Islamic-dominated regions of the U.S. if we do not work to bring attention to Islamic oppression now at this critical time in history. My journey began on an EgyptAir flight out of JFK. I was a bit surprised, to say the least, when the in-flight video came on prior to departure and instead of the usual safety video, a picture of a mosque flickered on and a deep-toned recorded voice came on reciting Islamic prayers out of the Koran. I've flown on Israeli airline El Al a number of times as well as hundreds of other global and U.S. airline companies, and I have never experienced a Christian prayer or a Jewish prayer on a flight, and could only imagine the reaction of Americans if an airline carrier were to try. Regardless of the policies and logic of other airlines, apparently a Muslim-owned airline feels it fit to assume that all its passengers desire to hear a Muslim prayer, regardless of their faith. The safety video followed and my journey had begun. I was on my way to Cairo and Alexandria to get a feeling of what life was like there for non-Muslims. The first day, I visited old Cairo. Walking through the alleyways, I visited the many ancient churches there. As I rounded a corner I came upon an old synagogue. Excited to find and learn the experiences of Jews who live there, I entered only to be greatly disappointed and utterly disgusted when I saw the synagogue was filled with hijab-clad Muslim women selling trinkets and postcards inside. It's a museum that I can only assume the government uses to show its "tolerance." I overheard the tour guides speaking of how there "were once Jews here," and I was told that there is only one other synagogue in the city. It makes you wonder if someday there will be regions of America with a museum of the last or second to last synagogue or church. Irritatingly, the Egyptian police refuse to allow anyone to take any photos or video at all of the synagogue either inside or out, and they threatened to take my camera if I questioned their rule. As I continued through the streets, the afternoon call to prayer began to broadcast from a local mosque, then another mosque, then a third, until the deafening sound of thousands of loudspeakers from mosques all over the city pierced through the air with the call of "Allah akbar" followed by Koranic verses. I recalled how in several American cities including Dearborn, Michigan, sound ordinances have begun to be overturned to allow this to occur in America. I made my way to meet with a friend who is an activist for human rights in Egypt. He showed me the Egyptian constitution which in article II states that Sharia (Islamic) law shall be "the principal source of legislation.". This clause goes for everyone in the nation regardless of faith. My friend told me the stories and showed me photos of young Christian girls who had been kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam, and threatened with death, and their families threatened if they ever convert back. After several days in Cairo, my journey continued to Alexandria where I would visit several churches which had been attacked in recent years. On the train to Alexandria, we passed through rural villages where I noticed vast amounts of hay on the roofs of many village homes. Our guide told us that the livestock sleep in the house with the people at night. Jokingly I asked if the women sleep out in the stable, but I didn't receive a definitive answer on that one. It was about this time that I realized the majority of the men everywhere I went had a small round bruise on their forehead reminiscent of something out of the book of Revelation. My guide told me that it was from hitting their head on the floor when praying. He also told me that in Egypt specifically, and perhaps elsewhere, some men heat up a metal spoon in a fire and stick it on their forehead to accentuate the bruise. It seems you aren't cool unless you have the mark. As we stepped off the train in Alexandria, a police officer approached and told my Egyptian Coptic friend that he did not have a license to be my guide, desiring a bribe before he would leave us alone. This had not been the first time in the trip that a cop came up looking for money. It seemed every time I took out my camera, a police officer would show up to tell me I couldn't take any pictures and I would have to pay him a nominal fine. Usually the officer would not be looking for a bribe of more than ten or twenty dollars, and thankfully our guide was able to talk officers out of it the majority of the time. We went to a local hotel where I turned on the television to see the Statue of Liberty in flames. I changed the channel only to see a video clip of a small child crying with her arms in the air, spliced in with images of U.S. soldiers. The video cut to a bleeding boy lying on the ground –– an obvious piece of anti-American propaganda. Interestingly enough, to the right of the boy in the video you could see a U.S. medic helping the injured child, no doubt hurt by Jihadist terrorists, but you certainly wouldn't know that from the theme of the video. Our first stop in Alexandria was the Church of St. George, the site of a brutal attack in 2005 where a Muslim in his early 20s entered as a prayer service was finishing. He shouted "Allah akbar" and stabbed a nun in the chest with a knife. Several days after the stabbing, an angry Muslim mob also attacked the church, brandishing sticks and throwing rocks at the Christians. Numerous cars and Christian-owned businesses in the area were torched, and in the end, three people were dead from the violence, all of it being sparked by unsubstantiated reports about a theatrical production that occurred at the church which was rumored to have offended Islam. I attended a prayer service there, and every 15 seconds over loudspeakers aimed at the church from the mosque next door, the Muslims were yelling at the Christians. "Allah akbar! Allah akbar!" they would yell among other things in an attempt to disrupt the prayer. This was entirely outside of the five daily calls to prayer which come over the same loudspeaker. It was intimidation designed entirely to disrupt Christian prayer, and stopped as soon as everyone left after the service was over. I took a short video of the incident, and posted it on YouTube. My next stop was the Church of All Saints. When I arrived, I saw a large mosque directly across the street and another on the other block. This was the same case with the previous church I had visited, and my guide explained that as soon as they built the church, mosques went up all around it. Yet today it has become nearly impossible to get a permit in the country to construct a new church anywhere. The Church of All Saints was another site of an attack which occurred in 2006 where a Jihadist entered and began stabbing church-goers while yelling the familiar phrase "Allah akbar". In all, he attacked three churches that day, critically wounding many and killing a 78-year-old man. Yet the government dismissed him as only an isolated mentally ill madman I met with many people during my trip, and I learned a great deal about what it is like to live as a minority under Islam. I spoke with a priest who told me how he can see the younger generation of Christians there becoming more and more Islamized. I spoke with a man who told me how his young Christian children are taught in public schools there that they are going to hell if they do not become Muslims. I saw brutal intimidation and oppression, and a life dictated by Islamic law that many Americans don't realize but are slowly beginning to see. Before we left, our guide showed us his ID card which had a glaring number 2 in the corner. He told me that Christians are required to have that number on their IDs. I asked if Muslims were required to have a number as well. "Yes," he responded. "Number 1." In my visit to Egypt I saw a place rampant with police brutality and corruption, where non-Muslims are second-class citizens at best, who are brutally victimized on a daily basis. All this in a nation which is a popular U.S. tourist spot, and has been the recipient of American aid in excess of $28 billion in the last three decades. Thanks to http://www.copticnews.ca/4_e_apr2008/419_egypt.htm Thanks to http://freecopts.net/english/ Morris Sadek Esq is a lawyer at the Court of Cassation, Egyptian special Legal Counsel, DC Bar, United States of America. He is president of the National American Coptic Assembly USA. |
|
SOMETIMES WORDS ARE JUST WORDS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 16, 2008. |
|
Having listened to President George W. Bush speak to Israel's Knesset and then having read the transcript, Bush clearly says all the "right" words and seemed imminently sincere. However, I recall taking a course in semantics ages ago where Professor Korzibsiki said: "Words are NOT things; words are just WORDS". President Bush has various teams that work for him and sometimes, without him. While the speech that the President made congratulating the Jewish State of Israel for all her achievements –– despite Terror attacks, Wars and other pressures was gratefully received, it ignored what Condoleezza Rice and the State Department were doing to Israel. Through their nefarious means, they had recruited a slavishly weak Prime Minister (Olmert) and before that, Ariel Sharon, to do their bidding and that of the Terrorists. While Bush was speaking words of encouragement, his various teams were subverting Israel at every possible level. Removing security checkpoints and road-blocks used to screen Terrorists was a high demand by Rice. At the orders of Rice, backed by the President, Israel was NOT to counterattack in force but to exercise "restraint" when the Kassam Rockets, Iranian Grad and Russian Katyusha missiles bombarded South Israel daily. President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) was to be treated as a peace implementer through his Terror organization of Fatah –– despite the various other Terror factions attached to Fatah, such as the Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade, Tanzim and Islamic Jihad –– all fully operational Terrorists. At that time Hamas was deeply integrated into Fatah and later broke away, planning to return and take over Fatah. Olmert, at Rice's orders, demanded the Olmert meet and negotiate transfer of G-d given Jewish territory to Abu Mazen –– such as Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and all of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. Rice and the State Department thought that this sacrifice would appease the Arab Muslims. Remember what has happened continually since Yitzhak Rabin turned over Gaza, Jericho and the 7 cities to Arafat under Oslo? And what has transpired since the Israeli government evicted 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from 21 thriving, blooming Jewish communities in Gush Katif/Gaza and the 4 Jewish communities in Northern Samaria? Is it possible that Bush was kept out-of-the-loop and he didn't know these recent momentous occurrences in history? Is it possible he didn't know the CIA had been training Arafat's 9 to 12 Secret Services (now under Abu Mazen) in weapons, training, electronics intercepts, sniper shooting? How is it possible that he hasn't noticed that these various Secret Services have mounted separate and coordinated attacks against Israelis? Bush said many things which, no doubt, he believed –– such as not appeasing or negotiating Terrorists or Terrorist nations who are trying to kill your country. But, in the end, it's what you do –– not necessarily what you say. The other Bush teams are subverting Israel and are intent on making her vulnerable to a so-called "Palestinian people" who cannot be appeased. They say so. 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 |
|
EHUD OLMERT WAS CHOSEN FOR THIS TIME
Posted by Gennadiy Faybyshenko, May 16, 2008. |
|
The destiny of the Jewish people and the Land of Israel, from the time of the creation of the world, is explicitly described in the Holy Torah. The Jews would be expelled and there would be four exiles, Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek, and Roman, and only then would the Jewish people finally come back to the Land of Israel for the final redemption and the end of times. The prophets constantly mention the fate of the Jewish people because of our covenant-an everlasting promise-between the Almighty and the Jewish people. Nothing that G-d does is without purpose; everything has a meaning that would lead to the final redemption. However, G-d gives people a choice and the time of the redemption depends on how soon we merit it. What about now? How is it that such a corrupt, self-serving traitor as Ehud Olmert is the prime minister of the country that the Almighty Himself chose? When G-d is truly almighty, and His actions only benefit the world in general and Jewish people in particular, why then do we have someone like Olmert, who is so anti-Jewish and anti-Israel, in such an influential position? I believe that Olmert's despicable traits are precisely the reason why he is in office. The government, both from the left and the right and from the middle, all despise Olmert; but in essence he is their mirror: the whole Israeli government in reality despises itself. In 1947 the Jews were depressed that the Arabs rejected the partition plan and waged war. Imagine if the Arabs instead had embraced the partition plan, agreeing to live with Jews happily ever after. Then Israel would never have Jerusalem and Hebron, Shechem and Jericho, Bethlehem and Jordan Valley, Eastern Negev and most of the Galilee with the Golan. And G-d purposely infuriated the Arabs in 1967 so that we would liberate those territories. At the beginning it seemed that everything was bad but in reality everything came out perfectly because G-d is perfect and all His decisions are perfect. I can list other miracles that happened to Jewish people but it will take me forever because "Jewish people" is one big miracle. However there were sad moments in history when in the late nineteenth century Jews accepted Berlin as their new Jerusalem and how quickly the remaining Jews who survived ran away from the so-called Berlin. Places like Vilna, famous for its profusion of Jewish literature and the renowned Vilna Gaon, now has barely a single Jew. Because G-d wants His people to be only in one place, Eretz Yisroel, to bring close the final redemption. No matter how much a Jew likes it or hates it when he lived in Galut, his community is nicely relocated in Israel. However this article is about Olmert and how he was chosen to be the prime minister of the Jewish people. This would be very hard to understand, but in reality similar processes occurred in the past and through out history. The first event happened in Egypt when Jews were slaves under Pharaoh. One day G-d heard the cries of the Jewish people and decided to redeem them. He sent Moses to speak with Pharaoh to let Jews out of Egypt. "But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply My miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt. He will not listen to you. Then I will lay My hand on Egypt and with mighty acts of judgment I will bring out My troops, My people the Israelites. And the Egyptians will know that I am the Lord when I stretch out My hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it." (Ex.7:3-5) Read that phrase very carefully. It makes absolutely no sense at first glance. On one hand G-d tells Moses to go and ask Pharaoh to let Israelites go while on the other hand G-d will harden Pharaoh's heart so he will not let anyone go and if Pharaoh will not let go then G-d will punish him. We might start to feel bad for the Pharaoh, where is the justice in that? It is equivalent to a bully finding an innocent passerby, tying his hands and asks for money. If that passerby will not give money, the bully will start to punch him. The passerby obviously cannot give money because his hands are tied and then the bully starts to throw punches. Where is the freedom of choice that G-d is known for? Indeed Pharaoh had a lot of choices and one of them was to repent, but I will not speak about Pharaoh because my topic is the Jewish people. All of us can believe that when Moses would come to Pharaoh and ask to let his people go, after one plague the Pharaoh probably would let them go and if not after one, then after two, but definitely after three because Pharaoh lost much more, almost his entire country. There was no point in keeping Jews as slaves when he had other nations as slaves and could easily conquer other countries. However, G-d hardened Pharaoh's heart on purpose because if not then, Jews who were redeemed would later tell their children that it was just a coincidence, but no Jew can say that after ten plagues and the parting of the Red Sea it was a fairy tale. When G-d sent the first plague some Jews saw a miracle in it, though it was not enough. Then G-d threw another plague and another and by the tenth plague the last stubborn Jew who refused to believe in G-d finally submitted and admitted that G-d indeed wants to redeem him. The Pharaoh was chosen to teach Jewish people to believe that indeed there is G-d who has unlimited power and who loves the Jewish People. When the Sinai Peninsula was planned to be given away to Egypt, most Jews did not care, only Rabbi Meir Kahane of blessed memory made a struggle with few heroic Jews. If we only had Sinai Peninsula, we would have huge oil reservoir that would provide its own economy and not be dependent on American money that did so much damage. That did not bring peace, indeed G-d started to punish even more, throwing plague after a plague with the Oslo Accord, Camp David, two Intifadas and constant threat either by sniper shots or suicide bombings by Arab terrorists. Little by little the average Jew opens his eyes. The liberal establishment does so much for peace but it is G-d Himself who brings war. The uprooting of Gaza strip opened eyes for so many politicians and ordinary people on all sides of the political spectrum. The residents of Sderot were not sympathetic with people from Gush Katif and did not support them, but now they are the ones who suffer the rockets falling on their roofs every single day. If G-d wanted, He could easily have taken Olmert and Kadima out of power by now, but then we would be so tempted to choose Likud or Avoda and that is not what G-d wants. He wants us to build a truly Jewish State that would live by the laws of the Torah and with the rebuilding of the Third and Final Temple on the Temple Mount and of course with the expulsion of all Arabs out of Israel. Of course G-d can perform a miracle and easily destroy the current government, but we wouldn't appreciate it. We would only appreciate it if we could make chances ourselves, because a man can only appreciate what he achieves on his own and not being spoon-fed. Many Israelis say they are ready. That's not true. They are not yet ready; otherwise they would take the necessary steps and remove Olmert from his throne along with his gang. It's amazing that there hasn't been a revolt. Israel is such a small country. In Europe, in much larger countries, revolutionaries took their respective countries back from the monarchs. Do we deserve His redemption? When people truly want changes, they make their own changes like in England, France, and the former Soviet Union, where those people disapproved of their government's corruption, they changed it, period. Would it take plagues from G-d to awaken the Jewish people? Are they just one step away from total annihilation? Gennadiy Faybyshenko is National Direct of Bnai Elim. Contact him by email at gennadiy1981@yahoo.com |
|
ORTHODOX UNION HOENLEIN AND UCJ RIEGER MUST RESIGN, TOO
Posted by Buddy Macy, May 16, 2008. |
|
open letter to To Malcolm Hoenlein and Howard Rieger: Ehud Olmert is by far the most corrupt, polarizing and destructive Prime Minister the State of Israel has ever had. One must take responsibility for one's actions, and for the relationships one forges. Your public support of Mr. Olmert and his destructive, suicidal policies and agenda in your roles as two of the most powerful Jews in the Diaspora makes both of you culpable and liable. When Olmert is forced to leave office, you must immediately resign from your positions of Jewish leadership. You may both argue that it is your responsibility to support whoever sits in the Prime Minister's chair, and that the demonstration of this support does not represent a political stance. Unfortunately, your actions during the past nearly three years, since the "disengagement," shout out otherwise. Your job –– first and foremost –– is to help all Jews in need; yet, you have shirked this critical responsibility in deference to the Prime Minister's political wishes. You have ignored the plight of the expellees from Gaza and northern Samaria until the pressure became impossible to bear. And, even then, your assistance to those 10,000 brave souls has been woefully inadequate –– just enough to temporarily silence your critics. Likewise, your refusal to equip our fellow Jews in Sderot and throughout the western Negev with protection from the constant rockets and missiles from Gaza reflects a glaring, unforgivable failure in leadership. Unfortunately, the politicization of your positions and your lack of leadership do not lie solely with their inaction and silence. In late February, 2008, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs passed a resolution endorsing the two-state 'solution' which completely ignores the resultant creation of a huge Jewish humanitarian crisis for the tens of thousands of new expellees and an imminent threat to Israel's very survival. Prof. Arieh Eldad, MD, MK, head of the newly-formed Hatikva party, equates the implementation of the two-state 'solution' with the destruction of Israel. As the heads of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and United Jewish Communities (UJC), respectively, you must be held responsible for supporting the resolution endorsing such a destructive, suicidal policy: you must be replaced with individuals who truly have the Jewish People's best interest at heart. Most sincerely,
Contact Buddy Macy by email at vegibud@gmail.com |
|
PRES. BUSH REJECTS 'NEGOTIATING WITH KILLERS' –– EXCEPT FATAH
Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, May 16, 2008. |
|
One theme repeated at a special Knesset session on Thursday –– in the speech of US President George Bush, as well as those of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and others –– was the rejection of appeasement and negotiations with terrorists. At the same time, Bush praised Israel's concessions for peace and envisioned a Palestinian Authority state. "You won't ever see that happen," MK Hendel shouted towards Olmert as the two right-wing MKs left the plenum. "No nation should ever be forced to negotiate with killers pledged to its destruction," President Bush told the Knesset. He adding that "we stand together against terror and extremism, and we will never let down our guard or lose our resolve... The founding charter of Hamas calls for the elimination of Israel [and] the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map." Bush then decried negotiations with "terrorists and radicals" as "the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." On the other hand, in his speech, Prime Minister Olmert said that the visit to Israel by the US President "provided another important opportunity for us to discuss the advancement of a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in accordance with your vision, Mr. President, of two states for two peoples. Your personal involvement, and the commendable efforts of the Secretary of State, Ms. Condoleezza Rice, is vital for the success of the intensive negotiations taking place between us and the Palestinians." Knesset Members Tzvi Hendel and Uri Ariel (National Union) got up in the midst of Olmert's speech and left the Knesset hall in protest. Olmert had just said that he would have the Knesset approve an agreement with the Palestinian Authority (PA) for a two-state solution. "You won't ever see that happen," MK Hendel shouted towards Olmert as the two right-wing MKs left the plenum. President Bush also reinforced the idea of a future Palestinian state alongside Israel when he detailed his vision for the Middle East 60 years from now: "Israel will be celebrating the 120th anniversary as one of the world's great democracies, a secure and flourishing homeland for the Jewish people. The Palestinian people will have the homeland they have long dreamed of and deserved –– a democratic state that is governed by law, and respects human rights, and rejects terror." Fatah and the PA: Not Terrorists? In response to the speech by President Bush, Dr. Aryeh Bachrach suggested that the US President take over his position as the spokesman for Almagor, an organization for victims of terrorism. In a letter to the American leader, Bachrach wrote: "In your forceful declarations against being 'tolerant of terrorism' and 'not to allow its perpetrators diplomatic achievements' you were giving us a voice. With one mistake –– that you did not count among the terrorist groups Fatah and the Palestinian Authority, which were and are terrorist organizations that just recently gave assistance and protection to their members to murder Israelis in various circumstances." Along similar lines, the National President of the Zionist Organization of America, Morton Klein, wrote of Fatah head and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas that he is behind the "continuing promotion of terrorism, refusal to arrest terrorists, and incitement to hatred and violence within the PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps." "Here is a clear, straightforward litmus test: Does Mahmoud Abbas support preventing terrorism and jailing terrorists? Is he opposed to terrorism? Does he regard terrorism as the enemy of the peace, to which he tells Western audiences he is dedicated? If so, he should be applauding and honoring Imad Sa'ad for doing his duty in fighting terror and assisting the Israelis in doing so, as per the PA's signed obligations under Oslo and the Roadmap. At the very least, he should be immediately releasing Imad Sa'ad from prison. In reality, he has done the opposite...." Only the intervention of Israeli groups prevented Sa'ad from being executed by the PA. Klein concludes, "There is no sense or morality in having peace negotiations with someone who arrests or executes those who help fight terrorists." As for the Fatah's being "killers pledged to [Israel's] destruction," thus placing them outside the realm of negotiations according to the Bush vision he articulated on Thursday, it is worthwhile recalling some earlier statements by PLO and Fatah officials. "The Palestinian people accepted the Oslo agreements as a first step and not as a permanent arrangement, based on the premise that the war and struggle on the ground [i.e., locally against Israeli territory] is more efficient than a struggle from a distant land... for the Palestinian people will continue the revolution until they achieve the goals of the '65 revolution..." (Palestinian Authority Minister of Supply Abd El-Aziz Shahian quoted in Al-Ayaam newspaper, May 30, 2000.) [The "'65 Revolution" marks the first attack by the PLO, a year after its founding and prior to Israel's conquest of Judea, Samaria and Gaza in 1967, and the publication of the Palestinian Covenant that calls for the destruction of Israel via armed struggle. –– ed.] "When we picked up the gun in '65 and the modern Palestinian Revolution began, it had a goal. This goal has not changed and it is the liberation of Palestine." (Salim Alwadia, Abu Salem, Supervisor of Political Affairs, quoted in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, January 20, 2000.) The official website of the Fatah terrorist organization bluntly stated, "a legitimate Palestinian entity forms the most important weapon that Arabs have against Israel, the outpost of the imperialist powers." The statement was part of a January 1, 2002 manifesto marking the 37th anniversary of the founding of Fatah. Pointedly emphasizing that the Fatah was founded in the late 1950s and carried out its first terrorist attack on Israel in 1965, the celebratory article states, "Fateh believes that the Zionist movement constitutes the biggest threat against not only the Palestinian national security but also against the security of the Arab world." Fatah recommends eliminating the threat through a combination of "the popular armed revolution" and other forms of the "revolution" at the "organizational, military, political, and diplomatic levels. The complementary nature of the different forms of revolution guarantees the continuity of the struggle until victory is achieved." Nissan Ratzlav-Katz writes for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
MECCA THE CENTER OF THE EARTH?; NY TIMES LAMENTS
ISRAEL'S BIRTH; JOURNALISM: JUDGMENTAL WITH POOR JUDGMENT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 16, 2008. |
|
WHAT IS FATAH REALLY LIKE? The US and Israel keep contrasting Fatah with Hamas, though only in generalities. Actually, Fatah is quite brutal. In Judea-Samaria, P.A. police pulled a Hamas cleric out of a mosque, and within a week killed him by torture. One of the cleric's co-worshippers recognized one of those P.A. police as having served in an Israeli prison with him for many years. He told his former cellmate, haven't you learned, this is why Fatah was kicked out of Gaza? (Pipe #855, 5/5.) Fatah is almost as vicious as Hamas and just as dedicated to destroying Israel. Westerner's delude themselves if they believe that it is important for Israel to reach an agreement with Fatah and to shore up Abbas against Hamas. Why don't those who suggest Israeli concessions to Abbas instead demand reform by Abbas? Have they nothing to say about his hiring terrorists, as that police agent, and about his use of torture? Let them demand that his media, schools, and mosques stop defaming Israel and calling for the murder of Jews! In answer to this, they claim he is weak politically, and needs concessions by Israel to show he can produce results. The concessions and the results are steps along the way to the conquest of Israel. If such steps are needed to shore him up, then his people are hopeless. If he doesn't reform both his regime's corruption and its devotion to jihad, then what is the point of making an agreement with that regime –– it continues jihad? IS MECCA THE CENTER OF THE EARTH? An Islamic conclave claimed that Britain imposed Greenwich Mean Time on the world. It claimed that science finds that Mecca is in perfect alignment with the magnetic pole and is in the center of the earth. It therefore proposes that Mecca time become the international standard. There is no perfect alignment with the magnetic pole, because the earth's pole shifts. The center of the earth is deep inside the earth. The Islamic conclave does not understand science or dissembles about it. Greenwich had the most advanced observatory. An international conference recognized Greenwich time. There was no imperialist plot in that. Rather, there is an Islamic plot against it. Islam is striving against the rest of the world, instead of working with it to solve human problems (Op. Cit.). NY TIMES LAMENTS FOUNDING OF ISRAEL The Times lead article, on the 60th anniversary of Israel, took the Arab perspective. That is, it stated Arab claims without explanation or alternative view, as if factual. The only Israelis heard from agreed with the Arabs. [The Times does not explain to readers that the government sympathizes more with the Arabs than with the Jews, at the risk of national security.] The article admits at the outset that Israeli Arabs are more integrated now and are better off in Israel now and are better off than Arabs elsewhere in the Mideast. They are discontented anyway, being poorer than the majority of Israelis and feeling unwanted by it. They feel part of the country, want equal rights in it, but believe that Israel will get overcome. Thousands of them will protest Israel's founding, this month, again. They sympathize with Israel's Arab enemies. Their elected representatives accuse Israel of Nazism. [The Arabs admire the Nazis and like them, falsely accuse the Jews of barbarism. Their sympathy with the enemy and even treason forfeits any consideration for them and makes them deserve to be unwanted. Their extensive parading with signs, "death to the Jews," and their extensive attacks on Jews are not mentioned. Why not? Mention of it would give a balanced perspective. Otherwise, the Arabs are left to seem like citizens with normal grievances rather than as subversives.] [Sure they are less well off. They take less education and have more children. Few perform any national service, for which they would earn veterans' benefits, useful in getting jobs. Does the Times expect the government to hire Arabs for jobs related to the defense industry and national security?] On the other hand, the government has imposed quotas or preferences for Arabs in education, infrastructure, and government employment. [The Times euphemistically calls this "affirmative action." I find that it helps the enemy. The Arabs remain the enemy, defeated but still trying to take over the country.] One Arab argued that declaring Israel a Jewish state means he is not there. [Every state controlled by the Arabs declares itself a Muslim Arab state and mistreats its minorities. Its Jewish minority was no threat to Arab states but was ousted. In Israel, the Arabs tried to exterminate the Jews. Israel does not treat the Arabs as invisible, having Arab parties in the Knesset and Arabs among the other parties, having Arabic as an official language of the country, and letting Arabs enjoy the rights of citizenship without the responsibility of national service.]] The Arabs complain about a scarcity of land for them. [Remove the illegal immigrants, and there would be enough.] The article explains that they are not allowed to settle in their former villages, some of whose ruins remain visible, and their towns are packed, while Jewish towns are encouraged to expand. One former landowner says his daughter, a doctor, does not distinguish between Jewish and Arab patients, so why should land rules. [I have heard of cases of Arab medical personnel mistreating Jewish patients and exulting over the wounded Jewish victims of terrorism brought into the hospital. Most land rules don't discriminate, though the Jewish national fund allots land only for Jews, since it was funded for Jews. The Arabs steal land on a large scale, but the law is not enforced against them. Israel was foolish to leave any visible ruins of abandoned Arab villages and mosques for Arabs to rally around] Jewish attitudes towards the Arabs have hardened. Some rabbis now forbid Jews to rent to Arabs. Most Jews favor the transfer of Arabs out of Israel, as part of the solution to the Arab-Israel conflict. [Yes, because of widespread Israeli Arab disloyalty and increasing terrorism. Once in a Jewish neighborhood, Arabs taunt and attack Jews and blockbust.] The Arabs say they don't want to leave because they know its worse in the P.A.. In a departure from Times practice, the article admits that the Arabs, including those in what now is Israel, started the wars between themselves and the Jews. The Arabs would not allow a Jewish state. When the Jews counter-attacked, the Arabs evacuated from most of their towns. [No, they defended themselves. They ignored most villages which stayed at peace and did not attack the countries of invading armies. This would have been a good place for the article to make clear that almost all of the evacuation was voluntary.] Israel promised the Arabs equality [no, equality of opportunity]. It broke that promise. The government admits there is discrimination against the Arabs. No examples of discrimination cited. The article admits that the government discriminates against the Jews, referring to "affirmative action". [Is it fair to hold Israel to a promise after the Arabs attempted genocide and still help Israel's foreign enemies?] The rest of the article speculates about Arab loyalty (Ethan Bronner, 5/17, A1). REPORTING & JUDGMENT The NY Sun copied a Washington Post report that: (1) Abbas leads the P.A., "which is considered relatively moderate;" and (2) A major test of whether their forces would "crack down on armed groups" took place in lawless Qabatiyeh, where they battled Islamic Jihad, pledged to eradicate Israel (5/7, p.7). Was the fight to stop crime, which doesn't affect peace, or to stop terrorism, which does. The report did not indicate which faction attacked nor why. The omission leaves the report of little import. Who considers the P.A. "relatively moderate?" Politicians, who use that false label as an excuse for demanding concessions from Israel. Abbas' organization is pledged to eradicate Israel, and he won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state. That is not moderate. Thus the report suffered from a lack of judgment on the purpose of the report and from being incorrectly judgmental in characterizing the P.A.. The Sun takes much of its news about Israel from the Washington Post, Daily Telegraph, and Associated Press. Those sources are biased. They slant against the Sun's editorial position on Israel. CONFERENCE ON CHALLENGES TO WORLD & TO JEWS The conference will include: (A) Kissinger, Pres. Bush, Peres, Tony Blair, Joschka Fischer, and Dennis Ross, whose organization devised the conference; and (B) Vaclav Havel, Sergey Brin of Google, Terry Semel of Yahoo, Robert Murdoch, and 7 Jewish Nobel laureates (Ethan Bronner, NY Times, 5/8, A23). What good for Israel can come from a conference by group (A), all anti-Zionist. INACCURACIES PM Olmert said he would resign if indicted, but meanwhile he must fulfill his duties, for he was elected Prime Minister (IMRA, 5/8). No, he was elected a Member of Knesset, appointed Dep. PM, and then inherited the premiership from Sharon, stricken after being alone with Olmert and Peres. Richard Holbrooke said that the UNO proposed to partition "Palestine" into a Jewish state and an Arab one (NY Sun, 5/8, Op.-Ed.). Not Palestine, but what was left of the Palestine Mandate. Jordan, the bulk of Palestine was already split off. 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 SHACKLED WARRIOR: ISRAEL AND THE GLOBAL JIHAD
Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 16, 2008. |
|
Friends, The Mayor of Ashkelon, whose main shopping center was destroyed by a jihadi missle from Gaza (launched, by the way, from the bulldozed homes of the former Gush Katif community of Dugit, where residents were dragged crying from their homes on the orders of brilliant Israeli politicians) says that the Israeli government will do nothing to protect its citizens because of the public relations involved in the Bush visit. I thought of the title of a new book written by Caroline Glick, probably one of the brightest and best political analysts in Israel, called Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad. The cover is a blinded Samson finally bringing down the house on the Philistines. How apt. It's a collection of her insightful and passionate Jerusalem Post columns, and highly recommended. I recently listened to Caroline in a fascinating interview which I think clarifies all the issues we are passionately involved it. She has a way of cutting through the fog and bringing great illumination. The book review below is by Shalom Freedman and it comes from
|
|
Caroline Glick has for the past several years written a regular column for The Jerusalem Post. This book is a collection of those columns organized in ten chapters: 1) The War Against Israel 2) The War Against the Free World 3) Israel Alone 4) The Threat of Destruction 5) Israel's Suicide Attempt 6) The Battle for Hearts and Minds 7) Contemporary Thought Police 8) European Betrayal 9) An Israeli in Iraq 10) A Light unto the Nations. Glick is an incisive, well-informed original and tough writer. Her deep concern is for the security of Israel, and she has an extra-sensitive antenna in detecting dangers and threats. As a Harvard educated native of the United States who served for several years in the Israeli Defense Forces she has a deep knowledge of the political and military systems of both the United States and Israel and the relations between them. While in one sense this book focuses on Israeli security questions it is a must read for anyone who cares about the free world's fight against Terror. As someone who has lived in Israel for many years I regard myself as fairly knowledgeable about the Israeli-Arab conflict. But reading this work I learned and understood much I had not before. Glick shows how mistaken the Bush strategy and execution has been in the war against terror. Embedded with the U.S. forces in Iraq at the beginning of its effort to depose Saddam Hussein, she has followed the struggling American effort there closely. She here repeatedly writes about the Americans half-hearted war on terror, in which they excluded as target a major force of Terror, the Palestinians. She shows how Israel and the United States have played the wrong game in believing withdrawal and concessions would lead to peace. She writes with anger and scorn at the withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza and how they brought neither Peace nor Security to Israel. She knows the Palestinian and Arab propaganda tactics inside out and exposes the way the Media repeatedly and perhaps in some cases willingly, falls for them. She is not at all reluctant to criticize Israeli leaders who have kept alive a phony peace partner, Abbas' PA instead of trying to make the best of the truth that the Palestinians at this stage are not ready for peace. She outlines clearly the mistakes made in the Lebanon War of summer 2006 and has harsh words for the phony accomplishments the Olmert government claimed afterwards. Glick is above all a truthseeker and truth-teller and the Truth she tells is often not very pleasant for Israelis themselves. But what is felt through every line she writes is her deep and passionate caring for the Jewish state. These columns provide an up-to-date look at the ongoing struggle in one of the world's most vital areas. They are a must read for anyone who would truly understand the struggle Israel, the United States the free world as a whole are now engaged in. I could not recommend this book more highly. 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. |
|
A TALK BY YORAM ETTINGER
Posted by Marc Caroff, May 15, 2008. |
|
For those not able to be at the talk yesterday by Yoram Ettinger, I must tell you that it was one of the most informative talks I have ever had the privilege to hear. Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il I will paraphrase some of the points made by Mr. Ettinger for the benefit of those who could not attend: |
|
1. While most of us are aware of the contributions that the modern state of Israel has made in the fields of science and technology, we should also be aware that Israel has been a strategic asset to the U.S. in our confrontations with the former Soviet Union, as well as with the rogue states and Islamic terrorists in the Middle East. Israel has been generous in sharing the experience and know-how it has gained about the tactics and weapons of our common enemies in direct confrontations, as well as in sharing new technologies it has developed to thwart those enemies; 2. Most of the blame for Israel's reckless concessions to its enemies, at the expense of its security, over the past several years should be placed at the doorstep of its weak political leaders. U.S. leaders and the media bear less responsibility since, for the most part, they have been following the lead of Israel's political leaders, e,g. Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon, Olmert. However, it should be noted that the State Department and the CIA have been actively working to undermine the state of Israel since its founding in 1948 to placate the Arab world; 3. The key to developing a more competent political leadership in Israel is better education and, specifically, more intensive teaching of Judaism, Jewish history, and Zionism in all schools and colleges; 4. While the prevailing malaise in Israel has given birth to a school of confused thought that believes problems of demography can be cured only by territorial concessions, in fact there is reason to hope that the problem will resolve itself. As Ettinger points out, Arab fertility rates have been significantly declining in recent years while the Jewish fertility rate in Israel has not. Moreover, Arab emigration from Israel has been increasing as the result of reduced economic opportunities, and the economic lure of working in the oil fields of the Gulf states has increased; 5. As for Judea, Samaria and Gaza, Ettinger believes that it is incumbent upon all of us to point out that the creation of a Palestinian state would not only endanger the viability of Israel, but it would also threaten vital American interests in the Middle East. Creation of a Palestinian state would be a reward for Islamic terrorism (considering that even our so-called "peace partner", Abbas, has a terrorist background and is the creator of the present system of incitement prevalent in Palestinian schools and media), and would also destabilize Jordan; 6. The talk by Yoram Ettinger was sponsored by Israel Bonds. I would encourage everyone to purchase an Israel bond as an investment in Israel's future, despite the poor state of Israel's present political leadership. As Mr. Ettinger stressed in his talk, Israel bonds were one of the most important factors in building Israel's infrastructure after its founding, and continue to promote Israel's strength and vitality to this day. Call 301-654-6575 for present interest rates on Israel bonds, and to obtain an investment form. Marc Caroff, President of the Brandeis Chapter of ZOA. |
|
UNDERCOVER MOSQUE
Posted by Nabil A. Bissada, May 15, 2008. |
|
Undercover Reporter in United Kingdom Films Islamofascism in Action!! Over a year ago, a United Kingdom television station dispatched a reporter to go undercover into mosques in the UK. In just the first installment, you will see imams proclaiming: "Allah has created the woman deficient ...If she doesn't wear the hijab, we hit her." In that same installment you will see how a large Muslim organization in the UK has a "special" chat room for communication not meant for non-Muslims to see. You will see how imams despise non-believers and call for jihad against them. See the set of videos at
Contact Nabil A. Bissada at NABissad@lasd.org |
|
MUSLIM LEADERS WANT MECCA TO BE CENTER OF WORLD TIME ZONES
Posted by Marc Samberg, May 15, 2008. |
|
This was written by Magdi Abdelhadi, BBC Arab affairs
analyst and was posted at |
|
Muslim scientists and clerics have called for the adoption of Mecca time to replace GMT, arguing that the Saudi city is the true centre of the Earth.
Mecca is the direction all Muslims face when they perform their daily prayers. The call was issued at a conference held in the Gulf state of Qatar under the title: Mecca, the Centre of the Earth, Theory and Practice. One geologist argued that unlike other longitudes, Mecca's was in perfect alignment to magnetic north. He said the English had imposed GMT on the rest of the world by force when Britain was a big colonial power, and it was about time that changed. Mecca watch A prominent cleric, Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawy, said modern science had at last provided evidence that Mecca was the true centre of the Earth; proof, he said, of the greatness of the Muslim qibla –– the Arabic word for the direction Muslims turn to when they pray. The meeting also reviewed what has been described as a Mecca watch, the brainchild of a French Muslim. The watch is said to rotate anti-clockwise and is supposed to help Muslims determine the direction of Mecca from any point on Earth. The meeting in Qatar is part of a popular trend in some Muslim societies of seeking to find Koranic precedents for modern science. It is called "Ijaz al-Koran", which roughly translates as the "miraculous nature of the holy text". The underlying belief is that scientific truths were also revealed in the Muslim holy book, and it is the work of scholars to unearth and publicise the textual evidence. But the movement is not without its critics, who say that the notion that modern science was revealed in the Koran confuses spiritual truth, which is constant, and empirical truth, which depends on the state of science at any given point in time.
Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com
|
|
NEW YORK TIMESPEAK
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, May 15, 2008. | |
|
Dear Readers: It occurs to me that I ought to have a running commentary on the anti-Israel bias in the contemporary New York Times. It is my home town newspaper and I do read it everyday. Sharing rather than silently swallowing my frustration will be an excellent tonic, and good for my blood pressure. In today's edition (May 15th), here is how the Gray Lady summarizes what happened in Israel yesterday. ATTACKS DURING BUSH VISIT "President Bush's trip to Israel to celebrate the country's 60th birthday was marred by violence. Four Palestinians were killed, including two militants, and nine were wounded in a series of Israeli Army strikes and incursions into Gaza said medics and witnesses there. In Israel, a rocket that the police said was launched from northern Gaza badly wounded four people, including a two year old girl." Before we even get to the piece itself which was located at the very bottom of page 6, lemme vent. The first "violence" noted above was that caused by "Israeli Army strikes." Absolutely no background or context are given in terms of why Israel would strike Gaza. Hundreds, maybe thousands of non-stop Kassam rockets launched against Israeli civilians, children, schoolhouses, hospitals? Could that be it? The Times isn't saying. And why-oh-why does TimeSpeak keep identifying Hamas terrorists and Islamists as "militants?" And, now that the Israeli military has been maligned and branded as evil day after day in the Paper of Record, even I tend to trust a smidgen less anything they might have to say. I am meant to; thus, if the Israeli "police" tell us the rocket was launched from Gaza-perhaps, maybe, I am meant to take that with a grain of salt. Not so the "medics and witnesses" of Gaza who have never been maligned and who appear, therefore, as neutral reporters. Only when you get to the longer piece, do you learn that the Gaza-launched rocket hit a health clinic in Ashkelon (beyond Sderot); that the doctor who was attending to the wounded was also wounded by it; that the rocket was "Iranian made;" that "Hamas has praised the attack." Yes, the same Hamas that Presidential hopeful Barack Obama wants us to talk to as does the new left-Jewish group which calls itself J Street –– just to make sure you understand that they are truly out of this world. ("J" street in Washington D.C. does not exist, that is their clever point). See James Kirchick's article "What Does the New Jewish Lobby Really Represent" in The New Republic of May 28, 2008. But back to the New York Times: In terms of this latest rocket attack upon Israeli civilians, you have to read on to the eighth paragraph to learn that sixty other people were also wounded-but only "lightly." Not seriously, right? The fact is, that such attacks have been going on for years, the civilian population is being terrorized and traumatized, as well as murdered and maimed. And yes, "lightly wounded" as well. The Times piece includes lots of other information having nothing to do with the Israeli murdered, maimed, or "lightly wounded." The piece is also about President Bush's visit and the diplomats, celebrities, theologians, and Israeli leaders who gathered to be part of it. Folks: Just for the record let me wearily repeat: Israeli government policy may sometimes be imperfect –– but as imperfect as it may be, it does not justify the horrendous, exterminationist assault upon Israeli civilians that Palestinians, Syrians, Jordanians, Egyptians, and Iranians have perpetrated over the decades. I would like you all to read how an Israeli newspaper reported this same event of yesterday.
Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and s co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/ |
|
IT'S THEM OR U.S.
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 15, 2008. |
|
After seeing how Western leaders are handling Lebanon, said an Israeli official privately, "Hizballah could only laugh. We have to take it into consideration that nobody will ever help us." Of course, Israel is not alone because there are so many others becoming victims of a combination of Western dithering and radical aggressiveness. Whether or not the West figures it out, the other side knows well what's going on. "There are only two sides –– Iran and the United States," said the Iranian newspaper Kayhan. Another leading Tehran daily, Jomhouri-e Islamia, explained that as a result of Hizballah's victory in Lebanon, "The U.S.'s Influence in the Region will stop, and the regimes identified with it will be replaced."[*] From Tehran's viewpoint, that's about 20 countries, all but Syria, maybe Sudan, and the Gaza Strip." It's a zero-sum game: Them or U.S., so to speak. Today, Lebanon (or at least west Beirut); tomorrow the world! Somewhere to the south of Iran target Lebanon, a bit west of Iran target Iraq, north of Iran target Egypt, and adjoining Iran targets Jordan and the West Bank, sits little Iran target Israel. A Gulf Arab journalist, in an article tellingly entitled, "Iran is Enemy Number One," wrote a few days ago: "The true feeling of the Saudis, Bahrainis, Kuwaitis, and Qataris is that Iran is the enemy and it must be brought down and weakened." These people know they are at war, with the two fronts right now being Lebanon and Iraq. The Arab-Israeli conflict still exists but has become more of an Israel-Palestinian, Syria, and Iran conflict in practice. For most Arab regimes, it's useful for making propaganda and proving their militant nationalist-Islamic credentials but things have changed a great deal from past decades. Of course, this doesn't mean they will cooperate or make peace with Israel. Moderation not only threatens to expose them to radical subversion but also to weaken their own dictatorships' structure, which rests heavily on demagogically blaming Israel for all their shortcomings. As one Gulf ruler put it privately, "We can use Israel and bash Israel simultaneously." In other words, Israelis –– as well as Americans and some Europeans –– must oppose Iranian ambitions for their own reasons. So why should Arab regimes give anything to them for doing so, even if it means protecting their own sovereignty and systems as well? In this context, the idea that solving the Palestinian issue will bring peace and stability in the region, ensure good Arab-Western relations, and quiet radical Islamism becomes especially laughable. Consider the following. If Iran gets nuclear weapons, it might use them on Israel. This is such a serious threat genocide that Israel must be prepared to attack Iran's installations to block the possibility. But this is just a possibility. There is also an absolute certainty. If Iran gets nuclear weapons: no Western country will stand against it, Arab regimes will rush to appease it, and hundreds of thousands of Muslims will join radical Islamist groups to replace all those regimes Iran says must go. For the moment, however, Lebanon is the Spanish Civil War before the main conflict. A democratic majority, a united front of Christians, Druze, and Sunni Muslims, defies terrorist attacks sponsored by Syria, Iran's ally. They simply don't want to live under an Iran-style Islamist regime. Government supporters are angry that Hizballah can launch war on Israel whenever it pleases at great cost to their nation. They angrily remember decades of Syrian domination, repression, and looting. Spain, of course, became progressive humanity's great icon of in the 1930s. Such people were horrified that the Western democracies would not help Republican Spain while the German and Italian fascists poured troops, weapons, and money into the Fascist side. But why didn't Britain and the others act? Their motives were precisely the same as inhibits determination today. They feared war and the resulting cost and casualties. They profited by trading with the other side. They disliked the great power that was doing more (in those days the USSR, today America of course). Since the Catholic Church backed General Francisco Franco's cause they didn't want to be labeled what today would be called "Catholophobic." They lacked confidence in their own society, which Ezra Pound called a "botched civilization," "an old bitch gone in the teeth." Pound eventually preferred the fascists, as too many intellectuals and artists now find the Islamists the lesser of the two evils. William Butler Yeats said it best: "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere, The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst, Are full of passionate intensity." In 2006, for example, the UN –– all the world's nations nobly assembled –– decided that troops would be sent to southern Lebanon, Hizballah would be kept out from there and disarmed, weapons smuggling would be blocked. Hizballah disagreed and did what it wanted. The world gave in: Hizballah (Syria and Iran), 1; World, 0. So if the world won't even help Arab, Muslim-led, democratic, Lebanon, why should Israel give credence to any such promises or guarantees. Ah, but Israel can defend itself. It's the toughest of all Iran's intended targets. Prime Minister Winston Churchill recalled in December 1941, speaking to Canada's parliament, that collaborationist French generals warned him that if Britain, too, didn't surrender to Hitler, "In three weeks England will have her neck wrung like a chicken." Churchill wryly told his cheering audience: "Some chicken; some neck!"
[*] A somewhat different version of this article was published in the London Jewish Chronicle, May 15, 2008. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
WIKIPOGROM
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 15, 2008. |
|
1. A few days ago I posted some dialogue that was being
disseminated via the anti-Semitic 'ALEF' chat list that operates under
the auspices of the University of Haifa, attempting partially to deny
the Holocaust. The material can be read here: The ALEF list is a list for outright anti-Semites, cheerleaders for terrorism, and Neo-Nazis. The 'dialogue' concerning the Holocaust began when Shraga Elam, an ex-Israel best known for his lavish praise for David Irving, claimed that 'at most' 5.1 million Jews were murdered by the Nazis during World War II. This was supposed to be based on an estimate of the world Jewish population posted on a Hebrew University web site by HU's demographer Prof. Sergio DellaPergola at
There it says that there were 11 million Jews world wide (elsewhere it says 11.4) after World War II and 16.5 before the war in the entire world. Elam and his ilk then claim that 'at most' 5.1 million Jews were murdered, and the 'Six Million' number is Zionist propaganda. Elam was then joined on the ALEF list by Stalinist British anti-Semite Tony Greenstein and others, including a professor of [psychology from Haifa University), who not only agreed but claimed that as few as 1.5 million Jews may have been murdered. This is all familiar stuff taken from Neo-Nazi and Holocaust Denial web sites, who make similar 'statistical arguments.' What is one to make of all this? First of all, the 11 and the 16.5 numbers on the Hebrew University web site are hardly firm authoritative data points and are little more than wild guesses. But suppose for the sake of argument that they are correct. Would this give credence to the claims of the anti-Semites and Neo-Nazis that the Six Million number is a fabrication? An invention of Zionists? Where is the 'missing million' if we take those numbers at face value? The answer is that the claim reveals far more about the demographic illiteracy of the anti-Semites than about the actual scope of the Holocaust. The 'claim' of the anti-Semites that the numbers show that fewer than Six Million were murdered in the Holocaust ignores natural growth of Jewish populations in other, non-European parts of the world, that is, the excess of births over deaths there. (These included all high-birth Jewish populations in North Africa and Asia.) It assumes a static world Jewish population between 1939 and 1946, other than the effect of the Holocaust. If the Jewish populations outside Europe in 1939 were about ten million, and if these Jewish populations were growing naturally at 2% per year during the years of World War II, which is probably close to or less than they were actually growing, then do the math and that more than 'explains' the supposedly 'missing million' in the data of the anti-Semites. In fact, the number of Jewish deaths during the Holocaust may have been closer to 7 million than six million. The anti-Semites, including the Jewish anti-Semites, are misusing demographic data about the Holocaust so that they can engineer a second Holocaust of Jews. 2. As you may know, Wikipedia, the amateurish web 'encyclopedia,' although a reference source that no one with a high school diploma would regard as reliable, has been systematically sabotaged by a group of anti-Semites, who distort and vandalize any entry having anything to do with Israel or Zionism. These anti-Semites seem to be working as a team of editors. Details about a campaign, led by CAMERA, to correct this can be read here:
Since so many high schoolers and laymen. too lazy to do real research on topics use Wikipedia, it is important to assist those attempting to correct the problem. Contact CAMERA for ways you can help. 3. Tel Aviv University held 'Nakba' events this week mourning Israel.s existence on campus facilities, conducted with university official approval and support. 4. Getting high with Hebrew University's Timothy Leary (Benny Shanon):
First Person: Benny Shanon
I don't think of myself as naive. But I was too innocent to foresee the reactions to an academic essay I published recently. It suggested that Moses and the early Israelites might have used psychoactive plants. After I gave an interview to an Israeli newspaper about it, the story was picked up by news wires all over the world. Hundreds of people wrote to me because they'd seen headlines like "Was Moses high on psychedelic drugs?" Some of them called me a sinner or an idiot, others heaped praise on me because they thought I was some kind of 1960s Timothy Leary counter-culture figure advocating hallucinogenic drugs. Just to be clear: I'm not. I'm a professor of cognitive psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; my expertise is in the study of human consciousness and the philosophy of psychology. I became interested in non-ordinary states of consciousness when I was on holiday in the upper Amazonian region of Brazil. I got the chance to take part in a religious ritual that meant drinking a powerful psychoactive brew called ayahuasca. This potion plays a central role in the cultures of the indigenous tribes of the region, where it is used in religious rituals and medicinal practices. Ayahuasca is famous for the vivid visions that it induces. Common effects include psychological insights, philosophical-like reflections and deep religious and spiritual sentiments. I have had similar experiences, which had a deep personal impact on me. I decided to study the potion from a psychologist's approach. Since then, I have consumed ayahuasca about 160 times and published my research in an academic book, called Antipodes of the Mind. The article on Moses was just a small offshoot of this work. I had started noticing clues showing that the early Israelites might have used a potion similar to ayahuasca. I should explain that although I am not religious, I deeply respect religious feelings and the Jewish tradition in which I was raised. I believe that Moses was an extraordinary man. Journalists simplified my theory and misquoted me, saying that Moses was stoned when he received the 10 commandments. It was like the children's game called 'broken telephone': a child whispers a message to a friend and this child to another, and so on; and in the end the message is totally distorted. Most people who wrote to me had never read my essay. I received about 100 hate messages, mostly from American fundamentalist Christians. One Christian woman wrote to say she was praying for me and urged me to repent. A Muslim called me a stupid Jew and said I had better never write anything like that about the Koran. Other people just thought I was in favour of drugs. A father wrote to say that his son was a drug addict and that I shouldn't publish such theories. He didn't know that in traditional native American societies, only mature people are allowed to use ayahuasca. I was 42 when I first drank it –– not exactly a kid taking drugs at a rave party. There were other people who realised I had been misinterpreted. One message I liked a lot came from a religious Jew living in the US. He said he thought I was right but that I should have kept my theory secret. Indeed, in the Jewish mystical tradition of Kabbalah esoteric knowledge is not meant for everyone. But I'm a scientist and believe in the power of arguments. I don't want to hide a theory just because it could create an uproar. 5. Daniel Barenboim is back: "We wanted to own land that had never belonged to Jews and build
settlements there. The Palestinians see this as imperialistic
provocation, and rightly so. Their resistance is absolutely
understandable –– not the means they use to this end, not the violence
nor the wanton inhumanity –– but their "no." We Israelis must finally
find the courage to not react to this violence, the courage to stand
by our history."
6. Remembert hat old definition of chutzpah –– where someone kills
his parents and then asks the judge for mercy cause he is an orphan?
Well, read this
7. Nutty Nadine: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=
8. MES Fiction: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/
9. Jews and Jew Haters II: From Cranks to Clowns May 8th 2008, 9:28 am (This is a guest post by Mikey) Six months ago, I posted Jews and Jew Haters: The Anti-Zionist Jewish Squabble. It was about the nasty feud between Tony Greenstein, an anti-Zionist British Jew, and Gilad Atzmon, an anti-Zionist Israeli. Greenstein wants "the state of Israel to be destroyed" and claims that Hamas and Hizbollah are not antisemitic. Atzmon says that burning down a synagogue is a "rational act." I wasn't sure if a sane person could support either side, but I concluded: "this argument is set to run and run." And so it has turned out. The Tony Greenstein camp has established its own blog, Anti-Zionists against Anti-Semitism, to "opppose [sic] that small current around Israel Shamir and Gilad Atzmon who wish to introduce the ideas of racism and anti-Semitism into the Palestine solidarity movement." A large proportion of the posts are attacks on Atzmon, described as "a holocaust denier" who is "fundamentally racist and reactionary." The blog is very dull and only masochists will enjoy it. Apparently even Greenstein finds it boring, which may explain why he is anxious for the excitement of a court case. He has initiated legal proceedings against Atzmon in respect of: False allegations of serious criminal conduct and fraud concerning alleged offences over 20 years ago, contrary to s.8 of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. In full litigation mode, Greenstein has also threatened to sue Google for hosting the website of Atzmon's main defender. In the Nazi mind, the ultimate evil is being a Jew. In Atzmon's mind, the ultimate evil is being a Zionist. This is worse than being a Nazi: there is no room for comparison between Israel and the Nazis. If a comparison is to be made, then it is the Israelis who win the championship of ruthlessness. Israel and Zionism endanger our world. We have to admit that Israel is the ultimate evil rather than Nazi Germany. We should never compare Israel to Nazi Germany. As far as evilness is concerned, we should now let Israel take the lead. Since it is the worst insult he can imagine, Atzmon has taken to calling the Greenstein camp crypto-Zionists. Since it is the worst insult he can imagine, Greenstein throws the same accusation against the Atzmon camp, whose ideas "can only lead in one direction –– to the strengthening of Zionism." But Greenstein is more promiscuous with his abuse. Not long after the BNP's legal adviser attacked the Board of Deputies as "a clique of self serving Zionist racists" and a "Zionist-Nazi organisation" and the Jewish Chronicle as "the mouthpiece of the same clique of Zionist parasites and crooks," Greenstein wrote that the BNP is "pro-Zionist." Perhaps he was trying to enliven his blog by making it hard for his readers to keep a straight face. It may become a double-act. Both Gilad Atzmon and Tony Greenstein despise Anthony Julius for his criticisms of anti-Zionism. Greenstein recently dismissed Julius as "quite a simple fellow" under a headline that screamed, "Gilad Atzmon Joins with Anthony Julius to Attack Jewish Anti-Zionists." That was shortly after Atzmon attacked Julius for his role in "the destruction of history revisionist David Irving's career." Meanwhile the Trotskyist Alliance for Workers' Liberty has rallied to Greenstein defence. This is in spite of Greenstein's boast on the very same webpage that he would lose no sleep if they [AIPAC], the Bush White House, the leadership of the Republican Party, New Labour's cabinet and any other warmongers I can think of, were vaporised. As Paul Bogdanor commented: Previously I exposed Greenstein's thoughts on vapourising as many as 100,000 American Jews in AIPAC, along with the inhabitants of the White House, as well as his endorsement of the IRA atrocity at the Brighton hotel. Greenstein now extends the list to the leadership of the Republican Party, New Labour's cabinet "and any other warmongers I can think of." Thus Greenstein's "anarchist wishful thinking" encompasses the mass murder of the entire democratically elected leadership of America and Britain, and, apparently, anyone at all who supported the Iraq war. That would presumably include everyone from Iraqi voters who support Coalition forces to those he has elsewhere described as "the racist warmongers of Harry's Place"! Greenstein's troubles go beyond allegations of serious criminal conduct and the exposure of his "wishful thinking" about terrorism. While coping with the tedium of his own blog, he faces the humiliation of a spoof blog by a supporter of Atzmon. The unidentified blogger has even started posting videos mocking a certain "Mony Gripstein" and his comrade, the irreplaceable Roland Rance. Watching the farce of the Jewish anti-Zionists, you may think that the lunatics have taken over the asylum. I prefer to say that the clowns are now running the circus Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
DEFEND JEWS, GO TO ISRAELI PRISON; PALESTINIAN NATIONALITY IS PHONY;
LEBANON'S CIVIL WAR FORESEEABLE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 15, 2008. |
|
ANOTHER WEEK IN ISRAEL The government of Israel indirectly negotiated to release hundreds of terrorist prisoners and give Hamas a ceasefire for rearming. Hamas continued to bombard Israeli towns. Israeli trucks delivered supplies to Gaza, where Hamas stored them and then claimed that Israel was depriving the people of supplies. Israelis commemorated the Holocaust, while Hamas called the Holocaust a Jewish plot to get disabled Jews out of the way. Hamas accused Israel of bombing a woman, but her husband, whom the IDF struck, was carrying a bomb that exploded and killed her. Israeli and international media reported the Hamas accusation unquestioningly as if factual, until an Israeli investigation disproved it (as IDF investigations always do). Although Israel lets 7,000 Gaza Arabs into Israeli hospitals free, the World Health Organization (WHO) falsely accused Israel of barring Arabs, of whom 33 died. WHO failed to accuse Egypt, which admits none. WHO did not acknowledge that Israel has no responsibility to let enemy aliens in, and no other country does. It did not state that Hamas hoards medical supplies and then claims that Israel denies Gaza hospitals sufficient medical supplies. It simply accepted Hamas' word. Fortunately, Israel investigated and replied swiftly (something it formerly did not do). The media also accepts Hamas' word, though it knows Hamas is so treacherous that it is afraid to let its reporters into Gaza to see for themselves. The media does not inform readers that its source is a terrorist group that murders Jews for religious reasons. The popularity of Hamas indicates the futility of hoping the Palestinian Arabs will make peace with Israel. Nevertheless Sec. Rice suggests not bothering Hamas and waiting for it to decide to make peace. She tries to get Israel to curb its anti-terrorist action in Judea-Samaria, too. (Incidentally, that would enable Hamas to get stronger there.) The problem is that the US and Israel won't admit that all the factions in the P.A. are irredeemable terrorists and must be fought down (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 5/3). DEFENDERS OF FELLOW JEWS GOING TO PRISON Two soldiers are going to prison for defending Jews in Samaria and firing warning shots in self-defense from a mob of Bedouin trespassers. A medic found no injuries there, but the Bedouin claimed there were. The Supreme Court rejected the defense that the police failed to check their weapons or conduct a line-up. The judges believed the Bedouin, who refused to come to court to make an official complaint. The judges imposed the sentence to be a lesson to others (IMRA, 5/4). Forensics in Rabin murder was poor, too. What lesson? Don't defend fellow Jews? Let oneself be killed? Sharia applies, in that a Jew's testimony is inferior to that of lying Muslims? Arabs are above the law? A Jew should not expect justice in an Israeli court? Obey the police state? WAS SYRIAN PLANT FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS? US officials briefed Congress on whether the secret Syrian plant that Israel bombed was for nuclear weapons. The officials had two gauges. According to one, they believed the plant was for weapons. According to the other, they could not determine the answer with "high confidence." The evidence points to weapons, but there isn't proof that a court would accept. The indicators? The reactor was not suited for research nor for producing energy, only for producing weapons. After the bombing, Syria removed the remains, as if attempting to prevent anyone from determining whether it had been for weapons. [I would add that any country may sign the pacts and set up nuclear energy plants with foreign assistance openly. Then why act in secret?] Absolute proof is difficult to obtain. Hence proliferators work hard to conceal their activity. Searching for it can waste valuable time needed for confronting determined proliferators. Therefore, assessors need to use a different vocabulary, so that their assessments be more realistic. They should describe the matter as a strategic analysis (IMRA, 5/4). NEW PROOF THAT PALESTINIAN NATIONALITY IS PHONY Israeli Arabs and their Jewish sycophants call the establishment of Israel a catastrophe for the Arabs. They use the word, "naqba," for catastrophe. It is assumed that Arabs initiated that term's use in 1948, when they lost out. Not so. The term first was used when the Palestine and Syrian Mandates were set up, about 1920. Arabs in both Mandates rioted over the news, considering the Arabs in the Palestine Mandate as Syrian. They refused to be considered Palestinian. So much for the myth of Palestinian nationalism (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/5). CHECKPOINT & SECURITY REMOVAL Sec. Rice keeps demanding that Israel remove checkpoints in Judea-Samaria. Israel keeps complying. She says the idea is to make life more convenient for the terrorists, I mean, the Palestinian Arabs. One checkpoint was removed from a road that leads to IDF bases and Jewish houses in Beit El. Along this road terrorists have shot at Jews and mobs came after Jewish residents. They attempted lynching. The road is not needed by the Arabs, who have another road nearby. Another checkpoint completed the encirclement of Nablus, keeping terrorists in (Arutz-7, 5/6). RICE INTERFERES WITH NEGOTIATIONS Sec. Rice wants Israel to reach an agreement on borders for a P.A. state. Apparently she is pushing the compliant Olmert to commit to Arab demands before the new investigation into his corruption deposes him (IMRA, 5/5). She's a menace to Israel and to the US. The pity of it is that if Israel did make a deal with Abbas while Bush still is in office, Bush would take credit for it and the US Jews would go along with it. They would not realize that it would doom Israel. How little they know about the issue. UNO SCHOOL IN GAZA A science teacher at a UNO school was killed by the IDF. Islamic Jihad terrorists treated him as a martyr, its chief bomb maker. UNESCO claims that it has nothing to do with terrorism, he hid his affiliation (IMRA, 5/5). Since the whole people there are jihadist, it would be difficult for UNESCO to do more than avoid hiring known terrorists. Since most of its employees are local Muslims, who will do the vetting? UNESCO doesn't supervise the Arabs enough. This makes for welfare fraud. The main problem is that UNESCO maintains the people's refugee status. It spends ever more money keeping them dependent. Other UNO agencies try to rescue people from refugee status. ZIONISM'S ACCOMPLISHMENT Western antisemites used to claim that the Jewish people "were racially inferior, intellectually inferior, cowards, money-grubbers, killers of God, sub-humans." Thanks to Jewish sovereignty, they are reduced to complaining that the Jews are mean to the Palestinian Arabs. That is a major change and a great accomplishment of Zionism. The accusations are false now, as the earlier ones were then. Actually, the Palestinian Arabs are mean to the Jews. Nor are the accusations sincere. The whole Arab world oppresses its own people. Westerners, including Israeli leftists, who complain about Israel, rarely condemn Arab oppressors, especially Palestinian Arabs who oppress both Arabs and Jews. They don't care about Arabs and their rights. The complaints are the new outlet for antisemitism. They criticize Israel in the hope of de-legitimizing it. They are motivated by the old hatred, but cloak it in humanitarianism (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/6). No wonder the humanitarian organizations unfairly condemn Israel! I think it isn't just sovereignty that has changed the outlet for antisemitism. The Holocaust discredited much of it. Americans have become more tolerant. Plaut overlooks the fact that Israel is the most antisemitic non-Muslim state. BASIS FOR U.S.-ISRAEL ALLIANCE The US once designated Israel as a "non-NATO ally." Before Israel was reconstituted, some US Presidents were pro-Zionist. Afterwards, none were. All followed, more or less, the State Dept. anti-Zionist line. Some of this hostility towards Israel was manifested by embargoes of arms, subsidies, and other attempts to blackmail Israel, by privately withholding or distorting intelligence publicly promised to Israel, by oppression of Israel's agents in the US, and by demanding that Israel appease the Arabs at the risk of its national security. The basis for an alliance is that Israel has kept US enemies from advancing, has advised the US on enemy weaponry, has offered the US weapons improvements and intelligence on terrorism, and supports the US in the UNO. There is some friction over Israeli competition in arms exports. Sometimes Israel exports to countries that the US considers a menace, but the US always exports to countries that Israel finds a menace. The US is a bully about this. Overall, Israel is pro-American in a world largely hostile or jealous of America. I think, however, that half-way decent foreign countries are starting to realize that the US is their bulwark against the indecent foreign countries. The basis for the alliance that most people state is illusory. That basis is shared values, including that both countries are democracies. Israel is democratic in name but hardly in substance. It is a police state towards the Jews. ON P.A. PROTESTS AT RAIDS ON TERRORISTS The P.A. keeps protesting against IDF raids in Judea-Samaria. The P.A. argument is that it wants to be responsible for capturing terrorists. The raids capture terrorists almost every time, throughout the P.A.. Nothing stops the P.A. from having captured the terrorists, itself. But it does not capture them, except a little for show. Therefore, it does not do the job. The P.A. failure indicates bad faith and requires Israeli intervention. LEBANON'S CIVIL WAR FORESEEABLE Hizbullah became such a threat to the state that even the Lebanese Army started opposing it. Too late. Hizbullah took over parts of Beirut. It is well armed and trained. The time for the Lebanese Army to have stopped Hizbullah was when Israel impaired Hizbullah and the Lebanese Army could have worked with UNIFIL to arrest Hizbullah for truce violations. Israel flubbed its own chance to destroy Hizbullah. Israel and the US failed to chastise Syria. Israel and the US seem to have been taken by surprise, though the way Hizbullah's protégé staged a coup in Gaza should have shown what to expect from Hizbullah, once rearmed.
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 GATHERING STORM, AND BEYOND
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, May 15, 2008. | |
|
Dear friends, Moshe Aumann is the brother of Nobel Prize winner in Economic Sciences Robert Aumann. His letter below speaks for itself. Also following, you will find the article by Irwin Cotler, the former Canadian Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Both the letter and the article are a required reading. They are particularly important in the wake of President Bush's amazing speech to the Israeli Knesset this afternoon. CNN and the Obama campaign have already begun a massive attack on what the President said. No matter how fierce they attack him, his great speech and incredible demonstration of support for Israel will be remembered forever. Your Truth Provider, Yuval
This below is an article written by Irwin Cottler. It appeared
yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
Irwin Cottler is the member of parliament for Mount Royal and the former minister of justice and attorney general of Canada. He is a professor of law (on leave) at McGill University and has written extensively on human rights and Middle-East issues. | |
|
The incendiary hate language emanating from Ahmadinejad's Iran –– in which Israel is referred to as "filthy bacteria" and a "cancerous tumor" and Jews are characterized as "a bunch of bloodthirsty barbarians" –– is only the head wind of the gathering storm confronting Israel on its 60th anniversary. Indeed, we are witnessing, and have been for some time, a series of mega-events, political earthquakes that have been impacting not only upon Israel and world Jewry but upon the human condition as a whole. These include:
WITH ISRAEL'S 60th anniversary, these mega-events have not only intensified but congealed into what might be called a "gathering storm," finding expression in the two theses that underpin this article. First, that this gathering storm appears to be without parallel or precedent since 1938, suggesting thereby that 2008 is reflective and reminiscent of 1938. The second thesis, which reflects my own position and is not inconsistent with the previous notion, is that whatever 2008 may be, it is not 1938. Simply put, there is a Jewish state today that is an antidote to the vulnerabilities of 1938. There is a Jewish people with untold moral, intellectual, economic and political resources. There are non-Jews prepared to join the Jewish people in common cause, seeing the cause of Israel not simply as a Jewish cause, but –– with all its imperfections –– as a just cause. Nor is Israel is isolated or alone. It has important friends and allies: for example, the United States, Canada, Germany and France, to name a few; and it has diplomatic relations with the two emerging superpowers, China and India. There are peace treaties, however imperfect, with Egypt and Jordan. In a word, if one looks at Israel at 60 in this global configuration, 2008 is, even with an admittedly gathering storm not unlike 1938, nonetheless very different from the Thirties. It is important, therefore, that Israel not be viewed as an Andy Warhol of the international media, or what passes as virtual reality on the Internet of the day. Israel is not simply a snapshot at age 60, nor a fragment frozen in time; nor is it anchored only in 60 years of Israeli statehood, or 120 years of Zionism. For Israel, rooted in the Jewish people, as an Abrahamic people, is a prototypical First Nation or aboriginal people, just as the Jewish religion is a prototypical aboriginal religion, the first of the Abrahamic religions.
IN A WORD, the Jewish people is the only people that still inhabits the same land, embraces the same religion, studies the same Torah, hearkens to the same prophets, speaks the same aboriginal language –– Hebrew –– and bears the same aboriginal name, Israel, as it did 3,500 years ago. Israel, then, is the aboriginal homeland of the Jewish people across space and time. It is not just a homeland for the Jewish people, a place of refuge, asylum and protection. It is the homeland of the Jewish people, wherever and whenever it may be; and its birth certificate originates in its inception as a First Nation, and not simply, however important, in its United Nations international birth certificate. The State of Israel, then, as a political and juridical entity, overlaps with the "aboriginal Jewish homeland"; it is, in international legal terms, a successor state to the biblical, or aboriginal, Jewish kingdoms. But that aboriginal homeland is also claimed by another people, the Palestinian/Arab people, who see it as their place and patrimony.
THE EXISTENCE of a parallel claim does not vitiate that of the Jewish people or cause it to resonate any less as memory and memoir of homeland –– where homeland represents history, roots, religion, language, culture, literature, law, custom, family, myth and values. Rather, the equities of the claim mandate the logic of Israeli-Palestinian partition –– a logic which in moral and juridical terms requires that a just solution be organized around the "principle of least injustice," and that includes mutual recognition of the legitimacy of two states for two peoples. Nor should the internal divides besetting Israel mask the existential raison d'etre, and moral imperative, of Israel itself. Nazism, and the gathering storm of the Thirties, almost succeeded not only because of its pathology of hate and industry of death, but because of the powerlessness of the stateless Jew and the vulnerability of the powerless without a state. Israel, then, is an antidote to Jewish vulnerability, the raison d'etre in the most profound existential sense for Jewish self-determination. It is not the case, as it sometimes said, that if there had been no Holocaust, there would not have been a State of Israel, as if a state could somehow even compensate for the murder of six million Jews. It is the other way around: If there had been an Israel, there would not have been a Holocaust, or others horrors of Jewish history. In the end, we come back to the beginning: that whatever the gathering storm from without may be, whatever the internal grievances, the Kulturkampf of the Jews' despair in 2008 would not only be a betrayal of the Jewish aboriginal past, but a denial of the next 60 years and beyond. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL: INTOLERABLE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 14, 2008. |
|
The entire situation here. Many things that call for discussion can be put aside until tomorrow. I would like here to touch only upon the most intolerable elements of our situation. ~~~~~~~~~~ President Bush arrived this morning, bringing with him (incredibly!) a contingent of 100 prominent American Jews, all of whom seem to think it's just peachy keen that the president is promoting those "peace negotiations" with Abbas. Bush was, of course, welcomed with the most lavish praise from the heads of our government. And Bush, for his part, expressed great admiration for us and pledged undying friendship. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is important, however, to take a closer look at what Bush has said, and what he is advocating. He has a plan, you see: He thinks that we need to set our borders once and for all, and that this will help move things along. The borders? Well, you can't give the Palestinians "Swiss cheese" for a state and expect them to be happy. If we're going to make those Palestinians happy, they have to be offered a contiguous state. And what of the Bush commitment to our retention of major settlement blocs, presumably incorporated into the letter he had written to Sharon? As Post editor David Horovitz wrote, after interviewing Bush: "On borders, Swiss cheese trumps a 4-year old letter." Horovitz reports that Bush said: "We... try to make sure that the Palestinians understand that we believe in the contiguous state...How can you have a hopeful place if you're not really in charge of a contiguous territory?... It won't be a viable state." ~~~~~~~~~~ Just the other day I wrote about how sometimes I report on a situation, and how, almost before my eyes, it will metamorphose into something else. It's not long since Abbas came back from his meeting with Bush very depressed because he learned that the president wasn't going to push us on the settlements. Then I wrote that just possibly Bush would come through on his commitment given to Sharon. How does that dovetail with what Bush is saying now? Not terribly well. Many analysts see Rice's influence here. But there's more to the plan. Once Abbas is happy about those borders, it is reasoned, he may be willing to compromise on the issue of "right of return." Unfortunately, Rice has a short memory, because (as I reported here) not long ago Jordan's King Abdullah warned her that if Abbas were pushed into a compromise such as this, his life would be in danger. Abbas, even if he wanted to, does not have the latitude to give away what the Palestinians see as a key "right." Hamas is breathing down his neck. ~~~~~~~~~~ Bush made a statement today about US loyalty to Israel. In part, it went like this: "...we will stand with Israel against the nuclear threat." And I ponder what that means. To me it sounds like: You take care of it, and we'll be right behind you. The only tolerable statement would be one that pledges in simple terms not to let Iran go nuclear. ~~~~~~~~~~ We endured another terrorist attack today. This was a Grad Katyusha, shot at a shopping mall in Ashkelon. Fifteen were wounded, including three seriously, when a part of the roof caved in. Among those seriously injured were a mother and her three-year old daughter. Intolerable indeed! This was surely timed by terrorists (Islamic Jihad claimed credit) for Bush's visit. In several places, including in Judea and Samaria, there were protests at Bush's coming to celebrate our independence. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert was just concluding a meeting with Bush when the attack occurred. Olmert's subsequent comment was not easy to swallow: "We will not be able to tolerate continuous attacks on innocent civilians. We hope we will not have to act against Hamas in other ways with the military power that Israel hasn't yet started to use in a serious manner in order to stop it." We will not be able to tolerate? We have BEEN tolerating, shamefully. We hope we won't have to act? What kind of nonsensical, empty threat is that? We must act. And note: military power that Israel hasn't yet started to use in a serious manner. In the name of all those suffering under the rocket barrages, I ask, and why not?? Channel two cited an unnamed Israeli official as saying, "We are on a certain path of an extensive military confrontation with Hamas." So, when already? Information is that the IDF is ready and only awaits political go-ahead. ~~~~~~~~~~ And this, heaven help us, was Bush's comment on the attack: "We believe that the surest way to defeat the enemies...is to advance the cause of hope, the cause of freedom, liberty as the great alternative to tyranny and terror." Will someone please tell this man that the only way to defeat tyranny and terror is by defeating it, not by bringing "hope." Once upon a time, he seemed to know this. ~~~~~~~~~~ And the last intolerable of this report: In a conference in the Egyptian parliament, Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni is reported to have said that he "would burn Israeli books himself if found in Egyptian libraries." This is going to put a considerable strain on our relationship with Egypt. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
BIBLE QUIZ CONTROVERSY
Posted by Gershom May, May 14, 2008. |
|
Recently, in the Israeli news –– they reported the controversy, over a messianic Jew, who lives in Israel, and is Jewish by birth. Who entered the Israel sponsored –– International Bible Quiz. Which, traditionally –– has only Jewish participants. This quiz, was sponsored by an Israeli governmental organization. However; this year, a young lady, living in Israel, who is a Jew –– by birth, and a member of the Messianic Jewish Church. BTW, all of whom, consider themselves –– Jews, and entitled to be a part –– of the Torah Covenant, that, G-D, gave the Jewish Nation/People. She, entered the competition, at the urging of –– what she called, her rabbis. Who are nothing more than, non-Jewish messianic Christian ministers, who proselytize a belief that, The G-D of the Jews, has a son. And, or, is a part of a triune deity. Though, the government minister, was contacted by many prominent –– Jewish Rabbi's, and asked to either –– exclude the girl, based upon the fact, she is openly practicing as a NON_JEW. And because; traditionally, this quiz, has been for Jewish youth. The government minister, declined to prevent her from participating. Stating that; it was sad that; with the 60th birthday celebration of Israel. That, this sort of controversy, had to spoil the celebration. I wrote a response to the Jerusalem Post, which I would like to share with the Think-Israel audience/members. |
|
Sir, Regarding the recent TORAH Bible Quiz, and the participation of a person –– associated with, the messianic Jewish movement. Instead of quibbling, over the equivoque –– of the word Jew, and who is eligible to participate in –– The International TORAH Bible Quiz. Which obviously was not defined clearly –– from the start. Because, the quiz –– is sponsored by the Jewish People/Nation. We need to either ensure that; it is either limited to, solely Jewish youth –– who are practicing, as JEWS, according to Halachah. And –– or, to make it perfectly clear –– to our non-Jewish friends, when they apply to participate that; (1), other forms of beliefs, and their interpretation of the Jewish TORAH, are not acceptable. [**] According to the JEWISH TORAH: Bamidbar/Numb 23, 19; "G-D is not man –– that He should be deceitful, nor a –– son of man –– that he should relent. Would HE say and not do, or speak and not confirm"? [**] Dvarim/Deut: 6-4; "Hear, O Israel; G-D is our G-D, G-D is the ONE and ONLY".
Therefore; To say; He (G-D), is also a man diety, or, a deity in any form(s). Then; that makes G-D –– a liar. These are but a few of the counter points, to present, to those who seek to infiltrate Jewish activity, potentially to proselytize their religion. BTW, I am formerly associated with this group, when I practiced –– Born-Again-Christianity, and worked as an evangelist. In that time, I began to discover, that the Christians, were overlooking, re-interpreting –– basic Torah Text. I intensely sought and answer from G-D. HE, showed me the true truth. I and my wife, then converted to Orthodox Judaism. And now, live in Israel. Where I browse/belong to groups/Internet sites. Seeking to expose –– the dark side, of subtle proselytizing, by groups, such as –– the messianic Jews. Sincerely,
Gershom May lives in Hatzor HaGelilit, Israel. Contact him at myplate@actcom.co.il |
|
KFAR AZA, THEN AND NOW
Posted by Israel Zwick, May 14, 2008. |
|
This was published May 12, 2008 on CN Publications. |
|
It was with deep sadness that I read about the difficulties facing the people of Kibbutz Kfar Aza following the rocket attack that killed a member, Jimmy Kedoshim. I have fond and nostalgic memories of this kibbutz. I worked there briefly following my junior year in college in 1969. It was my first trip to Israel, two years after the 1967 War and the summer that Neil Armstrong took a giant step for mankind. The trip to Israel was a giant step for me, I had to save up for it for several years because my parents couldn't afford to finance it, and I forfeited a good summer job as well. But I was eager to go. I wanted to see the historic Jewish sites and visit the few relatives that I had that weren't killed in the Holocaust. My mother had an uncle who went to Palestine before the War and my father had some cousins who were able to get to Palestine after the war. One day I went to visit my mother's cousin, Refoel Engel, who lived in the ancient Arab town of Ramla near the airport. He introduced me to his attractive daughter who was about my age. After chatting for a while in broken English, Miss Engel (I don't remember her first name) asked me if I would like to work on a kibbutz. Miss Engel was serving her military obligation in a paramilitary unit stationed at Kibbutz Kfar Aza. Since the kibbutz was located near the Gaza border (hence the name Kfar Aza) soldiers were stationed there for protection. It sounded like a great opportunity to participate in Israeli life, so I grabbed it. An opportunity to meet the young women in the military unit also crossed my mind. Transportation to the kibbutz was on some rickety truck. It was a long trip and the whole time I thought that we weren't going to make it and would get stuck somewhere in the middle of the desert and wait for days until we were found. No such thing happened. The truck made it there and I was excited from the moment I arrived. Kfar Aza was one of those kibbutzim that you read about in the books, a Miracle of the Desert. They were actually growing oranges in the desert with irrigation techniques. The people working there were dark-skinned Israelis, mostly Sephardim, who didn't speak much English. Their vehicles were British Jeeps and trucks that were left by the departing British army. They looked like they were held together by glue, tape, and paper clips. It was a poor kibbutz, most of the work was done by hand with primitive tools, not modern farm machinery. The people lived simply, their only luxury was a swimming pool that was recently completed. Once I arrived, I couldn't leave even if I wanted to. A bus came to the kibbutz only once a day at irregular hours. Most of the transportation in and out of the kibbutz was by delivery or military vehicles, if there was any room. But I didn't want to leave, this was exciting. I was assigned to a simple room not far from my cousin, Miss Engel. After a brief rest, I went to train for my job which was to count caterpillar larvae in the cotton fields. I was assigned this job because I told them that I majored in biology in college. The kibbutz had three cotton fields which received varying amounts of irrigation because of the water shortage. Each day, we would go to a different field. We were supposed to identify and count the caterpillars and our totals would determine whether a crop duster would be hired to spray the fields. It was an important job because the welfare of the cotton crop and finances of the kibbutz depended on it. It wasn't an easy task because the larvae camouflaged well in the cotton plant. Work started at 4 am when the sun rose. I didn't have trouble getting up because I was so excited. A rickety, old British military vehicle drove us out to the cotton field. The first day was the one that received the most irrigation. So I had to take off my sandals, roll up my pants and walk ankle-deep in mud in the hot sun, looking for caterpillars. But I loved it. At 8 am, we were picked up by the same vehicle to bring us to the community dining room for breakfast. They served us fresh milk that was still warm from the cows. The milk was poured through a strainer to remove the fat. In addition, we had some fresh salad with olives, some cheese, and coarse bread. I wanted to have a fresh orange but was told that they weren't in season, not ripe yet. After breakfast, we went back to the fields for another four hours of work in the hot sun, then returned for lunch which was similar to breakfast. I don't recall if they served any meat, but being kosher, I didn't eat any meat. The workday was over at around 1 pm, after that the desert heat made it too unbearable to work. We cooled off in the new swimming pool which was the pride of the kibbutz. I was able to socialize with the other young people. Between their broken English and my broken Hebrew, we were able to communicate a little. I followed this schedule for about a week, then I decided that my time in Israel was too short and precious to spend it all at this kibbutz, so I went back to civilization, as it was known in Israel at that time. I understand that Kibbutz Kfar Aza is no longer growing cotton but has developed a lucrative business in industrial plastics. I never went back to visit, but will never forget my experience there. I pray that this rocket attack was an isolated incident and that the IDF will soon find a solution to the persistent attacks on the southern Negev. To the people of the kibbutz and to the Kedoshim family who are true to their name, I can only say, "Hamokem Yenachem Eschem," and may you overcome your grief and continue to thrive in happiness and peace. Contact Israel Zwick by email at israel.zwick@earthlink.net
and visit his website: www.cnpublications.net. This article is
archived at
|
|
"PEACE PROCESS" DRYING UP ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 14, 2008. |
|
"PEACE PROCESS" DRYING UP ISRAEL Israel's main source of water is Lake Kinneret. It is drying up. Tapping it probably will have to stop, this summer. The government attributes this to drought. Not so. The fault is Peres' and other Israeli officials, over-eager to sign the peace agreement with Jordan. Jordan, the aggressor, unjustifiably demanded 50 million cubic meters of water annually. A dry country such as Israel, should have rejected the demand. Now more water is removed than can be replenished (Barry Chamish, 5/3). I remember thinking of this at the time, but I did not know whether the quantity stipulated in the treaty was excessive. The government should have. QUARTET ANNOUNCEMENTS I just read the Quartet announcement of 5/3. It reads just like its announcement of a week or two earlier. Both sides should meet their obligations and not exacerbate tensions, the announcements state, but Israel should do more to make life easier on its enemies in the P.A. (IMRA). Should, should, should. Sounds silly. The Quartet doesn't do anything useful, and is not fair. WHAT EMBOLDENED THESE ARABS? As dozens of Arabs walked towards the Jewish town of Yitzhar in Judea-Samaria, they set the Jews' crops ablaze. At the town, in which they had no legitimate business, they started fighting with residents. Soldiers stopped the fight. No arrests. The Arabs claimed that Yitzhar Jews and Israeli troops went to their village and smashed Arabs' cars (Arutz-7, 5/4). If Jews had attacked Arabs, they would be arrested. IDF troops don't engage in vandalism against the Arabs, so the Arabs are lying. What has unleashed their aggressiveness? The government wants the Jews out and doesn't prosecute Arabs much. 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 |
|
OPEN LETTER TO BUSH: SAVE ISRAEL FROM PA STATE
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 14, 2008. |
|
A grassroots organization has penned an open letter to President George Bush in honor of his visit, succinctly explaining why many Israelis oppose a Palestinian state. The letter, dotted with sources from the White House website and elsewhere to bolster its points, begins by welcoming the US President to Israel. It then explains that "vital interests" of both Israel and the US are liable to be endangered "due to your visit, particularly in view of Prime Minister Olmert's legal troubles." Not North or South, but East The Mattot Arim group states that Israel's worst security threat comes not from Lebanon or Gaza, but from a potential Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria: "Israel is plagued from the north by a terror machine in Lebanon, and from the south by a second terror machine in Gaza. However, Israel's north and south border regions are populated by fewer than 200,000 Israelis. By far, the worst terror threat, therefore, is the potential third terror machine, in Judea and Samaria, just opposite the homes of millions of Israelis." Pro-Terror Rate in PA –– the Highest in the World The letter briefly quotes the finding of the prestigious Pew Global Attitudes Project that fully 70% of Moslems in the Palestinian Authority believe that suicide terrorist bombings against civilians can be often or sometimes justified. The PEW survey notes that the extremist Palestinian position is "starkly at odds with Muslims in other Middle Eastern, Asian, and African nations." In fact, the next-highest rates of Muslim approval for such attacks are Nigeria, Mali, and Lebanon, with 42%, 39%, and 34%, respectively. Mattot Arim states that "this sinister prospect [of danger to millions of Jews] will immediately spring into being if the plans to establish a 'Palestinian state' in Judea and Samaria are pursued." "We know from your last visit, Mr. President, that you are well aware of this problem," Mattot Arim states. "For example, on January 9, 2008, you said: 'You can't expect the Israelis, and I certainly don't, to accept a state on their border which would become a launching pad for terrorist activities.'" Despite this, the letter to Bush continues, "Persecution of the only alternative to the Palestinian terror machine –– namely the productive and peaceful, half-million strong Jewish population in Judea and Samaria –– continues, including destruction of homes and places of worship, prohibitions on building homes and schools for large families with desperate housing needs, and disregard for elementary safety of these Jews from terror attacks." 'Olmert is Indisposed' The letter posits that Olmert's legal troubles render him unable to solve this problem: "Sadly, due to Prime Minister Olmert's ongoing and recently greatly exacerbated legal troubles, he cannot be expected to show leadership on the topic of Judea and Samaria. So, both Israel and the United States can look only to you to act prudently with respect to Judea and Samaria, an area which has long held the elusive key to world peace." The letter concludes, "We are sad to observe our liberal counterparts not only openly advocating pressure against Israel, but cynically claiming that such pressure is a form of friendship. We are proud to profess a more reasonable alternative... Contrary to what you may have been informed, both the people of Israel and Israel's countless friends in the United States and abroad will welcome any steps you may choose to take to further the Jewish, peaceful and productive, alternative in Judea and Samaria. Throughout history, whenever and wherever allowed to exist, the quiet, stable, constructive Jewish home has been a successful antidote to extremism and barbarism. Your actions can make it so again –– this time in Judea and Samaria, a historically Jewish area whose importance to world peace cannot be overestimated." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
PERES CONFERENCE FOCUSES ON FOUNDING "PALESTINE"
Posted by Ezra HaLevi, May 14, 2008. |
|
President Shimon Peres's star-studded mega-conference kicked off in Jerusalem Tuesday with addresses by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Tony Blair and Peres himself.
The newly-refurbished Binyanei HaUmah Jerusalem Conference Center was lined with displays by the cutting edge of Israeli technology and scientific research initiatives –– from insulin pills to electric cars –– as heads of state and Israel's elite mingled over sushi and mini gherkins. Journalists the world over discussed how they had been courted by Peres's staff for months, with promises of an event like no other. Despite the conference's seeming focus on technology and scientific advances, Peres's role as architect of the Oslo Accords and the main proponent of unconditional negotiations shone through. All three of the top speakers took the opportunity during their short addresses to extol the virtues and importance of establishing a Palestinian state. Former British Prime Minister and current Middle East envoy for the so-called Quartet (the UN, US, Russia and EU) Tony Blair spoke at the opening event, which featured dozens of former and current heads of state in one of the conference center's smaller rooms, leaving many irate journalists outside the doors. "It is justice that makes us want a State of Israel," Blair said. "It is justice that makes us want two states –– Israel and Palestine –– living side by side." Blair went on to call upon the world to spread democracy and freedom. "Though it may take some period of time for some countries, they will reach it," he promised. Prime Minister Olmert, welcomed to the conference hall by more than a few audible boos from the invitation-only crowd, declared that he and Fatah chief PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas "have reached understandings and points of agreement on the core issues" in their ongoing negotiations. Despite that, Olmert said the ongoing talks are "very serious and very significant." Olmert said that the greatest challenge facing Israel is the determination of its "final borders" with its neighbors in an agreement recognized by the international community. That statement drew the only positive response from host Peres, who applauded and smiled broadly. Faced with an unenthusiastic crowd, Olmert turned to the scores of young members of Birthright Israel and the Masa educational programs, praising both initiatives and garnering loud applause from the teenagers. Peres himself took the opportunity of opening the conference –– both at the presidents' event and the main opening –– to criticize Iran. "Fanatical religious ambitions aimed at taking over the entire region –– and terror, including Iranian terror, have no shape and no future," he said. He cited both Lebanon and Gaza as places where Iran was robbing people of their future and said, "If it weren't for Hamas, there would already be a Palestinian state founded on the principle of two states for two peoples." Peres ended with his trademark exhortation to break with the past in favor of focus on the future. He closed saying: "In Jerusalem we learned to pray. Now let us how learn to act." US President George W. Bush will be joining the conference Wednesday and delivering an address in the evening.
Ezra HaLevi is a writer for Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).
|
|
HAPPY BIRTHDAY ISRAEL
Posted by Nabil A. Bissad, May 14, 2008. |
|
We can't forget the History and what the Arabs and the Muslims world wants to do with Israel. With my all best wishes God bless. Nabil Bissada
|
|
VIDEO CLIP OF A RIGHTEOUS GENTILE: JON VOIGHT
Posted by Ellen Horowitz, May 14, 2008. |
|
Look at this truly moving clip of Jon Voight. His heart is with the Jewish people.
Note that Voight was raised a devout Catholic. He is not affilated with evangelical groups or mega church leaders. He appears to take and individual moral and authentic heartfelt stand with the people of Israel. This is a man who has done some real soul wrestling. And although he may be biblically inspired (he admits in another interview a few years back that Isaiah appeals to the poet in him), he handles himself with the utmost respect while in Israel. I doubt you will find him publically referring to Jesus, spreading the gospel, or hailing Christianity while on his visit here. But you will find him endorsing the Noahide laws and expressing great respect for Judaism as a religion: Voight was brought up Catholic and has no intention of converting to Judaism. But he says that of all the religions he studies, he has a special fondness for Jewish learning and values. "Judaism is an amazing fountain of information. It's not the only answer, but I have tremendous regard for it." ... Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, an author and a columnist for Israelnationalnews.com. Email her at ellenwrite@bezeqint.net |
|
ON ZERO POPULATION GROWTH, CONDI & CONDOMS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 14, 2008. |
|
This is by Lenny Ben-David and it appeared in the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
Take your favorite houseplant and do something stupid: put it in the freezer. Within two hours it will be irreversibly dead. Like plants, human communities and families grow, flower, reproduce and spread their roots. Unless someone does something stupid and attempts to "freeze" them. On May 2, four ministers of the "Quartet" –– comprised of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and representatives from Russia, the United Nations and the European Union –– expressed "deep concern at continuing settlement activity and called on Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth." Rice and her partners are opposed to all settlement activity, not just the planting of a rickety caravan on some wind-swept hilltop in Samaria. They are opposed to building in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Har Homa, to new apartments in the city of Ma'aleh Adumim, or new housing in the Gush Etzion town of Efrat. They do not give any dispensation to Jerusalem's new neighborhoods. They are opposed to construction in settlement population centers despite President Bush's assurances of April 14, 2004 when he wrote: "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949 [the 1967 lines]." How serious is that Bush commitment? National security adviser Stephen J. Hadley admitted in a January briefing that Bush's 2004 letter was aimed at helping prime minister Ariel Sharon win domestic approval for the Gaza withdrawal. "The president obviously still stands by that letter of April 2004, but you need to look at it, obviously, in the context of which it was issued," he said. Is the "context" of 2004 different from the context of 2008? The Quartet makes clear that the "natural growth" of Jewish communities is taboo. That means Zero Population Growth, or even negative population growth. It is a call for no new apartments for growing families and no construction of health clinics, kindergartens or schools. What would that mean for the ultra-Orthodox Jews in the burgeoning West Bank towns of Betar Illit and Kiryat Sefer, where children under 17 comprise two-thirds of the population? The "knitted kipa" national religious communities are not too far behind in the size of their families. Shas politicians could never accept such a diktat. How does the Quartet plan to stop the natural growth of these Jewish communities? With procreation police? Campaigns advocating birth control? "Sorry," the religious Jews will respond, "we gave at the ovens." In their case, ZPG stands for "Zionist Population Growth."
A FEW years ago, an imprudent ad agency placed posters of bikini-clad models at bus stations in ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods. Within hours the stations and posters were toast. A few months later, an anti-AIDS poster campaign was launched with a picture of a condom. Incredibly, the posters in the ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods were left unscathed. Why? Probably because the residents had no clue what the product was. These are neighborhoods where televisions are banned and late-night activities do not include watching Jay Leno. Large families mean larger apartments. Married children mean a demand for nearby housing. The ultra-Orthodox community of Mea She'arim was visited recently by US Ambassador Richard Jones, who showed just how much he was out of touch with his audience when he expressed concern "about where things are built in Jerusalem... Sometimes people do have to move to a different location. They cannot always stay close to their families." Would an American ambassador ever make such a statement in an Arab society where sons traditionally stay close to their fathers and clans? Incredibly, it is a tragic fact that the government of Israel actually approved the Quartet's road map in 2003, with its restrictions on settlements and natural growth. The Israeli government, which at the time included several right-wing ministers, expressed 14 "reservations," but they have no standing in talks with the US government or the other members of the Quartet. And not one of those reservations included opposition to the "natural growth" restriction. To use a rabbinic term, the restriction is a gezera (decree) that the community cannot bear. So why did Israel's leaders accept such a decree? Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that government leaders who supported the road map live primarily in the tony coastal plain, have few children, or have children living on the West Bank of the Hudson, the Rive Gauche of the Seine, a government-granted homestead in the Negev, or eventually in a state correctional facility. Compare those leaders with two gentlemen very dear to me who passed away last week. Joseph Black, my father-in-law, made aliya at the age of 92 and moved into our home in Efrat. (Is that defined as "natural growth?") When he died at the age of 97, we were comforted by his six grandchildren (our children) and seven great-grandchildren, all of whom live in relatively new homes nearby. Our neighbor, Ernie Alexander, died at age 85 while we were still sitting shiva. His tribe numbers some 60 children, grandchildren and their offspring. Virtually all live in Israel, and most live "over the Green Line." They prove that "natural growth" is an irrepressible and irresistible force. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
THAT VISION THING
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 14, 2008. |
|
Reports on the attack in Ashkelon of a Grad Rocket are still coming in. The comments in Bold are additional to the original article. |
|
Like his father, George W. Bush is engaging in "That Vision Thing". Only this time George W. Bush is experimenting with the lives of Jews on the off chance that Muslim Arabs can be civilized. His "Vision" is based on absolutely no evidence or experience that Muslims can be weaned away from their blood-lust, murderous pagan religion that allows for no other. All other religions are viewed as irreconcilable enemies. Real Peace was not ever tolerated but, only a "Hudna" or temporary truce –– unless one side won a battle conclusively, usually slaughtering the men while selling the women and children into slavery. George Bush is experimenting with the lives of the Jewish people whom he praised, fulsomely, in his speech May 14th. Bush wishes to leave office with a foot-note in the history books as his legacy that he made another Muslim Arab country called "Palestine". You might think that a president with German ancestry who similarly experimented with the lives of Jews and similarly employed by German industry in slave labor would be reluctant to expose the Jewish State and her people to a hateful, barbarous people. In the Bush "Vision Thing", he dismisses the unending pledges by the Arab Muslims to occupy Israel and kill all of her Jews. Even as Bush makes speeches as he visits Israel during her 60th birthday anniversary, the Muslim Arab Palestinian Terrorists of both Fatah and Hamas are launching Kassam Rockets, Missiles and suicide attacks into Israel. Worse yet, he has employed a crooked Prime Minister to do his bidding while calling him an "honest man" –– as Olmert is facing his fifth or sixth charge of illegal, fraudulent behavior. Is this then Bush's delusional "Vision Thing" of "Peace, where there is no Peace"? Bush and Condoleezza Rice have observed the Mujahadin (Holy Warriors –– a mix of Muslim Jihadists) who keep attacking, killing and maiming American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. They observe Syrian-backed Hezb'Allah successfully destroy the Lebanese government and yet insist that Israel accept his "Vision" and likely die for his word. Granted, Israel's present government may be the sickest, most crooked that Israel ever had but, to sell out a people hunted almost to extinction is a new low low. But, no less warped is the pro-Arab Bush-Rice government perfectly willing to sell out Israel in a useless gesture to an Islamic world of sheer hate. These two make Neville Chamberlain look like a visionary genius. There is the expectation that Olmert, driven by a Leftist ideology to de-Judaize Israel through re-partition will make an extraordinary offer to abandon much of Israel. The Perfidy of this crooked Prime Minister, in cahoots with a President whose family is inextricably linked to the Saudis is a tremendous demonstration of betrayal. President Bush is going to speak before the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) and try to pull off a Sadat-style "tour de force". Sadat got the Sinai, the oil fields developed by the Israelis, the airfields, road infrastructure and an $18 Billion dollar Israeli investment in Sinai infrastructure. What did Israel get for this sacrifice? Only the temporary absence of War for as long as America paid Sadat and later Mubarak $2 Billion a year for a cold peace. Egypt's President Mubarak put that $2 Billion dollars a year into building his military into the colossus of the Middle East. That's approximately $60 to $70 Billion worth of high tech weapons –– ready to go to war and guess with whom. Trusting the Bush family with James Baker III and the multi-national oil companies is like petting a black mamba snake. Knowing the Knesset, they will fawn and applaud but none will ask even one penetrating question. After writing the preceding, I caught the Fox News broadcast covering President Bush's speech to a large Israeli audience. It was brief, well-written by professional speech writers, entirely devoid of the problems such as a missile landing today in Ashkelon, striking a medical clinic, injuring at least 14 with the actual casualty numbers yet to be revealed and reports still coming in. Some reports range from 78 to 100 civilians injured –– including a baby girl. The Grad rocket crashed through the roof of the Ashkelon mall Wednesday and is believed to have carried a message from Tehran to visiting U.S. President George W. Bush that Iran's arm was long enough to reach an American presence anywhere. [Bold: Additional facts] Yesterday the Terrorist Kassam Rockets killed a 70 year old woman in her own home. So, on Thursday May 15th, can we expect the full blown double cross as Olmert and Bush speak to the Knesset and tell the Jewish nation how they have arranged a national suicide mission for Israel?
Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
AMERICA'S WAR ON WORDS
Posted by Mark Silverberg, May 13, 2008. |
|
The Bush administration has launched a new "outreach" policy reflecting it's reluctance to discuss jihadism in public. This time, it has targeted language. We are no longer at war with jihadism. Rather, we are engaged in a war against "extremism". In a document titled: "Words that Work and Words that Don't: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication" released in March 2008, Federal agencies including the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center will now be issued instructions on how not to describe jihadists, or the "mujahedeen", or to use any references relating to Islam, Islamic theology or Muslims in the context of our current war. Nor are these the only words to be struck from the government's political lexicon. Words and phrases like "al Qaeda movement", "Salafi", "Wahhabist", "Sufi", "ummah" (the Muslim world), "Islamic terrorist", "Islamist", "holy warrior" and even "caliphate" are also to be removed from diplomatic discourse. The erroneous rationale given is that these terms promote support for "extremism" among Arab and Muslim audiences by providing religious credibility to "extremists" while offending moderate Muslims. The directive states that the term jihad tends to "glamorize terrorism, imbues terrorists with religious authority they do not have and damages relations with Muslims around the world". The memo says the advice is not binding and does not apply to official policy papers, but should be used as a guide for conversations with Muslims and media. This directive mirrors identical policy guidelines distributed to British and European Union diplomats last year to better explain the current war to Muslim communities there (as if they don't already get it). Last summer, Prime Minister Gordon Brown prohibited his ministers from using the word "Muslim" in connection with terrorism. And in January this year, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith went even further, announcing that the British Government had dropped the hollow term "War on Terror" as well as "Islamic extremism" and decided that Islamic terrorism would henceforth be described as "anti-Islamic activity". Civil servants now have to refer to Islamic terrorists merely as "criminals" without any reference to Islam in order to "prevent the glorification and incitement of terrorism". Bat Ye'or would call these actions just another manifestation of creeping British d'himmitude (infidel submission to Islam), but the fact that the US government is now following the British lead (where fear or misguided sympathy under the guise of "outreach" or "multiculturalism" is the motivating factor) is disturbing. There are billions of Muslims and literally thousands of Islamic scholars and organizations who believe that democracy and Islam are indeed compatible; who reject violence in pursuit of Islam's goals; who condemn terrorism; who advocate equal rights for minorities and women; and who accept pluralism within Islam. The jihadi Salafists, however, have externalized jihad and interpret this struggle as a holy war to be waged against infidels and apostates until a global Islamic caliphate has been established under shari'a law. These two distinctly different interpretations of the Muslim holy books affect the vast majority of the world's 1.4 billion Muslims as much as they affect non-Muslims. But rather than clarify the distinction between these two divergent schools of interpretation and define jihadi Salafism as the enemy, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center have chosen to sanitize their diplomatic jargon in the name of "Muslim outreach". It's a fair guess that the vast majority of the global Muslim community understands quite well that a segment of their co-religionists are responsible for a considerable amount of terrorism around the globe, so they don't need us to explain it to them, especially in generic terms which make us look foolish. Nor is anything we say going to affect jihadist credibility amongst Muslims. The argument that: "We must carefully avoid giving bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders the legitimacy they crave ... by characterizing them as religious figures, or in terms that may make them seem to be noble in the eyes of some" is ridiculous. Few if any in the Muslim world care what non-Muslims think about jihadist groups like al Qaeda, so the argument that we have to be careful in our language so as not to give bin Laden credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of Muslims is a non-starter. At least the 9/11 Commission had the wisdom to define the enemy without all the political correctness we see in this directive. As Jeffrey Imm points out in the Counter Terrorism Blog: "The 9/11 Commission Report uses the term jihad in referencing the enemy 79 times and specifically defines jihad as a "holy war" executed by Osama Bin Laden and his compatriots (Section 2.3, Paragraph #302 on page 55), as well as defining "mujahideen" as "holy warriors" (Paragraph #302, same page). The 9/11 Commission Report refers to such "mujahideen" 22 times. ... .The 9/11 Commission Report refers to the term jihadist 31 times, including the references to the "worldwide jihadist community" (Section 5.1, Paragraph #691 on page 148), to Islamist Jihadists (Section 5.3, Paragraph #741 on page 158), to Islamist and jihadist movements (Section 6.3, Paragraph #887 on page 191), and multiple references to an NSC memo on Jihadist Networks ... Most importantly, the 9/11 Commission Report provides the definition of "Islamist terrorism" as being based on the ideology of Islamism (Notes, Part 12, Note 3: "Islamism", page 562)? ... Does the NCTC now claim that the 9/11 Commission Report "legitimizes" the actions of Jihadists?" The only reasonable explanation behind this policy (both here and in Britain) is that these directives represent an emerging trend in our federal security, intelligence and legal agencies (DOJ, DHS, CIA and FBI) that we can somehow better protect America and American foreign interests and reduce the level of violence by engaging in "outreach" with pro-jihadist organizations or countries whether it be Iran in the Middle East or representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood in the US. In effect, jihadist ideologies no longer concern our State Department provided there is a reduction in the level of violence that such groups promote. It amounts to surrender to the forces of global Islam with the only qualification being that jihadists conduct themselves peacefully so as to reduce the necessity of future American military interventions. Part of this policy holds that the language used to describe jihadism actually incites it, so if we change our language, we can reduce the problem. But this "problem" with jihadism is not and never has been one of linguistics, and it will not disappear. This "outreach" approach is flawed because it ignores the totalitarian ideology of jihadist Islam, the central tenet of which remains conquest, submission and the establishment of a global Islamic caliphate (another term US diplomats will no longer be allowed to use). This new War on Words is just another manifestation of our failed strategy in dealing with global jihadism. Perhaps we should cease using the words "freedom" or "democracy" since these concepts are offensive to Shari'a law, and start setting up no-pork aisles in our supermarkets, or adopt such British "outreach" practices as banning piggybanks, pulling Holocaust education from school curricula and, in some cases, changing the names of pig-centered children's classics like "The Three Little Pigs" to avoid offending Muslim sensitivities. An Administration that continues to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars to the Palestinian Authority and billions of petro-dollars to our enemies should be more concerned with legitimizing jihadists by funding them than they are about nomenclature. Contact Mark Silverberg at jfednepa@epix.net |
|
'DEAD GAZAN' ALIVE AND KICKING
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 13, 2008. |
|
This was written by Meital Yasur-Beit Or and it appeared in
YNet
|
|
Stayin' alive: Muhammad al-Harrani, a father of six from Gaza diagnosed with cancer who reportedly died while waiting for a permit to enter Israel, miraculously "came back to life." This was not the result of a miracle, but rather, just part of the tactics used by al-Harrani's family in a bid to secure a permit for him. Al-Harrani is currently awaiting an entry permit into Israel, so that he can undergo head surgery at Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and receive radiation and chemotherapy treatment. At the end of April he was summoned to a questioning session at the Erez Crossing as part of the permit process, but the session was postponed by a week. On the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day, al-Harrani's story was published. His family reported to the "Physicians for Human Rights" organization that he died. "The sick man could not withstand the wait for the permit," claimed Ran Yaron, Director of the Occupied Territories Department who blamed the Shin Bet for adopting cruel policies against cancer patients. However, the next day, the organization discovered that al-Harrani was still alive. Members of group estimated that his brother, who reported the death, "killed" him so he does not report to the questioning session. "This is a rare case where a family member knowingly provided false information to the organization," Physicians for Human Rights said. "Usually, the organization receives information from the families and from the hospitals, but in this case the information was received from the family and was not confirmed by the hospital." Meanwhile, the Shin Bet sent the organization an angry response: "We view these harsh accusations on your part with great severity; not even a minimal inquiry into the facts was conducted." The Shin Bet noted that due to the suspicion of his involvement in terror activities, al-Harrani was indeed called in for a security check, and it was indeed postponed by a week. Since al-Harrani did not arrive at the questioning session, "he will have to bear the consequences or future damage that may be caused to him, in line with his refusal to cooperate in the procedure," the Shin Bet said. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL'S 'DOOM' COULD ALSO BE EUROPE'S
Posted by Dave Nathan, May 13, 2008. |
|
This was written by Mark Steyn
and is archived at
|
|
Almost everywhere I went last week –– TV, radio, speeches –– I was asked about the 60th anniversary of the Israeli state. I don't recall being asked about Israel quite so much on its 50th anniversary, which, as a general rule, is a much bigger deal than the 60th. But these days friends and enemies alike smell weakness at the heart of the Zionist Entity. Assuming Iranian President Ahmadinejad's apocalyptic fancies don't come to pass, Israel will surely make it to its 70th birthday. But a lot of folks don't fancy its prospects for its 80th and beyond. See the Atlantic Monthly cover story: "Is Israel Finished?" Also the cover story in Canada's leading news magazine, Maclean's, which dispenses with the question mark: "Why Israel Can't Survive." Why? By most measures, the Jewish state is a great success story. The modern Middle East is the misbegotten progeny of the British and French colonial map makers of 1922. All the nation states in that neck of the woods date back a mere 60 or 70 years –– Iraq to the Thirties, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel to the Forties. The only difference is that Israel has made a go of it. Would I rather there were more countries like Israel, or more like Syria? Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East (Iraq may yet prove a second), and its Arab citizens enjoy more rights than they would living under any of the kleptocrat kings and psychotic dictators who otherwise infest the region. On a tiny strip of land narrower at its narrowest point than many American townships, Israel has built a modern economy with a GDP per capita just shy of $30,000 –– and within striking distance of the European Union average. If you object that that's because it's uniquely blessed by Uncle Sam, well, for the past 30 years the second-largest recipient of U.S. aid has been Egypt: their GDP per capita is $5,000, and America has nothing to show for its investment other than one-time pilot Mohamed Atta coming at you through the office window. Jewish success against the odds is nothing new. "Aaron Lazarus the Jew," wrote Anthony Hope in his all but unknown prequel to "The Prisoner Of Zenda," "had made a great business of it, and had spent his savings in buying up the better part of the street; but" –– and for Jews there's always a "but" –– "since Jews then might hold no property ... ." Ah, right. Like the Jewish merchants in old Europe, who were tolerated as leaseholders but could never be full property owners, the Israelis are regarded as operating a uniquely conditional sovereignty. Jimmy Carter, just returned from his squalid suck-up junket to Hamas, is merely the latest Western sophisticate to pronounce triumphantly that he has secured the usual (off-the-record, highly qualified, never to be translated into Arabic and instantly denied) commitment from the Jews' enemies, acknowledging Israel's "right to exist." Well, whoop-de-doo. Would you enter negotiations on such a basis? Since Israel marked its half-century, the "right to exist" is now routinely denied not just in Gaza and Ramallah and the region's presidential palaces but on every European and Canadian college campus. During the Lebanese incursion of 2006, Matthew Parris wrote in The Times of London: "The past 40 years have been a catastrophe, gradual and incremental, for world Jewry. Seldom in history have the name and reputation of a human grouping lost so vast a store of support and sympathy so fast. My opinion –– held not passionately but with little personal doubt –– is that there is no point in arguing about whether the state of Israel should have been established where and when it was" –– which lets you know how he would argue it if he minded to. Richard Cohen in The Washington Post was more straightforward: "Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself." Cohen and Parris, two famously moderate voices in the leading newspapers of two of the least anti-Israeli capital cities in the West, have nevertheless internalized the same logic as Ahmadinejad: Israel should not be where it is. Whether it's a "stain of shame" or just a "mistake" is the merest detail. Aaron Lazarus and every other "European Jew" of his time would have had a mirthless chuckle over Cohen's designation. The Jews lived in Europe for centuries but without ever being accepted as "European." To enjoy their belated acceptance as Europeans, they had to move to the Middle East. Reviled on the Continent as sinister rootless cosmopolitans with no conventional national allegiance, they built a conventional nation state, and now they're reviled for that, too. The "oldest hatred" didn't get that way without an ability to adapt. The Western intellectuals who promote "Israeli Apartheid Week" at this time each year are laying the groundwork for the next stage of Zionist delegitimization. The talk of a "two-state solution" will fade. In the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, Jews are barely a majority. Gaza has one of the highest birth rates on the planet: The median age is 15.8 years. Its population is not just literally exploding, at Israeli checkpoints, but also doing so in the less-incendiary but demographically decisive sense. Arabs will soon be demanding one democratic state –– Jews and Muslims –– from Jordan to the sea. And even those Western leaders who understand that this will mean the death of Israel will find themselves so confounded by the multicultural pieties of their own lands they'll be unable to argue against it. Contemporary Europeans are not exactly known for their moral courage: The reports one hears of schools quietly dropping the Holocaust from their classrooms because it offends their growing numbers of Muslim students suggest that even the pretense of "evenhandedness" in the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" will be long gone a decade hence. The joke, of course, is that Israel, despite its demographic challenge, still enjoys a birth rate twice that of the European average. All the reasons for Israel's doom apply to Europe with bells on. And, unlike much of the rest of the West, Israel has the advantage of living on the front line of the existential challenge. "I have a premonition that will not leave me," wrote Eric Hoffer, America's great longshoreman philosopher, after the 1967 war. "As it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us." Indeed. So, happy 60th birthday. And here's to many more. Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com |
|
WHY ISRAEL IS THE WORLD'S HAPPIEST COUNTRY
Posted by Bryna Berch, May 13, 2008. |
|
Given that the Israelis are so beset with problems –– what with Arabs who have vowed to destroy the Jewish state, "friends" who supply the Arabs with armaments and Jews, who'd prefer there be no Jewish state to remind them of Judaism, the title of this article seems unreal. But Spengler makes some very good points. Of course if Israel got rid of the missiles aimed at her, she'd be still happier than she is. Spengler's article appeared today in Asia Times Online
|
|
Envy surrounds no country on Earth like the state of Israel, and with good reason: by objective measures, Israel is the happiest nation on Earth at the 60th anniversary of its founding. It is one of the wealthiest, freest and best-educated; and it enjoys a higher life expectancy than Germany or the Netherlands. But most remarkable is that Israelis appear to love life and hate death more than any other nation. If history is made not by rational design but by the demands of the human heart, as I argued last week, the light heart of the Israelis in face of continuous danger is a singularity worthy of a closer look. Can it be a coincidence that this most ancient of nations [1], and the only nation persuaded that it was summoned into history for God's service, consists of individuals who appear to love life more than any other people? As a simple index of life-preference, I plot the fertility rate versus the suicide rate of 35 industrial countries, that is, the proportion of people who choose to create new life against the proportion who choose to destroy their own. Israel stands alone, positioned in the upper-left-hand-quadrant, or life-loving, portion of the chart [2]. Those who believe in Israel's divine election might see a special grace reflected in its love of life. In a world given over to morbidity, the state of Israel still teaches the world love of life, not in the trivial sense of joie de vivre, but rather as a solemn celebration of life. In another location, I argued, "It's easy for the Jews to talk about delighting in life. They are quite sure that they are eternal, while other peoples tremble at the prospect impending extinction. It is not their individual lives that the Jews find so pleasant, but rather the notion of a covenantal life that proceeds uninterrupted through the generations." Still, it is remarkable to observe by what wide a margin the Israelis win the global happiness sweepstakes. Nations go extinct, I have argued in the past, because the individuals who comprise these nations choose collectively to die out. Once freedom replaces the fixed habits of traditional society, people who do not like their own lives do not trouble to have children. Not the sword of conquerors, but the indigestible sourdough of everyday life threatens the life of the nations, now dying out at a rate without precedent in recorded history. Israel is surrounded by neighbors willing to kill themselves in order to destroy it. "As much as you love life, we love death," Muslim clerics teach; the same formula is found in a Palestinian textbook for second graders. Apart from the fact that the Arabs are among the least free, least educated, and (apart from the oil states) poorest peoples in the world, they also are the unhappiest, even in their wealthiest kingdoms. The contrast of Israeli happiness and Arab despondency is what makes peace an elusive goal in the region. It cannot be attributed to material conditions of life. Oil-rich Saudi Arabia ranks 171st on an international quality of life index, below Rwanda. Israel is tied with Singapore on this index, although it should be observed that Israel ranks a runaway first on my life-preference index, whereas Singapore comes in dead last. Even less can we blame unhappiness on experience, for no nation has suffered more than the Jews in living memory, nor has a better excuse to be miserable. Arabs did not invent suicide attacks, but they have produced a population pool willing to die in order to inflict damage greater than any in history. One cannot help but conclude that Muslim clerics do not exaggerate when they express contempt for life. Israel's love of life, moreover, is more than an ethnic characteristic. Those who know Jewish life through the eccentric lens of Jewish-American novelists such as Saul Bellow and Philip Roth, or the films of Woody Allen, imagine the Jews to be an angst-ridden race of neurotics. Secular Jews in America are no more fertile than their Gentile peers, and by all indications quite as miserable. For one thing, Israelis are far more religious than American Jews. Two-thirds of Israelis believe in God, although only a quarter observe their religion strictly. Even Israelis averse to religion evince a different kind of secularism than we find in the secular West. They speak the language of the Bible and undergo 12 years of Bible studies in state elementary and secondary schools. Faith in God's enduring love for a people that believes it was summoned for his purposes out of a slave rabble must be part of the explanation. The most religious Israelis make the most babies. Ultra-Orthodox families produce nine children on average. That should be no surprise, for people of faith are more fertile than secular people, as I showed in a statistical comparison across countries. Traditional and modern societies have radically different population profiles, for traditional women have little choice but to spend their lives pregnant in traditional society. In the modern world, where fertility reflects choice rather than compulsion, the choice to raise children expresses love of life. The high birthrate in Arab countries still bound by tradition does not stand comparison to Israeli fertility, by far the highest in the modern world. The faith of Israelis is unique. Jews sailed to Palestine as an act of faith, to build a state against enormous odds and in the face of hostile encirclement, joking, "You don't have to be crazy to be a Zionist, but it helps." In 1903 Theodor Herzl, the Zionist movement's secular founder, secured British support for a Jewish state in Uganda, but his movement shouted him down, for nothing short of the return to Zion of Biblical prophecy would requite it. In place of a modern language the Jewish settlers revived Hebrew, a liturgical language only since the 4th century BC, in a feat of linguistic volition without precedent. It may be that faith burns brighter in Israel because Israel was founded by a leap of faith. Two old Jewish jokes illustrate the Israeli frame of mind. Two elderly Jewish ladies are sitting on a park bench in St Petersburg, Florida. "Mrs Levy," asks the first, "what do you hear from your son Isaac in Detroit?" "It's just awful," Mrs Levy replies. "His wife died a year ago and left him with two little girls. Now he's lost his job as an accountant with an auto-parts company, and his health insurance will lapse in a few weeks. With the real estate market the way it is, he can't even sell his house. And the baby has come down with leukemia and needs expensive treatment. He's beside himself, and doesn't know what to do. But does he write a beautiful Hebrew letter –– it's a pleasure to read." There are layers to this joke, but the relevant one here is that bad news is softened if written in the language of the Bible, which to Jews always conveys hope. The second joke involves the American businessman who emigrated to Israel shortly after its founding. On his arrival, he orders a telephone, and waits for weeks without a response. At length he applies in person to the telephone company, and is shown into the office of an official who explains that there is a two-year waiting list, and no way to jump the queue. "Do you mean there is no hope?," the American asks. "It is forbidden for a Jew to say there is no hope!," thunders the official. "No chance, maybe." Hope transcends probability. If faith makes the Israelis happy, then why are the Arabs, whose observance of Islam seems so much stricter, so miserable? Islam offers its adherents not love –– for Allah does not reveal Himself in love after the fashion of YHWH –– but rather success. "The Islamic world cannot endure without confidence in victory, that to 'come to prayer' is the same thing as to 'come to success'. Humiliation –– the perception that the ummah cannot reward those who submit to it –– is beyond its capacity to endure," I argued in another location. Islam, or "submission", does not understand faith –– trust in a loving God even when His actions appear incomprehensible –– in the manner of Jews and Christians. Because the whim of Allah controls every event from the orbit of each electron to the outcome of battles, Muslims know only success or failure at each moment in time. The military, economic and cultural failures of Islamic societies are intolerable in Muslim eyes; Jewish success is an abomination, for in the view of Muslims it is the due of the faithful, to be coveted and seized from the usurpers at the first opportunity. It is not to much of a stretch to assert that Israel's love of live, its happiness in faith, is precisely the characteristic that makes a regional peace impossible to achieve. The usurpation of the happiness that Muslims believe is due to them is sufficient cause to kill one's self in order to take happiness away from the Jewish enemy. If Israel's opponents fail to ruin Israel's happiness, there is at least a spark of hope that they may decide to choose happiness for themselves. Why are none of the Christian nations as happy as Israel? Few of the European nations can be termed "Christian" at all. Poland, the last European country with a high rate of attendance at Mass (at about 45%), nonetheless shows a fertility rate of only 1.27, one of Europe's lowest, and a suicide rate of 16 per 100,000. Europe's faith always wavered between adherence to Christianity as a universal religion and ethnic idolatry under a Christian veneer. European nationalism nudged Christianity to the margin during the 19th century, and the disastrous world wars of the past century left Europeans with confidence neither in Christianity nor in their own nationhood. Only in pockets of the American population does one find birth rates comparable to Israel's, for example among evangelical Christians. There is no direct way to compare the happiness of American Christians and Israelis, but the tumultuous and Protean character of American religion is not as congenial to personal satisfaction. My suspicion is that Israel's happiness is entirely unique. It is fashionable these days to speculate about the end of Israel, and Israel's strategic position presents scant cause for optimism, as I contended recently. Israel's future depends on the Israelis. During 2,000 years of exile, Jews remained Jews despite forceful and often violent efforts to make them into Christians or Muslims. One has to suppose that they did not abandon Judaism because they liked being Jewish. With utmost sincerity, the Jews prayed thrice daily, "It is our duty to praise the Master of all, to acclaim the greatness of the One who forms all creation, for God did not make us like the nations of other lands, and did not make us the same as other families of the Earth. God did not place us in the same situations as others, and our destiny is not the same as anyone else's." If the Israelis are the happiest country on Earth, as the numbers indicate, it seems possible that they will do what is required to keep their country, despite the odds against them. I do not know whether they will succeed. If Israel fails, however, the rest of the world will lose a unique gauge of the human capacity for happiness as well as faith. I cannot conceive of a sadder event. Notes [1] There are many ancient nations, eg, the Basques, but no other that speaks the same language as it did more than 3,000 years ago, occupies more or less the same territory, and, most important, maintains a continuous literary record of its history, which is to say an interrupted national consciousness. [2] The countries shown in the chart show a roughly inverse correlation of Suicide rate and Fertility Rate. Starting at Top with low Suicide Rate and High Fertility (per 100,000) are: Israel with suicide rate of 6.2 and a fertility rate of 2.77, United States, France. down to at the Bottom: Lithuania with a suicide rate of 40.2 and a fertility rate of 1.22, Singapore and Hong Kong. The original article has the complete list. |
|
THOUSANDS DEMAND POLLARD'S RELEASE ON EVE OF BUSH VISIT
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 13, 2008. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Monday evening in Jerusalem: Thousands of people yelled, sang, held signs, protested and demanded the release of Jonathan Pollard from US prison. The hope was even mentioned that US President George W. Bush would bring Pollard with him when he arrives in Israel on Wednesday. At the same time, three Pollard letters were in the news: One written by 13 former Prisoners of Zion to Bush, asking him to pardon Pollard and ensure that he does not die in prison; one by the young winner of the International Bible Contest to Prime Minister Olmert, and a third by Pollard himself and his wife Esther, praising the young Bible scholar for her actions. Jonathan Pollard is well into his 23rd year of a life sentence with no possibility of parole for passing classified information to a United States ally –– Israel. He is the only person in the history of the United States to receive a life sentence for spying for an American ally. The median sentence for this offense is 2-4 years. The data in question included information about Iraq's offensive weapons capabilities. Monday's protest began when dozens of Pollard activists formed a human chain outside the U.S. Consulate in downtown Jerusalem. Shortly afterwards, thousands began to gather in Freedom for Jonathan Pollard Square –– also known as Paris Square –– between the Prime Minister's residence and the Great Synagogue. Among the speakers were Esther Pollard, Jonathan's long-time lawyer Larry Dubb, activist organizer Nissan Gan-Or, Yosef Mendlevitch, Shifra Hoffman, Atty. Nitzana Darshan-Leitner, Nadia Matar and Moshe Feiglin. Popular Israeli singer Ariel Zilber, whose appearances at right-wing events over the past several years have harmed his career, and folk singer Ari Ben-Yam performed original songs on behalf of Pollard. Letter to Bible Champ The Pollards wrote a letter of congratulations to International Bible Quiz winner Tzurit Berenson, who capped off her victory last Thursday by asking Prime Minister Olmert to secure Pollard's release. The 15-year-old winner handed Olmert a letter that she and her two runners-up had written, asking the Prime Minister to do all he could to have US President Bush pardon Pollard. "The eyes of the Nation were upon you, in your moment of victory," the Pollards wrote. "In that moment, you gave honor to HaShem [G-d] and to His Torah. In that moment, you took your learning and used it the way that it was intended, not for mere scholarship or trivia, but for action! Ashreinu Yisrael! Fortunate are we, the People of Israel, to have such a model of righteousness in our midst! Fortunate are we to have you as a model of Torah-true action!" Ex-Refuseniks Warn Bush The letter by the Prisoners of Zion to Bush was written in a particularly strong tone, warning the President that "if, G-d forbid, Pollard should die in prison, complex questions will remain unanswered which may permanently damage the reputation and affect the conscience of America." The 13 signatories –– former prisoners of conscience in the USSR –– wrote that the price they paid for standing up to oppression was nothing near what Jonathan Pollard has paid: "Our principle of identifying with our brethren and with Israel, with justice, freedom and the battle against obvious and veiled antisemitism took a toll of many years of imprisonment in the Soviet Union. However, none of us even came close to the period of imprisonment of a quarter of a century as is taking place in your country, in the case of Jonathan Pollard." The 13 also made the point that Pollard alone, among all those who spied against the US for the Soviet Union and other enemies during a critical period in history, remains in prison:
"Pollard was active in a period that the evil Soviet empire of cruelty, espionage and world subversion was at its peak. Every clear-thinking person can ask himself: Is there any agent of this horrible and hostile power that remains in an American prison? We all know the answer: Nyet!
The Prisoners of Zion then once again alluded to the danger that Pollard might die in prison unless Bush takes action: "You, Mr. President, have the power now to correct this injustice –– but only as long as two flames remain: the flame of the life of Jonathan Pollard and the flame of your term of office. You have the opportunity to pardon Pollard and enter the history books as the one who removed this dark stain on the conscience of your country. This is an act of benevolence of the highest order, appropriate for the President of the greatest world power, who supposedly stands for the struggle against world evil. |
|
SACHA STAWSKI: SPEAKING TOUR PROPOSAL
Posted by Sacha Stawski, May 13, 2008. |
|
Dear friends, Some of you know me already, others do not yet. This is a short email to offer myself to you and the organizations you represent as a guest speaker during my upcoming trip to the US this June. I will be arriving in Washington around June 01 and staying in the US until around June 14th. So far, I only have few fixed dates, so that I am ready to make myself available anywhere in the country in the time inbetween. (The only cost to you would be my travel expenses.) I have enclosed one possible topic, which I could talk about, though I am ready to talk about anything to do with life in Germany, Jews in Germany, attitudes towards Israel, poitical lobbying and the media, particularly in regards to Israel. As the founder and editor-in-chief of Honestly Concerned, a German NGO, I have wide range of experiences and vivid examples to draw upon, to spend an interesting evening or afternoon together. (Please feel free to take a look at our website, and particularly some of the print materials, which we have recently produced, for more information). Honestly Concerned, by the way, not only is a media watch dog, comparable to the American CAMERA, but also does political lobbying, much like its much larger American counterpart, AIPAC. If your interest has been kindled, I can gladly provide you with lots of more information about us.... Thank you for your help and all the best
Sasha Stawski is editor of Honestly Concerned. Contact him at sstawski@honestly-concerned.org |
|
MEIN KAMPF AND THE KORAN
Posted by Larry Houle, May 13, 2008. |
|
HITLER: THE FINAL SOLUTION OF THE JEWISH QUESTION;
Before there was a Hitler, Mein Kampf, the SS, concentration camps and final solution of the Jewish question there was Muhammad, the Koran, the SS Jihadists and the first final solution –– the murder and forced exile of Jews/Christians from Arabia. "the Apostle of Allah said, 'Kill any Jew that falls into your power."
HITLER AND THE FINAL SOLUTION OF THE JEWISH QUESTION In any process of extermination and mass murder of human beings, the first step is to blame them for all of societies ills, demonize the selected victims as dangerous, then as the enemy, then dehumanize and reduce them to the status of sub humans –– evil creatures –– that must be destroyed. Once human beings are robbed of their humanity –– mass murder becomes the final solution. Following are just a very small sample of Hitler's teachings demonizing the Jews and laying the intellectual foundation for their extermination. HITLER'S HATRED OF THE JEWS "The struggle for world domination will be fought entirely between us, between Germans and Jews. All else is facade and illusion. Behind England stands Israel, and behind France, and behind the United States. Even when we have driven the Jew out of Germany, he remains our world enemy.
"The Ten Commandments have lost their validity. Conscience is a Jewish invention, it is a blemish like circumcision."
–– "If only one country, for whatever reason, tolerates a Jewish family in it, that family will become the germ center for fresh sedition. If one little Jewish boy survives without any Jewish education, with no synagogue and no Hebrew school, it [Judaism] is in his soul. Even if there had never been a synagogue or a Jewish school or an Old Testament, the Jewish spirit would still exist and exert its influence. It has been there from the beginning and there is no Jew, not a single one, who does not personify it."
"The internal expurgation of the Jewish spirit is not possible in any platonic way. For the Jewish spirit as the product of the Jewish person. Unless we expel the Jewish people. Unless we expel the Jewish people soon, they will have judaized our people within a very short time."
–– "The Jew has always been a people with definite racial characteristics and never a religion."
"If we consider how greatly he has sinned against the masses in the course of the centuries, how he has squeezed and sucked the blood again and again; if furthermore, we consider how the people gradually learned to hate him for this, and ended up by regarding his existence as nothing but punishment of Heaven for the other peoples, we can understand how hard this shift must be for the Jew."
"But even more: all at once the Jew also becomes liberal and begins to rave about the necessary progress of mankind."
'The Jew almost never marries a Christian woman; it is the Christian who marries a Jewess."
–– "the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.'
–– "With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus stealing her from her people."
"And so he [the Jew] advances on his fatal road until another force comes forth to oppose him, and in a mighty struggle hurls the heaven-stormer back to Lucifer."
Hitler's final solution was the concentration camps and the industrialization of mass murder. MUHAMMAD AND THE FRST FINAL SOLUTION OF THE JEWISH QUESTION OF ARABIA Unlike Hitler who had a very deep hatred of Jews as a young man, Muhammad spent the early part of his life (13 years) trying to convince the Jews and Christians that he was the final prophet of Allah and that his Allah was the one and same God that the Jews and Christians worshipped. The Jews and Christians realized that he was a bogus, false prophet and totally rejected Muhammad and his Allah. Having failed as a preacher, Muhammad fled to Medina. It was here that Muhammad re –– invented his Allah. Gone was the Allah of peace that preached tolerance and in was the Allah –– a god of murder, extermination, terror, torture, looting. In the new reformed Islam, deceit, torture, murder, assassination, massacre, genocide, pillage, robbery, enslavement and rape are halal (legal) acts, deserving of paradise, as long as they were perpetrated on infidels. The new Allah permitted polygamy, temporary marriages (muta), pedophilia, marriage with adopted son's wives, wife beating, and sex with slave girls. In Medina, the teachings of the Koran exploded into hatred and rage against Jews, Christians and all other infidels. The hatred of Muhammad and his Allah was directed against the peoples of the book –– Jews and Christians who had dared to reject the prophethood of Muhammad. Because of their rejection, they remained a direct challenge to the authority of Muhammad and the legitimacy of Islam. Due to the danger posed by the peoples of the book –– their destruction became imperative. The first final solution of the Jews –– their murder and mass exile from Arabia, the looting of their rich towns, the rape and enslavement of their women by Muhammad and his Allah was set in motion. MUHAMMAD'S TEACHINGS OF PURE HATE FROM THE HADITHS Kill All The Jews : The First Final Solution
It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the
Messenger of Allah (m
ay peace be upon him) say: "I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim." [This single sahi hadiths tells everything about Islamic intolerance]
The Prophet on his death-bed, gave three orders one of them was to Expel the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula.
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' " Is it a rational, reasonable human thought of a rational, reasonable, normal person that 700 years after Christ and his teachings of peace and love that allowed the peoples of the Roman Empire to embrace Christianity throughout the Middle East, Egypt, North Africa that God would send another prophet who after 13 years of trying to convince Jews/Christians of his prophecy by teachings of peace would then turn to teachings of extermination and set them in motion by raising armies to terrorize, conquer and make slaughter in the land. If anyone can believe that God would have as His prophet –– such an evil man who ordered extermination and genocide of entire peoples, can believe that such a god exists who would order and celebrate such slaughter, then they have forsaken God and have embraced evil. MUHAMMAD'S TEACHINGS OF HATE FROM THE KORAN Just as Hitler demonized the Jews and called for their destruction in Mein Kampf so to Allah dehumanized the Jews and demanded their total destruction in the Koran. As part of the first final solution, Muhammad conquered the Jewish settlement of Banu Qurayzah and ordered that all Jewish men be beheaded and their women raped and sold into slavery. Between 600 to 900 Jewish men were murdered. Muhammad himself worked on the digging of the trench in the center of the town into which the massacred Jews were to be thrown. But he did not only take part in those preparations, Muhammad personally struck off at least two heads of the tribal leaders and maybe of more. Beheading 600-700 men one by one takes a substantial time and strength. Certainly this was not done by one man alone but by many. Whoever was appointed to execute the bulk of this judgment, one has to be really numbed in ones conscience to strike off hundreds of heads, looking into the eyes of the victims to be killed. How Did The SS Jihadist Executioners Decide on Which Jewish Boys To Slaughter Or Leave Alive To Be Sold Into Slavery To separate young Jewish men from young Jewish boys, Muhammad ordered that their pants be pulled down and the youngsters genital area examined SS style for pubic hairs and if they had grown any pubic hair, it was enough to behead them.
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
The Quran Celebrated The Massacre of The Jews of Banu Qurayza Allah celebrated this slaughter and enslavement of the Jews in the Koran: Quran-33:25 –– "Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the believers battle. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty." ALL Muslims believe the Koran is the ETERNAL divine word of God –– the LAWS OF GOD –– that God authored the Koran and a copy of the Koran is in heaven. The Koran remains for all Muslims, not just "fundamentalists," the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places FOREVER; its ideas are absolutely true and beyond all criticism. To question it is to question the very word of God, and hence blasphemous. A Muslim's duty is to believe it and obey its divine commands without question. In order for the Koran to be the divine word of God –– every word, every teaching must be PERFECT. Since God is PERFECT, every word, every teaching of God –– A PERFECT GOD must be PERFECT. If only one word/teaching of the Koran is not PERFECT –– if only one teaching is not PERFECTION –– MORAL PERFECTION –– TRANSLATABLE MORAL CLARITY –– MORAL PERFECTION for ALL mankind for ALL TIME, then the entire Koran is not a work of PERFECTION and therefore not the word/teachings of God AND THEREFORE ISLAM IS TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY BOGUS –– A SHAM AND A FRAUD. How can you believe in a God who instructs the murder of all prisoners? These are CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. THESE ARE CRIMES AGAINST GOD. This law was an order from Allah (the ANTI GOD) to murder all prisoners until Arabia was conquered for Islam. Take no prisoners. Kill them all. "Make slaughter in the land." MASS MURDER. The word slaughter is so outrageous that only the insane can believe in Islam. If God murdered human beings He would no longer be God. He would be nothing more then just a murderer. IT WAS EVIL MUSLIMS WHO SLEW THEM NOT GOD. Quran-33:25 –– "Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the believers battle. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty." Quran-33:26 –– "And He brought those of the People of the Book [Jewish people of Banu Qurayza] who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, some of them you slew (beheaded) and some you took prisoners (captive)" Words of hate and terror pour from the above 2 verses. " in a state of rage" " cast terror into their hearts" " some you slew" (beheaded) Can you imagine God the essence of pure love striking fear and terror into the hearts and souls of men, women and children. Can you imagine the men being shackled and brought out into the town square to be beheaded. Do you not hear the screaming and wailing of women and little girls and young boys as their fathers and brothers are about to have their heads chopped off in front of them. Can you not picture Muhammad the Apostle of God raising his sword, the sunlight flashing on the blade as he cuts downward with all his might –– can you picture the blood spurting from the neck as the head falls and bounces on the ground –– the blood pouring out of a once living human being. Does anybody in their right mind believe that God would order such a brutal, immoral, hideous act. God as a criminal. God as a mass murderer. All the above teachings are evil and immoral and not of God. Therefore being not PERFECT –– to say the least –– the entire Koran is not a book of PERFECTION –– not a book of God but a book of evil and therefore not the word/teachings of God AND THEREFORE ISLAM IS TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY BOGUS –– A SHAM AND A FRAUD. Following are the LAWS OF ALLAH inviting Muslims to enjoy booty of Banu Qurayza Jews sanctioned for them. Below are some examples how Quran openly supported Islamic jihadi's immoral acts: Quran-8:1 –– "They ask thee concerning (things taken as) spoils of war (booty). Say: "(such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Messenger: So fear Allah, and keep straight the relations between yourselves: Obey Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe." Muhammad Enriches Himself : Muhammad had huge spoils from this "final solution". Muhammad gets twenty percent of the Jewish property (movable, immovable and human), and the murderous jihadists get eighty percent, to be distributed as he sees fit. At least 600 grown men are killed (those with the ability to fight). This represents probably something like 500 families, each of which on average would have at least a wife and a child, probably several. Consider, 1/5 of the possessions of a whole tribe (possessions of 100 families for Muhammad) plus the profit from selling the women as slaves. Muhammad Took One Of The Jewish Women As His Sex Slave The apostle had chosen one of their women for himself, Rayhana bint Amr ... one of the women of ... Qurayza, and she remained with him until she died, in his power. The apostle had proposed to marry and put a veil on her, but she said: "Nay, leave me in your power, for that will be easier for me and for you." So he left her. She had shown repugnance towards Islam when she was captured and clung to Judaism. (Ibn Ishaq p. 466) QURAN 33:50: "Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty;..." This verse is for Muhammad. ALLAH allows Muhammad to own and rape his sex slaves. What could be more unethical than owning slaves and raping slave girls? ALLAH graciously allowed Muslims to own and rape slave girls. Prophet Muhammad himself and his disciples routinely raped their slave girls. Raping slaves, selling women and children, killing people for their property and sharing the proceeds with God is evil incarnate –– these laws of God –– are so morally outrageous –– that too claim that these teachings in the Koran are the word of God –– is the greatest sin that Muslims have committed against God. Again –– the Koran is an evil book and an obscenity against God. Of course, God in his infinite wisdom created a SPECIAL LAW OF GOD SOLELY FOR MUHAMMAD –– that allowed his prophet to keep 100% of the booty if no fighting was involved. This is utter self serving nonsense. The booty of Banu Nadir belongs to Muhammad; this is because no fighting, either with horses or on foot took place; one must obey Muhammad's decision (blindly and totally)...59:6 Whatever booty goes to Muhammad belongs to Allah; it shall go to the relatives, the poor and the travelling alien; accept whatever booty Muhammad gives...59:7 This is truly insane. How can any NORMAL, RATIONAL person believe in a God that shares in booty? You worship God by murdering infidels, stealing their property, selling their women and children into slavery and sharing the proceeds with God. This is so evil as to be unspeakable. What of Hitler and the German SS robbing and looting the property of murdered Jews. When Hitler came to power, Jewish businesses and property were confiscated. Everything was seized from expensive paintings to exclusive furniture. Their women and children were stripped of their clothing, forced into slavery, and after slaughter in the ovens –– gold teeth were pulled out of their burnt skulls. Anti-Jewish Hate Teachings In The Koran: Mein Kampf is the word and teachings of Hitler. As has already been shown, ALL Muslims believe that the Koran is the word and teachings of God. The Koran is God talking to us –– teaching us how to be better people, how to lead better victorious lives. Such wonderful teachings of love and peace that only God could create fill the Koran like: 5.60 "God has cursed the Jews, transforming them into apes and swine and those who serve the devil." Isn't this a wonderful teaching to quote to your children around the kitchen table. Such noble wisdom to live their lives by. Again for the Koran to be the word/teaching of God –– EVERY WORD MUST BE PERFECTION. EVERY TEACHING MUST BE MORALLY PERFECT FOR ALL ETERNITY. If only one word is not PERFECTION –– if only one teaching is not MORAL PERFECTION then the ENTIRE KORAN IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD AND ISLAM IS TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY BOGUS –– A SHAM AND A FRAUD. Does any rational reasonable, normal person believe that Koran 5.60 is God speaking to us –– imparting to us moral wisdom. "God cursed the Jews transforming them into apes and swine and those who serve the devil." The words "ape" and "swine" are evil words meant to dehumanize Jews, robbing them of their humanity. Jews are the lowest of the low. Apes and swine. No longer human. Sub humans. Once deprived of their humanity, they can be killed with impunity just as apes and swine can be killed. All of the teachings listed below are evil. None of these teachings are from God. The Koran is no more the word/teaching of God then Mein Kampf is the word/teaching of God. You tell me the difference between the two books. There is none. Both books are books of pure hate that reflect the hateful souls and minds of their authors –– Hitler and Muhammad. Both men who hated Jews with a passion. Both men who sought their total dehumanization and extermination from the history of humanity. 2.61 Wretchedness and baseness were stamped on the Jews and they were visited with wrath from Allah. 2:96 Jews are the greediest of all humankind. They'd like to live 1000 years. But they are going to hell. 4:160-1 For the wrongdoing Jews, Allah has prepared a painful doom. 4.16 And for the evildoing of the Jews, we have forbidden them from some good things that were previously permitted them. 5.82 Indeed you will surely find that the most vehement of men in enmity to those who believe are the Jews and the polytheists. 5.60 God has cursed the Jews, transforming them into apes and swine and those who serve the devil. 9.29 Fight against such of those have been given the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, as believe not in Allah nor the last Day. 9.34 Many of the rabbis and the monks devour the wealth of mankind and wantonly debar men from the way of Allah. Quran 62: A hypocritical Jew looks like an ass carrying books. Those who deny the revelations of Allah are ugly. How can any rational, normal person believe that God would have as his prophet a killer, a murderer, a terrorist who slaughtered human beings, had the pants of young terrified boys pulled down to determine whether they lived or died, allowed the raping of the women and young girls, sold the women and young girls Muslims did not want as sex slaves into slavery, and took for himself one of the young beautiful women to be his sex slave. How can any rational, normal person believe that God would celebrate such evil, heinous crimes with teachings for all eternity to be recorded in a so called holy book –– the Koran. How can any rational, normal person believe that God would share in the looting and pillaging of murdered Jew's property. God as the Mafia chieftain of Muhammad's Muslim crime family. These teachings are evil and not from God. They are the teachings of Allah (the ANTI GOD). The teachings of Muhammad. Since not one of these teachings is moral, the Koran is not the word/teachings of God. Again the Koran is not a holy book but a book of evil.
Islam is the total and complete rejection of God, the total and complete rejection of all teachings of God. The teachings of the Koran are a very great sin and crime against God. It is a book that blasphemes against and makes a farce of everything God stands for. Islam is totally and completely bogus –– a sham and a fraud. ISLAM IS EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD. Contact Larry Houle at intermedusa@yahoo.com and visit his website
|
|
ARAB PALESTINIANS ARE NOT PALESTINIANS
Posted by Muskita Wati, May 14, 2008. |
|
Muslims are majority in Indonesia. The Muslims discriminate, torture, rioting the non-muslim, the christians, the Budhism, the chinese, and the hinduist. Chinese Indonesians are not Indonesian, they are as same as Arab Palestinians they are Arab who live in Palestinian. Although the Chinese Indonesians are Indonesians citizens but they betreated as foreigners. Therefore, to make it straight forward, to make every word clear from ambiquity, I suggest all news, all media, and all information must not mention anymore word "Palestinians", they must apply the correct word "Arab Palestinians" instead. The inhabitant People on the land only one nation but they are separated by two believing. The one who believe on Philistine Goddest are called "The Philistine", the other who whorsips the Jahweh are called "The Jews". The Jews and the Philistines are the real inhabitant of the land out of the Arab Palestinian. The Philistine had been massacred (genocide) by the Arab Palestinians, therefore, the Arab Palestinians have no right to adopt the name of the Palestinians. There are very important to distribute this information through the Indonesian people who support the Arab Palestinian but they killed the Chinese Indonesian. If the Indonesian hate the Chinese Indonesian, so they must do the same toward the Arab Palestinian. Israel Government must promote and distribute this information to the world especially to the Indonesian People the most populated muslims in the world. The Libanese, the Syrian, and the Yordanian are all the same as the Arab Palestians. What on earth the Arab Palestinians can be right to remove the Israelist from their land ???? The best and the just treatment are removed all those rebellous Arab Palestinian out of the Gaza and West bank to their land in Arab or Egypt. They are neither belong to the land of Israel, Libanon, nor to the Syria. Muskitawati. Contact Muskita Wati by email at Muskita Wati@yahoo.com |
|
RE PALESTINIAN PEOPLEHOOD
Posted by Ronald Sheinson, May 13, 2008. |
|
Re: "Palestinians: 'Peoplehood' Based on a Big Lie" by Eli Hertz
My great Uncle with academic training in the US could not get a University position as he was a Jew, very obvious with his beard, etc. He decided he had enough of the US and made Aliah in 1924. He told me that the Arabs would call him a "Palestinian" as a term of derision. Contact Ronald Steinson at ronsheinson@aol.com |
|
ISLAMOFASCISTS FLEX MUSCLES; SYRIA'S NUCLEAR DECEPTION
Posted by Gary Bauer, May 13, 2008. |
|
Islamofascists Flex Muscles The U.S. is doing well in Iraq where, over the opposition of America's political Left, we are taking the fight to the enemy. But in the rest of the region, the news is disastrous. Hezbollah's show of strength in Lebanon follows the pattern we saw in the streets of Gaza a year ago: Militant Islamists, ready to die for their cause, roll over their "moderate" opposition. Hamas humiliated Fatah in Gaza, and Hezbollah just humiliated the Lebanese government in the streets of Beirut. (There are unconfirmed reports that Iranians were captured fighting alongside Hezbollah in Beirut.) The implications for Israel and the United States are horrific. Here's why. Iran and Syria are redrawing the maps of the Middle East, while domestic politics is paralyzing Israel and the United States. Iranian terror camps continue to train new thugs who are sent into Iraq to kill U.S. soldiers. Israel now faces Hamas, growing stronger by the hour, on one border and Hezbollah, armed by Iran, on its northern border. Each day, we are closer to the unthinkable: a nuclear Iran threatening Israel, U.S. military assets and Europe. A lot has been written about Iran's Ahmadinejad facing internal dissent. But in Israel, the prime minister, under U.S. pressure, is racing to give away more land to Israel's enemies before he is indicted on corruption charges. And here in the United States, half the country is embracing isolationism and appears willing to embrace candidates on the left and the right who think that the reason there are problems in the Middle East is that we have not talked or negotiated enough. Several candidates are promising to withdraw from the region and, weary after 4,000 casualties, millions of Americans are saying, "Yes we can!" We can't predict what will happen today, but we can look at history and be reminded of this truth: The Islamofascists, like all thugs before them, are not going to be defeated by words, but rather by will. And right now "will" seems to be in short supply. But there is something you can do! Join me and thousands of other pro-Israel Christians in Washington this July for the third annual Christians United for Israel summit. In addition to briefings and panel discussions from an outstanding line-up of speakers, one day of the summit will be devoted to personal meetings with members of Congress on Capitol Hill, giving you the opportunity to boost the will of our elected representatives to stand with Israel in a time such as this. For more information about the 2008 Washington-Israel Summit, or to register online, please visit CUFI's website today at www.cufi.org. I hope to see you there! Syria's Nuclear Deception Last September, Israeli jets bombed Al Kibar, a suspected Syrian nuclear facility that was being built with the aid of North Korea. In a recent study, the Institute for Science and International Security discovered that Syria took extreme measures in disguising and concealing the plutonium-producing nuclear reactor from U.S. intelligence agencies on the ground and in the air. The authors of the report, David Albright and Paul Brannan, wrote, "This case serves as a sobering reminder of the difficulty of identifying secret nuclear activities." One of the measures the Syrians took to disguise the reactor was to build large underground chambers that were often dozens of feet below ground, making them impossible to detect from satellite photos. Aerial photographs of the site prior to the Israeli strike showed a small building that would be incapable of holding a prototypical nuclear reactor. The Syrians also built an extensive electrical line network buried deep in trenches, as well as an underground water system that discharged into the Euphrates River. This method of cooling water, along with a ventilation system built alongside the walls of the building, rather than in two smokestack towers, were both techniques that are normally not seen at nuclear reactor facilities. In today's modern warfare, the United States has relied on its technological and intelligence superiority against the enemy. But this story shows that intelligence reports are not 100% accurate. America's enemies are determined to develop new methods that have never been encountered before. It is crucial that we adapt and become even more cognizant of our enemy's capabilities and intentions. If our ally Israel had not taken the initiative in destroying the Al Kibar site, the West would have woken up one morning to face a nuclear-armed Syria, which would pose a threat to American and Israeli interests in the Middle East. Gary Bauer is the president of American Values. Contact him at
gary.bauer@mail.amvalues.org. And visit the website:
|
|
EMPTY RHETORIC OF DECEITFUL CANDIDATES
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 13, 2008. |
| ,
White House candidates proclaimed their ties to Israel and vowed to stand by the Jewish state as the key US ally celebrated its 60th anniversary. Obama: "What I love about Israel is it is such a robust democracy and... So it is critical that we send a message around the world, we will stand with Israel, we want them around not just for 60 years..." Hillary Clinton: "In every generation, Israel faces serious challenges to its security and threats to its existence... united by shared values and strong bonds of friendship... and strengthen these bonds, so that the State of Israel will continue to grow, from generation to generation, in security and peace." McCain: "Let no one doubt that, while the challenges will continue, Israel will survive and it will flourish. There will always be an Israel, and there will always be a vital bond between our two peoples." None of the White House hopefuls was strong on specifics and willing to state on record: that Jews have the right to live in peace on their ancestral land –– Eretz-Israel; that 60 years of Arab aggression against the state of Israel must be stopped now; that the fake peace process does not work and extends the suffering of Jews from Arab terror. In short, each one of them will continue to apply pressure on Israel to sacrifice Jewish land to create another, 23rd, Arab state –– the terror-infested state of a fabricated nation, whose sole purpose will be the destruction of Israel! Just empty words! Just survival at any cost is not an issue any more; the right to live in peace on Jewish land is. According the 1922 resolution of the League of Nations, the Palestinian mandate was created to establish a Jewish state –– Eretz-Israel. Just because Jews were weak before and desperate after WW2 and did not have oil to offer to the Western 'masters' does not make the systematic robbery that has been committed against Jews since 1922 right (the illegal creation of Jordan –– 77% of the Palestinian mandate, the shameful UN partition plan of 1947, the current demands for the creation of another Arab state on Jewish land)! Anything less than a clear endorsement that Jews have the right to live in peace in their homeland, the land of their ancestors, is just empty words and unadulterated hypocrisy! At the moment there are three runners for the position of the President of the United States; not one of them had integrity to admit the mistakes of the past and speak up with clarity about the rights of Jews and the state of Israel. It means that all of them will conduct the same policy of stupidity and duplicity, facilitating the rise of terror and the prolongation of injustice against Jews in Israel! Get Lost Condi! US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, appearing increasingly desperate to see an Israeli-Palestinian Arab agreement signed before her president leaves office at the end of the year, reportedly used less than diplomatic language. Both sides she said "need to draw a map [showing their agreed-upon borders of Israel and "Palestine"] and get it done." After meeting with a newly-scandal-plagued Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and ineffectual PLO terror chief Mahmoud Abbas, Rice was forced to leave empty-handed, unable to secure the place in history for her 'master'. (Israel does not need to agree on ceding more Jewish land to Arabs. At the same time, 'Palestinians' want it all!) Peace Process? Over the weekend, terrorists in Gaza fired 22 Kassams and five mortar shells at Israel. On Sunday afternoon a rocket almost hit a busload of students of Sapir College in Sderot. (Stupidity must end now!) Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Isn't it amazing that in a modern democracy even a former drunk, a pea-brained person, can become a president, as long as he is a well-connected member of "Bones and Skull" fraternity! And if his international policy has failed (like: ignoring the rise of global Islamic terrorism and the ideology of Wahabee Islam, the official religion of Saudi Arabia; in spite of billions of dollars spent on National security, missing the September 11 attack; the failed war in Iraq, which is mainly about a personal vendetta and enrichment, demonstrating state power and definitely oil), it can always be hidden by beefing up and shifting the attention of voters to the fake Middle-East peace process and blaming Israel for almost everything! Arabs in Israel are the Fifth Column in Waiting. Having just completed an anti-Israel rally near the town of Tzipori, Israel, hundreds of Arabs clashed violently with a group of Jews celebrating Independence Day, injuring five police officers. Violence started when Jews raised the Israeli flag at an Independence Day picnic. (There is no difference between Israeli Arabs and so-called PA Palestinians. They do not hide their hatred toward Israel and their intentions and plans for Jews! Why must only Jews be politically correct?) Bleak Outlook. Israeli teenagers don't believe another Holocaust is likely –– but 82% said they do believe there is an existential threat to the State of Israel. (Only 20 years ago Israeli born Jews proudly called themselves "Sabra" –– sweet inside but prickly outside. They could not understand why Jews had allowed the Holocaust in Europe. Now the remaining Holocaust survivors can't understand how Israel allows the killing of Jews in the Jewish state!) Quote of the Week: "Olmert is stuck up to his neck in investigations. We cannot have a prime minister who is serially investigated by police. He is plainly corrupt even without [the public] waiting for a conviction. In the entire world there was never yet a precedent of a prime minister against whom so many investigations were held," –– Labor MK Shelly Yacimovich. –– Even Labor party members are losing their 'cool'! 'Wishful-Thinking' Diplomacy of Hypocrisy. In a statement that seemingly runs contrary to reports from Turkey that a Syrian-Israeli breakthrough is imminent, Syria's President Bashar Assad has told that he has rejected Israel's demands regarding a peace deal that Syria would cut its ties with Iran and the terror organizations. (One can't change the nature of the 'beast'!) UN Gaza Boys' School Headmaster was a Bomb-Rocket. A terrorist killed in an IAF air strike last week, Awad al-Qiq, actually lived a double life: By day, he was a respected headmaster and science teacher at a United Nations school, but during the night, he built rockets for Islamic Jihad. PA 'Policemen' Entered Jenin. Some 600 armed Arabs took up positions in the Jenin area on Saturday as 'policemen' for the PA, the result of a recent 'gesture' by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Two IDF soldiers, Ahikam Amichai and David Rubin, were killed in December while hiking in the Hevron Hills. In both cases the shooters were later discovered to be PA 'policemen'. UN: Gaza is Dumping Sewage. Gaza's water authority has dumped 60 million litres of partially treated and untreated sewage into the Mediterranean Sea since January. The sewage discharge is contaminating Gaza seawater and posing health risks. (Sewage dumping is a common practice of the incapable PA government, but, as usual, the UN report authors blame Israel.) Hypocrisy of the 'Loaded' Headlines: "Russia to Israel: Did You Supply Georgia with UAVs?" –– Israel could ask Russia: "Do You Supply Arabs with Katusha rockets and Kalashnikov machine guns? Why do you give help to build a nuclear reactor to oil rich Iran? What is the Russian army doing in Georgia?" Reconnaissance UAVs do not kill! Inaction of 'Ugly Nothing'. The UNIFIL troops were on patrol on March 31st, and pulled over the truck. When they approached the vehicle, carrying arms and ammunition for Hizbullah, terrorists exited and threatened them. The UNIFIL troops returned to their cars and went back to their base. (As in Sudan, Bosnia and Rwanda, the UN troops do nothing but facilitate genocide and the growth of terror by not letting Israel deal with her enemies!) Where is International Outrage? 1. A double suicide bombing has struck a wedding convoy northeast of Baghdad, killing 35 people and wounding 76 others. 2. The fighting that erupted in Baghdad's Sadr City last month has killed 925 people and wounded 2,605. (Only Israel is internationally bashed and criticised. The world has no shame or sense where Jews are concerned!) Iran is a Threat –– We Must Trust Only Ourselves. Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shkedy tells CBCNews 60 Minutes that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats against Israel must be taken extremely seriously. The general said: "I think it is a very serious threat to the state of Israel, but more than this, to the whole world. They are talking about destroying and wiping us from the earth." Gen. Shkedy likened ignoring Ahmadinejad today to the atmosphere that enabled the Holocaust yesterday. "In those days, people didn't believe Hitler was serious about what he said. I suggest we do not repeat this way of thinking and... prepare ourselves for everything." "We should remember. We cannot forget. We should trust only ourselves." Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
STRENGTHENING AMERICA'S ENEMIES: THE IDEOLOGICAL ALLIES OF A FUTURE PALESTINIAN STATE
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 13, 2008. |
|
President George Bush arrives this week in Israel to further his promotion of a Palestinian state. Last month PMW director Itamar Marcus was invited to the US Congress by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Rep. Elliot Engel of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to release a report documenting the dangers to US interests of a Palestinian state with ideological alliances to many US enemies. "Strengthening America's Enemies" The ideological allies of a future Palestinian state," now being released, concludes: "There is overwhelming evidence that the contacts between the Palestinian Authority and the enemies of the United States are relations between allies who share a common ideological bond. Strikingly, hatred of the United States and disdain for the US role of world leadership are what unite them. Unless the Palestinian Authority demonstrates a major shift in ideology, a future Palestinian state will be firmly allied with North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Iran, Chavez's Venezuela, and Hezbollah, the forces that are seen as threats to the US and which are linked to world terror...There is no reason to believe that were a Palestinian Fatah state created, and its dependency on the US reduced, it would then choose to embrace the US. Indeed, in all likelihood the ties with the enemy states would intensify."The following is the executive summary of the report. To read the full 30 page report in PDF, go to http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=0019wr92MSzw7mH4efS7WMbf6q7YZQSZjV_ qZMoE69fGQpd9awmamumiP7hUzE7lhVi_ztIRRuVH11qbobJLD-UmwNQ pfoPl2DlNDFKRXQj2VsrlHhrFD3ewcvfN6x33p0wfZBH1a6BQwAI6NY9hZU- 6KRVivTP5WvtXyLReNs8Xz_hrMnvWJirjw== |
|
Executive Summary At the Annapolis Conference, the US initiated a peace process with the goal of creating a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), headed by Mahmoud Abbas of the Fatah movement. This initiative is based on the assumption that the creation of a Fatah-based Palestinian state is in America's interest and will encourage long-term peace in the Middle East. This report examines the assumptions upon which the new peace initiative is based. Methodology This report examines the current ideology and political allies of the Fatah government as expressed by Fatah leaders and in the Arabic-language Palestinian Authority (PA) media. Documents examined include contacts and statements by the Fatah political, academic and religious leadership, reporting, editorials and education in the Fatah-controlled PA daily newspapers, PA television and PA schoolbooks. The goal is to determine the likelihood that a potential Palestinian state would be an ally or adversary of the United States, and would support the US goal and policy of promoting world security and peace. Findings This report reveals that the Palestinian Authority-Fatah government of Mahmoud Abbas is allied with many states who see themselves as enemies of the US and whom the US sees as threatening US security and world peace. Significantly, the affinity that is felt for such geographically distant non-Muslim countries, such as North Korea, Cuba, and Chavez's Venezuela is precisely because these states publicly challenge and express loathing for the US. The PA admires such organizations as Hezbullah, PA-Fatah heroes are master terrorists such as Imad Mughniyeh, killer of 241 American soldiers in Lebanon and the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 are celebrated almost every annual anniversary with a political cartoon in the official PA daily (see Part 1). The US, on the other hand, is depicted by Fatah leaders, their controlled media and PA education with disdain and loathing. Language such as, "the greatest Satan in the world, America" [PA TV, March 3, 2008], by a Fatah legislator is routine. Conclusion Palestinian State will continue alignment with enemies of the US There is overwhelming evidence that the contacts between the Palestinian Authority and the enemies of the United States are relations between allies who share a common ideological bond. Strikingly, hatred of the United States and disdain for the US role of world leadership are what unite them. Unless the Palestinian Authority demonstrates a major shift in ideology, a future Palestinian state will be firmly allied with North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Iran, Chavez's Venezuela, and Hezbollah, the forces that are seen as threats to the US and which are linked to world terror. 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. |
|
AMIN AL-HUSAINI AND THE HOLOCAUST. WHAT DID THE GRAND MUFTI KNOW?
Posted by Gloria Center, May 13, 2008. |
|
This was written by Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, a historian of the Middle East and German Middle East policy. He is the author of four books and the editor of ten others, including "Germany and the Middle East, 1871-1945." He grew up in Cairo and Berlin, and he teaches at Rider University in New Jersey. This article had been adapted from a longer article that appeared on the German website Kritiknetz. The full German version is available on Kritiknetz here. The English translation is by John Rosenthal. Wolfgang Schwanitz is currently writing a book with Barry Rubin, to be published by Yale University Press, on Nazi Germany's policy toward the Middle East and relationship with the Arabic-speaking world. |
|
Amin al-Husaini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, remains a controversial figure. The Palestinian leader, who was born in 1895 and died in 1974, first sparked controversy during his lifetime. As an officer in the Ottoman army during the First World War, he implemented the German idea of organizing jihad and terror behind enemy lines. (See my discussion here.) Later, he led the resistance against the British mandate authority in Palestine during uprisings in 1929 and in 1936. He fiercely opposed Jewish settlement. But it is, above all, the Grand Mufti's close ties to National Socialist Germany that are the subject of ongoing debates. From 1941 to 1945, he lived for the most part in Berlin as a guest of the German government. The Nazis provided office space, vehicles and money, so that the Mufti and his entire entourage could stay active. In return, the Mufti used his influence in the Middle East on the Nazis' behalf and recruited Muslims for the Nazi war effort. On the airwaves of Nazi Germany's Arab language radio service, he called for a Holy War, a jihad, against the Allies and the Jews. Some German authors, like René Wildangel, claim that it is still unclear whether and to what extent Amin Al-Husaini was informed about the Nazis' exterminationist policies toward the Jews. In a recent review of Klaus Gensicke's biography of the Grand Mufti, John Rosenthal expresses some doubts as well: noting that the fact that members of the Grand Mufti's entourage visited the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in 1942 is not sufficient evidence for concluding that he also knew what was transpiring in the death camps further to the East. But in fact the full record of the available evidence, including both German and Arabic sources, leaves no room for doubt anymore. Indeed, the Grand Mufti's own words provide the most compelling proof. Memoirs of the Grand Mufti, edited by Abd al-Karim al-Umar, were published in Damascus in 1999. In the memoirs, al-Husaini openly discusses his close relationship to SS chief Heinrich Himmler. According to his account, he often met Himmler for tea and during these meetings the Nazi leader confided some of the secrets of the German Reich to him. Thus, for example, in the middle of 1943, Himmler is supposed to have told him that German nuclear research had made great progress: In three years, Germany could have an atomic weapon that would guarantee its "ultimate victory." As Rainer Karlsch's recent book on "Hitler's Bomb" has shown, this assessment was not far off. Himmler presumably confided this information to the Grand Mufti on July 4, 1943. That is the date on a photo of the two men with a signed dedication from Himmler: "to his Eminence the Grand Mufti –– a Memento". as shown here. 
There is evidence, moreover, that the Grand Mufti knew about the Nazis' plans still earlier. In 1946, Dieter Wisliceny, a close collaborator of Adolf Eichmann in the "Jewish Affairs" division of the Reich Central Security Office, provided a written statement on the Grand Mufti to the Nuremberg Tribunal. According to Wisliceny, at the beginning of 1942 Eichmann made a detailed presentation to al-Husaini on the "solution of the European Jewish question." The presentation took place in Eichmann's "map room" in Berlin: "where he had collected statistical graphics on the Jewish population in the various European countries." The Grand Mufti, Wisliceny recalls, was "very impressed." Furthermore, al-Husaini is supposed to have put in a request to Himmler to have Eichmann send one of his assistants to Jerusalem after Germany had won the war. The representative of Eichmann was to serve as the Grand Mufti's personal advisor: i.e. when the Grand Mufti would then set about "solving the Jewish question in the Middle East." We can infer from other documentation that this was not just a vague idea. A declassified document on Nazi war crimes from the National Archives in Washington indicates that as of mid-1942 a special SS commando unit had plans to liquidate the Jews of Cairo following the capture of the city by German forces. (See detail below.) Gen. Erwin Rommel was supposedly disgusted by the proposition. The head of the SS unit, Walter Rauff, had earlier been involved in developing vans that served as mobile gas chambers. It should be noted that he was a German and not a Pole, as suggested in the U.S. government document. In his memoirs, however, the Grand Mufti feigns astonishment at Himmler's remark. On his account, Himmler asked him how he would solve the problem of the Jews in his country. Amin al-Husaini says that he answered that they should go back to where they came from. To which Himmler is supposed then to have replied: "Come back to Germany –– we will never allow them to do that." But the Grand Mufti is here white-washing his own role in history. After all, in Berlin on November 2, 1943, he publicly declared that Muslims should follow the example of the Germans, who had found a "definitive solution to the Jewish problem."
The Gloria Center –– Global research in international affairs ––is
based in Herzliya ––
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: INCONSISTENCIES
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 13, 2008. |
|
I can only report the information as it comes to me. But sometimes I take a look at the news and am startled at how different it seems from what I shared just 24 hours ago, or less. Yesterday Olmert and Barak were reported as telling Suleiman that the deal for a ceasefire with Hamas was insufficient and not acceptable as is. Today, the whole story sounds different, as it is being reported that Israel is leaning towards that ceasefire –– to be instituted slowly. The words of Mark Regev, Olmert's spokesman, perhaps tell the story: "Israel cannot continue to tolerate the daily barrage of rockets, so either the attacks will cease or Israel will have to stop them. We don't have a great desire to escalate in the south, and if it is possible to achieve calm, that is obviously our preference." Actually, it is not so obvious, because this solution is short-sighted. Hamas will be strengthening and there will be a price to pay for this quiet down the road. Be that as it may, apparently there will be no military response to the lethal attack yesterday –– sort of a "good faith" gesture. ~~~~~~~~~~ But even now there are conflicting reports. On the one hand some officials are said to be hopeful that, in the words of one: "If the initiative is successful –– it may be the answer to how we block Hamas's growing strength while preventing arms smuggling across the border and furthermore, this could mean good news on the Palestinians' willingness to compromise on the Shalit deal." This has a very "pie-in-the-sky" feel to it. Hamas is intent on our destruction. The ceasefire, such as it may be, would not be the first step in permanent cessation of hostilities that would lead to peace with Hamas. It is intended by Hamas to be temporary, because right now they're hurting and want to be stronger before they come at us again. This is built into their ideology. Even if the smuggling is stopped by Egypt –– a stretch in itself –– Hamas has military people who were trained in Iran and who will be training others to make their army stronger, and they are doing refinement and building of weapons inside of Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ On the other hand, there are those who believe that Hamas will never agree to compromise on the terms for release of Shalit as part of a ceasefire deal, and that this will give us the out we need. For there is another factor at play here: the government is afraid that Hamas, which is offering the interlude of quiet, will appear "peaceful" while we, refusing to accept it, will appear "warlike." If they refuse on Shalit, we can say that we had good intentions but it was Hamas that did not come through. And right now this looks like the way things will play out. While, admittedly, Suleiman has not gone back yet to talk with them again, today Hamas is saying that they'll continue to hit us hard unless we agree to the ceasefire, and that there will be no talk about Shalit until after we have agreed to that ceasefire, i.e., it will not be part of the ceasefire deal. If we agree to a ceasefire without a deal on Shalit, after we had insisted this had to be part of the agreement, we will be showing weakness and surrendering deterrence. Hamas has to sue for quiet, not us. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is a mixed message in another quarter as well. There have been reports indicating that Bush was likely to bring "gifts" with him when he arrives tomorrow. I just reported, for example, on the possibility that we might receive radar more sensitive than what we now have. US officials, however, are playing down this possibility. While there have been intensive talks in recent months between top Israeli defense officials and the Pentagon and White House, regarding Israeli receipt of cutting edge US equipment –– most notably the F22 stealth bomber that can avoid radar –– in order to maintain Israeli's qualitative military edge and prepare us for dealing with Iran, they are saying Bush won't be closing any deals on his largely ceremonial visit. Israeli officials continue to be of a different mind. ~~~~~~~~~~ Investigation update: The police, warrant in hand, went into City Hall yesterday afternoon in search of documents from the time that Olmert was mayor. Talansky has been questioned again, under caution, by the National Fraud Unit. He has already admitted that he gave envelopes filled with cash to Olmert. Now there is consideration going on of favors that Olmert may have done for him: possible rezoning of land for the benefit of Talansky's associates, possible installation of speed bumps in the area where Talansky's son lives, after he complained that traffic was dangerous for his grandchildren. Remember, however, that certain benefits do not have to be proved to make the case for bribe –– the money can be a hedge against the possible need for favors down the road. I had been under the impression that Talansky was remaining in the country voluntarily, to cooperate, but apparently this is not the case. For now I read that the State may extend the "hold departure order" on him. Talansky is due to leave the country on May 21. According to Haaretz, investigators are hoping to first do in-depth questioning of Olmert, followed by the early testimony of Talansky, before then. They are concerned that plans for Olmert's travel will interfere with the schedule for questioning him. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
"NOT ONE INCH!" OR "INCH BY INCH"
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, May 13, 2008. |
|
Considering the facts of Eretz Hakodesh,
Considering the purchase in Schem by Yaakov where Yosef Hatzaddik is buried, a protected by Oslo II handshake, now violated by hate in all its manifestations, Considering the purchase of the Temple Mount before David Hamelech conquered Yerushalayim,
Considering all the purchases by Eurasian Jews and the Jewish National Fund,
ceding the land willed by HaShem,
Considering the collaboration against the rightful recipients by the British violating its guardianship of the Balfour Mandate, the only current legal document
Considering the consequences of land for peace –– suicide genocide, rockets, bombs, knifings, threatening annihilation, as well as empowerment of the Arab leagues of Jihad: Husseinis of Iraq, Hizballah and Hamas of Iran and Syria, Al Qaida of Afhghanistan, Wahabbis, Mujadeen
Considering the destruction of Kever Yosef, the antiquities of the Temple Mount, the Magan David Synagogue in Gush Katif, the thievery, the misuse of funds for the poor, the destruction of greenhouses and selling Jewish patented know how worth billions for $3000 to Egypt, Considering another inch for the terrorists of Tulkaren, Jenin, Kalkilya, Ramalah, BeisLechem, Hebron, Gaza is surrendering to an accelerating war. One inch made a fire, two inches made another Inquisition, three inches has made a manageable, defeatable war, four inches can disorder law, five inches can unmake civilization.
To be or not to be, that is the answer. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com. |
|
DRANG NACH OSTEN. IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!
Posted by Alexander Maistrovoy, May 13, 2008. |
|
Had anyone of the European monarchs, grandees or pontifices of the XVth century ever heard a word "Prussia"? Unlikely. Stuck in the Baltic bogs between Russia and Poland, Prussia, the miserable successor to the Teutonic Order, the obedient vassal of proud Poland (Rech Pospolita), hopelessly vegetated on the boondocks of Europe. Could anyone imagine that in two centuries only Prussia would become one of the main players on the European arena, initiate the two most terrible in history wars and claim world hegemony? However, skeptics would not consider three important circumstances: belligerence and vigor of Prussians, their support by boundless Russian empire and the favor of Fortune, whose whims can never be predicted. By the beginning of the XVIIth century the House of Hohenzollern united with Brandenburg, skillfully combining military discipline and intrigues. The bridge to Europe over Poland has been thrown. The capital of the new formation was moved from Keninsberg to Berlin; steady absorption of Germany by Prussia (interrupted by Napoleonic wars) began: Hanover, Gessen, Nassau, Schleswig-Holstein, and Frankfurt-on-Main. At that time democratic Poland which was torn apart by petty ambition of its dukes, endured one disaster after another: it was tormented by Swedes, Turks, Cossacks, and Russians. The Polish cavalry was the most irrepressible in Europe, but democracy of the country had turned into a parody to itself. Polish dukes squandered the state treasury on ridiculous follies –– from love affairs to alchemical experiences. Great European powers did not feel any danger. They indulged the fall of Poland, not understanding, that they themselves had lined up to become a predator's dinner. Austria, and then France were defeated by Prussia. United by Teutons, Germany dominates over Europe. The next step was the possession of the whole world: the First World War, then Nazism and the Second World War. History is not a very inventive producer. Costumes and scenery vary, but not scripts. They repeat themselves in other countries, civilizations and cultures. There is no other place in the Middle East as stale and ill-fated, as Gaza. No resources, no statehood –– only sand, sea and ignorant superstitious masses. But there is an organization, ready to lead these masses. It is well organized, disciplined and has high motivation. What is more, there are influential forces supporting it. Gaza was not the aim of the HAMAS coup. Gaza is no more than a springboard. And Israel is not the main objective of the future campaign. It will of course be a victim, but not the overall objective. As well as Poland was by no means the overall objective of Teutonic aspirations. As well as Prussians were unable to resist the Polish cavalry in the XVIIth century, HAMAS cannot resist the Israeli army, which is considered to be the best in the Middle East. But they are not going to fight it. The next step of HAMAS is to get influence in the West Bank. They do not hide their intentions. In November, 2007 one of the leaders of the organization, Mahmud az-Zahar told, that "as soon as the Israeli army will leave these areas, HAMAS can establish there the authority". This aim is quite accomplishable, considering how corrupted the highest ranks of FATH are. At this very moment that Ramallah becomes the capital of new the formation, the world will recognize HAMAS because it will become the only "dialogue partner ". But it is only half of the way. The next blow will be directed not against Israel, but again at the East. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan will be the next victim. 60 percent of its population are Palestinians, and the significant majority in Parliament are already Islamists. The rulers of the Hashemite Kingdom are undoubtedly the most educated and enlightened rulers in the region, but they are very vulnerable. If HAMAS gets the West Bank, Jordan can easily be swallowed by the blood-thirsty predator as enlightened German princedoms and liberal cities had been swallowed by Prussia. The result of this will be the creation of a huge Palestinian formation on both banks of the Jordan river which will get in contact with Sunni Arabs in the east of Iraq and the cradle of Wahhabism –– Saudi Arabia. In the south HAMAS's success will give impulse to the Muslim brothers in Egypt where Mubarak tries to keep them under control with the carrot and stick. But Mubarak is not eternal, and the Muslim brothers and HAMAS are a Two-headed Ogre. Israel will come next. The state has been losing its deterrent effect due to "successes" of its own plutocracy and EU Israel-bashing. That's why it won't be ready to resist the strong enemy, obsessed by military triumph. Surrounded by foemen it could be torn apart as Poland had been, with conniving indifference of "the civilized world"... But it is not the end of story. It is only the beginning. Israel is not the primary target of militant Islamists. They endanger the whole of the world. When HAMAS creates a huge beachhead in the center of the Middle East, the rules of the game will change. It will be extremely difficult to do something. It was quite possible to suspend the rising of Prussia. But it required two world wars, the combined efforts of the international community and tens million victims to stop Germany. It is not a phantasmagoria. It is the scenario which has already started to be carried out... ... We only need to remember the fate of the protagonists of "that" Prussian story. Europe was liberated by the USA, but demoralized and disgraced. Germany went through defeats from which it never fully recovered morally. Poland returned to life, having passed through sufferings, treachery and humiliations. If Europe gets back its values and consequently its future, it will only be due to the handful of East European countries: Poland, Czech Republic and some others. As for Prussia, it has disappeared from the face of planet. Unlike generous Polish kings, Stalin solved problems radically. One part of the Prussian population was starved to death during organized famine, others were moved to Siberia. Keninsberg became Kaliningrad with entirely Russian population. It is useless to speak about history in a conditional mood, but who knows what the history of Germany and Europe (as well as Prussia itself) would be if after the defeat of the Teutonic order by Rech Pospolita, Keninsberg became a Polish city, and not a Prussian duchy. Predators have neither honor, nor mercy... Alexander Maistrovoy is a journalist with the Russian-language Israeli newspaper Novosty nedely. |
|
CHRISTENDOM'S CHRISTIAN MARTYRS; NYT'S NOTIONS; IS SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST PEACE?
Posted by Richard H Shulman, May 13, 2008. |
|
CHRISTENDOM'S CHRISTIAN MARTYRS An Anglican bishop tried to alert Britain to the menace to Christians in many English cities. His colleagues ostracized him for it. Muslims threatened him with death, confirming it. He is right. The East End of London is one example. As Muslims from Bangladesh poured into the East End, the Jews poured out, but many Christians remained and their clergy remained to serve them. Those clergy are subjects to religious taunts and beatings by Bangladeshis. They are told to turn their churches into mosques. Some churches' windows are broken a couple of times a month. (Imagine the fear and expense that engenders!) English police don't call those attacks crimes of hatred, only attacks on mosques. Islamic bookshops display Islamic hate literature (Daniel Johnson, NY Sun, 3/20, Op. Ed.). People have a right to hate literature but a responsibility not to sell it. English Muslims should be asked not to sell it. The police should fulfill their own duty, which is not to protect hate crime by discriminating against Christians in identifying it and prosecuting it. Have they adopted the notion that minorities always are innocent and victims, and never pick on the innocent majority? Muslims do, in many places. That is the fruit of thoughtless multi-culturalism. Just because Bangladesh once was in the British Empire, does not mean they should be allowed to make their haven as miserable as the country they fled. Why should English Christians be besieged in their own country? When will their government stop trying to appease their Muslims oppressors and crack down? DANISH CARTOONS Bin Laden accused the Pope of helping foment a "new Crusade" against Islam. Part of that Crusade is the cartoons published by Danish newspapers. Bin Laden wrote, "You went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings." Jihadi forums call for revenge against Europe, over the cartoons (Paul Schemm, NY Sun, 3/20, p.7). There is no Crusade, there is jihad. All the Pope call for was dialogue rather than violence. Nor were Danish cartoons intended to insult. They were meant to describd the Islamic impetus to Islamic terrorism. Bin Laden's propaganda is hysterical and defamatory. Why don't the Muslims deal with the issue of their terrorism. To punish "Europe" over an imagined slight by a few newspapers is the collective punishment that Muslims pretend Israel inflicts. The Muslims do what they accuse their enemies of. That is how they think up accusations. INCOMPLETE OR FALSE NOTIONS "Palestinians Seek Support From Rice On Borders." The NY Times headline lacks a full and frank explanation. Readers would assume that the situation is normal. It is not. The Times should have explained that the Arabs violated their agreements, fail to make the promised peace, negotiate with Islamist intransigence, and then ask the US to support their total demands. Requesting asking US support means asking that the US take the Arab side. Readers are reminded that Pres. Bush assured Israel that he expects Israel to keep its major towns in Judea-Samaria, and is leaving it up to the parties to negotiate this. The P.A. asks that Israel either relinquish all the land that, as the Times put it, Israel "conquered in 1967" or give the P.A. equivalent amounts of territory from pre-1967 Israel. The implication is that Israel acted improperly in conquering the land, that it conquered it from the Palestinian Arabs, that the Palestinian Arabs had title to it, and that the 1967 lines were some official border. Not at all. Israel cites Bush's letter as justification for permitting Jews to build thousands of houses in their existing Judea-Samaria towns that it expects to keep. The P.A. leaders are angry about that building. Unmentioned are the tens of thousands of houses that Arabs build illegally in the Territories and in Israel. The Arabs' hypocrisy goes unnoticed by the Times and other anti-Zionists. The armistice lines of 1967 were happenstance and define no border. Jordan and Egypt unjustifiably invaded the Territories in 1948 and ruled them dictatorially until 1967. From them, Egypt and Jordan attacked Israel in 1967 from the Territories, unprovoked. Israel defended itself. Nobody had title to the area. The Palestinian Arabs never did. They never were a nation or had a national territory or history, being mostly families of wanderers and immigrants ruled by others and with no sense of distinction from others. The status of the Territories was as the unallocated part of the Palestine Mandate. Israel is the primary heir to the Mandate. Therefore, Israel has the best claim to them. The history of the Territories does not support the Times' pro-Arab position, so the Times omits the history from its account. Hundreds of Arab police entered Jenin "to focus mainly on fighting crime," to prove the P.A. capable of statehood. The P.A. complains that the IDF raiding of terrorists undermines those police efforts. Never discussed is whether such a bigoted, aggressive group is worthy of statehood, whether that statehood should come at the expense of Jewish territory, and whether there already is a Palestinian Arab state (Jordan). Omitted is any note that fighting crime is only one part of governing. Another part would be fighting against terrorism. How significant that the hundreds of P.A. police do not intend to fight against terrorism! As Israel puts it too tactfully, the P.A. forces are "too passive in fighting terrorism." It isn't logical to accuse Israeli raids of undermining police efforts, when the raids are against terrorists whom P.A. police do not raid and if the P.A. police did raid terrorists, why should they object when Israel raids them. Facts unmentioned are that the P.A. police protect terrorists and are terrorists. I conclude that their continued failure to fight against terrorism, even though they are the rulers of the area, forfeits consideration for statehood and certainly indicate to Israel that it would be wiser to confer sovereignty onto a group that has just proved it is not making peace by not ending terrorism. Problems in equipping P.A. forces there are attributed to Israeli worry that the forces could turn their new arms on Israelis or get taken over by Hamas "as in Gaza." (Isabel Kershner, 5/4, p.6.) The Times sees fit to show that the prospect of P.A. forces in Judea-Samaria getting taken over by Hamas is reasonable, because it happened before in Gaza. Why doesn't it see fit to show that the concern that P.A. forces may turn their guns on Israel is reasonable, because it happened before? Hmm. IS SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST PEACE? It is, according to the NY Times. It is, the paper suggests, when practiced by Israel. It's 5/3 headline was, "Israel's Tactics Thwart Attacks, With trade-Off At Odds With Peace Bid. Raids Reduce Suicide Bombs, But Undercut Palestinian (Arab) Forces." The article is long, but the news in it is short. Opinion abounds, not candidly labeled editorial. The obvious purpose of the article is to suggest that Israeli defense may work but keeps the P.A. from making peace. What facts back up that conclusion? None. There only is the assertion by the P.A. that Israeli raids keep it from fighting terrorism. That assertion is a lie. Israel has informed the P.A. of the identity and location of terrorists. Instead of arresting the terrorists, the P.A., whose government and forces are comprised largely of terrorists (as if the Times, which piously expects much from the P.A., didn't know), puts them under protective custody and uses its counter-terrorism training to try to track down and execute Arabs who informed Israel about planned terrorism. The P.A., in fact, has been allotted security control over certain of its cities, as an experiment. That gives it the opportunity to prove intent and capability. Result: order is kept, traffic moves, ordinary criminals are arrested. But terrorist organizations are unhindered! At least, an Israeli general states that nobody believes any more that the P.A. will fight terrorism. (Nobody but governments, that is, which keep demanding Israeli sacrifices to prop up the corrupt Abbas as the one with whom to make peace and whose peace would exclude terrorism and war.) What the P.A. and Abbas fight is anti-terrorism. Why doesn't the Times, which gives so much space to P.A. lies, have room for that truth? The Times does acknowledge that the separation barrier is largely fence, but its photograph is of a wall. Hmm. It acknowledges that Israel's checkpoints and raids have reduced suicide bombing successes to a minimum, but not suicide bombing attempts. Nevertheless it maintains, as if one with P.A. propaganda, that Israel's methods prevent peace. The nice Abbas wants peace, the Times implies here and states constantly elsewhere. Is that so! If he wanted peace, would his forces keep committing terrorism? Would he threaten to resume warfare if he didn't get everything he wants in a peace agreement, and what he wants means Israel couldn't survive –– from the influx of millions of bigoted and violent Arabs? If he opposed terrorism, would his media constantly glorify terrorists? Would his schools and media and mosques preach the duty of killing Jews and eradicating Israel? Would he keep agitating for the release of thousands of terrorists? Would the US, for that matter? Why doesn't the Times explain that? Because that would expose the real culprits as the Muslims, with whom the publisher sides. It would lead people to question whether there is any point in Israel negotiating a final peace agreement with those who remain dedicated to destroy it and would use the agreement and sovereignty the better to exterminate Jews. People might even question why there is a drive to give those undeserving Arabs another state in the Jewish homeland. An honest paper would remind readers that the P.A. already has a peace agreement, but never complied with it. Islamic ideology does not permit it to, where it doesn't have to. Pretending to hear from the other side, the reporter quotes an Israeli saying that if Israel didn't raid the P.A. in Judea-Samaria, "The price of staying out might be one that we don't want to pay." How vague and ambiguous! For clarity and fairness, they should find the many Israelis who put it, "If we stayed out of the P.A. in Judea-Samaria, terrorism would become as prevalent as from Gaza, even if Hamas did not take over, which it would do." The article mentions Hamas' take-over of Gaza. Why doesn't it include the assessment of knowledgeable commentators that Abbas' forces are so weak and he is so unpopular, that Hamas, which has good military training and organization, would take over as soon as the IDF were to leave? Why not report that? Because that would show the fallacy of trying to prop up Abbas. The governments\ of the US, which demands concessions to popularize Abbas on the theory that his people are so bellicose that if he can get terrorists releases, the people would approve of him. Self-contradictory, that his popularity depends on how much he supports terrorism against Israel. The government of Israel, which worries more about gentile approval than its own people's security, keeps demanding and making more concessions without evaluating their effect. What kind of policy-making is that? What kind of reporting ignores the results of a policy that doesn't succeed but whose proponents keep making the same false assertions about it? Independent analysts in Israel have studied the results. Abbas is losing popularity. He has failed to make reforms in his corrupt government. The pursuit of failed policy is evidence of stupidity or malice. Speaking of stupidity or malice, the Times mentions that the P.A. Arabs and the "international community" want the checkpoints removed. The "international community" includes anti-Zionist governments that oppose almost all Israeli security measures and fail to oppose almost all Muslim anti-Israeli measures. But the Times cites them as if legitimate. As for the Palestinian Arabs, sure they want the checkpoints removed. This is where an honest newspaper would report the many poll results that show a majority there approving of terrorism. Israel periodically yields to US demands to remove some checkpoints. When it does, terrorism erupts through them. Sometimes Israelis get killed that way. Any regret by Sec. Rice? No. By the P.A.? Maybe as a mere formality, but contradicted by Abbas' honoring the terrorists and the people, supposedly moderate, celebrating. If the US government were sincere about opposing terrorism, it would suggest more checkpoints. Even some Israelis talk about working with "pragmatic" P.A. officials. What does "pragmatic" mean? Whom do they mean? Why don't they do something or say something. "Pragmatic" is just a nice-sounding word, like "moderate," used to deceive readers. There is no group in the P.A. that rejects holy war. The Times and State Dept., of impure motives, try to dupe us. Unfortunately, they control both our government and most of the news that We need to evaluate governmental policy. That policy should recognize that Israel's actions are not at odd with its desire for peace. It wants peace, but the P.A. foments war. Truth is, the P.A.'s actions are at odds with its claim to want to settle the Arab-Israel conflict. The Times usually finds vague and dry statements from Israelis that hardly make Israel's case, and concrete and emotions statements from Arabs that make wild assertions but are not challenged. Can this be other than to steer readers against Israel, although the Arabs are the aggressors? Isn't it fundamental that failure to defend against aggressors' probes encourages the aggressors to make full-scale war? ARABS PLAN MASS CIVILIAN INVASION OF ISRAEL They plan to mass the descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees at the borders of Israel and then cross. Hamas tried to do the same, recently. The government of Israel issued clear orders to its troops, and made known that the orders were to shoot all who attempt to cross into Israel. An Arab admitted that knowing of Israel's intent to use whatever force is necessary to stop the invasion, the Arabs would not take the chance of trying to invade. That's deterrence! Time to issue the order, again (IMRA, 5/2). If Israeli troops did shoot down mobs trying to storm the country and take it over, the world would condemn Israeli "brutality," as if the Muslims didn't deserve it and is if the world didn't bear some responsibility for letting the Arabs assume, from constant examples, that the world does not mind constant Arab attacks on Israel, only Israeli self-defense. The Western moralizers against Israel are immoral. P.A. ACCUSES BUSH OF NOT BEING HONEST BROKER According to the P.A., the Bush Administration tells the parties to negotiate their own deal. It sees this as taking Israel's side and not being an honest broker. It wants the US to take its side. Then it would see the US as an honest broker (IMRA, 5/3). An honest broker doesn't take sides. Would that the US didn't take sides! It continually presses Israel to make fatal concessions to the Arabs. It keeps breaking its word to Israel and condoning serious P.A. violations of peace agreements as if that doesn't indicate the futility of further agreements. But what does the P.A. know about honesty? It violates all its agreements. Its propaganda is as false as, and along much of the same racial and defamatory lines as the Nazis'. Its ideology is one of relentless pursuit of conquest, in behalf of which deceit is considered honorable. The use of deceit is a matter of degree. Americans note some deceit by Pres. Bush, but don't know the half of State Dept. deceit –– their deceitful advocacy journals keep from them knowledge that Islamic methodology is based on deceit. 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 |
|
WHY ZIONISM IS A MULTI-ETHNIC DREAM COME TRUE
Posted by Crystal K, May 12, 2008. |
|
a quick translation of a good article ... This is taken from the LiberaliPerIsraele website
|
|
A record number of hundreds of new immigrants from twenty different countries have arrived in Israel last May 5 on the eve of 60 jubilee of the Jewish state. Aliyah was organized by the Jewish Agency and the Ministry for Home immigrants to celebrate the arrival and integration of more than three million immigrants from 1948 to today. To Israel, as the only multi-ethnic state in the Middle East, Haaretz dedicates a splendid article.sono sentita molto a mio agio in Israele. When Haaretz Magazine asked Fadela Amara, the French Minister for Urban Affairs, what impression Israel had done, Amara –– daughter of immigrants Berbers in Algeria and known champion of women's rights and immigrants in war against extremist Islam –– replied: "I felt very comfortable in my stay in Israel. I did not feel any racism, although I am sure that exists. In Israel there are all colors, so it's become almost natural to see white, yellow, brown. For the French I am not 'quite' French. Here we live in a dominant culture. When you have a French name and you are white with blue eyes, is something. But when your name is Fatima and are a little 'dark, they look at you in a different way. In Israel, thanks to the variety of people, I have not experienced this kind of feeling. " According to Haaretz "a visitor coming from France has grasped something fundamental of society and of Zionism: the incredible ethnic diversity contained in the concept of the Jewish state." The Jewish identity in a certain way can also be defined by ethnic origin (born by Jewish mother), as many people emphasize, but does not coincide with Israeli citizenship. In a country with two different people –– as such Jews and Arabs consider themselves –– the national identity of each tends to be ethnic necessarily because it represents only part of the inhabitants of the country (unlike what is commonly accepted in countries like France). "But beyond that, there is a very significant paradox contained in the definition of the Jewish people, and which is at the origin of Israel. The Zionist vision of a people which includes all Jewish communities in the world (a prospect that arouses the opposition of some trendy left) is certainly one of the more multiethnic and multicultural national attitudes in history. When you see the Jews of Poland and the Jews of Yemen, Jews of Germany and the Jews of Morocco as members of one people, and a country is founded on this national vision, we are faced with an essentially multi-ethnic and multicultural, whether Israelis agree with it or not. " The ethno-cultural differences between the various groups that jointly formed the Jewish Israeli society were quite large. "But these groups shared the conviction of belonging to the same people, whether they adhered to the modern version of this Zionist perspective, to the traditional Jewish or any possible combination of both. They had then a base and a cultural awareness in common: true recipe for a successful multiculturalism, although the feeling of belonging to one nation only may not avoid some arrogance or bias, at times. " This feeling of belonging is the main reason why the state of Israel is the most successful example of integration between the peoples of Europe and the muslim Middle East –– in a ratio of about 50 to 50 –– throughout modern history. "Strictly speaking, from a Zionist perspective this success should not surprise us: after all, this is not the integration of immigrants from 70 countries, but the absorption of newcomers from 70 diasporas who since the beginning were members of the same people". During her visit to Israel, Fadela Amara perceived the fruits of this success: "A society where people take for granted the ethnic differences more than in others which boast of their open mindedness and acceptance of the 'different'. It can be assumed that many of those that she saw here were not of Jewish origin, but people with Jewish relatives, close or distant, arrived in Israel and becoming citizens through the Law of Return, members of hebrew-speaking Jewish-Israeli society They too are now part of the Israeli mosaic that the visitor from France so much admired. " (Giulio Meotti) Crystal is moderator of EUROPEANS_WHO_SUPPORT_ISRAEL@yahoogroups.com. Contact her at k_hallal@yahoo.com |
|
J-STREET IS SETTING UP STRAWMEN AND SPEAKS FOR FEW
Posted by Ted Belman, May 12, 2008. |
|
The article below appeared in the Washington Post. It was written by Jeremy Ben-Ami executive director of J Street, a lobby and political action committee that "promotes peace and security in the Middle East." My glosses are in red inside square brackets. [Editor's Note: The J-Street Blog (home also of the JStreet Pac) is the newest of the Peace Now (at any price) groups. The J-Street reference? There is no J-Street in Washington, D.C. The streets jump from I Street to K Street. Read into this what you will. Supporters and advisors include such "friends" of a viable Israel as Avrum Burg, George Soros, Henry Siegman, and Robert Malley. –– BSL] |
|
Six decades ago, my father fought alongside Menachem Begin for Israel's independence. If you'd have told him back then that politicians in the world's last superpower would be jockeying today to see who can be more "pro-Israel," he would have laughed at you. Grateful as I am for decades of U.S. friendship to Israel, I have to wonder, as the state my father helped found turns 60, just who is defining what it means to be pro-Israel in the United States these days. [This is a curious statement. Few countries can be described as pro-Israel. Even those countries act to pressure Israel to not defend themselves and to give up her security. Secondly, the US has been at the forefront of forcing Israel to retreat from Judea and Samaria even though it was given to the Jews in the Mandate.] Some purported keepers of that flame claim that supporting Israel means reflexively supporting every Israeli action and implacably opposing every Israeli foe –– adopting the talking points of neo-conservatives and the most right-wing elements of the American Jewish and Christian Zionist communities. Criticize or question Israeli behavior and you're labeled "anti-Israel," or worse. But unquestioning encouragement for short-sighted Israeli policies such as expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank isn't real friendship. (Would a true friend not only let you drive home drunk but offer you their Porsche and a shot of tequila for the road?) Israel needs real friends, not enablers. And forging a healthy friendship with Israel requires bursting some myths about what it means to be pro-Israel. [On the contrary, we supporters don't remotely "reflexibly" support Israel's every move. In fact we challenge her all the time. As much as J-Street suggests this is true of AIPAC, the truth is that AIPAC leans to the left while not publicly opposing what Israel does. J-Street just leans more to the left. They support the ridiculous notion that friends should force Israel to capitulate. It is a lie to say that criticism of Israel gets you labelled anti-Israel. Only some king of criticism does, namely where a double standard is involved or where the threats to Israel are ignored. Much has been written about his and Ben-Ami should be ashamed of himself for suggesting otherwise.] 1. American Jews choose to back candidates largely on the basis of their stance on Israel. This urban legend has somehow become a tenet of American Politics 101, which is why politicians work so hard to earn the pro-Israel label in the first place. But it's a self-serving fable, cultivated by a tiny minority of politically conservative American Jews who actually are single-issue voters. Most Jewish voters make their political choices the way other Americans do: based on their views on the full spectrum of domestic and foreign policy issues. Moreover, the American Jewish community still has a markedly progressive bent. Exit polls suggest that nearly 80 percent of Jewish Americans voted for John F. Kerry over George W. Bush in 2004; some 70 percent of them were opposed to the Iraq war in 2005, according to the American Jewish Committee; and polls show that most American Jews say they favor a more balanced U.S. Middle East policy that's aimed at achieving peace. [Once again, he is setting up a strawman. Everyone knows that Jews are joined at the hip with Democrats. No one can argue that Democrats have been better for Israel than Republicans have. So they are voting for the party regardless. But there is a minority that uses, as a litmus test, the attitude to Israel expressed by each party. I can assure you that while most Jews support the Democratic Party and will continue to do so, they do not back J-Street which wants the US to apply pressure on Israel for their own good.] 2. To be strong on Israel, you have to be harsh to the Palestinians. Wrong, and counterproductive to boot. One popular way for members of Congress to earn their pro-Israel stripes is to come down as hard as possible on the Palestinians, by using economic and diplomatic pressure or giving the Israelis a freer hand for military strikes. That may satisfy some primal urge to lash out at Israel's foes, but it does Israel more harm than good. As Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has argued, Israel's survival depends on offering the Palestinians a more hopeful future built on political sovereignty and economic development. As long as Palestinians despair of a decent and dignified life, Israel will be at war. And as long as the only channel for the Palestinians' ingenuity is building better rockets, not even the Great Wall of China will protect Israel's cities from their wrath. Helping the Palestinians achieve a viable, prosperous state is one of the most pro-Israel things an American politician can do. [The converse of this is to be good for the Palestinians you have to be weak on Israel. This is what J-Street recommends. History has shown that the Palestinians aren't interested in their welfare. They just want to destroy Israel. They receive the highest per capital aid and prefer to spend it on armaments than developement. They organize for hatred and war. J-Street would have you believe that they do so because Israel is harsh on them. They blame Palestinian terror on Israel. Palestinians have been trying to destroy Israel from the beginning. The fact that Israel is now harsh on them is due to their murderous intent. The West has been offering them economic development since Peres introduced Oslo based on a "new Middle East". They rejected it then and rejected it again when Israel disengaged from Gaza. Yet J-Street won't change their paradigm. Israpundit believes that only strength will bring peace.] 3. The Rev. John Hagee and his fellow Christian Zionists are good for the Jews. Hardly. Are Israel and American Jewry really so desperate that we
must cozy up to people whose messianic dreams entail having us all
killed or converted to Christianity? Hagee, the founder of Christians
United for Israel, and his ilk believe that Israel dare not cede any
territory in the quest for peace, claiming that the Bible promised all
of the holy land to the Jews. In other words, Christian Zionists look
at the trade-offs that Israel must make to achieve peace –– and hope to
thwart them. Then again, peace is not what these folks have in mind;
they hope that Israel will seek to permanently expand its borders,
thereby goading the Arabs into a war that will become the catalyst for
Armageddon and the second coming of Christ. Do your ambitions for
Israel extend beyond turning it into the fuel for the fire of the
"End of Days"? Then Hagee and company are not –– repeat, not –– your
friends.
[Since when do progressives worry about what will happen when there is a second coming. While some religious Jews, like evangelicals, believe that Israel shouldn't cede any land for religious reasons, they both believe, along with the 2/3 of Jewish Israelis, that no land should be ceded for security reasons. Ben-Ami proceeds on the proposition that trade-offs can achieve peace. That is wishful thinking. He favours embracing the the Saudi Plan. But no where is there any evidence that to accept such a deal will deliver peace. In a democracy, the majority rules. Since 2/3 don't want to cede any more land and certainly don't want to be forced to, he is ignoring democracy and simply wants to support the minority in Israel who want such pressure. Not for a moment do I believe that the evangelicals are resisting ceding any territory as a means to bring on Armageddon.]
4. Talking peace with your enemies demonstrates weakness. You don't need an advanced degree in international relations to recognize that pursuing peace only with people you like is pointless. Most Israelis know this; a recent poll in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz found that two-thirds of Israelis favor cease-fire negotiations between their government and Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip, exactly because Hamas is such a bitter foe. But in Washington, we self-righteously refuse to engage –– even indirectly –– with Hamas, Iran or Syria. Hamas won the most recent Palestinian national elections in a landslide. Do we seriously think that it can be erased from the political landscape simply by assassinations and sanctions? Precisely because Hamas and Iran represent the most worrisome strategic challenges to Israel, responsible friends of Israel who'd like to see it live in security for its next 60 years should be engaging with them to search for alternatives to war. [The appropriate question is given the Charter, words and intention of Hamas, does he really believe Hamas will abandon its goal if we talk to them. Hamas must be destroyed not talked to. Nowhere does he at all care for Israel's rights. Its tantamount to demanding Israel share its home which they have a legal right to, simply because Hamas is demanding it.] 5. George W. Bush is the best friend Israel has ever had. Not even close. The president has acted as Israel's exclusive corner man when he should have been refereeing the fight. That choice weakened Israel's long-term security. Israel needs U.S. help to maintain its military edge over its foes, but it also needs the United States to contain Arab-Israeli crises and broker peace. Israel's existing peace pacts owe much to Washington's ability to bridge the mistrust among parties in the Middle East. So when the United States abandons the role of effective broker and acts only as Israel's amen choir, as it has throughout Bush's tenure, the United States dims Israel's prospects of winning security through diplomacy. The best gift that Israel's friends here could give this gallant, embattled democracy on its milestone birthday would be returning the United States to its leading role in active diplomacy to end the conflicts in the Middle East –– and help a secure, thriving Israel find a permanent, accepted home among the community of nations. [His theory is that a friend should help Israel make peace which means should force Israel, against the will of its majority and government, to make peace. Wrong. The peace process exacerbates the conflict, just the opposite of what Ben-Ami suggests. If the world would stop forcing Israel's retreat and butt out, Israel will achieve peace in her own way. If the US insisted on all refugees being resettled in other countries, they would be serving peace. If the US supported Israel's claim to Judea and Samaria, it would serve peace. Despair doesn't lead to terror, hope does. So kill the hope.] Addendum: The New Republic just published a takedown of J-Street under the title, "Street Cred? Who does the new Israel lobby really represent?" It starts with Consider the plight of the American Jewish peacenik. With Hamas in control of Gaza, Ehud Olmert under investigation, and the West Bank government of Mahmoud Abbas shaky as ever, a negotiated deal between Israelis and Palestinians doesn't exactly appear imminent. Meanwhile, closer to home, the likely Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, has said he won't negotiate with Hamas. Under these grim circumstances, what's a Peace Now type to do? And ends with Given that AIPAC and other similar groups already speak for most American Jews, and given that J Street's founders are well outside the mainstream of Jewish public opinion, it's far from clear what, exactly, the new organization can realistically hope to accomplish. Of course, if J Street someday surpasses AIPAC in membership and manages to convince the majority of pro-Israel voters in the United States that negotiations with Hamas are a smart idea, then it will rightly be able to accuse other groups of misrepresenting American Jews. But that is about as likely as crossing J Street Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
A PLEA FOR HELP FOR THE STILL HOMELESS GUSH KATIF REFUGEES
Posted by Freedman, Helen, May 12, 2008. |
|
Dear friends, I received this note from Anita Tucker, one of those expelled from her beautiful home and farm in Netzer Hazani, in Gush Katif, in the Gaza strip, in August of 2005. She is presently living on a kibbutz, in a tiny room, with her family scattered, while she tries to help restore the community which once existed. The government has reneged on all its promises and demands money from these poor souls who have lost their jobs as well as their homes. Reading her email to me will give you an idea of the magnitude of these problems. She will be in NY from May 20-June 3. Anita is a powerful speaker and a remarkable woman. To know her is to love her, to respect her, and to want to help her. Please think of what you and your friends can do. Please contact me with any suggestions or questions. All the best,
|
|
Helen, good to hear from you, hope all is well with you and you are busy as always with your caring for Am Yisrael and Eretz Yisrael. thanks so much –– this is not much fun nor easy –– but we are determined to raise the the ransom funds the feudal lords demand and not let them get away without building anew! ThePrime mnister's office demands our paying their shortfall of $2 million towards the farming land acquisition –– we have now so far close to $400,000 towards this. In addition they are playing all sorts of games of separate and rule which we refuse to give into –– especially since they are now not respecting agreements already signed by yonattan Bassi, former head of SELA commission. Though we have already planned all our public buildings –– and the shortfall there is also not simple –– we are concentrating mostly on this land funding shortfall –– knowing that though we had a beautiful synagogue etc. –– the absolute must to enable the community to survive is –– getting the land and becoming a new town even if we have to pray in a caravan at first!! We are of course in constant dialogue with our lawyers as to bringing all this to court –– but it will take years and of course though there is obviously a good chance –– there is definately no assurance that we will win –– as the law is often upheld and justice is not done. THis is especially true while the many legal advisors in prime ministers office work overtime to try to dig up old laws to make things difficult for us and to enable their interpretation of some old law to cover them –– while they continue to act with extreme injustice. We, on our part, will not allow the spirit and values that we managed to salvage from the rubble to be destroyed –– as this spirit and these values are exactly what our dear country most needs to again be flourishing today. Helen Freedman has long been associated with Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Contact her at GHFree@aol.com |
|
KEEPING UP WITH IT ALL
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, May 12, 2008. |
At the same moment that another Jewish woman was killed by a terrorist missile in southern Israel, several thousand Jerusalemites formed themselves into a human chain in front of the U.S Consulate two days ahead of the visit of President George W. Bush, to urge the American president to "free your captive –– Jonathan Pollard." The crowd spilled over to the square around the corner from Prime Minister Olmert's residence where a long list of speakers berated the Israeli government's lack of action as well as the intransigence of the American defense establishment in refusing to allow Pollard out of jail after 22 years punishment. Amongst the crowd I spotted Mayer and Regina Mansdorf, a couple who are almost 90 years old, who both survived the Holocaust, emigrated once to America and then to Israel in the 1980s. They live close by and never miss the opportunity to speak out against injustice. Standing close to the spry elderly couple are a gaggle of teenage girls who lead the shouts of "Free Pollard, Free Pollard" that are quickly taken up by the large, mostly religious crowd. Human rights lawyer Nitsana Darshan Leitner addresses the demonstrators, as does former Prisoner of Zion Yosef Mendelevich, who spent 11 years in a Soviet prison camp back in the 1970s. Police photographers discreetly take photos of participants as a throng of border patrol and police officers ring the square. About four blocks away at the beautiful Mishkenot Shaananim conference center, the evening session of the first Writers Festival gets underway. It takes no more than 10 minutes to walk between the rally and the festival, but the atmosphere and the crowd couldn't be more different. Several hundred fashionably dressed and largely secular types have gathered in the marquee overlooking Sultan's Pool and the walls of the Old City to listen in on a discussion between Israeli author Eshkol Nevo and American writer Jonathan Safran Foer, moderated by Israeli literary critic Noa Menheim. The audience is overwhelmingly female and surprisingly, not all made up of native English speakers. The conversation focuses on Jewish identity and the nature of the conflict in Israel. Both authors are disarmingly frank and good-natured, even while they disagree over their perceptions of the major conflicts in Israeli society. Foer, an avowed secular Jew living in New York with an identity he says is shaped by eastern Europe, sees the crux of the matter here as the great divide between ultra-orthodox Jews and the rest of Israel. Nevo, Jerusalem-born and now living in Raanana, tells Foer the Haredim aren't a factor in his ife, but ensuring a safe drive between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem is. "On the scale of conflicts that's number one," he states. Nevo somehow weaves in the thought that Israelis aren't taught the "Arab narrative" in high school, and I decide it's time to leave. There's a book launch at the Conservative synagogue on Agron Street that I don't want to miss. The synagogue is just across the street from the Pollard protest, and as I walk by, Esther Pollard, Jonathan's wife is exhorting the remaining demonstrators to keep up their activities during the Bush visit. The Moreshet Yisrael Synagogue is almost full as I slip into one of the few remaining seats at the back of the sanctuary. The evening is to mark the publication of the latest book by one of the congregation's emeritus rabbis, Avraham Feder. Rabbi Feder is a prolific author, lecturer and chazan and husband of my friend Tzipora. After a learned introduction by Rabbi Yosef Green, Rabbi Feder's predecessor at Moreshet Yisrael, Rabbi Feder launches into a passionate, accessible and inspiring talk about the art of the darshan –– one who gives a drasha. Rabbi Feder's new two-volume book is entitled Torah Through a Zionist Vision, and he tells us,"The Torah's Zionist call jumps out on every page." Last month when I spent Seder with the Feders, he told me with a sly smile that there wasn't a single Shabbat when he didn't mention aliya or Zionism in his drashot to his congregation in Toronto. Tonight, Rabbi Feder, a powerful and extraordinarily effective communicator, closes his talk by noting the difference between delivering a drasha and writing a book. "In a drash you're dramatic, passionate –– you yell a lot," he explains. "In a two volume book things are calmer, steadier, there's time to be more philosophical, it's a serene passion," he says. The rabbi leaves us with the main point he says he's tried to get across by writing this book. There are no footnotes in his book –– "I don't pretend to be a Biblical scholar." Rabbi Feder says he's taken a more literary approach inspired by a Bialik essay and focusing more on the revelatory aspects of Torah. "I hope this modern perush will help us realize what a precious gift we have," he concludes. Three events within a half mile radius over a three hour period that draw hundreds of participants representing a panoply of perspectives and providing food for thought. Sign of a vibrant society or a fractured people?
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. Contact her at judy.balint@gmail.com
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: INSPIRATION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 12, 2008. |
|
Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, delivered a speech for Israel's 60th. It is so extraordinary that I must lead off with this today: "All of my life, Israel has been a symbol –– a symbol of the triumph of hope and faith. After 1945, our battered world desperately needed to be lifted out of post-war darkness and despair. After so much pain and suffering, humanity needed comfort and optimism. After so much death and destruction, we needed renewal –– the renewal of the dream of a better and more civilized world. In short, we needed to be inspired. It was the people who had suffered who most provided that inspiration. By their example, they led the world back to the light. From shattered Europe and other countries near and far, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob made their way home. Their pilgrimage was the culmination of a two-thousand-year-old dream; it is a tribute to the unquenchable human aspiration for freedom, and a testament to the indomitable spirit of the Jewish people. "In the sixty years that followed, Israel blossomed into one of the most successful countries on earth; a land of ingenuity and enterprise, an oasis of agricultural genius, a wellspring of fine art and high culture, a model of democracy. Israel truly is the 'miracle in the desert.' "But the source of Israel's strength and success, in my view, is its commitment to the universal values of all civilized peoples: freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law... "Unfortunately, Israel at 60 remains a country under threat –– threatened by those groups and regimes who deny to this day its right to exist. And why? Make no mistake; look beyond the thinly-veiled rationalizations: because they hate Israel, just as they hate the Jewish people. Our government believes that those who threaten Israel also threaten Canada, because, as the last world war showed, hate-fuelled bigotry against some is ultimately a threat to us all, and must be resisted wherever it may lurk. "In this ongoing battle, Canada stands side-by-side with the State of Israel, our friend and ally in the democratic family of nations. We have stood with Israel even when it has not been popular to do so, and we will continue to stand with Israel, just as I have always said we would... "There will be many challenges along the way, but considering how far Israel has come in such a short time, in the face of such seemingly insurmountable odds, I can foresee no dark force, no matter how strong, that could succeed in dimming the light of freedom and democracy that shines from within Israel." ~~~~~~~~~~ How rare in this highly politicized and twisted world is such unqualified support. Imagine how different our position would be if other world leaders spoke similarly. PM Harper is to be saluted. ~~~~~~~~~~ Ted Belman has posted the entire speech at Israpundit:
~~~~~~~~~~ What I ask is that you take the time to thank Prime Minister Harper by writing to him at pm@pm.gc.ca. ~~~~~~~~~~ As to the Olmert investigation, I begin today by saying that I have never in my life encountered so many innocent people. No one did anything. At least, that is what they are working vigorously to have us believe. The former director of the New Jerusalem Foundation, Zvi Raviv, for example, expressed bewilderment as to why this non-profit organization, which does good work, should be involved in the investigation at all. Never mind that Olmert and Messer founded it and Talansky was made treasurer. Or that the Post reported eight years ago that there were suspicions about use for campaign purposes of money from this foundation (which had not yet registered in Israel as a non-profit and in 1999 failed to report millions in contributions). "We support those with special needs, children, and teenagers," said an NJF spokesman. "We fund dance centers, libraries in schools, provide help for the deaf, and holiday food packages." Bringing up the name of the foundation was "unjustified." "The police are not interested in the foundation." While Talansky gave an interview on Channel 10 TV, in which he said that Olmert asked for campaign donations, just as other Israelis were asking, and that he gave for the pure joy of giving and helping an Israeli candidate. If Olmert asked, he assumed it was legal. Talansky is adamant that he never bribed Olmert. As to that quote about being afraid something will be done to him because of his testimony, he says they are making a big deal out of what was only an off-hand remark. ~~~~~~~~~~ The investigation at this point is reportedly focusing on possible bribery, rather than illegal campaign contributions. What has been discovered is that he took large sums of money while he was minister of industry, trade and labor –– and had no need for campaign funds –– in a time frame around 2005. The term "soft money" is being bandied about, but I will not attempt to grapple with whatever legal meaning it has here in Israel. In the US it refers, broadly, to political donations made in such a way as to avoid federal regulations or limits. Here the implication is that rules for what can be accepted from foreign nationals for a campaign did not apply, as Olmert wasn't running for office –– that the money went to Likud and not Olmert, or to pay his previous campaign debts, or towards future campaigns. Remember, the law applies to donations to a candidate in the nine months before an election. According to Haaretz, an official connected with the investigation explained that: "There's no doubt that Olmert is trying to pull the investigation in a certain direction, of collecting funds for elections." "But," says the official, "in contrast to the impression Olmert is trying to create, the investigation team is currently focusing precisely on the period when there were no elections, and there was no apparent justification for collecting funds for an election campaign." This official, Haaretz reports, says that the police suspect Olmert of having received envelopes of cash that cannot be accounted for. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to another source involved in the probe, who was also cited by Haaretz: "The investigators are currently focusing on reinforcing suspicions that are relatively easy to verify....They are dealing with the period during which it is possible to unearth findings that will strengthen the suspicions against Olmert... "During the short period being probed so far, the investigators managed to arrange a cross-checking of sources. There are documents, there's Talansky's testimony, there's Messer's testimony –– all these findings reinforce the credibility of the other." All evidence is pointing in the same direction. ~~~~~~~~~~ YNet reports that according to Major-General (ret.) Borovsky, who headed the anti-corruption department at the State Comptroller's Office and is familiar with details of the current investigation, an indictment is likely to be served. "The police are acting with determination, professionalism and courage in this case." ~~~~~~~~~~ Apparently a deposition will be taken from Talansky. ~~~~~~~~~~ But, truly, we probably shouldn't worry about any of this, because we have it straight from President Bush in an interview that ran on Channel 10 here: Olmert, he says, is an "honest man." Translation: I want the peace process to proceed and don't want this stuff to get in the way. ~~~~~~~~~~ A Dahaf poll done yesterday for Yediot Ahronot shows that 60% do not believe that Olmert didn't take money (this double negative is how the poll was worded), and 59% think he should resign. If Livni heads the Kadima party, according to this poll, Kadima would get 27 mandates (seats) and Likud 23. This is bad news for Netanyahu, who's been biding his time, assuming that Likud would win the next election, and for those who are anxious to see Kadima out of power. ~~~~~~~~~~ Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman was here, and presented to Olmert and to Barak the proposal worked out with Hamas for a ceasefire in Gaza. Both Barak and Olmert indicated that terms were not acceptable because the return of Gilad Shalit must be included. Additionally, Olmert specified that terms must include cessation of smuggling and arming of terrorist groups. Suleiman was disgruntled by this Israeli response, after Egypt had worked so hard to establish terms. Suggesting that we are "inflexible," he pushed the notion that the ceasefire had to be accepted first, and then there would be an opportunity to discuss Shalit. But Israeli leaders weren't buying this, and he has no choice but to carry this message back to Hamas. MK Yuval Steinitz (Likud) made an important point, with this: Release of Shalit, as eager as we all are for it, should not be the cause for our agreeing to a dangerous ceasefire that will result in additional deaths and kidnappings down the road because Hamas will continue to strengthen. Although Suleiman spoke about a ceasefire leading the way to discussions on Shalit, it's not that simple. There is a standstill on these negotiations because there are certain Hamas prisoners with blood on their hands that our security people refuse to release but that Hamas insists must be released. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are those who see Suleiman's visit as a final effort to stop the shooting of Kassams before Israel escalates militarily. Barak made the observation, perhaps relevant, as his meeting with Suleiman ended, that "Israel cannot continue exercising restraint over the ongoing terror from the Gaza Strip." Additionally, Barak was clearly not receptive to the suggestion that after six months of quiet in Gaza there would be efforts to extend the ceasefire to Judea and Samaria. Olmert, however, is scheduled to meet with Mubarak, precisely when is unclear. This had been agreed to weeks ago. ~~~~~~~~~~ This evening an elderly woman who had come to visit at Moshav Yesha, near Gaza, was killed when a Kassam hit the house where her family lived. Islamic Jihad has claimed credit. Earlier today two Grad Katyushas hit Ashkelon. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
NEW YORK TIMES PHOTOS THAT LIE: BUILDING THE CASE AGAINST ISRAEL, ARTICLE BY ARTICLE, DAY AFTER DAY
Posted by Helen Freedman, May 12, 2008. |
|
This article was written by Phyllis Chesler and it appeared on the
Pajama Media website
|
|
For fifteen years, (1993-2008), Charlie Bernhaut of Americans for a Safe Israel has been sending Open Letters to the staff at the New York Times. Charlie loves Jewish cantorial music and Jewish jokes. He is an amiable, sociable man. So, what has driven him to launch such a lonely, one-man crusade? I doubt he can stop himself. Perhaps the Biblical bush burned for him too, perhaps, like Moses, he could not refuse the mission-which consists of documenting and protesting the newspaper's contemporary "use of photographs to prejudice their readers against Israel." He was at this long before CAMERA, MEMRI, or HonestReporting saw the same burning bush. The Times has never acknowledged Bernhaut's letters-nor have the Jewish media and organizations who also received copies. Of course, as the author Laurel Leff, (Buried By the Times. The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper), has documented, the Paper of Record did not cover the Holocaust either, they did not document Jewish suffering or genocide. The photos Charlie brought me were all taken by Rina Castelnuovo. Google her and you will find sixteen pages devoted to her photos in the Paper of Record, and to her gallery exhibits and prestigious awards. Castelnuovo was born in Tel Aviv but her focus is mainly upon the suffering of Israel's non-Jewish Arab citizens and that of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. A minority of her photos focus on positive Israeli realities but there is no real balance or complexity to her photojournalism. Of course, the articles that accompany her work are similarly unbalanced. One might conclude that she has been asked to focus only on Palestinian grief and to avoid Israeli grief altogether. Castelnuovo's photos enjoy prominent placement and sometimes occupy an incredible one-third of a page. Obviously, so do the articles that her photos illustrate. Bernhaut believes that some, if not all of her work, is staged; it therefore pre-dates the kind of faux-tography that characterizes the full-steam-ahead Arab, Palestinian, and Islamist visual and narrative brainwashing of the world's masses that gathered force during the al-Aqsa intifada. Stay tuned for an interview with Phillipe Karsenty, the hero who has been battling France's media over their use of the quintessential staged, fake event known as the Mohammed Al-Dura"Affaire," in which a small Palestinian boy was "seen" being shot to death in his father's arms by Israeli troops at the Netzarim junction. It turns out that the Israelis did not shoot him. Actually, the boy was neither shot nor killed. The poster child and father for the al-Aqsa intifada were actors. The harm is done. It cannot be repaired. But, perhaps the families of all those Israelis who were martyred between 2000-2008 can sue France's Channel Two, the Palestinian Authority, Arafat's estate, and the world media for damages. The propaganda against the Jews and Israel is relentless and effective and has reduced the truth to a lie. After forty years of manipulating the truth, millions, perhaps billions of people view Israel as the "Nazi, apartheid, occupier" of noble, oppressed, and suffering Palestinian people. They do not understand that the Palestinians have never existed as a group or as a nation-state; that early Zionist pioneers and Israelis improved both the non-Jewish Arab standard of living and life expectancy so much so that more and more family- and clan-identified non-Jewish Egyptians, Syrians, and Jordanians gravitated to Jewish lands; that, in 1948, the Arabs who occupied villages in Gaza and on the West Bank were not forced out by Israelis but rather by their own Arab leaders who wanted to use their homes for battle-purposes and who were absolutely convinced that they would drive the upstart Jews into the sea. They failed to do so. However, thereafter, the Arab High Command and individual Arab tyrants refused citizenship to all "Palestinian" refugees and also kept the enormous sums donated to alleviate their suffering for themselves and for weapons. The Israelis wanted mutual cooperation and peace with their non-Jewish Arab neighbors. The Arab and eventually the "Palestinian" leadership only wanted to use the "Palestinians" as human fodder in their eternal war against the Jews and against the West. Read Ephraim Karsh's excellent piece on this very subject in the latest issue of Commentary magazine. The first Castelnuovo photo that Bernhaut showed me appeared on February 17, 1993. It showed Muslims in full prayer position outside a mosque in Bir Nabala which the Israelis had "sealed." The photo caption, the article, and the headline do not explain that Hamas was using the mosque to store weapons and that the Israelis had raided it for that reason. The fact that the Israeli government is a faithful protector of religious shrines of all religions is never mentioned-nor is the Arab and Muslim shameful record of burning down, building over, or using the religious shrines of non-Muslim faiths as garbage dumps. On March 21, 1996, we see sorrowful, patient Palestinian women and children who have cancer "waiting for permission to go to Israel for treatment." Not shown are the scores of Palestinian patients who are routinely treated in Israeli Jewish hospitals. Even Arab and Muslim "militants"/terrorists who are captured in battle are treated in Israeli Jewish hospitals. The Times provides no photos of them. On September 11, (!) 1998, Castelnuovo provided a photo of the grieving family of a Palestinian woman shot "by accident." It did not balance this photo with that of a grieving Israeli family whose civilian member was shot "on purpose." As Bernhaut phrased it in his letter to Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. in April, 2000: "Of course, Jewish suffering is nonexistent (irrelevant). Bernhaut's latest letter is dated May 9, 2008 and addresses the two Castelnuovo photos that accompany the May 7, 2008 headline: "After 60 Years, Arabs in Israel are Outsiders and Their Anger is Growing." Pictured is a traditionally dressed 84 year old Arab who is touching the door of Hittin, a former Arab village in the north of Israel. Bernhaut suggests that Castelnuovo must have said: "Go over to the wall and face the door, that's it. Now, raise your hand, no, not the right hand, it will hide your face. That's it, the left hand, raised. Now, look longingly at the wall.Perfect. Here's the payment for your services." Yes, western journalists routinely pay for such theatrical participation. I am not saying that Castelnuovo did so in this particular instance. Bernhaut brought me one other article, which was dated April 23, 2000 and which concerned the photo which, much earlier, depicted the evacuation of people from the roof of the American Embassy in Vietnam. According to New York Times journalists Fox Butterfield and Kari Haskell, this photo became the "most remembered photo of the fall of Saigon." However, the caption in the New York Times was "wrong." Those boarding the helicopter to flee Saigon were not Americans; they were Vietnamese." Butterfield and Haskell write: "In it's way, the photo is a metaphor for all the misunderstanding that plagued the Vietnam war." Bernhaut writes that perhaps one day the New York Times will also write: "In it's way, the photographs that the New York Times featured to bias the public against Jews are metaphors for many of the misunderstanding that plagued the tiny, beleaguered Jewish state." I think Bernhaut is far too optimistic. Helen Freedman has long been associated with Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Contact her at GHFree@aol.com |
|
THE STRANGE BEDFELLOWS OF 1948 –– HAJ AMIN AL-HUSSEINI AND THE BOSNIAN MUSLIMS
Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 12, 2008. |
|
This was written by Seth J. Frantzman for the May 7, 2008 Jerusalem Post. Frantzman is in a doctoral program at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; his MA thesis was on the Christian Arabs in the 1948 war. |
|
On a pleasant Thursday in December 1948, Emilio Traubner, a correspondent for The Palestine Post, found himself near Abu Kabir, not far from Jaffa. Trenches and expended cartridges were strewn about, reminders of the fighting between units of the Irgun and local Arab forces that had taken place there seven months previously. There was a large Arab villa from where Traubner recovered a diary. It turned out to be the daily record of Yusuf Begovic of Pale, a town near Sarajevo in modern-day Bosnia-Herzegovina. In it Begovic had described his activities as a cook for the "Arab Army of Liberation." Traubner described who Begovic had been serving: "35 Yugoslav Muslims who had a good reason to expect to be among the first to occupy and loot Tel Aviv, were part of a group of some thousands who came to the Middle East to join the jihad against Israel." What were Yugoslav Muslims doing in Jaffa in 1948? How had they managed to get themselves all the way to the Holy Land? What had motivated them? Who had recruited them? What was the Bosnian or Albanian connection to the Palestinians, if there was one? There was a Bosnian connection: Haj Amin al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, had been in Bosnia in the 1940s. Had he recruited these men? What had become of them? It turned out that in 2005 a Bosnian had given an interview in Lebanon to a Croatian newspaper and claimed to have fought in the 1948 war. The story began to crystallize. The Long Shadow of Haj Amin In October 1937, Haj Amin al-Husseini, mufti of Jerusalem and leader of the Arab Higher Committee, was hiding from the British authorities in the Haram al-Sharif, the holy sanctuary atop the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. On October 13, disguised as a Beduin, he fled to Lebanon via Jaffa. In Lebanon he received sanctuary from the French mandatory authorities but he fled again with the outbreak of war in 1939. This time he made his way to Baghdad disguised as a woman. In Baghdad in 1940 and 1941 he increased his contacts with Germany, offering to aid the Nazis in return for their help in gaining independence for the Arab states. The Italians helped him enter Turkey, and then he made his way to Rome on October 11. He met with Mussolini and then with Hitler on November 28. After the failure of various schemes to create an Arab military unit he eventually settled for recruiting Muslim volunteers to aid the Nazis from the Balkans, Bosnia and eventually Kosovo. In speaking to potential recruits, Husseini stressed the connections they had to the Muslim nation fighting the British throughout the world: "The hearts of all Muslims must today go out to our Islamic brothers in Bosnia, who are forced to endure a tragic fate. They are being persecuted by the Serbian and communist bandits, who receive support from England and the Soviet Union... They are being murdered, their possessions are robbed and their villages are burned. England and its allies bear a great accountability before history for mishandling and murdering Europe's Muslims, just as they have done in the Arabic lands and in India." Three divisions of Muslim soldiers were recruited: The Waffen SS 13th Handschar ("Knife") and the 23rd Kama ("Dagger") and the 21st Skenderbeg. The Skenderbeg was an Albanian unit of around 4,000 men, and the Kama was composed of Muslims from Bosnia, containing 3,793 men at its peak. The Handschar was the largest unit, around 20,000 Bosnian Muslim volunteers. According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, "These Muslim volunteer units, called Handschar, were put in Waffen SS units, fought Yugoslav partisans in Bosnia and carried out police and security duties in Hungary. They participated in the massacre of civilians in Bosnia and volunteered to join in the hunt for Jews in Croatia." Part of the division also escorted Hungarian Jews from the forced labor in mine in Bor on their way back to Hungary. The division was also employed against Serbs, who as Orthodox Christians were seen by the Bosnian Muslims as enemies. The Handschar division surrendered to the British army on May 8, 1945. As many as 70,000 Bosnian Muslim POWs and their families were moved by the British army to Taranto in Italy. The creation of Marshal Tito's Yugoslavia at the end of the war meant that former Bosnian Muslim volunteers in the German SS units could not return home for fear of prosecution or internment. George Lepre, a scholar on the history of the Handschar and author of Himmler's Bosnian Division: The Waffen-SS Handschar Division 1943-1945 describes their fate: "Those Bosnians who elected to remain in the camps eventually found asylum in countries throughout the Western and Arab worlds. Many of those who settled in the Middle East later fought in Palestine against the new Israeli state." But first they had to get to the Middle East. The formation of the Bosnian unit in 1947 The Bosnian Muslims, usually referred to as "Yugoslavs" in period newspaper accounts as well as in intelligence reports, remained in DP camps in Italy until 1947, when it was reported in The Palestine Post on April 18 that there was a "request from the Syrian government for the transfer of 8,000 Bosnian Moslem refugees at present in Italy. Yugoslav quarters here say that the Arab League has written to all Arab states, urging them to assist these Moslem DPs, and that some financial help has already been received. Yugoslav officials say that they too want these 8,000 Moslems back, as they are the Handschar Division of the German Wehrmacht which surrendered to the British... The Yugoslavs state that they view with the gravest concern the possibility of the transfer of this group to the Middle East." By December 1947 a nucleus of former Handschar officers had made their way to Syria and were beginning to reconstitute their unit in Damascus. A report by Israel Baer in the Post noted that "the latest recruits to the Syrian army are members of the Bosnian Waffen SS... It is reported that they are directing a school for commando tactics for the Syrian Army." No doubt the fledgling Syrian army which had been born in 1946 was in need of officers and trainers with experience. Emilio Traubner, writing on December 3, 1947, noted that the International Refugee Organization (IRO) was even convinced to fund the travel of Bosnian Muslims from Italy to the Middle East so that they could find homes since they refused to be repatriated to Yugoslavia. In January 1948 Arab agents were working to recruit Bosnians for the fight in Palestine. On February 2, it was reported that 25 Bosnian Muslims had arrived in Beirut and were moving to Damascus to join 40 other Bosnians already there. A report by Jon Kimche on February 4 further noted that up to 3,500 were being transferred to Syria to fight alongside Fawzi Kaukji's Arab Liberation Army (ALA) in its invasion of Palestine. On March 14 a party of 67 Albanians, 20 Yugoslavs and 21 Croats led by an Albanian named Derwish Bashaco arrived by boat in Beirut from Italy. They were hosted by the Palestine Arab Bureau and made their way to Damascus to join the ALA. In the first week of April another 200 Bosnians arrived in Beirut. A lengthy report by Claire Neikind on March 2 described the procedure by which Arab agents were recruiting volunteers among the DPs in Italy. Men between 22 and 32 were sought and in return they would receive free passage to Beirut and their families would receive maintenance. According to Neikind, 300 men had already arrived and 90 Croatian Ustashi were also making there way. Fifty-seven were sent to Amman. Between December 1 and February 20 a total of 106 were sent to Syria. Neikind noted that "as soon as their families are settled, they enter Arab military service." If one accepts merely the low totals from newspaper accounts it appears that there were at least 520 Bosnians, 67 Albanians and 111 Croatians in Syria or Beirut, as well as 135 Bosnians on their way to Egypt and 57 Bosnians in Jordan. Thus 890 volunteers from Yugoslavia and Albania were in the Middle East by April 1948, before Israel's declaration of independence on May 15, 1948. Upon arrival the volunteers found their way to a camp at Katana, a military base west of Damascus that the Syrian army had provided for use by the Arab Liberation Army being assembled to invade Palestine. Here they met their commander, Fawzi Kaukji for the first time. Kaukji, 58, was a former Ottoman soldier who had fought in the Arab Revolt. Hagana intelligence estimated as many as 4,000 volunteers had joined his army. In December of 2005, Hassan Haidar Diab, a journalist in Bosnia, was able to locate Kemal Rustomovic, a Bosnian who had served with the Yugoslav volunteers. He claimed to have been a member of the Arab Salvation Army where 150 of his fellow Bosnians served under a Bosnian officer named Fuad Sefkobegovic. The Role of the Bosnians in the War of Independence Since the fall of 1947 Arab forces under Abdel Khader Husseini and other locals had harassed Jewish traffic and supplies moving from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. A mixed Bosnian-Arab unit of the ALA had been dispatched to aid in the siege of Jerusalem and this unit found itself embroiled in the battle for Castel between April 3 and 8, 1948. This battle was part of the Hagana's Operation Nahshon which was intended to relieve the siege of Jerusalem. It is not clear what became of the Bosnians who fought at Castel. Some may have retired to Ramallah, where it was reported on April 16 that Muslim foreigners including Yugoslavs had taken over the best hotels and "molested" the local population. The next battle that the Bosnian units participated in was at Jaffa between April 25 and May 5. Jaffa had been allotted to the Arab state in the UN partition plan, but it was surrounded by territory allotted to the Jewish state. The battle began when the Irgun launched an attack on the city. According to the Hagana, there were 400 "Yugoslavs" and 200 Iraqis defending Jaffa. On April 28, Michel Issa, the Christian Arab commander of the Ajnadin Battalion, received orders from Kaukji to move from the Jerusalem foothills to relieve the siege of Jaffa. On the same day, Hagana intelligence noted that there were 60 "Yugoslavs" among the defenders of Jaffa. Issa arrived in Jaffa on April 29 ; the commander of Jaffa, Maj. Adil Najmuddin, deserted the city on May 1, leaving Issa and his Yugoslavs. According to Issa's telegram to Kaukji, "Adil left [the] city by sea with all [the] Iraqis and Yugoslavs." Prior to their departure the Yugoslavs had been billeted at local homes and their unit even included a cook. Kemal Rustomovic recalled in his interview that he had first been at Nablus, then Jaffa and finally at Jenin. Between the evacuation of the Yugoslavs by sea from Jaffa and their reunion with the ALA, the State of Israel was born on May 15, 1948. On the same day five Arab armies invaded Israel and the war became much wider. The ALA became a disorganized and largely spent force by the time it saw fighting again around Nazareth again in July. During the fighting in the North, Kaukji's army of 2,500 men was reduced to only 800 and it was driven from Nazareth into northern Galilee. Rustomovic was one of these men according to his interview. The Post reported that the ALA still included "Yugoslavs." On July 18 the Post reported that the British government's intelligence had acted to "systematically sabotage [the] Palestine partition scheme" and provided as evidence the fact that England was aware of the presence of Bosnian volunteers in Syria. During the fighting in October the IDF conquered the entire Galilee and parts of Southern Lebanon. A report on November 1, detailing the capture of the Galilee, noted that some "Yugoslavs" had been captured during the fighting that had driven the ALA and the Lebanese army from Palestine and actually found the IDF in Lebanon. The Bosnians and the 1948 war, strange bedfellows? It is not known what became of the Bosnians who served with the Arab forces in the 1948 war. Rustomovic, who was born in the village of Kuti in central Bosnia in 1928, joined the Lebanese army in 1950. He served his adopted country for 30 years, married a local woman and had seven daughters and five sons with her. He was granted Lebanese citizenship, unlike the Palestine refugees who fled to Lebanon, and retired from the army in 1980. According to him, none of the Bosnians who had served in the SS ever returned to Yugoslavia. Some ended up in the US, Australia and Canada. It is assumed that some also settled in Syria or elsewhere in the Middle East. Today many would be in their 80s and 90s and it is doubtful that many of them survive. In the 1990s during the Balkan wars, Arabs would journey to the Balkans to participate in war between Bosnians and Serbs. In a strange twist they would be repaying the debt incurred when 900 or more Bosnian Muslims gave up their homes and past to come to the Middle East to serve the Muslim Arab cause. The involvement of these Bosnians may be seen as an early version of the linkage of Muslim conflicts throughout the world. This has gained increased exposure lately due to the involvement of foreign Muslim volunteers in the Algerian, Lebanese, Kashmiri, Sudanese and Afghani conflicts among others. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
NEW YORK TIMES RELATIVISM KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES
Posted by Judith Apter Klinghoffer, May 12, 2008. |
|
A short item in the NYT news summary caught my attention. It was entitled "Seven Die in Kashmir Attack." After all, terrorist violence in India rarely makes the pages of the New York Times and Kashmir has been relatively quiet in recent years. But my focus quickly shifted to the paper's inordinate efforts not only to avoid making any value judgements about the occurrence but to also prevent the reader from doing so. A long lull in violence in the Indian-administered province of Kashmir broke on Sunday as a gun battle between militants and Indian soldiers left seven dead, according to Indian authorities. The second paragraph makes it clear that as is the case with much of mainstream media's coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the war on militant Islamic terror everywhere, the purpose of the NYT headline "Seven die" was to equates the terrorists, excuses me, the "militants" with the soldiers. The term "gun battle" used in the very first sentence was designed to give the impression that both sides were equally to blame for the deaths and the phrase "according to Indian authorities" was intended to suggest that the story may not be entirely credible. The facts, as I later realized, were rather uncooperative as is immediately evident from the second paragraph. The terrorists assassinated a politician and his wife. The "security forces" merely acted as a normal police force would. Intrigued, I looked up the article. In the short piece tucked in the bottom right of page 11, I found that confronted with "uncooperative" facts," the reporter tried to regain his balance by blaming the victim. He wrote: It is unclear why the politician would have been a targetHe may have deserved it, for all the reporter knew. Unfortunately for him, the rest of the victims included another civilian as well as a photojournalist. But even the journalist's death was not enough to change the tone of the coverage. Indeed, to shift the reader's attention from these inconvenient facts the reporter added that the terrorists are usually more discriminating: "The previous major militant attack was last November in the Baramulla District. It left four soldiers dead," he writes. Soldiers, you see, are fair game. A quick search revealed information the NYT reporter chose to omit including the fact that the victims included children and hostages. The Hindu reports Flanked by Inspector General of Police (Jammu zone) K Rajendra, IG BSF A K Saprolia, Gen Sharma said the militants had actually infiltrated to this side to carry out a suicide attack on Army formation and enact a kaluchak like situation. Indeed, the terrorists were part of a larger group of infiltrators from Pakistan and continued Indian army efforts to track them down today resulted in the death of another infiltrator. The astute group spokesman confidently refused to take responsibility for the civilian casualties because they died in a "crossfire." He clearly trusted the media to go along with the obvious lie. Al-Mansoorian spokesman Amir Mir refused to take responsibility for the civilian deaths, saying the group was targeting the Indian army which has been battling the insurgency in the region since 1989. "We are not responsible for the civilian casualties, those deaths took place during cross-fire" between the army and the rebels, Mir said. If such misreporting were not sufficient to get your blood boiling, consider the misreported context. The NYT article ends thus: Talks between India and Pakistan, while yielding no concrete breakthroughs on the disputed province, have resulted in a sharp decline in violence in recent years. Actually, the talks did yield concrete results. Pakistan and India agreed to resolve the issue through negotiations and have begun a whole set of confidence building measures including a bus service enabling cross line of control visits. Militant rejectionists opposed to the peace process (yes, like Hamas and Hezbollah) do their best to scuttle progress. Pakistan has a new government and they are quick to test it especially as the Indian foreign minister is about to embark on a negotiating visit to Pakistan: MUZAFFARABAD, Pakistan (Reuters) –– The Pakistan-based commander of the biggest Kashmiri guerrilla group derided on Monday a peace process between Pakistan and India and vowed to continue a "holy war" against India. ... India and Pakistan like Israel are 60 years old though their continued existence has not been questioned. The two nuclear states have fought 3 wars and are involved in a territorial dispute. Radical Islamists are determined to block any negotiated solution because they are opposed to any territorial compromise with non Muslims. Ceding "Muslim land" to non Muslims is against their theology. The mainstream media, of which the NYT is but a prime representative, helps them by covering up the religious aspect of the dispute, downplaying it's cost to civilians and the danger they pose to world peace. In other words, such ideological, advocacy journalism is not only shameful but also irresponsible and not to mention self defeating. Journalists have no worse enemies than the Islamic extremists whose cause they work so hard to advance. Contact Judith Apter Klinghoffer by email at jklinghoff@aol.com |
|
POLISH HOLOCAUST HERO DIES AT AGE 98
Posted by Benjamin Yuzon, May 12, 2008. |
|
Personal message:
This was written by Monika Scislowska, Associated Press
Writer and it appeared today in Yahoo News
|
WARSAW, Poland –– Irena Sendler –– credited with saving some 2,500 Jewish children from the Nazi Holocaust by smuggling them out of the Warsaw Ghetto, some of them in baskets –– died Monday, her family said. She was 98. Sendler, among the first to be honored by Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial as a Righteous Among Nations for her wartime heroism, died at a Warsaw hospital, daughter Janina Zgrzembska told The Associated Press. President Lech Kaczynski expressed "great regret" over Sendler's death, calling her "extremely brave" and "an exceptional person." In recent years, Kaczynski had spearheaded a campaign to put Sendler's name forward as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize. Sendler was a 29-year-old social worker with the city's welfare department when Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, launching World War II. Warsaw's Jews were forced into a walled-off ghetto. Seeking to save the ghetto's children, Sendler masterminded risky rescue operations. Under the pretext of inspecting sanitary conditions during a typhoid outbreak, she and her assistants ventured inside the ghetto –– and smuggled out babies and small children in ambulances and in trams, sometimes wrapped up as packages. Teenagers escaped by joining teams of workers forced to labor outside the ghetto. They were placed in families, orphanages, hospitals or convents. Records show that Sendler's team of about 20 people saved nearly 2,500 children from the Warsaw Ghetto between October 1940 and its final liquidation in April 1943, when the Nazis burned the ghetto, shooting the residents or sending them to death camps. "Every child saved with my help and the help of all the wonderful secret messengers, who today are no longer living, is the justification of my existence on this earth, and not a title to glory," Sendler said in 2007 in a letter to the Polish Senate after lawmakers honored her efforts in 2007. In hopes of one day uniting the children with their families –– most of whom perished in the Nazis' death camps –– Sendler wrote the children's real names on slips of paper that she kept at home. When German police came to arrest her in 1943, an assistant managed to hide the slips, which Sendler later buried in a jar under an apple tree in an associate's yard. Some 2,500 names were recorded. "It took a true miracle to save a Jewish child," Elzbieta Ficowska, who was saved by Sendler's team as a baby in 1942, recalled in an AP interview in 2007. "Mrs. Sendler saved not only us, but also our children and grandchildren and the generations to come." Anyone caught helping Jews in Nazi-occupied Poland risked being summarily shot, along with family members –– a fate Sendler only barely escaped herself after the 1943 raid by the Gestapo. The Nazis took her to the notorious Pawiak prison, which few people left alive. Gestapo agents tortured her repeatedly, leaving Sendler with scars on her body –– but she refused to betray her team. "I kept silent. I preferred to die than to reveal our activity," she was quoted as saying in Anna Mieszkowska's biography, Mother of the Children of the Holocaust: The Story of Irena Sendler. Zegota, an underground organization helping Jews, paid a bribe to German guards to free her from the prison. Under a different name, she continued her work. After World War II, Sendler worked as a social welfare official and director of vocational schools, continuing to assist some of the children she rescued. "A great person has died –– a person with a great heart, with great organizational talents, a person who always stood on the side of the weak," Warsaw Ghetto survivor Marek Eldeman told TVN24 television. In 1965, Sendler became one of the first so-called Righteous Gentiles honored by the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem for wartime heroics. Poland's communist leaders at that time would not allow her to travel to Israel; she collected the award in 1983. Yad Vashem Chairman Avner Shalev said Sender's "courageous activities rescuing Jews during the Holocaust serve as a beacon of light to the world, inspiring hope and restoring faith in the innate goodness of mankind." Despite the Yad Vashem honor, Sendler was largely forgotten in her homeland until recent years. She came to the world's attention in 2000 when a group of schoolgirls from Uniontown, Kan., wrote a short play about her called "Life in a Jar." It went on to garner international attention, and has been performed more than 200 times in the United States, Canada and Poland. Sendler, born Irena Krzyzanowska, said she lived according to her physician father's teachings, arguing that "people can be only divided into good or bad; their race, religion, nationality don't matter." She married Mieczyslaw Sendler but they divorced after the war's end. Sendler then married fellow underground activist Stefan Zgrzembski, and they had two sons and a daughter. One died a few days after birth. The second son, Adam, died of a heart failure in 1999. Sendler is survived by her daughter and a granddaughter.
Contact Benjamin Yuzon at benyuzon@yahoo.com
|
|
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS –– GADOL HAMA'ASEH MIN HADIBOOR
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 12, 2008. |
|
This is Esther Pollard's Speech at the Pollard Freedom & Independence Rally [Delivered in both Hebrew and English] |
|
On the eve of the visit of President George W. Bush to Israel this week, to celebrate Israel's 60th anniversary, the message Jonathan asked me to share with you today is: Actions speak louder than words. To illustrate, let me share a couple of historic snapshots with you. Snapshot: #1 It is 1988. Jonathan Pollard is taken from his jail cell at the Springfield Prison Facility and transported overland to USP Marion, the harshest prison in the American Federal Prison System. Throughout the journey his armed guards mock him and torment him. After several hours, they arrive at USP Marion. With a loaded gun pointed at his head, Jonathan is led to the entrance of the prison. At the door, the guard cocks the gun and puts the muzzle to Jonathan's ear. "Turn around!" he orders. Jonathan turns around. "Take a good look," says the guard. "This is the last time you will see the outside world. When you leave here, it will be feet first, in a box." The guard then escorts Jonathan into the prison and delivers him to R&D (which is the department that receives new prisoners.) The Assistant Warden is there to greet him. "Welcome to your final home!" he says. When Jonathan looks quizzical, the AW continues, "You will not leave here alive." He turns Jonathan over to the R&D staff for registration and they too, mock Jonathan and deliver the message, "You will never leave here alive." Jonathan is taken into solitary confinement, to a dungeon cell, 3 stories underground, behind 13 locks and keys. The guard who escorts him, informs him, "You will never leave Marion alive. You will die here.' Several hours later, the Warden comes to see Jonathan in his dungeon cell, to make sure that he has gotten the message: This is the final stop. You will die here. You will not leave here alive. Every day, every person he came into contact with at Marion gave him the same message: This prison is your grave. You will not leave here alive. Anyone who understands the power of suggestion, which is the underlying basis for brainwashing, a technique routinely used on prisoners of war, will recognize that the reception Jonathan got at Marion was effectively intended to result in his death (G-d forbid) either by his own hand, or "assisted" by prison staff. This was the original plan that the Americans and their Israeli Mossad advisors devised for Jonathan. He was supposed to die in prison. A dead man cannot defend himself. A dead man can never bring the truth to light. Thus, America would forever have its myth, of the Jewish Spy, the "worst spy" in history! And Israel could continue to lie with impunity, claiming that Pollard was just some kook, a freelancer and a rodef betzah who got what he deserved. By the way, when Jonathan called on the telephone today, I told him that I planned to share this with you. He pointed out that the prison authorities at Marion took perverse pleasure in telling him, at every opportunity, that the Israeli Government was kept updated and KNEW everything that that Jonathan was going through. Israel never did anything to stop the torture and affliction, or to help Jonathan at all. Actions speak louder than words. Snapshot: #2 Nearly a quarter of a century goes by. G-d's will prevails. Jonathan is still alive! (Baruch Hashem!) In spite of the best "efforts" of Israel and the US, after 7 years in solitary confinement, Jonathan left Marion alive! For the last 15 years he has been in open population at FCI Butner, where he must fight for his life every single day. Every day that he survives is a complete miracle. Although Jonathan is very ill and suffering tremendously, he is still alive. He is still fighting for his freedom. He is still faithful to the Land and People of Israel for whom he sacrificed the last 23 years of his life. These days, I am often asked whether the recent hysteria in the media about the outing of Ben-Ami Kadish in America as an alleged spy for Israel, has lessened Jonathan's chances of release. The short answer is, "No, not at all." Before the Kadish arrest,PM Ehud Olmert never made an official request to President Bush to free Jonathan. After the Kadish arrest, PM Ehud Olmert never made an official request to President Bush to free Jonathan. No change. The American President's power of clemency is virtually unlimited. He may pardon whomever he wishes, without consultation, without affirmation, and without answering to anyone. But the President is not going to offer Jonathan Pollard to Israel as a gift, as long as Israel does not want that gift –– as long as Israel does not ask for Jonathan. Actions speak louder than words. Jonathan has now served more than 5 times the usual sentence for transferring vital security information to save Israel. The Americans have never had any compunction about treating Jonathan harshly, torturing him or afflicting him. America presents itself as a great democracy, a bastion of freedom and justice for all. These are fine words. But actions speak louder than words. The Government of Israel has no moral conscience and no compunction about ignoring Jonathan to death and then lying about its "efforts on his behalf." The fact that in 23 years neither Jonathan nor I have ever received a single cent of support from the Government of Israel, even though Jonathan is officially recognized as an Israeli agent, reflects the real attitude of the Government of Israel towards us. Actions speak louder than words. We, the People of Israel, are gathered together today to give testimony to Heaven and Earth. I do not mean verbal or written testimony. I mean physical testimony. Just the fact that we are here, now 23 years later, at a massive solidarity rally for Jonathan Pollard testifies as to who and what we are as a People and a Nation. What our values are. What we stand for. It is time for all Jews to wake up and open their eyes. It is time for the Government of Israel to learn from good Jews like yourselves. This rally is about our values. Our shared values. Everyone here today, no matter what political or religious stream he or she may belong to, has in common the following values: * Mitzvaht Pidyan Shvuyim: the redemption of a captive. This is the greatest of all the mitzvoth. This mitzvah is so great that one is permitted to sell a Sefer Torah, or to desecrate the Sabbath in order to redeem a captive. Thanks to your participation today, our rally does honor to G-d and His Torah. It gives honor to the Jewish People and to the Land of Israel. It is a piece of living history for all the People of Israel to learn from, and a lesson that the Government of Israel has yet to learn. Most important of all, this rally is as much a cry to Heaven as a massive show of solidarity with Jonathan. May our unity and love of our fellow man as it is being reflected here today, bring down the blessing of Heaven upon us, and may we merit to speedily greet Jonathan here in the Land very, very soon, in the wink of an eye! May the next rally be transformed from a protest rally to a Thanksgiving rally of thanks and praise! Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com For information about Pollard and the struggle: see www.jonathanpollard.org for English, or www.FreePollard.org for Hebrew. |
|
THE AL-QAIDA WEBTIFADA
Posted by Olivier Guitta, May 12, 2008. |
|
Europe facing radicalization over the Web A few months ago Bernard Squarcini the head of the DST (Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire), the French equivalent of the FBI, told the French daily Libération regarding Islamic radicalization: "An ideological transformation can be done in three months on the Web. An individual can at night auto-radicalize himself via the Web and get in touch with leaders of terrorist organizations." This assessment shows how dire the situation is in Europe when it comes to al-Qaida's use of the Web. Al-Qaida uses the web for four different tasks: propaganda; communication, mostly to instruct those in the field; training future combatants, a kind of online university of terrorism; and to send messages to the enemy, mostly to the West. For instance, one of the most popular jihadist sites in France is one which translates books on the jihad in French and gives lessons on urban guerilla tactics. (This site got more than 3 million visits from France alone). Another Web site explains how to get weapons in the West (hide, assemble and breakdown) and how to manufacture bombs from products found in supermarkets. The propaganda primarily targets youngsters. Some of them join the virtual jihad or "webtifada", i.e. cyber criminality. In March 2006, the DGSE (Direction Générale de la Sécurité Exterieure), the French equivalent of the CIA, tracked down a forum where jihadists recruited hackers to destroy "infidels'" Web sites and government sites. The jihadists recommended: "If you can't slash their throats, then at least destroy their sites." And on May 15, 2006 the Metz, France police arrested a young man who, under the alias Yanis, had attacked 1,161 sites including 710 linked to the Muhammad cartoons controversy. Fortunately in Europe, even though the number is growing only a minority is actually joining the virtual jihad. According to Louis Caprioli, ex-boss of the anti-terror unit of the DST, the number of French volunteers in Iraq is in the tens. Confirming this, expert Walter Akmouche states that statistically, to get one jihadi, you must contact an average 45,000 people. Which vehicle do the jihadis use on the Web? According to the DST, the chat room Paltalk is regularly used to hide operations. They also use Instant Messaging services such as Messenger or Skype and "dead e-mail boxes" which allow them, with the username and password, to retrieve unsent messages. But they also exchange information and coded files on forums devoted to soccer, music or any topic totally unrelated to Islam. It is important to note that to access true terrorist sites; one has to be an insider and needs to know the real number-coded URL address, which often changes. Also after years of research, al-Qaida has developed software called "Secrets of Mujahedin," that allows secure exchange in Arabic on electronic networks. It has allegedly been in use for over a year on clandestine forums close to al-Qaida, especially for jihadist groups in Iraq and al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb. This has been a formidable weapon for al-Qaida and numerous intelligence services and private companies have been trying to break it. How is Europe facing this threat? First by closely monitoring jihadist Web sites. For instance, last year, Holland devoted 10 million euros (about $15 million) to fighting extremism. Thus, more than 150 Internet sites broadcasting extremist ideology were the subject of complaints and were restricted. In France, about 30 potentially dangerous sites are monitored by some units of the UCLAT (Unité de Coordination de la Lutte antiterroriste), the French counterterrorism coordination unit. Software allows them to trace back the origin of a server or the IP address of a user and if they act fast, they can trace the network and use it against the Islamists using it. For instance, the recent monitoring of a forum allowed the unit to trace a couple of Salafist groups in the suburbs of Paris that were recruiting jihadis and organizing their trip. One of the main problems facing European authorities is that simply shutting down Web sites is not very efficient since these sites just end up operating under new names. European countries are also using the legal tool to fight al-Qaida's use of the Web in Europe. In a first, a Swiss court last summer sentenced several individuals including the widow of the killer of Ahmad Shah Massoud, Afghanistan's Northern Alliance's leader killed by al-Qaida on September 9, 2001, and her boyfriend, for having created and operated four Web sites and chat rooms for extremist propaganda and exchange of information by terrorist groups. European authorities are taking this issue very seriously. On Feb. 1, France's interior minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie told the French daily Le Figaro that the use of the Web by terrorists was "one of my major concerns, and one of the priorities assigned to the [security] services. This requires additional material, forces specialized in fighting cyber-criminality, legal resources. I want us to be able to stop the terrorist propaganda, find the operational networks, track them down and prevent them from acting." Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant, is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com), which is available at $99/year. This article appeared in Middle East Times
|
|
A RELIGION ON THE MOVE
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, May 12, 2008. |
|
Dear friends, I have been careful not to malign a whole group of people without good evidence of involvement of that entire group. It is the same issue as accusing all Germans for what happened between 1933 and 1945. And yet, as with the Germans, there are examples of groups who either through active or tacit agreement do nothing to stop murder and other crimes against humanity. Enter the Muslims. Yes, there are a few courageous individual voices among Muslims, as there were among Germans, who speak out loud and clear against the evil perpetrated by others in their group, but those are extremely few and far between. A few courageous voices shouting in the desert do not suffice to exonerate the huge majority (1.3 billions). The good voices fall of totally deaf ears! I am yet to hear or see a large group of Muslims who openly oppose terrorists and terrorism instead of apologizing for them or explaining their "causes." Have any of you ever seen a Muslim group such as Peace Now, Be'tzelem, the liberal left, the liberal media? Of course not. Have you asked yourselves why? Have you asked yourselves why Muslims have not protested the death sentence on Salman Rashdie? The murder of Theo van Gogh in Holland, the riots against the Danish cartoons? The terror acts in Madrid and London? Have you ever seen a Muslim street demonstration in the US or elsewhere against 9/11? Of course not. Have you asked yourselves why and where have tens of thousands of Betlehem Christian Arabs fled to since the PLO took control of the town after the 1993 Oslo Accords? All the above questions can only be explained thus: Muslims, in various measures, support these horrible acts because Islam is a religion on the move. Here is an interesting article on the subject. Food for thought, if nothing else. Your Truth Provider, Yuval. This below was adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book:
Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary
Threat, |
|
ISLAM IS A SYSTEM
Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components. Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called "religious rights." When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to "the reasonable" Muslim demands for their "religious rights," they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007). As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness: United States –– Muslim 1.0%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves –– along with threats for failure to comply. (United States). France –– Muslim 8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world. When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris –– car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam –– Mohammed cartoons). Guyana –– Muslim 10%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning: Ethiopia –– Muslim 32.8% At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare: Bosnia –– Muslim 40%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels: Albania –– Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide: Bangladesh –– Muslim 83%
100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" –– the Islamic House of Peace –– there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim: Afghanistan –– Muslim 100%
Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons. "Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel. –– Leon Uris, "The Haj" It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
LESSONS FROM THE RAID ON SYRIA; HOW HAMAS MISTREATS GAZANS; QUARTET DEMANDS & MINE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 12, 2008. |
|
HOW THEY NEGOTIATE When Defense Min. Barak suggested security arrangements retaining for Israel some territory outside the 1967 armistice line, the P.A. negotiator accused him of obstructing negotiations. Dr. Aaron Lerner wonders whether the objections were arranged by both sides so that Israel could claim it must make deeper concessions (IMRA, 4/29). In other words, the government is on the Arabs' side. After 88 years of Palestinian Arab terrorism and their violation of numerous agreements, a few modest security arrangements would seem reasonable, considering that armistice lines are not sacred. They P.A. negotiators are not reasonable. They do not negotiate to resolve conflicts and in good faith. They negotiate to gain the advantage in continuing religious conflict. By our standards, the Muslim Arab way of negotiating is repellent, and the Israeli way of negotiating is contemptible. LESSONS FROM THE RAID ON SYRIAN NUCLEAR PLANT Countries continue to proliferate and their clients continue to deny the existence and purpose of their nuclear weapons plants. The evidence and Syrian behavior make clear that such was the installation that Israel destroyed. Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and Libya all violated their Nuclear Proliferation Treaty obligations. How did the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) react to news of the raid? It condemned Israel for taking unilateral action (to preserve its existence), undermining the verification regime. But if Israel merely had reported Syria's violation to the IAEA, the reactor would not get destroyed, it would get monitored (giving Syria further opportunity to underhandedly go its own rogue way). The IAEA does not destroy reactors. With all those violators, the IAEA has failed in its task. (Pakistan was outside its purview.) "One also can learn from the episode how much Syria can be relied upon to honor treaty commitments and how third parties react to Syrian violations. Washington wanted Israel to basically turn the other cheek. It would be irresponsible for Israel to rule out the possibility of a similar attitude towards dangerous developments after a Golan retreat." (Shame on the US!) "With the exception of those who literally embrace as an article of faith the assertion that Israel will never face a security threat from the North for eternity if it would simply retreat from the Golan, this exposes a serious flaw in the 'land for piece of paper' approach." (IMRA, 4/29.) Treaties enable rogue states to exploit the naivete of other states. OBAMA LIES ABOUT NEVER BEING MUSLIM Just as the scandal over Obama's ties to a bigoted Christian pastor reached its peak, questions arose again over his ties to Islam, some of whose countries are at war with the US. He denies ever having been a Muslim or having considered himself one. He admits only to having lived in a Muslim country. Daniel Pipes reviewed the evidence from his boyhood. Obama had a Muslim father and step-father, whom he sometimes accompanied to the mosque. Muslim men pass on their religion to their sons. Obama's middle name is given only to Muslims. Obama attended a school run by Christians but registered as a Muslim and attended classes in Islam. He wore Islamic dress. People remember his family and himself as being religious. He is lying about his early religion. That renders questionable his other biographical and policy statements (Pipes #854, 5/2) many of which are false. Some are false because he finds it expedient to change his position with changes in popular opinion. What does he really believe? He's phony. How ironic that his campaign theme is decency and national unity! One has to wonder to whom and what he gives allegiance. We can't take a chance on him. What for? There are less phony candidates whose loyalty is more credible. He's dangerous. Damn him, he makes Sen. Clinton seem good! He gives out the story that he was close with his pastor for decades, not realizing that the outspoken pastor was so bigoted, ignorant, and vicious as is so apparent to us. Is Obama's judgment faulty? Who needs that! Or did he accept the racist view of the pastor whom he now finds inconvenient to befriend? This was written before the 5/12 NY Times Op.-Ed. warning that Obama might be assassinated for apostasy from Islam, a warning I had given. HOW HAMAS MISTREATS GAZANS When Israeli soldiers approach a neighborhood in Gaza, Hamas troops and their allies rush into an apartment house there and commandeer the apartments. Residents are told to vacate. Those who object are beaten. The troops then emplace machine guns and sand bags and place explosives in the sidewalks along which the Israelis may advance. Thus Hamas has turned the buildings from civilian to military. The lesson is not to second-guess IDF assaults for civilian casualties, but to allow the IDF sufficiently to bombard fortified positions before risking troops' lives. If Israel remains politically correct about formerly civilian areas, and lets the holy warriors use civilians as human shields, more Israelis will be killed (IMRA, 5/1). Israel has to learn to confront popular misconceptions about terrorism and civilians, rather than appease them. SAUDIS DUCK CRITICISM S. Arabia complained about the high and rising cost of food. It blamed the diversion of farm production to ethanol (IMRA, 5/1). There are about five major reasons. One is the high cost of oil. S. Arabia is less than candid about it. QUARTET DEMANDS The Quartet wants: (1) More P.A.-Israel negotiations; (2) Cessation of attacks by both sides; (3) End to building by Jews in Judea-Samaria; (4) Dismantle outposts; and (5) Improve conditions in Gaza (IMRA, 5/2). There have been extensive negotiations. What more do they expect? Trouble is, what good can come of negotiations with people who use negotiations and terrorism to try to exterminate you? If the terrorists stood down and ceased attacks, Israel probably would stop pursuing them. I think that Israel never should stop pursuing terrorists. That would be like letting serial killers get away with their crimes. Besides, religious fanatics don't, on the whole, rehabilitate themselves, especially not in a society geared totally to holy war. Why doesn't the Quartet demand that Abbas stop propagandizing for terrorism? If the Quartet bothered to study international law sincerely, it would find that it is incumbent upon them all to pursue terrorism. Israel really should ask them what they are doing against Palestinian Arab terrorism. How can the Quartet justify their demand that Jews end building in Judea-Samaria, to which, after all, they have the best legal (under the Mandate), historical, and moral claim? Does the Quartet want only one ethnic group there? Then what would it say if Israel said okay, provided Israel expels all the Arabs from Israel? Conditions in Gaza would improve when Hamas stops subordinating economic life to religious war. Why should the world spend money on those hate-filled Islamists, when innocent people all over are deprived by Islamist oppression. Help the deprived, not the depraved! My suggestion to the Quartet is: (1) End negotiations; (2) Build more Jewish housing in Judea-Samaria; (3) Worsen conditions in Gaza; (4) Encourage Israel to destroy the terrorist infrastructure in Judea-Samaria and Gaza, thereby ending terrorist attacks and the need for further Israeli attacks; and (5) Dismantle the Quartet. The Quartet is biased and foolish. 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 |
|
DEMOCRACY DEMANDS TRANSPARENCY
Posted by Isi Leibler, May 12, 2008. |
|
Two months ago I predicted that in order to delay as long as possible the drastic military action which will eventually have to be undertaken in Gaza, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert would seek a face-saving formula by which to consummate a truce with Hamas. Alas, despite the latest allegations of scandal directed against our prime minister, that is precisely what is happening. In the face of repeated and dire warnings by the IDF that a truce now with Hamas will rebound against us with a vengeance, Olmert lurched in this direction as though oblivious to the dangers, dangling before us illusions of the "peace" and "quiet" for which we all desperately yearn. There is absolutely no basis for suggesting that such a truce will in any way advance our efforts to achieve peace or security. It is no coincidence that the most extreme Palestinian factions –– all 12 of them –– support the tahadiyeh agreement. To this day, Hamas leaders repeatedly stress that this is merely a short term tactical expedient. They even relate it to a portion in the Koran which recounts how the Prophet Muhammad entered into a temporary pact with the Jews which he subsequently breached in order to vanquish them. They remain adamant that their primary objective remains the annihilation of the Jewish state, a goal which will never be compromised. The terrorists desperately want this truce. Reeling under the impact of IDF pressure, they are exhausted and require a respite in order to rearm, upgrade their missile infrastructure, send their members for training abroad and prepare for the next round. They consider themselves currently ill-equipped to confront an Israeli invasion of Gaza, fearing a repetition of 2002's Operation Defensive Shield when Israel destroyed the terrorist infrastructure on the West Bank which they have since been unable to replicate. They believe that given time to regroup and acquire more lethal weapons they will be able to inflict far heavier casualties on the IDF. The Egyptians, who are brokering the deal, want the Palestinian Authority to control the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and Gaza in the presence of European monitors. They promised Hamas that "the siege would be lifted and the border crossings would be reopened." They also had the gall to demand that Israel accept the deal without amending the terms negotiated. However, when questioned about Hamas exploiting the truce to import weapons, they responded that "Egypt does not control the Gaza Strip and is only a neighbor." In light of the hitherto dismal record of the Egyptians in stemming the flood of weapons to Gaza through their borders, it would surely be lunacy for us to rely on a combination of Palestinians, Egyptians and European "monitors" to prevent Hamas from exploiting the tahadiyeh to construct an offensive Hizbullah-style infrastructure capable of inflicting enormous damage on us. Besides, it is now increasingly evident that the differences in approach toward Israel between our duplicitous and impotent peace partners and Hamas amount to form rather than substance. Mahmoud Abbas recently proclaimed that he would not meet anyone who visited Israel for its 60th anniversary celebrations and also warned that he may revert to the "armed struggle." We should entrust our security to such people? So let us be clear. If we agreed to this truce for the sake of a few months of quiet, we would merely be replicating the debacle with Hizbullah in Lebanon by providing the Iranians and their Hamas proxies the opportunity of gearing themselves for a new round of hostilities at a time of their choosing. The likelihood of Lebanon now becoming a Hizbullah state suggests that in the event of a future conflict we could well become involved in simultaneous combat on three fronts. If this analysis is flawed it is surely incumbent on our prime minister (or his successor) to enlighten the nation and at least provide a broad outline of government strategy instead of making daily contradictory proclamations. Over the past fortnight, in addition to the Hamas truce imbroglio, we have witnessed yet more chaos as Olmert suddenly reversed his approach to the Syrians and reportedly offered to hand them the entire Golan. He was publicly opposed by Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, a former Defense Minister, who warned that this would bring Iran to the Golan Heights. More recently, Defense Minister Ehud Barak announced "this is not a time for a cease-fire with Hamas," but as is his custom, soon afterwards contradicted himself. Public Security Minister Avi Dichter, a former head of the Shin Bet, asked "Does the government really want to stop the terror?" and blasted his own prime minister's failure to respond to missiles attacks from Gaza. What sort of government is it in which senior ministers cannot either commit themselves to supporting their own government or to resigning? The other problem is that beyond contradictory rumors about concessions relating to borders, Jerusalem and refugees, nobody is aware of the details of what Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are secretly negotiating with the PA. There is an utter lack of transparency. Olmert and Livni, without explicit cabinet approval, are taking it entirely upon themselves to negotiate these crucial issues with the PA. We should be under no illusions. When these shelf agreements now being secretly consummated with the Palestinians are ultimately tabled to the Knesset, efforts by legislators to reverse or modify any aspect would encounter fierce international censure and accusations of intransigency. Of course, in light of the enormous personal pressures arising from the latest allegations of impropriety, one would assume regardless of whether there is any merit to the latest accusations, the prime minister is no longer capable of negotiating peace or leading the nation to war. He would therefore be expected to either freeze or at the very least withdraw himself from such negotiations. It would be unprecedented and utterly unconscionable if he intends to tough it out over a potentially lengthy legal process and continue making awesome life and death decisions about our future. This raises questions as to whether we can still honestly continue describing ourselves as a genuine democracy. Democracy is more than holding elections. It presupposes a government taking account of and respecting the will of the people. Today, while confronting the most difficult, even existential, threats since statehood, our failed and unpopular leaders continue making crucial life and death decisions without any sense of accountability to the cabinet, Knesset, or the nation. Surely the people are entitled to be informed whether their government has a game plan or is merely responding to pressures as they arise. In the course of our 60th anniversary celebrations, it would surely be appropriate if our prime minister or his successor, instead of making yet another empty speech, submitted a broad strategic plan (if it exists) for cabinet approval and insisted that ministers cease carrying on as though they were operating their own private fiefdoms. They should either adhere to the policies endorsed by the majority or tender their resignations. The government program should then be submitted and either approved, amended, or rejected by the Knesset. That is how a genuine democracy would function. Contact Isi Leibler at ileibler@netvision.net.il This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
TALK OF LIVNI AS OLMERT'S REPLACEMENT CREATES TENSIONS AT THE TOP
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 12, 2008. |
|
This was written by Gil Ronen for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
A poll published Monday by daily newspaper Yediot Acharonot showed that 59 percent of the public think Prime Minister Ehud Olmert should step down, or at least suspend himself voluntarily until the criminal investigation against him runs its course. Sixty percent of the public does not believe Olmert's claims that he never took any of the money given by Morris Talansky for his personal use. The same poll would appear to show that Kadima, if headed by Tzipi Livni, could win the general elections if held today. The poll found that if the public had to choose between Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud), Tzipi Livni (Kadima), and Ehud Barak (Labor), Kadima would win 27 seats while the Likud would garner 23 seats and Labor would receive 15. Were Kadima to be headed by Sha'ul Mofaz, it would receive only 17 seats. Under Meir Sheetrit, Kadima would take just 13 parliamentary seats. In a seeming contradiction, the poll showed that 37 percent of the public think that Netanyahu is the most fitting person to lead the country at present. Livni did not even come in second; Barak was the runner up, with 20 percent. 'Olmert –– We're Behind You!' The situation has created tension between Olmert and Livni, whose relations have been cool ever since last year, when Livni called for Olmert's resignation after publication of the interim report of the Winograd Commission on the Second Lebanon War. Olmert's confidantes noted that Livni has not been supportive of Olmert in the present crisis, preferring to keep mum and voice confidence in the police instead of expressing faith that Olmert will be acquitted, as other ministers have done. A gathering of central Kadima activists was held in Petach Tikva Sunday night, and the group voiced loud support of Olmert. This is apparently meant to signal that Olmert is stronger politically than some may think, despite the latest investigation scandal. Olmert supporters shouted "Olmert –– we are behind you!" and sent warnings to ministers who failed to publicly support the Prime Minister in his time of trouble. 'He Will Bury the Party' The poll showed that 37 percent of the public think that Netanyahu is the most fitting person to lead the country at present. Livni did not even come in second. Olmert has said that if the Attorney General decides to indict him, he will resign. This would lead to new elections, in which either Livni is likely to run as head of Kadima. Some sources say Olmert is considering naming Transportation Minister Sha'ul Mofaz as his successor, in place of Livni. According to other speculation, Olmert intends to make Livni's life difficult in order to bring about her resignation. Senior Kadima sources quoted in Ynet called on Olmert to stop attacking Livni, because such criticism only damages Kadima in the end. They also said that Olmert's political future was ending while Livni could turn out to be the leader who saves the party. "If Olmert hurts Livni he will wind up burying the party," they said. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL AS I SEE IT: HAPPY SIXTIETH BIRTHDAY
Posted by Mr. Samson Krupnick, May 11, 2008. |
|
YERUSHALIYIM, Israelite Tribal Territories of Judah and Benjamin, Kingdom of David and Solomon, United Israelite Kingdom of Judah and Joseph, Twenty Second Day of Sefirat HaOmer (Counting of the Omer between Pesach and Shavuot), Seventh Day, Second Month ("Iyar"), (Shmittah/Sabbatical Year) 5768; Yom Sheini (Second Day of Week/Monday, May 12, 2008), Root & Branch Information Services [mailto: rb@rb.org.il] [ www. rb.org.il]: Shortly after Yom HaShoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day) during which we observed with bitter tears our loss of Six Million Jews, we observed Yom HaZikaron (Remembrance Day) for 22,437 fallen Israeli soldiers and 1,634 Israeli men women and children, Jewish and non-Jewish, murdered by terrorists. We attended a bitter gathering of remembrance at the Kotel (Western Wall of the Temple). Opening remarks at the Kotel ceremonies were delivered by Israeli President Shimon Peres, who recalled with sorrow these sacrifices for the birth of our nation and for our continued existence on Israel's 60th birthday (1948-2008). Peres prayed for Israel's protection from the danger of Iran and its weapons. The Zahal (I.D.F./Israel Defense Forces) Rabbi recited Tehillim (Psalms) and words of appreciation for the sacrifices made during this time period. A young I.D.F. chazan (cantor) chanted the Hazkarah prayer following the Kaddish prayer of a father for his fallen soldier son. I.D.F. Chief of Staff General Ashkenazi and a young soldier led those assembled in singing our national anthem, HaTikvah (the Hope). The speakers and army soldiers shook hands with families of the fallen. Another Yom HaZikaron Day ceremony was held at Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem which the I.D.F. liberated during the Six Day War in June, 1967. Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were among the speakers. The I.D.F. gave awards to some 180 outstanding soldiers. Delegations of rabbis and army officer visited cemeteries throughout the country. At 11:00 A.M. people stood at attention for two minutes nationwide. Names of the dead were read at the Knesset, as was done on Yom HaShoah. Special services were held in synagogues, with recitation of Kaddish and responses. Remembrance Day ended at 8:00 P.M. Special services were held throughout Israel and the world on Yom HaAtzmaut (Independence Day) for our 60th birthday. Additional prayers were recited including Hallel (Psalms of Praise) in the morning services and in some synagogues in the evening service as at the Great Synagogue in Jerusalem. Immediately upon the conclusion of prayers we joined the Great Synagogue annual banquet at a large reception hall. We enjoyed the song and dance. Each year young soldiers are invited to our dinners. Celebrations last until midnight. As we left the banquet hall there were cars heading in all directions. For some, celebrations last the entire night. People wished each other "Hag Sameach". Israelis were on the move. The I.D.F. opened bases around the country for civilian visits, including an Israeli Air Force base in the north and the Navy base in Haifa. The public was even invited to visit some Intelligence bases in central Israel. It was important for the public to see military equipment and have Israeli soldiers welcome them in the hope that this will provide people with a sense of security that we can deal with all our enemies. The Education Ministry conducted two traditional events. The first was the International Bible Quiz. We enjoyed this competition. In earlier years it was open to all. We participated and won, representing the midwest U.S.A. As usual, Israeli had a winner and another went to overseas participants. The second event was the Israel Prize. This year, in honor of Independence Day on our 60th Birthday, eight lifetime awards were given to the Jewish Agency, Manufacturer's Association, Youth Movement Council of Israel, Ezer Mizion, Perach; and to three women's organizations in Israel: Na'amat, Wizo and Emunah. Special thanks were given to Danny Ayalon and his Nefesh B'Nefesh organization which assisted 15,000 Jews from Western countries to make aliyah (immigrate) to Israel. Ayalon declared that over 100,000 Jews from Western countries could be brought to Israel if proper arrangements are made during the coming year. Praise was given for achievements in science at the Weizman Institute and in general education and research at Bar-Ilan University. Israel's Open University now has an enrollment of 38,000 students. On the occasion of Israel's Sixtieth Independence Day ceremonies many nations sent best greetings to us and wished us much success for years to come. Leading was the United States. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice (Ed. Note: A "former" member of Chevron's Board of Directors who has an oil tanker named after her) reminded us that Israel was welcomed into the world 11 minutes after the Declaration of Independence by Israeli President David Ben Gurion. Blessings came from Britain, France, Italy and many other nations. We face problems but the blessings of the nations are of some comfort. However, our primary comfort comes from The Almighty, Who has been our help throughout. "He, guarding over Israel, slumbers not nor sleeps"! Shalom from Yerushaliyim, Samson Krupnick is Board Member and Treasurer, Root & Branch Association in Jerusalem (www.rb.org.il). He can be reached at kb@rb.org.il |
|
ECI TO GIVE ISRAEL A BIRTHDAY PRESENT THAT WILL LAST
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 11, 2008. |
|
This press release is from ECI. Contact them at P.O. Box 189, FI-00181 Helsinki, Finland; by email at info@ec4i.org and visit their website: www.ec4i.org |
|
The European Coalition for Israel (ECI) Invites churches and Christians to recommit their support for Israel Brussels, 12 May, 2008 –– The European Coalition for Israel is planning to give the state of Israel a different kind of birthday present on its 60th anniversary which will be celebrated in Europe on Wednesday May 14. In the week leading up to the festivities the Coalition is calling on national and local churches in Europe to recommit their support for Israel and for the safety of the Jewish state. –– "During the last hundred years Christians of various backgrounds have stood side by side with the Jewish people in solidarity and support for their own homeland. This year one such organization turns 100, indicating that even 40 years before the declaration of independence, there were Christians in Europe who had read their Bibles and believed that God would bring back the Jewish people to the land and give it back to them as their own Jewish homeland", explains founding director Tomas Sandell in Brussels. In time for Israel's 60th anniversary the European Coalition for Israel feels it is time to ask Christians in Europe to recommit themselves in their support for Israel. –– "Israel continues to be under threat, both from militant terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as from hostile nation states such as Iran. At a time when a leader of a UN member state, namely Iran, is openly threatening Israel with annihilation it is time for Christians in Europe to stand up and be counted', says Sandell. The European Coalition for Israel was founded in 2003 as an organization to promote better relations between Europe and Israel and to commemorate the Holocaust at a time when Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism was again on the rise in Europe. Over the years the Coalition has successfully presented its case to the European institutions in Brussels as well as to the governments and parliaments in the European Union member states. Christians in Europe have not always been this active. –– "The church in Europe has been influenced by a theology which teaches that politics is of the world and not worthy the attention of a true believer," explains Sandell. "We believe this passiveness is detrimental at a time when the Judeo-Christian foundation of our societies is eroding and the state of Israel is under threat of a nuclear attack", says Sandell. This week the Coalition will start inviting new groups and churches to partner with them in order to build an ever stronger base of support for Israel in the European Union. The Coalition has recently changed its structure from being a closed membership based organization to becoming an open and inclusive network which seeks to actively partner with national and local churches as well as with associations and private individuals. Later this summer the chairman of the European Coalition for Israel, Helmut Specht, is scheduled to meet with the president of Israel Shimon Peres to personally commit to the goal of increasing the support for Israel. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
HISTORY LESSONS ARE OFTEN INCREDIBLY SIMPLE AND BLUNT
Posted by Jewish Press Mailbag, May 11, 2008. |
|
Wake Up! 
A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. "Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. 
So the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."
WE ARE TOLD AGAIN AND AGAIN BY "EXPERTS" AND "TALKING HEADS" THAT ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. 
The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage all of the 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. 
It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority," the "silent majority," is cowed and extraneous. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians, most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
HISTORY LESSONS ARE OFTEN INCREDIBLY SIMPLE AND BLUNT, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. 
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts –– the fanatics who threaten our way of life. Lastly, at the risk of offending anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on contributes to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on!! Let us hope that thousands worldwide read this, think about it, and send it on.
Contact the Jewish Press Mailbag at JPmailbag@aol.com
|
|
OLMERT: 'WE'LL GIVE UP A LARGE PART OF THE TERRITORIES'
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 11, 2008. |
|
Newsweek's Lally Weymouth talked with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert about important issues facing Israel in an exclusive interview published on Thursday, Israel's Independence Day. |
|
Sweeping Concessions to PA Asked about attempts to reach a final-status agreement with the Palestinian Authority, Olmert said that the final borders "will be closer to what they were in '67 than what they are today." Olmert explained that this is "because we will give up a large part of the territories ... in the context of full, comprehensive peace." It is not clear if the ellipsis [three dots] inserted by Newsweek represents additional details of Olmert's planned retreat, such as the number of Jewish communities he plans to raze under the terms of such an agreement. The Jewish population in Judea and Samaria stood at 282,000 at the end of 2007, according to Interior Ministry. This is an increase of 5.2% over the year before –– three times higher than the population jump in all of Israel. The population figures do not include citizens living in communities deemed illegal by the government. Another approximately 250,000 Jews live in areas of Jerusalem liberated after the 1967 Six Day War. Recent reports have stated that Olmert has agreed to withdraw from between 89% and 92% of Judea and Samaria (not including Jerusalem). The PA, however, continues to demand at least 98.5% of the contested area (including Jerusalem), as well as compensation on a 1-to-1 basis for the remainder. Giving up 90% of Judea and Samaria could involve the expulsion and displacement of well over 100,000 Jews. Asked about earlier hopes for a peace agreement with the Palestinian Authority by the end of 2008, Olmert said he now hopes just for a "more detailed and accurate outline of how a solution of the two states should look." Arutz-7's correspondent Haggai Huberman stated, however, that this could be even more significant than an attempt to reach a final-status agreement, "because a final agreement appears unreachable, whereas a declaration of principles could bind Israel for decades to come." No Right of Return Regarding the Arabs' claimed "right of return" for hundreds of thousands of Arabs who left Israel in 1948 and millions of their descendants, Olmert said that they "don't have a right of return." "I don't think that this is on the agenda as far as Israel is concerned," the Prime Minister said. Date of Resignation Possibly the most important feature of the interview –– that Olmert is considering resigning –– was rendered obsolete by the time it was published. This, because Olmert said on Thursday evening, just a few hours after the magazine was circulated, that he would resign only if he was actually indicted. Question Marks Remain Regarding Gaza Regarding Gaza, Olmert was asked if there will soon be no choice but to take military action against the Hamas regime there. Olmert answered: "I don't like this terminology that you have no choice. You always have a choice. While we were talking, two Kassam rockets landed in open areas near the regional municipality of Eshkol. Then there were a series of seven rockets shot from Gaza to [the Israeli town of] Sderot." The interviewer did not ask Olmert to explain himself. Syria and Iran Regarding Syria, Olmert said he is interested in negotiating with Syrian President Assad, and that "I never heard from my friend George W. Bush any warning or any request not to negotiate with the Syrians." Olmert said that though Israel is "very unhappy with the continued intensive involvement of Syria in the affairs of Lebanon" and with "the continued links between Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas," still, "relations between us and Syria have to be reexamined." Regarding Iran, Olmert reiterated that Israel would "not tolerate a
nuclear weapon in the hands of people who say openly, explicitly and
publicly that they want to wipe Israel off the map," but said that the
U.S. is "the leader of the international effort to stop the Iranians
from becoming nuclear." He said that Israel does not agree with the
U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that Iran had probably shelved its
nuclear weapons program, and feels instead that Iran's "military
program continues and has never been stopped. If this program
continues, at some point they will be in possession of a nuclear
weapon."
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com).
|
|
LEBANON TO WEST: WAKE UP FAST!
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 11, 2008. |
|
While America's secretary of state devotes her time to doomed Israel-Palestinian talks and America goes ga-ga over a candidate whose main foreign policy strategy is to talk to dictators, still another crisis strengthens radical Islamists and endangers Western friends and interests. William Butler Yeats said it best: "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere, The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst, Are full of passionate intensity." The "best" are often too innocent indeed, sunk in constant self-criticism, persuading themselves they must atone for having done too much in the past by doing nothing in the present, trying to convince the other side of their niceness and sensitivity. Their priority is to ensure no one will accuse them of being imperialistic. And to prove it they will let another country fall into the enemy camp. The Lebanese logjam has broken at last as Hizballah seized west Beirut and inflicted a big defeat on the pro-government side. While Iran and Syria provide guns and strong backing to their friends, the West responds with words backed by nothing. Who can blame Hizballah and Damascus and Tehran for laughing with contempt, believing they are the tide of the future, assuming their "passionate intensity" will inevitably triumph over the weak-willed West? The historic great powers act as pitiful, helpless giants but their enemies will take no pity on them. In short, Hizballah is pulling a two-stage version of Hamas's Gaza strategy in Lebanon and no one does anything effective about that either. What Spain was in 1936; Lebanon is today. Does anyone remember the Spanish Civil War? Briefly, a fascist revolt took place against the democratic government. The rebels were motivated by several factors, including anger that their religion had not been given enough respect and regional grievances, but essentially they sought to put their ideology and themselves into power. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy backed the rebels with money and guns. The Western democracies stood by and did nothing. Guess who won? And guess whether that outcome led to peace or world war. Funny, I thought September 11 changed everything. Why should Lebanese Sunni, Druze, and Christians risk their lives when the West doesn't help them? Every Israeli speaking nonsense about Syria making peace; every American claiming Damascus might split from Tehran; every European preaching appeasement has in fact been engaged in confidence-breaking measures. Hizballah doesn't need to win a military victory but only to show it can win one, using that position of strength to try to force its demands on the moderate government. The government has already accepted Michel Suleiman, Syria's candidate for president. But Hizballah and the rest say this is not enough: they want veto power over everything. The goal of Hizballah, and its Syrian and Iranian backers at present is not the full conquest of Lebanon –– something beyond their means –– but to control the government so it does nothing they dislike: no strong relations with the West, no ability to stop war against Israel, no disarming Hizballah's militias or countering that group's control over large parts of the country, and certainly no investigation of Syrian involvement in terrorism there. Why, three years after Damascus ordered the murder of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri do investigators dawdle, having edited out the names of top Syrian officials they blamed for the killing in their initial report? Israel bombed a nuclear reactor being built in Syria. Rice reportedly opposed the action. The world yawned. Iran drives for nuclear weapons. There is some effort but too little, too slow. Whether or not the war in Iraq was a mistake, when terrorists murdered Iraqi civilians, much of the West blamed America; all too many Americans agreed. Far too much Western media, intellectual –– sometimes political life –– reviles Israel. But Israel is no threat to them; other forces are. And events in Lebanon are one more proof that the Israel-Palestinian conflict is only a portion, say one-fifth, of the wider Middle East crisis. Many in the West think Israel will pay the price for their follies. But Israel is ready to do what it needs for its self-defense. If anything, the mistakes of the last round in Lebanon reinforced this determination. Instead, the main victims will be Arabs, mostly Muslims, in Afghanistan, Gaza, Iraq, and Lebanon, killed by the various Jihad groups, or ruled by them where they take power or dominate through intimidation. And second they will be Western interests, which would not fare well in a region dominated by a combination of Islamists and those who feel they have no choice but to appease them. When Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama says he will negotiate with Syria and Iran over Iraq's future, he signals every Persian Gulf regime to cut its own deal with Iran. When his stances convince Hamas that he's the guy for them; when Iran and Syria conclude they merely need stand defiant and wait until January 21 for any existing pressure vanishes, the U.S. position in the Middle East is being systematically destroyed. Note that this does not make Obama the candidate favored by Arabs in general but only by the radicals. Egyptians, Jordanians, Gulf Arabs, and the majorities in Lebanon and Iraq are very worried. This is not just an Israel problem; it is one for all non-extremists in the region. If the dictators and terrorists are smiling, it means everyone else is crying. The Syrian and Iranian regimes know that while they may walk through the valley of the shadow of sanctions they need fear nothing because there are all too many who comfort them. After all, if the UN human rights committee is run by Libya, if UNIFIL forces in Lebanon tread lightly so Hizballah won't be angry with them, if Westerners tremble and repeal freedom of speech lest some Muslims be offended, why should the "bad guys" worry? Yet the West doesn't have to play it stupid forever. Now is the time for energetic action on Lebanon to wipe that confident sneer off their faces. To contain Iran and Syria, to buck up the Lebanese government side and all those Arabs who, whatever their faults, don't want to live in an Islamist caliphate. If you want to know what's wrong, consider Obama's May 10 statement on Lebanon. He starts out playing tough, talking about "Hezbollah's power grab in Beirut....This effort to undermine Lebanon's elected government needs to stop, and all those who have influence with Hezbollah must press them to stand down immediately." He calls for supporting the Lebanese government, strengthening the Lebanese army, and to "insist on disarming Hezbollah." But how to do this? By "working with the international with the international community and the private sector to rebuild Lebanon and get its economy back on its feet." In other words, according to the Obama world view, it's a problem of development. If people have more money they won't be terrorists. Of course, that was the policy of Hariri, which was countered by Syria blowing him up. In politics, bombs trump business. And any way you can't have a strong economy with no government and chaos. Part of the mistake here is Obama's assumption that Hizballah (and other radicals) want stability and prosperity. In fact, they want to use instability as blackmail in their pursuit of power. They don't want conciliation. It's a military-strategic problem, not one of community organizing. The statement continues: "We must support the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions that reinforce Lebanon's sovereignty, especially resolution 1701 banning the provision of arms to Hezbollah, which is violated by Iran and Syria." Great. But the UN is no substitute for U.S. power. As David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy writes, "It is highly unlikely that the UN –– which failed to even prevent the rearming of Hizballah –– would agree to more dangerous deployments in Lebanon." America doesn't need a president whose solution is to turn over crises to the UN. Nor can Obama pass the buck to Lebanon's army. Its commander is Syria's presidential candidate, its soldiers are mostly pro-Hizballah, and the quarter-billion dollars of U.S. aid given since 2006 may well become additional assets for Tehran. As President Harry Truman said of the president's desk, the buck stops here. So the president of the United States must take the lead, be tough, and make credible threats. What's needed is not a conciliator but a confronter. These are the questions Obama isn't even pretending to try to answer: Are you willing to fight on this issue? To defy an "international community" that opposes action? To intimidate and defeat the radicals? Answer: No. But here's the worst part that few in America but everyone in Lebanon will understand all too well: "It's time to engage in diplomatic efforts to help build a new Lebanese consensus that focuses on electoral reform, an end to the current corrupt patronage system, and the development of the economy that provides for a fair distribution of services, opportunities and employment." Here, make no mistake, Obama is endorsing the Hizballah program. It wants a new Lebanese consensus based on it having, along with its pro-Syrian allies, 51 percent of the power. What's needed is not consensus (the equivalent being getting Fatah and Hamas to bury their differences, or bringing in Iran and Syria to determine Iraq's future) but the willingness to fight a battle. In effect, Obama without realizing it, is arguing for a Syrian-, Iranian-, and Hizballah-dominated Lebanon. Such talk makes moderate Arabs despair. Here, at the "From Beirut to Beltway" blog, is a typical, sarcastic, reaction by Lebanese government supporters: "Oh the time we wasted by fighting Hizballah all those years....If only we had engaged them and their masters in diplomacy...sitting with them around discussion tables, welcoming them into our parliament, and letting them veto cabinet decisions. If only Obama had shared his wisdom with us before, back when he was rallying with some of our former friends at pro-Palestinian rallies in Chicago. How stupid we were when, instead of developing 'national consensus' with them, we organized media campaigns against Israel on behalf of the impoverished people who voted for them. The battle isn't over, which is all the more reason for real –– not just verbal –– international action. Hizballah has made its point for the moment, that it is the most powerful and to it every knee must bend. Yet without serious political and diplomatic support for Lebanon's government and real costs inflicted on Syria and Iran, the battle will be lost eventually. For all those in the West who don't like Israel, then at least help the people you pretend to like. Back the Lebanese government with real power and aid, covertly or overtly, those battling the radical forces in Lebanon. Rick: "Sam, if it's December 1941 in Casablanca, what time is it in New York?" Sam: "Um, my watch stopped." Rick: "I bet they're asleep in New York. I'll bet they're asleep all over America." [1] http://www.beirutbeltway.com/beirutbeltway/2008/05/obama-time-to-e.html Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: INEVITABLE COMPLICATIONS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 11, 2008. |
|
Now, perhaps Olmert is a totally innocent man, who never illegally took an agora (the Israeli equivalent of a penny), but this is not stopping him from having his lawyers fight a tough fight on his behalf with regard to the case being made against him. The background: Last week, the State petitioned the Jerusalem District Court for permission to take a deposition from Morris Talansky, and on Friday that permission was granted, although to be done in open court, not behind closed doors as State officials would have preferred. They requested this permission because Talansky will be returning to the US and might not return to testify if there is an indictment against Olmert, and a trial. This deposition would serve in lieu of testimony within a trial. (Additionally, State Prosecutor Moshe Lador told the court that Talansky "has expressed his concern to a police officer that Olmert might send someone to hurt him." Whether this was hyperbole only, expressing Talansky's discomfort with testifying against a former associate and friend, or a real anxiety, I cannot say.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert's lawyers are now going to the High Court, seeking permission to appeal the Jerusalem Court decision. The argument, as I understand it, is that such a deposition would be prejudicial to Olmert because it would not permit his lawyers to do the cross-examination that would go on in court. A lawyer with whom I consulted advises me that it would be very unusual (though not impossible) for the High Court to intervene in a procedural matter such as this. In any event, there is a way to handle Olmert's protest without blocking the State's ability to do the deposition: Olmert's lawyers must be provided with the current case against Olmert in all particulars and must be permitted to cross-examine Talansky during the deposition. Thus would Olmert's rights be protected. ~~~~~~~~~~ Talansky is remaining here voluntarily for the time being. He has made a public statement regarding his having promised the police he would remain and cooperate. He himself has been charged with no wrong-doing, at least not yet. While there has been no indication officially that he is a state's witness, the logic of the situation makes it exceedingly likely that there is some sort of (however unofficial) understanding between Talansky and the police; otherwise he would be greatly reluctant to provide testimony with which he might damage himself. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are potentially two sorts of charges that might be leveled against Olmert. One is the illegal acceptance of foreign donations for his campaigns. There are stringent legal limits (I believe something less than $10,000) regarding what a foreign national can contribute to the campaign of an Israeli candidate. This is for the obvious reason of avoiding the "purchase" of a campaign by foreign elements. In Olmert's case there was allegedly a "fortune" in money passed to his campaign over an extended period of time. A potential legal loophole here involves the time-frame during which the money was provided. The law forbids large foreign donations to a campaign in the nine months prior to an election; if no donations were provided by Talansky during that period before elections in which Olmert was running, it might be more difficult to make a case. A second potential charge, which has been mentioned by official sources, is that of bribery. The money, which may have gone into campaign funds, may have been intended for purposes other than campaign expenses. I wrote recently that there is no information on what was "bought," if this was a bribe. But I've since learned from my legal contact that it is not necessary to document this. In essence, it would have been Olmert himself who was "bought,' and not a particular service. There is even a legal term for this when large sums of money exchange hands in such situations. Olmert would have been in a potential position down the road to do one or more good turns for Talansky, who, it happens, does business in Israel. It is possible, legally, for the exchange of considerably large sums of monety to represent the forging of an unspoken agreement: "I give you this now, and we understand that when I need help you'll be there for me." ~~~~~~~~~~ And there is yet another issue. As I mentioned last week, Olmert and Uri Messer had co-founded the New Jerusalem Fund, which was ostensibly intended to do projects for Jerusalem (whether there were any such projects is not clear) and which was used to manage Olmert's campaign. The Fund is a registered non-profit, and its use for a campaign may have been blatantly illegal. Coupled with this is the whole issue of whether Messer (who, it is now being said, may go "state's witness") was Olmert's partner or his lawyer, or both. Olmert made a public statement last week about the fact that donations were turned over to Messer, as the Fund's lawyer; Olmert expressed confidence that Messer would have handled them legally. This, of course, was intended to put the onus on Messer, who is not having it. (Messer would have no protection under notions of attorney-client confidentiality if he assisted in the breaking of the law.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Lastly (for now), the NY Times has broken a story alleging that Talansky in 2005 (when Olmert was a minister in the government) paid for Olmert to stay in a $4,700 a night suite in the Ritz-Carlton in NYC. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Ali Waked, writing in YNet, the Palestinians are increasingly concerned about the effect of Olmert's legal troubles on the peace negotiations. According to one unnamed Palestinian official, they believe that if Livni should come in, hers would be a "weak, fragile government, unable to push any significant political move." The PA is worried that "any headway made in the negotiations at this time may just amount to a waste of time." Warned this PA source, if there is cessation of talks with Israel, the PA will begin talks with Hamas with an eye towards reconciliation. ~~~~~~~~~~ The attacks continue: On Friday, Jimmy Kedoshim was killed by a mortar shell shot from Gaza, while he was gardening in his yard in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, near northern Gaza; three others were wounded in the barrage. Hamas claimed responsibility. Yesterday, over 20 rockets were fired on Israel from Gaza, lightly wounding five. One Kassam damaged a building at Sapir College, another landed next to a synagogue, and a third hit a home. Today one Kassam landed near a school bus in Sderot, one landed on the property of Sapir College and a third landed in an industrial area of Sderot. This time Islamic Jihad took responsibility. But Israel holds Hamas, which controls Gaza, responsible. Over 700 rockets and 500 mortars have been fired at Israel this year. ~~~~~~~~~~ At the weekly Cabinet meeting today, Olmert declared, with regard to these attacks: "We are not planning to accept the [current situation]. "It won't end in one day or one week, we haven't promised this and don't intend to promise this. But I will promise one thing: Either there will be quiet or we will act with such force that will impose quiet." Threats are one thing, action is something else. Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, who has been increasingly critical of the government's response to the rocket attacks, stated: "The time has come to make a decision. If they don't stop terror activities of their own accord, and I am referring to Hamas, we need to return to the policy of 2004, when Hamas and terror –– meaning all the terror infrastructure, all the fuel and money used for terror and everything linked to Gaza gunmen –– were targeted. We need to act against these components continually with all our might in order to bring quiet..." ~~~~~~~~~~ Omar Suleiman, Egyptian intelligence chief, is due here shortly to discuss a proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza, in accordance with what has been worked out with Hamas and other groups. Public Security Minister Avi Dichter has expressed great reservations about this so-called ceasefire, because arms are continuing to be smuggled into Gaza from Egypt. What is more, Dichter is concerned about Hamas influence in Judea and Samaria: "Hamas is interested in getting to the same point in the West Bank that Hezbollah has gotten to in Lebanon –– to be in control without bearing the responsibility of the population. Under no circumstances can we allow that." ~~~~~~~~~~ As to Hezbollah being in control in Lebanon... While Hezbollah has pulled back from Beirut, clashes between pro- and anti-government forces continue in other parts of the country, including in the mountains overlooking the capital, and north towards Tripoli. Amos Yadlin, head of military intelligence, providing a briefing in the Cabinet today, warned that "Hezbollah's use of arms inside of Lebanon is a different sort of message." And, indeed, Dichter's statement at that Cabinet meeting was that "Hezbollah continues to be in control of Lebanon, without carrying the responsibility of managing the country." Haim Ramon's statement echoed this: "Lebanon must be treated as a Hezbollah state. Everything that happens there is the responsibility of Hezbollah. The country is controlled by this terror organization and its government has become irrelevant. The notion that there is another government apart from Hezbollah is entirely fictitious." While there is no panic, and no intention at this point to get involved, clearly Israeli intelligence is watching the situation in Lebanon very carefully. ~~~~~~~~~~ While Israel celebrated Independence Day on Thursday, in terms of calendar the actual date was yesterday, Saturday. The move in national celebration was made by the Knesset so that there would be no desecration of the Shabbat. Israeli Arabs are clearly not concerned with desecration of the Jewish Sabbath, and so recognized Israeli Independence Day according to the calendar yesterday, and are continuing today. And how do they recognize it? With the concept of "Nakba" (catastrophe). This means essentially protests against the existence of the State of Israel, organized by groups such as the Islamic Movement of Israel. At one such commemoration in an Arab village in the north, Sheikh Kamel Khatib declared, in a statement that should not be taken lightly: "Sixty years they have asked us to be Israeli Arabs and tried cutting us off of the Islamic nation. But their plan has failed." There is enormous irony in the fact that Israeli Arabs have it better then Arabs in surrounding areas, with regard to a number of freedoms and benefits. And yet they would destroy us. It is also ironic that Jordan banned such commemorations, but Israeli courts permit them. ~~~~~~~~~~ Shmuel Katz has died at 93. Associated with Ze'ev Jabotinksy before the founding of the State, and then a member of the first Knesset on the Herut list, he has long provided a strong and principled voice for the Israeli nationalist camp. He mentored many, and towered as a writer and historian who was able in recent years to speak incisively for the concept of "peace for peace" as opposed to the failed notion of "land for peace." With his passing, an historical era is gone. I salute his memory. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Reuters, President Bush is thinking of offering Israel a powerful US radar system when he comes this week –– one of several parting gifts under consideration.. Built by the Raytheon Company, this system can track an object the size of a baseball from 4,700 kilometers away. This would allow Israel's Arrow missile to engage a Shahab-3 ballistic missile shot from Iran about halfway through its flight, considerably sooner than would be the case with current Israeli radar. This strikes me as a very, very good idea. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ISRAEL'S PREDICAMENT AT 60: SHE LIVES IN THE WORLD'S WORST NEIGHBOURHOOD
Posted by Gabrielle Goldstein, May 9, 2008. |
|
This article was written by Daniel Pipes for the National Post (Toronto) and it appeared May 6, 2008. It is archived on his website: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5552 |
|
Two religiously-identified new states emerged from the shards of the British empire in the aftermath of World War II. Israel, of course, was one; the other was Pakistan. They make an interesting, if infrequently-compared pair. Pakistan's experience with widespread poverty, near-constant internal turmoil, and external tensions, culminating in its current status as near-rogue state, suggests the perils that Israel avoided, with its stable, liberal political culture, dynamic economy, cutting-edge high-tech sector, lively culture, and impressive social cohesion. But for all its achievements, the Jewish state lives under a curse that Pakistan and most other polities never face: the threat of elimination. Its remarkable progress over the decades has not liberated it from a multi-pronged peril that includes nearly every means imaginable: weapons of mass destruction, conventional military attack, terrorism, internal subversion, economic blockade, demographic assault, and ideological undermining. No other contemporary state faces such an array of threats; indeed, probably none in history ever has.
THE ENEMIES OF ISRAEL DIVIDE INTO TWO MAIN CAMPS: the Left and the Muslims, with the far Right a minor third element. The Left includes a rabid edge (International ANSWER, Noam Chomsky) and a more polite centre (United Nations General Assembly, Canada's Liberal Party, the mainstream media, mainline churches, school textbooks). In the final analysis, however, the Left serves less as a force in its own right than as an auxiliary for the primary anti-Zionist actor, which is the Muslim population. This latter, in turn, can be divided into three distinct groupings. First come the foreign states: Five armed forces that invaded Israel on its independence in May 1948, and then neighboring armies, air forces, and navies fought in the wars of 1956, 1967, 1970, and 1973. While the conventional threat has somewhat receded, Egypt's U.S.-financed arms build-up presents one danger and the threats from weapons of mass destruction (especially from Iran but also from Syria and potentially from many other states) present an even greater one. Second come the external Palestinians, those living outside Israel. Sidelined by governments from 1948 until 1967, Yasir Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization got their opportunity with the defeat of three states' armed forces in the Six-Day War. Subsequent developments, such as the 1982 Lebanon war and the 1993 Oslo accords, confirmed the centrality of external Palestinians. Today, they drive the conflict, through violence (terrorism, missiles from Gaza) and even more importantly by driving world opinion against Israel via a public relations effort that resonates widely among Muslims and the Left. Third come the Muslim citizens of Israel, the sleepers in the equation. In 1949, they numbered merely 111,000, or 9 percent of Israel's population but by 2005, they had multiplied ten-fold, to 1,141,000, and to 16 percent of the population. They benefited from Israel's open ways to evolve from a docile and ineffective community into a assertive one that increasingly rejects the Jewish nature of the Israeli state, with potentially profound consequences for that the future identity of that state. If this long list of perils makes Israel different from all other Western countries, forcing it to protect itself on a daily basis from the ranks of its many foes, its predicament renders Israel oddly similar to other Middle Eastern countries, which likewise face a threat of elimination. Kuwait, conquered by Iraq, actually disappeared from the face of the earth between August 1990 and February 1991; were it not for an American-led coalition, it would quite certainly never been resurrected. Lebanon has been effectively under Syrian control since 1976 and, should developments warrant formal annexation, Damascus could at will officially incorporate it. Bahrain is occasionally claimed by Tehran to be a part of Iran, most recently in July 2007, when an associate of Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, Iran's supreme leader, claimed that "Bahrain is part of Iran's soil," and insisted that "The principal demand of the Bahraini people today is to return this province ... to its mother, Islamic Iran." Jordan's existence as an independent state has always been precarious, in part because it is still seen as a colonial artifice of Winston Churchill, in part because several states (Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia) and the Palestinians see it as fair prey. That Israel finds itself in this company has several implications.
IT PUTS ISRAEL'S EXISTENTIAL DILEMMA INTO PERSPECTIVE: If no country risks elimination outside of the Middle East, this is a nearly routine problem within the region, suggesting that Israel's unsettled status will not be resolved any time soon. This pattern also highlights the Middle East's uniquely cruel, unstable, and fatal political life; the region ranks, clearly, as the world's worst neighborhood. Israel is the child with glasses trying to succeed at school while living in a gang-infested part of town. The Middle East's deep and wide political sickness points to the error of seeing the Arab-Israeli conflict as the motor force behind its problems. More sensible is to see Israel's plight as the result of the region's toxic politics. Blaming the Middle East's autocracy, radicalism, and violence on Israel is like blaming the diligent school child for the gangs. Conversely, resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict means only solving that conflict, not fixing the region. If all the members of this imperiled quintet worry about extinction, Israel's troubles are the most complex. Israel having survived countless threats to its existence over the past six decades, and it having done so with its honor intact, offers a reason for its population to celebrate. But the rejoicing cannot last long, for it's right back to the barricades to defend against the next threat. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
WHAT IS ISLAM?; ISRAELI RADIO EXPOSES FAR LEFT TRAITORS; SHADOW GOVT IN U.S.
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 9, 2008. |
|
ECONOMY MOVE OR ETHNIC CLEANSING? "Recent decisions affecting the personal and communal safety in Yesha towns include:
In addition, many checkpoints at which Arabs are checked for –– and often found to be carrying –– weapons have been removed. Furthermore, permission has been granted for more Arab policemen to bear arms in PA-controlled cities, and 20 armored vehicles will be transferred to PA control. "In addition, ten towns currently on the 'Israeli' side of the partition wall/fence –– such as Shaked and Hinanit in the Shomron –– will have their protection removed altogether. The thinking is that the wall provides sufficient protection against terrorist infiltrations." "Vaknin totally disagrees: 'The wall doesn't stop the terrorists, who get through either by dressing as day-workers or by infiltrating at night.'" The government also has refused permission to build more houses for the increased Jewish population. It proposes compensation for Jews who move out (Arutz-7, 4/27). Like the US, Israel has at times economized on defense, so it can spend more on domestic matters. Then it finds itself unprepared for war. WHAT IS ISLAM? Gamal Banna, brother of the Muslim Brotherhood's founder, is a liberal Islamic intellectual. He contends that the spirit of Islam is in the Koran, but the religion is applied according to ancient interpretations of Muhammad's sayings and teachings that do not apply to life, today (Jeffrey Fleishman, NY Sun, 5/7, p.7). ISRAELI & U.S. GOVERNMENTS ARE COLLABORATIONIST At the behest of Sec. Rice, Israel has opened a road for thousands of Arabs, to speed passage to and from Nablus. Israel warned that if terrorists exploit the opening to commit terrorism, it would close the road. That would be after Israelis were attacked. A few days earlier, PM Olmert stated that Israelis know that their government can protect them (IMRA, 4/28). Of course terrorists will exploit the opening. They always do. Israel knows that. The US knows that. Nevertheless, the US bases its policy partly on appearances of progress towards peace and of being humanitarian, and partly to appease the Arabs at the expense of Israel. Israel makes its policy partly to appease the US and the Arabs. Both governments know that the policy is inhumane towards Israel and helpful for terrorists. They are collaborators with terrorism. ISRAELI RADIO EXPOSES FAR LEFT TRAITORS Israeli Radio is owned by the government and biased in favor of the Left. To everyone's surprise, it started a series exposing the Far Left as traitorous. It gave noted "post-Zionists" their say, but let other noted Israelis demolish their arguments and their pretense at sincerity. Apparently years of exposure elsewhere has aroused even Israel Radio. (The Far Left had gone too far against Israel. Israelis resent the casualties that result from appeasement.) The main point was that post-Zionists are anti-Zionists who seek Israel's annihilation and ally themselves with antisemites. They call Israel a Nazi state that caused all the wars with the Arabs, and call the Arabs interested in peace. Some admit this project, but others pretend that they want peace and what is good for Israel. The Far Left has turned into a nest of traitors, psychologically ill and driven by Jewish self-hatred. Some Far Leftists claim that the Jews are not a people, not entitled to a state. One defamed Israel by fabricating a massacre (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/28). MUSLIM ARAB NOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
The Palestinian Center for Human Rights opposes capital punishment. It therefore opposes it for those found guilty of working with Israeli security officers against terrorists. The Center declared, "The death sentence affirms that the prosecution of collaborators is a right and duty of the PNA since these collaborators are an occupation tool participating in the implementation of war crimes against Palestinian civilians." Some Jewish nationalists asked Israel to try to save the convict (IMRA, 4/29.) Terrorism is the war crime. Muslims call terrorists civilians, because they are not in any state's armed force. SHADOW GOVERNMENT IN U.S. The implications of the government's sudden recollection of an old Israeli spy has deadly implications for Pollard, whom the story was supposed to help keep imprisoned by embarrassing the US about Israel. It has frightening implications for American democracy. My fellow Americans slumber on, but their government is not the open one they imagine. Pres. Bush has distorted some practices in order to disengage himself from Congressional oversight. Thus he signs bills into law, and then enforces them selectively. That is subversive, but at least it is open. It gets criticized. While liberal critics complain that Bush is grasping for excessive power, they fail to see his secret policies for what they are and Presidents' inability to wield the full power to which they are entitled. Cabinet departments vie for influence and jurisdiction, as if the President cannot reconcile their different approaches. He seems to set a policy, but the CIA and State Dept. undermine it. They fail to act on his instructions or they act against them. Somehow, the President fails to crack down on them. Pres. Truman did fire Gen. MacArthur for insubordination, and was unpopular for doing so. An example is that when Pres. Truman prepared to recognize Israel, the State Dept. undermined it with pre-emptive policy statements. Truman had to resort to keeping his intent secret from the State Dept., and sneaking in the recognition. Now, security agencies came up with a second Israeli spy, to hinder Bush from releasing Pollard. We find official policy of cooperation with Israel, but unofficial policy of non-cooperation. Sometimes this is with the President's approval. Pollard initiated document-transfer to Israel upon finding that the Defense Dept. withheld information about Arab war preparations that the government officially had promised to deliver. Pollard was punished excessively, not because he committed a minor crime, but because he exposed the subversives' major crime and the falsity of the supposedly pro-US policy. The subversives were not punished at all. The State Dept. seems unaccountable for their persistent failures. The investigation into 9/11 held the FBI and CIA largely responsible for the failure to apprehend the terrorists, but did not investigate the State Dept. failure for granting the terrorists visas without checking. Why is the State Dept. immune? What we have is departmental subversion of the Chief Executive, and the Chief Executive's subversion of law and of his own official policy. Who really is running the government? Why do the media accept offered scapegoats without getting to the bottom. Secrecy in government hides stupidity and wrong-doing. 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 |
|
WE MOURN THE PASSING OF SHMUEL KATZ
Posted by AFSI, May 9, 2008. |
|
Americans for a Secure Israel (AFSI) mourns the passing of Shmuel Katz z"l. Mr. Katz passed away in Eretz Yisrael at the age of 93. We thought it appropriate to share the following article written in his honor a few years ago, on the occasion of his 90th birthday. It was written by Herbert Zweibon, President of AFSI in November 2004 and published in Outpost. |
|
Shmuel Katz, who celebrates his 90th birthday in December, was the inspiration for the establishment of Americans for a Safe Israel thirty-three years ago. Underground leader, member of the first Knesset, publisher, historian, biographer, essayist, Shmuel Katz is above all the most trenchant political thinker modern Israel has produced. His career has also been marked by a selfless political integrity. Indifferent to person advantage, Katz has sought only the good of Israel and the Jewish people. In 1936, at the age of 22, Katz came to Palestine from South Africa, and retains to this day the accent of his native land. A disciple (as he would remain throughout his life) of Zionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky, at his request Katz went to London in 1940 to start and edit a Zionist weekly. After the war he returned to Palestine where he rejoined the underground Irgun Zvai Leumi, becoming a member of its high command under Menachem Begin. With Israel's independence, Katz became a Knesset member for Begin's Herut Party, but left after a single term, unhappy with Begin's failure, as he saw it, to reach out beyond his narrow constituency. Katz abandoned party politics to run a publishing house for many years. In 1977 when Begin finally upset the Labor Party's long monopoly on power, Katz returned briefly to public life, initially as Begin's personal representative to the United States. When Begin disavowed his commitment to put Katz in charge of Israeli information abroad (Katz had seized on the opportunity to transform Israel's miserable efforts in this area) and threw aside his ideological principles to achieve a paper peace with Anwar Sadat, Katz resigned. To the astonishment of Begin, who tried to buy him off with an offer he was convinced could not be refused –– the high prestige post of UN ambassador –– Katz refused. Katz is best known as a writer and almost all his books are landmarks in their own way. Days of Fire remains the best book about the Irgun. Battleground is the best single history of the Arab-Israel conflict over Palestine. Less well known but equally trenchant, The Hollow Peace is a devastating account of how Begin, beginning with his unaccountable decision to install Labor leader Moshe Dayan (whose failures in 1973 had discredited him with the Israeli public) as his Foreign Minister, squandered the opportunity to implement Jabotinsky's vision. Lone Wolf is the definitive biography of Jabotinsky. But above all Shmuel Katz is a prophet in his own time. When Katz was only 22, Jabotinsky said of his articles: "I must very earnestly congratulate you on the perfect clarity, the forcible simplicity, the sachlichkeit [matter of fact, to the point] with which you present the most complicated situations." To this day, Katz in his essays has continued to lay out, with that same perfect clarity, the situation confronting Israel, the consequences of the actions her leaders take, and the alternative path that should be taken. Katz saw the opportunities her victory in the Six Day War opened for Israel. He became a leader of the Land of Israel Movement which recognized that Israel could be a geopolitical factor in the region, with the historic heartland of Judea and Samaria restored to the Jewish people, strategic depth and oil from the Sinai, the high ground on the Golan Heights a deterrent to Syria. Like prophets generally, Katz has been ignored, sidelined, heard by many, hearkened to by few. History will pay tribute to his prescience. We, his disciples in Americans for a Safe Israel, are proud to pay tribute to him now. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Barry Freedman is Executive Director. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE STORY IS OUT
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 9, 2008. |
|
As judicial officials loosened the gag on the media that had been in place here in Israel regarding an investigation of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the story broke. Most of you are likely already familiar with at least some of the details, as they were released first by the NY Post and then the NY Times. Olmert is being alleged to have illegally received hundreds of thousands of dollars from persons in the US ("foreign nationals") when he was running for the office of mayor of Jerusalem (he first ran in 1993 and again in 1998) and then when he was minister of labor, trade and industry. The money came, all or for the most part, as campaign contributions –– either to the mayoral campaign or to Likud (which was Olmert's party before he joined Kadima). The receipt by Olmert of this illegal money is alleged to have taken place over an extended period of time, and is being called "bribery" by law enforcement officials. There is still no public indication of what was allegedly being "bought" with this money. ~~~~~~~~~~ The key state's witness against Olmert is American millionaire businessman Moshe Talansky, 75, who either provided the money or served as the middleman for it. Talansky lives in Long Island but also has an apartment here in Jerusalem. He served for years as the executive director of the American Committee for Shaare Zedek Medical Center and is CEO of the Globes Resources Group investment firm. According to Haaretz, Olmert has known Talansky for many years, and used to refer to him as "my dear old friend," while Olmert's close aides referred to him as "the banker" or "the launderer." ~~~~~~~~~~ Reportedly, Talansky was being questioned in connection with some other issue here when the matter of foreign donations to Olmert came up and Talansky offered to cooperate in supplying information. As alleged by one of my sources, what Talansky did was to offer to turn state's witness on a new issue in an effort to protect himself from further investigation on the original issue. It seems from this allegation that investigators were not even looking for information on the matter of Olmert having accepted money from foreign nationals, but that it literally fell in their laps by virtue of what Talansky offered. Testimony has been taken from Talansky, in anticipation that he will be returning to the States. The situation has further been complicated by the fact that long-time Olmert confidant, attorney Uri Messer, is also cooperating with police in this matter, although he has not turned state's witness. Messer's testimony allegedly implicates Olmert's former bureau chief Shula Zaken, who has not been cooperating with police. In 1998, Messer headed an organization called "United Jerusalem," co-founded by Olmert and Talansky, which was supposed to promote projects for Jerusalem and also ran Olmert's campaign for mayor. It was Messer, according to Olmert, who handled all the money donated or collected by Talansky. Last year Messer's name made news when State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss issued a report to Mazuz that included suspicions that when Olmert was secretary of labor, trade and industry, he had granted favors to a factory represented by Messer. This report generated one of four earlier investigations against Olmert currently pending. ~~~~~~~~~~ One of the things that makes this investigation more serious than the previous four is that this is the first time there are willing, cooperative witnesses. With the other investigations there are suspicions that must be corroborated by tedious efforts such as checking a trail of bank records. ~~~~~~~~~~ Late last night, after the gag had been lifted, Olmert called in impromptu press conference at which he declared: "Citizens of Israel, I look you in the eye and I say to you, in no uncertain terms, I have never taken a bribe, nor have I unlawfully pocketed money." Anyone who wishes to believe this is certainly free to do so. Olmert also pledged that if Mazuz indicts him, he will step down from his position as prime minister. ~~~~~~~~~~ Needless to say, all of this is going to impinge on the "peace negotiations." Kaled Abu Toameh in the Post is citing PA officials who say that Olmert is misleading the public when he speaks of progress in the talks. Said one PA official, "If Olmert has problems with the police because of financial corruption, that's his problem. But he should not use the peace talks as an excuse to divert attention from the police inquiry." ~~~~~~~~~~ Other briefs now: –– The PA, which just brought 600 police into Jenin to restore law and order, is now saying 1,500 police are required. –– Jordan has banned all commemorations of "Nakba" –– which means "catastrophe' and is how the Palestinians refer to Israeli Independence Day. Islamicists, who had planned events, were furious. It seems to me that this is a development of import, one I'd like to explore further soon. –– Assad says he will not cut ties with Iran or Hezbollah and that this is "irrelevant" to holding peace talks with Israel. It's not irrelevant to Israel. –– Lebanon appears on the verge of civil war as Iranian backed Shiite forces loyal to Hezbollah have taken control of parts of Sunni neighborhoods in Beirut and are surrounding government offices. This is in response to a declaration by the government that Hezbollah's communication system was illegal. More after Shabbat. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
BRAINWASHED JEWS NEED AN ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 9, 2008. |
|
"After 60 years, Arabs in Israel Are Outsiders and Their Anger Is Growing", a front page article in the 05/07/2008 edition of the New York Times written by Ethan Bronner,, surprisingly portrays a somewhat balanced account of a potentially perilous state of affairs, imbued with some anti-Israeli sentiment, nevertheless suggesting Arabs ironically refuse to leave the Jewish homeland they presumably loathe, knowing where their pita is buttered, knowing they have it better in Israel than they would in surrounding Middle East all-Muslim regimes that would not tolerate for one moment even a miniscule Jewish presence. No doubt, Arabs in Israel collectively are poorer than Israeli Jews, yet are represented in their nation's Knesset, are allowed to berate the State that feeds them, are allowed to express their kinship with Israel's mortal terrorist enemies, and indeed are treated with the softest of kid gloves compared to how any outspoken Jew might be treated in any Arab Muslim land. It is quite amazing the tiny State of Israel, about two tenths of one per cent as large in area as her surrounding Middle East Muslim neighbors, chooses to be so democratic, so tolerant of her Arab citizens who speak of her with such disdain. Yet, it is not surprising that such tolerance is generally ignored by an outer non-Muslim world, bizarrely in solidarity with so many brainwashed Jews that accept the false notion that Judea and Samaria, blithely referred to as the West Bank, are Israeli occupied territories, and Jewish citizens living there are not legal citizens but settlers, alas squatting on Palestinian land, morphing the concept of disputed sovereignty in favor of Arabs, as if Jewish communities are strictly forbidden to exist in any Middle East enclave except pre-1967 Israel, a small fraction of the land originally declared to be the Jewish homeland by the Balfour Declaration. Unable to get past such twisted perspectives, why would the outer world give credit to Israel when credit is due, instead maximizing the State's perceived bad points, minimizing or indeed nullifying her good points? Expectations are a one-way-street when it comes to Israel, and Israel invariably goes the wrong way according to much of the world. The generally 'go with the flow' New York Times, usually spinning its deceptive threads of news on a pro-Arab loom, for the most part selectively iterating anti-Israeli out of context presumed facts to a mostly gullible audience, most surprisingly in this article provided a broader less biased portrayal of Israeli Arab uneasiness within core Israel, augmented with some necessary historical perspective. The article notes "There is a real level of Jewish-Arab co-existence in many places, and the government has recently committed itself to affirmative action for Arabs in education, infrastructure and government employment." If only the Times and other media outlets would cease referring to Israel as an occupier of Palestinians, if only they would cease referring to Judea and Samaria as the West Bank, if only they would cease referring to Jewish residents of these lands of disputed sovereignty as settlers inferring they are trespassers, when in fact Israel must send troops into these enclaves, not as an occupation force, but to protect her peaceful citizens, who have every right to reside there, from hostile Arabs. Why indeed are Jews, egregiously not permitted to hang their hats almost anywhere else within the vast stretches of a mostly antagonistic Muslim Middle East, discouraged by the outer world from forming communities on small swathes of land bordering core Israel? Israel allows Arabs to reside peacefully, form communities within the core Jewish homeland, does not restrict their right to worship the Koran, treats them well enough so they won't pack their bags and move elsewhere, so why is there a double standard for Jews? Again, why are Israeli troops forced to protect Jewish citizens who happen to reside in a neighboring region dominated by Arabs? Might the Times someday devote a front page article to this inequity? Still, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Times or most media outlets to run articles or broadcasts unambiguously favoring Israel, but we might observe that as long as Israel is viewed within world accepted boundaries, fairer reporting does seem to emerge from at least this one influential Western media source. It could be that many brainwashed Jews, themselves believing in the occupation fantasy, reinforce such misinterpretations of reality. After all, if so many Jews accept Arab claims concerning post-1967 borders, truly a consequence of intrepid Jewish fighting forces vanquishing an enemy intent on annihilating the State of Israel, not realizing that no sane country would cede what it has convincingly earned in combat, supported by worldwide precedents such as America's acquisition of its Southwest from Mexico, further realizing that the 1967 war was a defensive war of survival for Israel and if Jews had lost Arabs would not be expected to return what they had viciously taken, then why would worldwide media outlets support rational Israeli claims to such land? If you won't respect yourself and your right to be treated fairly, why would others respect you and treat you fairly; in the case of nations, treat you like they might a self-respecting nation? Think about it! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
HAPPY SIXTIETH BIRTHDAY ISRAEL
Posted by Amil Imani, May 9, 2008. |
|
Archived at
|
|
Israel, your people, as well as people of good will, are celebrating your sixtieth birthday. We, the children of Cyrus the Great, also would like to offer our heartfelt best wishes to you on this occasion. Yet, this, in fact, is your rebirth. Your birth occurred some 6,000 years ago. Regrettably, your journey from your early beginning to the present has been fraught with great suffering. It is a tribute to the indomitable spirit of your people that they persisted in their valiant struggle to re-gather again in the land of their birth. Contact Amil Imani at amil_imani@yahoo.com. And visit the website at http://www.amilimani.com |
|
MESSAGE FROM JONATHAN POLLARD TO NATL BIBLE CONTEST WINNER, TZURIT BERENSON
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 9, 2008. |
|
Dear Tzurit Berenson! Bravo! Jonathan laughed with delight when I told him of the Kiddush HaShem that you did when you used your Israel Nation Bible Contest first-place win last night to participate in the mitzvah of Pidyan Shvuyim! The letter that you handed to Prime Minister Olmert as he handed you your prize, asking him to do everything in his power to secure the release of Jonathan Pollard, was an awesome gesture! Jonathan and I are deeply touched by your gesture. The eyes of the Nation were upon you, in your moment of victory. In that moment, you gave honor to HaShem and to His Torah. In that moment, you took your learning and used it the way that it was intended, not for mere scholarship or trivia, but for action! Ashreinu Yisrael! Fortunate are we, the People of Israel, to have such a model of righteousness in our midst! Fortunate are we to have you as a model of Torah-true action! Yashar Koach Gadol as well, to your principled friends and fellow contestants Liora Bach and Elad Finnish who collaborated on the letter to Olmert, with the intention that no matter who would win, the plea for Jonathan Pollard and the mitzvah of Pidyan Shevuyim would be passed to the Prime Minister. Jonathan was overwhelmed with pride and joy and deep respect for you three, when I shared this plan of holy collaboration with him! How ironic, that mere youth should understand this amazing mitzvah of redeeming a captive with such clarity, yet the Prime Minister of Israel does not. How inspiring and touching your noble intentions as a group are! How absolutely awesome your collaboration and your unity is, in your determination to extend yourselves to save Jonathan's life. Jonathan told me he is overwhelmed by your courage of conviction and humbled by the wisdom and Jewish honor demonstrated by such young heroes. He said that it is because of people like you, Tzurit, Elad and Liora, that we know that the Jewish Nation will survive and endure. Yashar Koach to you all, and may G-d bless! With much love, admiration and appreciation, Esther and Jonathan Pollard Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com For information about Pollard and the struggle: see www.jonathanpollard.org for English, or www.FreePollard.org for Hebrew. |
|
PEACE, THAT'S THE PROBLEM
Posted by Batya Medad, May 9, 2008. |
|
This post has been "festering" in my mind for awhile, but it only came to a head at the recent Yom Zikaron –– Soldiers and Terror Victims Memorial Day. One of the songs used as "background" mentioned "peace." Forever, it seems, Israel has been striving for peace, willing to do everything for peace. That's the problem. We should be doing everything plus, not for peace, for VICTORY, victory against our enemies. Only when we defeat our enemies will we know peace, true peace. All of those praising peace as an ideal, whether Peace Now or the late Menachem Begin have been dangerously wrong and misguided. We are suffering from peace-caused terror. By not concentrating our energies in defeating those who want to destroy us, we are facilitating their strengthening. Just look at what has been going on, even before the State of Israel was established. All that talk about living with our Arab neighbors in peace, as if we're sharing some fancy apartment house. The Arabs understand the situation very well, unlike the Jews. For us to have real peace we must understand our enemies and we have to be victorious. Life is no yin/yang coexistence. In real life all people aren't equal; that's anarchy. Consensus is mediocrity at best. Some people are meant to lead. It's not that they're aggressive; they are more efficient. Think of all the jokes about committees. Everyone is different; that's how G-d makes us. We all have different talents and roles. Our opportunities should suit that pragmatic reality. To think that some sort of peaceful compromise can be made with terrorists is totally and dangerously and suicidally unrealistic! I remember being asked by immigrants of the former USSR why Israel doesn't celebrate Victory Day, what they called the anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. They got it right in that sense. We have to stop being embarrassed about our victories. * If only we had proudly celebrated our 1967 victory over Egypt, Jordan and Syria... I have no doubt, no doubt at all, that the Moshiach (Messiah) was here with us, ready to take us to true peace. But we sinned. I must say "we," because we're all responsible. Jewish prayers are in the plural, "our G-d," never "my G-d." To get back to such a lofty level will be difficult. We must be proud of our military might, not embarrassed by it. In 1967 we defeated our enemies in six days, six days like the six days of creation. The True Shabbat was about to begin. Shabbat is considered by chazal, our sages, as a taste of Redemption. But the key was given to our enemies and we will have to fight again until we understand that victory is our goal. G-d willing. Shabbat Shalom U'Mevorach May you have a Peaceful and Blessed Sabbath. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at
Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il
This article is archived at |
|
GOOD SHABBOS (AND OTHER WORTHWHILE PETITIONS)
Posted by Anne Lieberman, May 9, 2008. |
|
Hi, I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed: "Give Israel a REAL 60th birthday gift" http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Gift2Israel/?e I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes less than a minute of your time. Thanks! Anne Lieberman hosts the Boker tov, Boulder website. Contact her at annelieberman@yahoo.com |
|
THE 3RD WORLDWIDE CONTEST FOR THE BEST WEBSITE ON THE NET. THIS WAS THE WINNER!
Posted by Dave Nathan, May 8, 2008. |
|
The 3rd Worldwide contest for the best website on the net just took place in the city of Venice. 169 countries participated, 38 were judges –– 10 of which were Arabs!!!! Israel won the first prize! This is a magnificent website! Enjoy! http://www.cityofdavid.org.il Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com |
|
ISRAELI MEMORIES. THE PRICE FOR SUPPORTING ISRAEL GROWS HIGHER BY THE MINUTE
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, May 8, 2008. |
|
Dear Readers: Greetings! I am recovering rather slowly from a non-life threatening surgical procedure but will begin posting new material together with the ongoing retrospective of some of my writing. The distinguished editor and author, Leo Haber, asked me to contribute an article about my memories of Israel for the venerable magazine Midstream's lead section "Israel at Sixty: Reminiscences and Reflections." I joined Elie Wiesel, Itamar Rabinovich, Edward I. Koch, Ram Belinkin, Vera Stern and Leo Haber. Here is part of what I said. The entire issue will appear online in the near future at www.midstreamthf.com. |
|
I can't remember a time when Israel was not central to my imagination both as a model for heroism and as a transcendent, miraculous, reality. From childhood on, Zionism was an ever-evolving example of political, theological, historical, and personal liberation. I was born in 1940 and grew up in an Orthodox family in Borough Park. In 1946, I started learning Hebrew. And, in 1948, I "rebelled." I joined Hashomer Ha'Tzair, a left-wing socialist Zionist youth group. Within a few years, I joined Ain Harod, a group to the left of Hashomer. In the early 1950s, I packed machine gun parts for Israel. Both Hashomer and Ain Harod shared a vision of Jews and Arabs living together in the Holy Land. This utopian, agrarian vision, this defiant form of idealism, got me embroiled in dangerous adventures in the Islamic world but in Israel too. In 1972, after having wrestled with anti-Semitism on the left and among feminists, I traveled to Israel for a long overdue, first-time visit. I was newly famous-and I needed to go "home," live anonymously, without having to give a speech or an interview. I instantly loved the land. I reveled in the beaches and cafes of Tel Aviv, the mountain-down-to-the-sea views of Haifa, the mystical desert of the Negev, the hot coral colors of Eilat, the radiantly golden Jerusalem. At first glance, "everyone" (bus drivers, prime ministers, police officers, soldiers, farmers, physicians) were Jewish. Jews seemed to occupy all the niches. Certainly, I saw Christians and Muslims too, (I also saw Arab Jews); what I mean is that, in Israel, Jews had crashed through all the occupational restrictions of exile and this consoled and uplifted me. It also struck me as funny. Oh, how I did not want to return to America! My dear friend, Molly Oren, who worked at the Weizmann Institute, persuaded me to leave the night before I was due to teach my university classes. On this fateful trip, I met a Jewish-Israeli Prince. He was born after 1948, and he was a descendent of the Bal Shem Tov. He was innocent and beautiful and had no idea that I was a firebrand feminist. He followed me back to America. Reader: I married him. He became an American citizen (perhaps my gift to him)-but we also had a wonderful son together (perhaps his gift to me). He did not want to live in Israel and so I never made aliya. He remained here and we divorced when our son was two years old. I have often joked that my Zionism is a miracle because it both pre-dated and has survived even marriage to an Israeli! Israel-related memories include: Housing and feeding some young Israelis who were pressed into government service in New York City during the 1973 Yom Kippur war; delivering feminist speeches in Tel Aviv and Haifa that galvanized what became the Israeli feminist movement; trying to get American celebrities and progressives to sign letters protesting the United Nations Zionism=Racism resolutions; choosing and accompanying journalists to Israel in 1974-1975 in the hope that their views of Israel might be somewhat tempered by reality; working with the nascent Israeli feminist movement-standing in Haifa with Israeli feminists and envisioning a future shelter for battered women and a rape crisis center where indeed, one now stands; working with Palestinian feminist for "peace." In addition: Walking with the late Meir Levin for hours in Netanya as he described the cruel reactions to his view that the Anne Frank story had been "hijacked" by Jews who wished to de-Judaize her story (he was obsessed, but he was also right); working with the Israeli delegation (Tamar Eshel, Mina Ben Tzvi, Yael Etzmon, Nitza Libai, and my own guest, Shula Aloni) at the United Nations conference in Copenhagen in 1980; flying to Israel immediately thereafter and meeting with David Kimche in the Foreign Office; trying to explain what anti-Semitism is and does to uncomprehending Israelis; being interviewed for Yediot Aharonot by the poet, Rachel Chalfi, on this very subject. We became close friends thereafter. I remember davenning at the Kotel (Western Wall) with the women who did so for the first time in 1988; co-leading a delegation of American Jewish women who donated a Torah to the women of Jerusalem which became the basis for our entering the lawsuit on behalf of Jewish women's right to pray at the Kotel. In 2000, with the advent of the Intifada, I became an advocate for Israel and have been documenting Israel's demonization by fairly lethal propaganda ever since. I have lost nearly all of my politically correct friends and allies, including other Jews and feminists, because I do not view Zionism as a form of racism; indeed, I view anti-Zionism as a form of racism and as the new anti-Semitism. Once one is deemed a "traitor" to an ideology by ideological loyalists, funny things begin to happen to you. Your body of work gets "disappeared," it is no longer mentioned or remembered where most appropriate. You yourself no longer get invited to events nor are you allowed to speak at such events. If you attend anyway-backs are either turned, or greetings grudgingly growled. When videographers have been hired to document the collective memories at Memorial Services for beloved, departed friends, you are not allowed to speak; this has already happened to me twice. In a third instance, I was slated to speak last, after four hours of speeches had already taken place and after many of the assembled had already left. I am talking about Memorial Services for dear and long-time friends who also happened to be feminist pioneers. I stand by my support of Israel with pride. My superlative education about how intolerant ideologues can be continues unabated. While I know that Israel is far from perfect: Many of its leaders are arrogant and deluded and have not pursued justice on behalf of women or on behalf of other vulnerable citizens, I also see that Israel, alone among nations, is existentially endangered. I understand more than ever how a Holocaust can happen. I hope and pray that God continues to watch over tiny Israel and that humanity refuses to collaborate with radical evil and chooses instead to resist it in heroic and principled ways. Israel: Happy Sixtieth Birthday! Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and s co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/ |
|
ISRAEL'S 60 YEAR TEST
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 8, 2008. |
|
http://zionism-israel.com/his/Palestine_Nakba.htm contains Lots Of Facts To Enable You To Counter The "Nakba" Lies. The article below was written by Bret Stephens and it appeared in Wall Street Journal online http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121003365007069313.html Contact Mr. Stephens at bstephens@wsj.com |
|
Sixty years after its birth, Israel continues to test the proposition that reality counts for more than perception. The Web site eyeontheun.org keeps a running tally of all United Nations resolutions, decisions and reports condemning this or that country for this or that human rights violation (real or alleged). Between January 2003 and March 2008, tiny Israel –– its population not half that of metropolitan Cairo's –– was condemned no fewer than 635 times. The runners-up were Sudan at 280, the Democratic Republic of the Congo at 209, and Burma at 183. North Korea was cited a mere 60 times, a third as many as the United States. Is Israel the world's foremost abuser of human rights? A considerable segment of world opinion thinks that it is, while an equally considerable segment of elite opinion thinks that, even if it isn't, its behavior is nonetheless reprehensible by civilized standards. I would argue the opposite: that no other country has been so circumspect in using force against the provocations of its enemies. Nor has any so consistently preserved the civil liberties of its own citizens. That goes double in a country so constantly beset by so many threats to its existence that its government would long ago have been justified in imposing a perpetual state of emergency. For reasons both telling and mysterious, Israel has become unpopular among that segment of public opinion that calls itself progressive. This is the same progressive segment that believes in women's rights, gay rights, the rights to a fair trial and to appeal, freedom of speech and conscience, judicial checks on parliamentary authority. These are rights that exist in Israel and nowhere else in the Middle East. So why is it that the country that is most sympathetic to progressive values gets the least of progressive sympathies? The answer, it is said, is that as democratic as Israel may be in its domestic politics, it is nothing but bloody-minded as far as its foes are concerned. In May 2002, at the height of the so-called al-Aqsa Intifada, I reviewed Israeli and Palestinian casualty figures, sticking to Palestinian sources for Palestinian numbers and Israeli sources for Israeli ones. Much was then being made in the Western media of the fact that three times as many Palestinians as Israelis had been killed in the conflict –– evidence, supposedly, that despite the suicide bombings, lynchings and roadside ambushes perpetrated daily against Israelis, Palestinians were the ones who really were getting it in the neck. But drilling down into the data, something interesting turned up. At the time, 1,296 Palestinians had been killed by Israelis –– of whom a grand total of 37, or 2.8%, were female. By contrast, of the 496 Israelis killed by Palestinians (including 138 soldiers and policemen), there were 126 female fatalities, or 25%. To be female is a fairly reliable indicator of being a noncombatant. Females are also half the population. If Israel had been guilty of indiscriminate violence against Palestinians, the ratio of male-to-female fatalities would not have been 35-1. These are not complicated facts. Yet the effort to think them through is rarely made. Is it laziness? I think not, because the image of demonic Israel, presented in copiously footnoted and ingeniously mendacious books like "The Israel Lobby," is the product of a great deal of effort. Is it anti-Semitism? One dare not suggest it, since the standard by which anti-Jewish bigotry is judged today is considerably stricter than what is usually used in the face of allegations of racism, sexism or homophobia. But whatever it is, the constant assault on Israel's morality has had its effect. Beyond Hamas, beyond Hezbollah, beyond the competition between Jewish and Arab numbers west of the Jordan River and the ever-growing number of Iranian centrifuges spinning a nuclear future for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Israel is beset by the fear that, being unloved, it is unworthy. "The anti-Semite makes the Jew," said Jean-Paul Sartre, as if Jewishness was something conferred rather than practiced. A sibling notion, seemingly benign but insidious, is that Israel's right to exist rests ultimately with the acquiescence of others, which in turn is a function of their perceptions. This is also known as "legitimacy." Perhaps not surprisingly for a state that was born of a U.N. resolution (which the U.N. has never since ceased trying to disavow), Israel has been uniquely mindful of how it is perceived. Yet a nation that constantly feels the need to demonstrate its right to exist, rather than simply assert it, puts itself to an endless test, which it may someday fail. Then again, look at the headlines in the copy of the May 16, 1948, Palestine (later Jerusalem) Post, reproduced nearby. That was a nation in far greater peril than the one that exists today. For 60 years, it has survived mainly through courageous and improbable acts of assertion, yielding an unfolding set of realities that defied perception. It's the only formula by which Israel's next 60 years may be assured. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
|
|
A STUNNING DOCUMENT
Posted by A Recovering Presbyterian, May 8, 2008. |
|
I am unsure how to react to this. I will confess that upfront. I have been a rather vocal critic of "mainline" denominational policies and statements that pertain to the Israeli –– Palestinian conflict. For me, the primary reason that prompted such criticism has been the manifest bias in denominational materials and the presence of alarming anti-Judaic and antisemitic themes among both church and secular activists. This phenomenon is particularly troubling given the church's historical treatment of the Jewish people. That is not to say that Israel is somehow exempt from criticism; that is not to say that Palestinians do not have legitimate complaints; that is not to say that the situation could not be far better than it is. I am keenly aware that many people are motivated by a sincere desire to help, by a longing for peace, and out of a concern for justice. I also understand that the denizens of various denominations are often shocked and genuinely hurt when instances of antisemitic and anti-Judaic biases are pointed out to them. Many people hold anti-Arab and anti-Muslim biases that also bear on this situation; but it must be observed that the actions and statements of the "mainline" denominations and of various activists do not reflect those biases. On the other hand, the palpable upsurge in antisemitism in the United States, in Europe, and in many other parts of the world, is reaching worrying proportions and must be confronted. In my opinion, there is NO PLACE in the church for any of these biases –– or at least there should be no place for them. The question, as I see it, is how best to genuinely help in this situation. That cannot be done with simplistic answers; it cannot be done with symbolic actions; it cannot be done with political theater; and it cannot be done where incomplete or biased information is present. This brings me to the document I have called stunning. The Interfaith Relations Office of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) released a paper, "Vigilance against anti-Jewish ideas and bias". I recommend that everyone concerned with this issue read it in its entirety (it only runs about 3 ½ pages). [I suggest reading it directly because I have no wish to misrepresent the Interfaith Relations Office. I am, however, going to quote several portions of it here.] The primary concern of the paper is expressed in the fifth paragraph: "However, we are aware and do confess that anti-Jewish attitudes can be found among us. Our conversations with Jews in the last several years have renewed our concern to guard against anti-Semitism and anti-Jewish motifs and stereotypes, particularly as these find expression in speech and writing about Israel, the Palestinian people, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and steps toward peace. Once again, many Presbyterians have become aware that strains of an old anti-Jewish tradition are present in the way we ourselves sometimes speak and in the rhetoric and ideas of some writers that we may read regarding these matters."I believe the Interfaith Relations Office has raised a number of significant issues that need to be considered: * There is an admission of anti-Jewish attitudes within the PC(USA).The concluding paragraph offers what I believe to be very sound advice: "We would do well to examine our own thinking, theology, and advocacy to be sure that we do not accept or impart anti-Jewish ideas, but speak truthfully and without bias in our support of justice and peace." Let me say that I need to acknowledge this effort of the Interfaith Relations Office because it is a remarkable development. In all bluntness, I had little hope that, in addressing antisemitism, anti-Israel and anti-Jewish bias, denominational officials would escape the wagon circling mentality. I'm a little bit shocked –– and very happy to have my expectation disproved. It is a very different thing for ordinary Presbyterians, for members, elders, or pastors to raise a concern of this type than it is for an office of the national organization. It seems to me that in producing this document, the Interfaith Relations Office has endeavored to remain faithful to Presbyterian concerns for peace and justice –– while at the same time alerting the church to a very real hazard that needs to be confronted. It was an act of honest and careful self-evaluation that I imagine was the result of a painful process. It was an act of courage to pen something that may well be unpopular because it is not the kind of reflection any of us want to see of ourselves. It may be that this will help mitigate some of the potential harm of the previously unchecked anti-Jewish bias; it may be that the Interfaith Relations Office has contributed something that might help Presbyterian avoid a grave mistake. It may also be that this will mark the beginning of a new season for the witness of the PC(USA). I commend them for it and offer them my heartfelt appreciation. Will Spotts Contact A recovering Presbyterian at wspotts@zoominternet.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: ON INDEPENDENCE DAY
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 8, 2008. |
|
Last night, many here in Israel –– before going out on the street to see fireworks or to dance or to just stroll –– began the celebrations by gathering in synagogues to pray, and to chant Hallel, a series of psalms of thanksgiving to the Almighty: This is the day that G-d has made, we will rejoice and be glad for it." Today had a purely secular feel, as the national pastime is barbecue. There were also jet formation fly-bys, at least over Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Heartening to see. In many ways the world stopped for us during the course of celebrations, but still there is news to be shared... ~~~~~~~~~~ But first, an expression of gratitude that we've passed the day without a major terrorist attack as was intended by our enemies –– there were some 17 serious and specific warnings. This, of course, is the result of the sterling work of our security and defense personal. ~~~~~~~~~~ I want to call your attention to a JINSA Report (#769). Says JINSA: Rice has been pushing Israel to surrender 95% of Judea and Samaria. In return for this we would allegedly receive US "security commitments" and a pledge from Abbas that this would represent "end of hostilities" and withdrawal of claims for "right of return." Abbas, however, according to information from MiddleEast Newsline, (MNL) refused, saying he would resign before agreeing to this. This provides a new perspective on reports that he would quit, which had come from Abu Toameh. While I tend not to take Abbas's all-too-frequent threats to quit seriously, in light of this information it would seem that this time he means it. The reason is simple. As MNL also reported, Jordan's King Abdullah, when meeting with Rice, rebuffed this plan, explaining that Abbas would be killed within days of agreeing to such a plan, and Judea and Samaria would be taken over by Hamas (not incidentally, creating danger for Jordan). As JINSA elaborated: "[Abba's] hold on power and his life are not tied to the further removal of Israeli checkpoints or quality-of-life issues for the Palestinian people. His future is directly tied to maintaining the Palestinian hard line. He is not empowered to give up the 'right or return' on behalf of other Palestinians or decide to 'end the conflict.'" (Emphasis added)
~~~~~~~~~~ What we see here, then, is yet another attempt by Rice to meddle in Middle East politics without having a clue as to what she is doing, or what potential exists for her to cause serious damage. Aside from the possible demise of Abbas, a Hamas takeover, and risks to Jordan, there is serious risk to Israel (this is addition to our legal and moral right to hold on to Judea and Samaria): Rice plays fast and loose with our security, and has on several occasions before this asked us to relinquish situations that were important for that security. Most immediately, this is the case with her demands that we remove roadblocks. But what her plan here does is ask us to trust that the US will protect us if the Palestinians should attack after we pulled out. This is, at bottom, a recognition that it's not safe to turn over to the PA major parts of Judea and Samaria –– which means she shouldn't be asking us to do it. For us to trust that the US would protect us would be the height of folly. Bottom line is that Rice is so invested in forging an agreement between Israel and the PA that she is oblivious to the fallout that such an agreement would generate. She ultimately works not just against us, but also against her own country's genuine best interests. ~~~~~~~~~~ And who do we see adding his voice to Rice's right now: EU envoy Tony Blair, who declares in an interview with Sky News that Israel must remove more roadblocks. "...what is necessary is for Palestinians to be able to move relatively freely around their own territory. That is what they cannot do now." Does he have a word, even one word, about why we are not eager to let them move freely? Not as far as I can tell. It has become truly wearisome. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hopefully this will hold: The White House has announced that this is not the time for MidEast talks. When Bush comes next week he will not participate in a three-way meeting with Olmert and Abbas. He will participate in ceremonial events only. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ISRAEL RESTRAINED, TERRORISTS UNRESTRAINED; RARE ISRAELI PROPAGANDA
SUCCESS; NY TIMES HAS NO HONOR
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 8, 2008. |
|
NO NEW SPY FOR ISRAEL The Clinton and Bush administrations fabricating claims about Israeli spying and sales of weapons to enemies, to intimidate Israel and its supporters (or to get away with dangers arms sales to the Arabs). The arrest of an American Jew for spying for Israel 25 years ago apparently was timed to undercut concessions that Pres. Bush was prepared to bring to Israel, where sentiment for getting Pollard has soared. (The news releases said that the newly indicted spy is "linked" to Pollard. They did not deal with each other. The only "link" is that both reported to the same person in Israel.) What would the point of making the arrest now, except to undermine Pollard's chances of getting belated clemency, to reduce US concessions to Israel, or to soften up Israel so it would make dangerous concessions to the Arabs? I didn't comment much about this case, because, I felt, more would come out. Caroline Glick has now brought more out. She explains that, four years ago, Israel informed the US of the other spy. Nor was he much of a spy. He transferred from a library documents far fewer than Pollard did, were not highly classified, and were about weapons that the US had sold Israel or Israel knew about. The US got a confession, but let him go. Only now, four years later, does the US arraign him. It is a repugnant case of political maneuvering and manipulation of public opinion in a vendetta against Pollard and Israel. Joseph diGenova, who prosecuted but also defamed Pollard, exaggerated about the newly indicted suspect, a Mr. Kadish. He said Kadish belonged to a "sleeper cell." A "sleeper" refrains from espionage or sabotage until summoned. Kadish committed his crime about 25 years ago. If anyone were asleep, it was the prosecutors, who took four years to indict someone who had confessed. Although the US holds bad news or fabricates it for when it most would harm relations with Israel, as with the second spy, the US holds on to much good news about Israel. For example, the US tried to keep secret that for the second time, Israel destroyed an enemy nuclear bomb factory, doing a great service for the US as well as itself. This time the service was to destroy a Syrian facility. Letting out the secret might prompt Americans to notice the superiority of Israeli intelligence (which US intelligence often ignores because it doesn't want to give credit to Israel and be beholden to Israel, but then regrets having ignored). (NY Sun accepts Pres. Bush's explanation that he withheld the news of the raid so as not to excite Syria into retaliating.) It is time for Israel to push back. It keeps apprehending US spies, but quietly deports them. Instead, it should arrest them noisily and demand Pollard's release in exchange for them. It should demand his release if the US gives a half-year sentence to the Hizbullah spy, Prouty, who penetrated the CIA and FBI (IMRA, 4/25). It should publicize its services to the US. IN HEBRON Dozens of Jewish leftists and Arabs, without a permit, demonstrated with PLO flags in the Jewish sector of Hebron, blocking residents from using the street for arranging the conclusion of Passover. Residents accuse police of letting hostiles routinely disrupt Jewish life in Hebron (Arutz-7, 4/27). Hebron Arabs are with Hamas, which just won the student elections there. HOW HAMAS TREATS CEASEFIRES Hamas instituted a ceasefire a year ago. Israel honored it, but Gazans fired 315 rockets at Israel. This time Hamas actually is not offering a ceasefire but a hudna, which Islamic authorities may abrogate at any time (Noam Bedein, 4/27). FREEING JEWISH PRISONERS Uri Orbach opposes pleas to free Jews convicted of violence against Arabs, to match the freeing of Arab prisoners. Don't free murderers, he argues, just for being Jewish. Religious ones disgraced their movement (IMRA, 4/27). His logic is sound, but he poses the question incorrectly. Most freed Arab prisoners were not convicted of murder. The Jewish prisoners for whom there are calls for commutation of sentences were not, either. Most of the Jewish prisoners were framed. Therefore, the pleas make sense. So long as Israel is freeing Arabs who attempted to murder Jews, let it free Jews who were imprisoned for being nationalists or who were framed. U.S. RESTRAINTS UPON ISRAEL PROTECTS TERRORISTS The US interferes with many Israeli defense measures against terrorism. The US does not stop Israel from killing rocket crews if it can catch them, but demands that Israel not kill the upper echelon leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad who give the orders to fire the rockets. This is wrong of the US (MediaActCom –– David Bedein's group –– 4/30). UNIFIL COVERING FOR HIZBULLAH "The UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is intentionally concealing information about Hezbollah activities south of the Litani River in Lebanon to avoid conflict with the group, senior sources in Jerusalem have said. In the last six months there have been at least four cases in which UNIFIL soldiers identified armed Hezbollah operatives, but did nothing and did not submit full reports on the incidents to the UN Security Council. Despite this failure, Olmert is considering having foreign troops patrol in Gaza (IMRA, 4/28). REAL REASON FOR U.S. SECRECY ABOUT RAID? Some foreign experts think that Sec. Rice kept the Israeli raid on nuclear facilities that N. Korea built in Syria a secret so her failure to curb N. Korean nuclear development would not be shown up (IMRA, 4/28). Probably one motive. U.S. PRESSES ISRAEL TO TAKE FUTURE CASUALTIES Israel keeps explaining that a ceasefire in Gaza (even if honored, which Hamas usually does not do), would allow Hamas to build up its forces and wreak many more casualties afterwards. Nevertheless the US is pressing Israel to accede to it. This would help Bush's momentum to get a new peace agreement with the P.A. (IMRA, 4/28). The peace agreement would be phony, like all the others. The Arabs always renege. Agreement or not, their holy war continues. But Jews must die so Bush can pretend to look good. Jews call Bush a friend of Israel. He isn't. The State Dept. isn't. About time Jews learned that. They should stop feeling they need "friends." That feeling breeds dependency instead of the needed self-reliance. Compare their sense of dependency, of inviting foreign hostiles to patrol their borders, with the Orthodox view of following the Blblical injunction to dwell as a people apart and that all they need is to be faithful to God. Secularists worry too much about gentile opinion. ISRAEL REACTED PROMPTLY TO UNO PROPAGANDA Usually, Israel takes so long to investigate and respond to hostile propaganda, that the damage is too entrenched to be undone. It reacted promptly and effectively to the World Health Organization's libel that Israel keeps P.A. Arabs from getting medical care. Israel pointed out that WHO reached its negative conclusions by interviewing only Israel's enemies and not consulting it. Israel exposed lies in all specifics cited. For example, it wasn't Israel that delayed a boy's treatment as alleged, but the boy's Arab doctor. Israel omitted two points. One is that it is not Israel's responsibility to treat aliens from an area whose leaders (and people) are pledged to destroy Israel. The other is that WHO is an agency of the UNO, which is so biased against Israel, that almost all its reports are one-sided and false. The UNO devotes disproportionate energy to defaming Israel. Israel should urge people to disregard UNO reports (IMRA, 4/28). BEHIND THE HEADLINES IN GAZA The headlines screamed about civilian casualties in Gaza. Absent clarification, even major journals make it seem as if the IDF strikes wantonly. Internet antisemites write that the "Zionazis" struck civilians, again. The IDF investigated. Its missiles struck the targeted terrorists, whose own explosives then blew up. Since the terrorists operated in civilian areas, their own explosives struck a house and killed some occupants. The secondary explosion was greater than the type of explosion caused by Israeli ordnance. Israel holds the terrorists responsible for those deaths (IMRA, 4/28, 5/2) as does international law. Sometimes the houses are bomb depots that blow up, too. They get what they deserve. The choice is the terrorists'. They could fight in the open, according to international law. But then they would lose fast. They could adhere to the peace agreements and negotiate further. Instead they chose to risk their civilians' lives. Then they have the temerity to reap propaganda from the loss of civilian lives that their war crimes produce. The P.A. reports military casualties as civilian ones and civilian casualties as Israel's fault and target. Their lies seldom get exposed in the Western media. The NY Times cites what the P.A. officials claim as if as valid as Israeli reports. The Times puts lying jihadist propagandists on a par with the IDF, which strives for accuracy and takes pride in minimizing civilian casualties. Israeli efforts to minimize civilian casualties, like those of the US in Iraq, are one of the most humanitarian developments in warfare, but Western media, being largely anti-Western and certainly largely anti-Israeli, fail to celebrate it. European media generally just report the Arab side. If the NY Times had any more honor than the terrorists, it would make jihadist criminality and Israeli decency clear. But it, too, writes in such a way as to make Israel look bad. People complain that the Times minimized Nazi Holocaust crimes, at the time. That should alert them to the Times minimizing Islamic genocidal crimes against the Jews, now. P.A. SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM A P.A. court sentenced to death a P.A. employee who gave Israel the information needed to liquidate four terrorists. Whenever the Israel gets the information it needs to kills some terrorists, the P.A. concentrates not on uprooting the terrorist cell and organization but on identifying the informant. Some P.A. official said it is one thing to make peace, another to spy on the P.A. (IMRA, 4/28). But terrorists are not making peace. They are criminals whom one is obliged to capture. Thus the P.A. of Abbas, as of Arafat, strives to protect terrorists. The notion that those terrorist leaders are moderate, interested in peace, and can be expected to fight against terrorism, is disproved abundantly. Disproved but not abandoned! 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 |
|
ON A FRIDAY AFTERNOON SIXTY YEARS AGO
Posted by UCI, May 8, 2008. |
On a Friday afternoon sixty years ago, David Ben Gurion stood up before a small crowd and a radio microphone and read a document which said in part: It is the natural right of the Jewish people to lead, as do all other nations, an independent existence in its sovereign State. With that, what was a dream for over two thousand years was now a
reality. View the video clip at Editor's Note: Menachem Kovacs suggests also the beautiful pictures of Eretz Ysrael at http://www.jerusalemonline.com/60israelslide.asp. See also "Israel Then and Now" at http://www.aish.com/movies/60Years.asp. Eleazar Ben Yair suggests also Chazak Amenu –– We stand as
one –– at
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=tlA-Wq9SDeE& NR=1
UCI –– The Unity Coalition for Israel
(http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) –– is "the largest worldwide
coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200
groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we
have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and
Secure Israel." "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!"
|
|
THIS, MY LAND, MY STATE
Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 8, 2008. |
|
This was written by Yaffa Ganz in 1998. |
Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
YEARNING FOR JUSTICE AND KINDNESS ON THIS BIRTHDAY
Posted by Anita Tucker, May 7, 2008. |
|
I just returned from the Nitzan cemetery where we had the Gush Katif ceremony for those who fell on Kiddush Hashem as soldiers and by terror. Four of the names of the fallen read were from my own Netzer Hazani community and each name read individually of the too long list read of all those that fell, whom we all knew well from our Gush Katif communities penetrated my heart deeply with a terrible pain. My neighbor Bryna, whose soldier son was reinterred in the Nitzan cemetery spoke with great pain and said Please Hakadosh Baruch Hu give the dead of Gush Katif menucha nechona, an appropriate place of rest, because we, the living, have not yet found one for ourselves." Still, I am now busy preparing our Seudat Hodaya, Thanksgiving dinner, where we as a family will express together this 60 th birthday of the State of Israel, after returning from the special Independence Day thanksgiving prayers –– sincerely thanking G-d for all that we do have in our dear Land of Israel. In 1969 my husband Stuart and I decided we wanted to come on Aliya to Israel, not only because it was the biblical Land of Israel. G-d's Holy land was now also the declared State of Israel, the homeland of the Jewish people. The Bible and even the UN declared Israel as the homeland of the
Jewish people –– so we wanted to be there!
MY PARENTS WERE REFUGEES FROM GERMANY, my grandparents from Poland etc. We didn't want to be refugees. We wanted to live in the State of Israel the homeland of the Jewish people. The ceremonies in which our children completed their IDF training courses were at least as moving as their kindergarten Chanukah ceremonies –– where we were convinced that our little geniuses were truly descendents of the valiant soldiers of the tiny fledgling Royal Forces of G-d, the Maccabies. In 2005 we were forced to leave our home, farm and lifetime of 29 yrs. (we celebrated the State of Israel's thirtieth birthday in Gush Katif) by the thousands of young men of our own beloved IDF who were sent to do this by the Members of the Knesset of the State of Israel. I wasn't sure that very terrible day whether we still had a State of Israel, nor was I sure that it was still our Reishit tzmichat geulateinu –– the beginning of the redemption of our people. Beyond that, all our lifetime was now a pile of rubble. I, my extended family and my lifetime friends were all homeless in my Homeland perpetrated by my Homeland. That day, and still today, I was shocked that these representatives of our beloved State did not have the moral fiber to stand up and say proudly and clearly that it is immoral to throw 10 thousand people out of their home and certainly when all know the terror will continue and intensify and no one knows where we are to go. I wanted so much that my grandchildren would continue believing in
the State of Israel, in the beginning of the flourishing of our
redemption.
OUR COMMUNITIES WERE FORTUNATE TO MANAGE TO SALVAGE THE SPIRIT AND VALUES out of the rubble of our towns. We hope we will be enabled to build anew so that these values and spirit might blossom anew. Those who do not see importance in this spirit and those values have emptied the State of Israel of the moral strength that the values provide. G-d willing we will all, you and I, together, continue to fill the State of Israel with the true values of Zion that were significant in first building the State of Israel I wish my dear State of Israel, on this sixtieth birthday, that it will fulfill one of the main functions that will bring the land of Israel, the People of Israel and the Torah of Israel again to its full glory, "JUSTICE" and "KINDNESS" –– which will shine clearly as our light house awaiting the return of all, as promised by our Prophets. Anita Tucker is a former celery farmer who lived in Gush Katif, Gaza. She, together with almost 10,000 other Jews were expelled from their homes and land by the Israeli Government in August 2005. She and her family are still living in temporary quarters. |
|
ISRAEL REMEMBERS
Posted by Gary L. Bauer, May 7, 2008. |
|
Israel Remembers This week marks the 60th anniversary of the founding of the modern state of Israel. For sixty years, this tiny democracy, the only homeland of the Jewish people, has been an ally of the United States and a beacon of liberty in the Middle East. It has survived in an ocean of hatred, surrounded by "neighbors" who lust for Jewish blood. In the last 24 hours, the Israeli people marked their annual Remembrance Day for the Fallen, a commemoration of the 22,400 soldiers and terror victims who have died in the multiple wars Israel has endured since 1947. And even today as Israel marks this solemn occasion, its enemies are planning the next war. Iran continues to advance toward nuclear weapons, and its "president," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regularly promises his followers that Israel will soon disappear and America will follow. Hezbollah is amassing weapons in Lebanon as it prepares to launch a new attack. In Gaza, Hamas digs in and daily fires missiles into Israeli civilian centers. And all over the Middle East another generation of Muslim children are being taught to kill the "apes and monkeys" (Jews) and the Crusaders (Christians). Meanwhile, the "world community" continues to blame Israel for the region's problems. Why –– Israel, a country half the size of California's San Bernardino County, roughly one fifth of one percent of the land mass of the Arab world, is the only place on earth where, in 4,000 years of history, Jews have formed a majority. It is the only place where they've been able to rule themselves and defend themselves. It is the only place where Jews have been able to shape their own destiny and create a society according to their values the way everyone else does. Only in Israel can a Jew speak the Jewish language, see his holidays as national holidays, walk where his ancestors walked and continue the story those ancestors began near the dawn of human time. Slow Down! Sadly, the Bush Administration appears to be ramping up pressure on Israel to give up more land to build a Palestinian state. Secretary Rice was in Israel a few days ago, and Israeli newspapers are reporting that she demanded that Israel agree to withdraw from additional territory. Rumors are circulating that the "new" Israel would be reduced essentially to its 1967 boundaries –– boundaries that many military experts are convinced are indefensible in an era of modern warfare. Here is what I can't figure out. Every indication is that a new Palestinian state would be an Islamic terror-supporting entity. We went to war to destroy Saddam Hussein's terrorist regime. Why in the world would we take steps that are likely to create a new terrorist state that will threaten Israel and us? It makes no sense, and I fear the Bush Administration is deceiving itself about the Palestinian population. Poll after poll shows that support for terror runs deep and that most Palestinians want Israel destroyed. I urge you to call the White House at: 202-456-1414 and politely tell the president to quit pressuring Israel. Gary Bauer is the president of American Values. Contact him at gary.bauer@mail.amvalues.org. And visit the website: http://www.ouramericanvalues.org |
|
FROM ISRAEL: REJOICE AT 60
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 7, 2008. |
|
This evening begins Yom Ha'atzmaut, Israeli Independence Day –– our 60th. And a time for rejoicing it is. Repeatedly I'm seeing essays that celebrate the fact that after sixty years we're still here. What other nation would celebrate its independence day by saying, "We made it this far!"? But here we are, beleaguered still, and we've not only made it this far –– we've excelled in a thousand ways. From the early days of struggle we've become a first rate, first world nation: Top flight in medical and scientific research, cutting edge in hi-tech. Boasting impressive rates of higher education, and book publication. We are a nation that continues to absorb Jewish immigrants from around the world, while lending assistance to other countries in trouble because of natural and other disasters and taking in non-Jewish refugees from places like Dafur. We are a land both of unexcelled natural beauty and modern urban development. Most importantly, we are a Jewish nation. This is our land, imbued everywhere with our ancient history and heritage. A land –– the only in the world! –– where Judaism is normative. We run on Jewish time and are mindful of Jewish values. May this never change! All power to you, Israel. May Heaven keep you safe and strong. May you grow in all the ways that matter, becoming finally a Light Unto the Nations. And may you exist as long humankind peoples this earth. To all of you who celebrate Israel, I say Hag Sameach!
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
GOING TO ISRAEL THIS YEAR? DON'T MISS THESE HISTORIC SITES!
Posted by Moshe Phillips, May 7, 2008. |
|
Visiting Israel to mark her 60th Anniversary? Been to Israel? Been there and done that? Beyond the Western Wall, beyond the Diaspora Museum and the Knesset and beyond Masada there are places to visit that will help the untold history of Zionism come alive. The leftist establishment controlling Israel during its formative years from 1948 to 1977 did much to prevent, through official government mechanisms, the political opposition's attempt to write its own history and thereby protect and preserve its story. Even after Menachem Begin's election to prime minister in 1977 these entrenched bureaucrats of Israel's elite left were allowed to maintain control over the vast majority of the nation's cultural and academic institutions. Below is a list of eight places to visit in Israel that will help you to develop a more accurate picture of the struggle to build the Jewish State. The sightseeing adventure Israel's Ministry of Tourism hopes you don't take. Acre Prison Acre Prison is where Zionist leader Zev Jabotinsky and his comrades
were imprisoned by the British in 1920 for defending Jewish
neighborhoods in Jerusalem from Arab rioters. Later the British
imprisoned Irgun and Stern Group (LEHI) underground fighters. Several
fighters were executed there by the British. The prison is perhaps
best known for the escape of dozens of fighters during an underground
raid that was depicted in Leon Uris's novel Exodus and the subsequent
movie. For more on Acre Russian Compound Another prison where the British held Irgun and LEHI soldiers was
Jerusalem's Russian Compound. The museum there has significant
exhibits that relate the stories of the underground. For more
information
Etzel Museum The Irgun was also known as the Etzel. This museum in Tel Aviv details the history the Irgun and the movement's impact on the British decision to leave Eretz Israel. Exhibits and information on many of the Irgun's military operations are included.
For more information go to
LEHI Museum The LEHI underground launched a campaign to force the British to leave Eretz Israel. Its founder Yair (Avraham) Stern had been a leader in the Irgun and formed the LEHI in order to fight the British at all costs. The LEHI museum is housed in the building where Stern was assassinated by the Brititsh. The museum is also known as Beit Yair and includes personal artifacts from Yair's life including the copy of the Tanach he studied and his Tefillin and more. The address is 8 Avraham Stern St in Tel Aviv.
For more about the museum
Menachem Begin Heritage Center To better understand this founding father of Israel, prime minister
and leader of the Irgun there is simply no better place to visit than
the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem. For more about the
center
Jabotinsky Institute Zev Jabotinsky (1880-1940) was the Zionist statesman that created a
bold, new militant vision for Zionism and his words and leadership
have inspired generations of Zionists. The Jabotinsky Institute in Tel
Aviv houses both a museum dedicated to teaching about to him (see
http://ilmuseums.com/museum_eng.asp?id=69) and another that teaches
about the Irgun which had pledged its allegiance to Jabotinsky
Tel Chai Tel Chai was a settlement in the Galil that was the site of a battle against Bedouin Arab marauders. The Zionist hero Joseph Trumpeldor and seven other valiant defenders died in the settlement's defense against a much larger Bedouin force. Trumpeldor had been instrumental in forming the Jewish Legion during World War One. Jabotinsky named his Betar movement after Trumpledor. A large stature of a lion sits at the sight as does a museum in kibbutz Kfar Giladi. Trumpeldor's inspiring last words were: "Ein Davar, tov lamut be-ad Artzeinu." (No matter, it is good to die for our Land). Rosh Pina Shlomo Ben Yosef is buried in Rosh Pina. Rosh Pina was an early Zionist settlement. In 1938 in response to attacks on Jews by Arab terrorists, Ben Yosef was a Polish born member of Betar and the Irgun, and two comrades organized a reprisal attack. They were subsequently arrested by the British. Ben Yosef was executed by the British in Acre; he was 25 years old. His last words were: "I die with the name of Jabotinsky on my lips, sacrificing my life in the hope that the Jewish nation may learn the lesson that Havlaga, Self-restraint, is fatal." Jabotinsky called Ben Yosef "the teacher of us all." Before you go... A perfect book to bring along on your trip is Zev Golan's Free Jerusalem Heroes, Heroines and Rogues Who Created the State of Israel (Geffen Publishing, 2003). Golan's book will help to make your visits to the historic sights above much more significant. Another good book is the late J. Bowyer Bell's Terror Out of Zion: The Fight for Israeli Independence (Transaction Publishers 1996). Both books are well worth reading, even if you have no plans to visit the Jewish State anytime soon. Have a meaningful journey. Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For a Safe Israel –– AFSI. The chapter's new website is at: www.phillyafsi.com. |
|
WHY HAMAS WANTS CEASEFIRE; QUESTIONS FOR CANDIDATES ON ME; HAMAS ATTACKS ISRAEL BUT DEMANDS SUPPLIES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 7, 2008. |
|
ISRAEL ON HIGH ALERT AGAINST ABBAS' PEOPLE Thousands of Israeli troops, police, and volunteers were put on patrol and the country on high alert against suspected terrorism to emanate from the P.A.. Abbas never has taken the pledged steps against terrorism, such as "to arrest terrorists, confiscate their weaponry and end the incitement to hatred and murder that permeates the PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps." "If he cannot be motivated to stop terrorism when he is still seeking Israeli concessions, what possible motivation will he have to do it when he has received all these concessions?" Why do Sec. Rice and PM Olmert think of him as a moderate and as an opponent of terrorism? Why are they suggesting he gain sovereignty over territory within which he could build up terrorism without the present, daily, Israeli interference? (ZOA in Arutz-7, 4/21.) If Israel still has to put up roadblocks, why does Rice demand that Israel remove roadblocks? What kind of government is Olmert's that yields? The overall answer is a combination of Rice's Evangelist antisemitism, State Dept. anti-Zionism, Olmert's anti-Zionism and fear of being prosecuted for corruption if he stands firm, inability to foresee or to act against greater dangers in preference to pretended agreements that are described as good, the American hubris in working with one set of evil characters against another, only to find the effort producing more evil, ignorance of the main issues of the day, cowardice, and ideological hatred of one's own people. Did I omit any factors? Sec. Rice is neglecting US foreign policy in order to focus on the P.A. and on Iraq. HAMAS REDUCES TERMS FOR CEASEFIRE Hamas no longer demands that any ceasefire be throughout the P.A.. It would settle for one in Gaza, provided the Gaza border with Egypt were open (IMRA, 4/21). Hamas must be running out of ammunition. Needs to re-supply. Have you noticed that the Muslims regularly violate ceasefires? The major media doesn't seem to have noticed. The NY Times refers to fragile ceasefires. It doesn't say they are fragile because the Muslims insert escape clauses, some of their leaders say they didn't agree to them, the person who signed them is dead, they don't feel bound by their word to infidels, or they pretend that their enemy violated them. It leaves one to imagine that Israel may violate them. Israel violated one in its war for independence. QUESTIONS ON MIDEAST TO ASK CANDIDATES The questions are verbatim, except for minor editing. From: Israel Resource News Agency, David Bedein,4/18 http://israelbehindthenews.com/#insight 1. Numerous declassified security reports confirm that S. Arabia continues to fund groups defined by the US government as terrorist organizations, while S. Arabia maintains an active state of war against Israel since 1948. How would you, as President relate to the security threat posed by S. Arabia? 2. The current administration offers major arms sales to S. Arabia, despite its pro-terror posture. Would you, as President, continue this policy of arming the Saudis? 3, Successive US presidents have supported keeping Palestinian (Arab) refugees in the squalor of UNRWA refugee camps..., instead of under the principles of UNHCR which works to rehabilitate refugees in decent living permanent living conditions. Would you, as President, call for an application ofUNHCR principles? 4. The Bush Administration has announced a program to arm the Fatah, despite current terror activities of the Fatah and despite the fact that Fatah remains on the list of organizations defined by American law as illegal terrorist organizations. Would you, as President, continue to arm the Fatah? 5 The PA has used US AID funds to foster an Islamic Sharia constitution which does not provide juridical status for any religion besides Islam. Do you, as President, approve of this PA policy, or would you ask for a change in such a constitution as a condition of future aid to the PA? 6. The Bush Administration has restrained Israel from counterattacking in Gaza to put an end to the daily missile attacks from Gaza. Would you, as President, restrain...Israel? 7. As a matter of policy, terrorists who fire missiles at Israel from Gaza use Gaza civilians as human shields. Would you, as President, recognize the fact that casualties in Gaza remain a direct result of this human shield policy? 8. The P.A. harbors terrorists suspected of murder and refuses to hand them over for trial. The Clinton and Bush Administrations turned a blind eye to such a policy. Would you, as President, allow such a policy to continue? 9. The P.A. operates with no system of civil liberties or human rights. Would you, as President, condition for any future US assistance in a human rights and civil liberties reform in the PA? 10. Christians are persecuted in the PA and are often not allowed to practice their religion in the open in the PA. The American consulate in Jerusalem has refused to render assistance to Christians who are persecuted by the PA. Would you, as President, continue to ignore the plight of Christians who are persecuted in the PA or will you, as President, champion the cause of Christians to practice their religion freely in the PA? 11. Syria continues to host and support a plethora of terror groups. What would be your policy about this? 12. Syria continues to orchestrate the export of lethal narcotics to the world. Would you, as President, support an effort to destroy the Syrian source of lethal narcotics in the Bekka Valley? 14. Since the Golan Heights was used by Syria between 1949 and 1967 to attack Israeli communities in the Galilee, would you, as President, support an effort to force Israel to withdraw from the Golan? (Or pressure Israel to seem to do so voluntarily?) 15. The Bush Administration asks that Israel abide by the road map for peace. Which road map would you, as President, endorse –– the road map of April 30th 2003 or the road map of May 25th 2003? [The second road map contains the reservations of Israel, which include detailed Israeli directives to disband terror groups as a precondition to continued negotiations]. 16. The Bush Administration characterizes the Fatah terror organization as a "moderate" factor. Would you, as President, share in that characterization? 17. The Clinton and Bush Administrations overlooked the fact that the PLO never ratified the Oslo accord "declaration of principles" which required the PLO and Fatah to recognize Israel, denounce terror and cancel the PLO/Fatah charter which calls for Israel's obliteration. It will be recalled that the PLO signed the Oslo accords on the White House lawn on September 13th, 1993 and would not ratify these accords when the PLO executive convened on October 6th, 1993 in Tunis and would not cancel the PLO charter when the PNC convened on April 24th. 1996. Would you, as President, continue the Clinton/Bush policy of ignoring the fact that the PLO never ratified the Oslo accord and never cancelled the PLO charter? 18. The Clinton and Bush administration instituted a policy of ignoring the message communicated by the newly constituted P.A. in the Arabic language of continued war on Israel. Would you, as President, insist on a change in that policy and issue a directive that any aid to the PA require a cessation of calls to terrorism by the official media outlets of the PA? 19. The Clinton and Bush administrations have consistently ignored the fact that the new P.A. curriculum inculcates the next generation to continue the war to liberate all of Palestine. Would you, as President, ask for a cancellation of such a curriculum? 20. Since the Gaza withdrawal demonstrates that Palestinians will use areas under their control to launch missile attacks against Israel, would you, as President, insist on future Israeli withdrawals? (Bush isn't pro-Israel. This is what our media neglect.) Arutz-7 reports that the questions were sent to the candidates. Sen. Obama's advisors consulted with their candidate. They got a couple of evasive answers, a couple of answers indicating Obama would continue policies that help terrorists against Israel and that he doesn't recognize that Abbas' faction is not moderate, and refusals to answer the bulk of the questions (4/23). What did the other candidates say? WHAT UNIFIL TRIED TO KEEP SECRET A UNIFIL patrol in southern Lebanon, where Hizbullah forces are banned, pulled a truck over for inspection. Hizbullah troops jumped out, guns ready. The patrol returned to base. UNIFIL did not mention the incident for half a year. UNIFIL's commander complained that the ceasefire ties his hands. Hizbullah warned that if untied, UNIFIL would become an army of occupation to be fought (Arutz-7, 4/23). Israel's Foreign Minister calls that ceasefire her great achievement for Israel. ASKING FOR HELP, VOWING ATTACKS "...Hamas terrorists complained that the only power plant in Gaza would be forced to close without Israeli-supplied diesel fuel. The plant provides approximately 20 percent of the region's electricity." "Hamas' plea for Israeli assistance came on the heels of a promise Monday to continue to infiltrate and hit all crossings used to supply food and humanitarian supplies to Gaza residents and expressed their intent to escalate their attacks." (Arutz-7, 4/23.) The people of Gaza approve of terrorism against Israel. Foreign demands that Israel continue its effort to supply Gaza with power and food are primarily not humanitarian but part of the effort to enable the Arabs to destroy Israel. Otherwise, there would be some humanitarian concern for Israel, which is not the aggressor and whose people are not imbued with religious hatred. U.S. & ISRAEL ASSESS SYRIA The Press Secretary said that Syria had been developing nuclear weapons and "The Syrian regime supports terrorism, takes action that destabilizes Lebanon, allows the transit of some foreign fighters into Iraq, and represses its own people." The Olmert regime, however, is offering Syria strategic Israeli territory in return for a peace treaty that such a country is not likely to honor (IMRA, 4/24). BUSH ASSESSES ABBAS Pres. Bush called Abbas a man who rejects the idea of violence to achieve his goals. That is false. Abbas endorses violence, but doesn't want an all-out war that he would lose now, when he may get much by diplomacy (IMRA, 4/24). He said that if he can't negotiate all he wants, he would resume the armed struggle. Meanwhile, he lets terrorists operate from the P.A., and praises them. Ask Bush why he and Rice lie about Abbas. OLMERT REGIME LEARNED SOMETHING? The Olmert regime rejected Hamas' offer of a ceasefire, because it would enable Hamas to arm unhindered (IMRA, 4/25). Earlier, the regime had approved such ceasefires and seemed to be accepting another. Is this the first sign that Olmert is capable of learning? "CARTER'S FOLLY" That's the title of Hillel Halkin's piece that, I think, hits all the right points. Let's give Mr. Halkin credit, after the score of articles I have written chiding his appeasement-mindedness. Although I had commented about Jimmie Carter's trip to terrorists, I dismissed the trip before expressing the depth of some of the points Halkin makes. Carter should not automatically be castigated for having talked with our enemies, but (what he always does) "for pandering to them, swallowing their lies, and allowing oneself to be used by them." Thus Carter returned from meeting with Hamas leader Mashaal, falsely claiming to have wrung major concessions that can become the basis for negotiations for making peace with Israel. One concession is that Hamas would agree to any agreement between Israel and Abbas, if approved by a P.A. referendum or an elected government and if it med Hamas' conditions. Yet this is nothing new. The conditions include Israeli retreat to the armistice line that would divide Jerusalem and Israeli acceptance of millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees. Extensive withdrawal would dislocate hundreds of thousands of Jews. If that wouldn't destroy Israel, the influx of millions of hostile Arabs would. What would Hamas offer Israel? A mere truce, followed by a continuation of war (for which the truce period would give Hamas time to prepare and invite in a big army). Hamas still would not recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state. What would such an arrangement accomplish? Give Hamas time to prepare for war. Those are not concessions that Carter has elicited. He thinks he is a great negotiator. He has been fooled, again. He has endorsed the jihadist program. The mischief Carter came back with is spreading among people who also don't realize that Hamas, having an exclusivist ideology that it deems sacred, will not make peace with a sovereign Jewish people. Significant negotiations with it are pointless (NY Sun, 4/29). Mashaal called the proposed truce a tactic in the struggle (Arutz-7, 4/27). That proves that he deceived Carter. 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 |
|
WHO CARES ABOUT ISRAEL, ANYWAY?
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 7, 2008. |
|
This was posted by Freedom Fighter on Joshua Pundit website
|
|
So, it's Israel's 60th birthday..... It seems to be fashionable this time for lots of people to wonder in print and aloud whether the country can survive...or if it should. Especially in view of a very well funded effort to rewrite history and to delegitimize the US/Israel relationship. To hear some of these people, Israel is at the heart of the problems we have with the Muslim world, and things would be just fine if we became more 'balanced'...or translated, became more pro-Arab and curtailed our support for those pushy, stubborn Jews. To hear others, Israel can't survive unless it pushes itself into an indefensible enclave and makes even more real estate in the Middle East Jew free, and perhaps not even then. They've forgotten that Israel has beaten much greater odds in the past. Nor do they see the grim irony in encouraging a retreat to borders 'for peace' that would make the destruction of the country and its people far more likely. But let's take an objective look. So what? What difference does what happens to Israel make to us here in America? Why should we care? Why is what happens to Israel important to the US? If Israel somehow ceased to exist, would it matter? Very legitimate questions, especially as many people are unaware of the real answers. To get there, let's put aside any of those slooshy considerations of fairness, justice, religion or humanitarian principles...and go for the cold, hard, self-serving realpolitik reasons why what happens to Israel is important to the US.
FIRST, HISTORY SHOWS THAT THE JEWS ARE THE EARLY WARNING SIGNAL of history for the West, and the atrocities visited on them first get visited on the non-Jewish world later. Hitler is one example, Islamic terrorism and jihad is another. The tactics used to bomb New York, London, Mumbai, Bali and Madrid were perfected in Israel. So was the disinformation and propaganda to rationalize such actions, now used against the US and Europe as well as Israel. What happened in Israel was and is a precursor as to what we can expect here. Israel was merely a front for jihad, not the cause of it.
SECOND, ISRAEL IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT AND RELIABLE ALLIES THE US HAS, and one of the few allies we have with a significant military and intel quotient. Israel's destruction would considerably weaken the US, especially in the Middle East and cost us strategically. Here are a few examples of how that has worked to our advantage: * Israel singlehandedly pushed the Soviets out of the Middle East during the Cold War and provided America a first hand look at the latest Soviet weapons and technology...without the cost of a single American soldier. And that's without factoring in the value of the intel, technology and strategic benefits the US receives from our alliance with Israel. Based on this, a good case could be made that aid to Israel, certainly the military portion, should be part of the United States defense budget and hardly considered 'foreign aid' at all.
THIRD, ISRAEL IS AN IMPORTANT TRADING PARTNER OF THE US and a leader in biotechnology, agriculture, solar, medical technology, computer science, irrigation technology, synthetic energy, and a number of other fields. And the 'value added' component to that trade far outweighs the actual dollar value.
Many American corporations like Intel and Hewlett Packard have facilities there to take advantage of the talent coming out of TAU and the Technion. The cell phone and cell communications technology, for example, were perfected in Israel.
FOURTH, IF ISRAEL DISAPPEARED, AMERICA'S PROBLEMS WITH THE MUSLIM WORLD wouldn't change one iota and in fact would get much worse. A casual examination of history shows the fallacy of abandoning a loyal, powerful ally to appease an enemy, especially during wartime. Nor would it ive been very different. mprove relations between the US and the Arab world. The proof of that is to examine the US relationship with the Arab World before we became one of Israel's main allies..after the '67 Six-Day War. That's because real alliances come from shared values..something we don't have in common with a large chunk of the Islamic world. Getting rid of what the Muslims world refers to as the Little Satan would just weaken the Big Satan, America and deprive us of one of our strongest and most valuable allies. And a victory over the hated Jews would only embolden America's enemies. Take Israel out of the equation and the Saudis would still be exporting jihad to the West, Iran and its allies would still be a threat to the US and jihadis would still target America and Americans. And like Israel, it would be simply because of who we are, not because of anything we've done. So yes, ordinary Americans should DEFINITELY care what happens to Israel. From a strictly pragmatic, self-interested point of view if nothing else...because it's been a good relationship for both parties. And wishing our ally a happy 60th is certainly a good and proper thing to do. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
THE 60TH BIRTHDAY OF OUR COUNTRY IS SPREADING ITS WINGS
Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 7, 2008. |
|
Friends, Here is a translation of a message I received from the Carmey Hayil in the Galilee. It says everything. Every blessing. Mazal tov to us all. Naomi |
|
What does one do on a birthday? Search one's soul, consider what was, and how to go forward. But also give thanks. Thanks for what we have achieved, for those things we have gone through for the better and the best. Thanks for the new strength that flows from our students, our soldiers, our young people. Thanks for our land –– our gorgeous, wonderful, wide-open land –– land of the gazelle, the land bequeathed to us, and which we have the great merit to live upon and defend. Thanks for a nation of people who know how to laugh and to endure, and to care –– so much! Who know how to band together as one when they absolutely must. Thanks for our youth –– so marvelous and dedicated, who know the secret of sacrifice and messirat nefesh, even without being taught. Thanks to G-d for giving us another chance to be a Jewish nation
in our own land. We will try this time not to fail Him ...
TO GIVE A PRESENT TO OUR COUNTRY If we could, we would give you a present: A tree under whose shade we rested. A new trail we found right near the house. Vistas one sees only after a long, hard climb up a mountaintop. A home and a family. The smile of children. We would give you a letter, the letter one writes when one is in love, the letter one tears to shreds when one is angry, the letter one pieces together again and again with tears and paste and continues to write. A look ahead, a look behind A little country, only 60 years old. An ancient nation, two thousand and sixty years old. A collection of prayers that became a reality: the prayer of a slave in Egypt. The prayer of Rabbi Akiva. The prayer of the Jew by the waters of Babylon. The prayer of a Jew in Europe during the Holocaust. The prayer of a boy on the deck of the Exodus. Prayers that continue until today, and will go on tomorrow, and the next day and forever. A prayer that we shall be worthy, that we will withstand the trials, that we shall become the last link in the chain that connects the thunder of Mount Sinai to the days of the final tikkun of a nation living in its old-new land. With love and hope,
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. |
|
REFLECTIONS ON ISRAEL'S INDEPENDENCE DAY
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, May 7, 2008. |
|
"For 2000 years Jews would have gladly exchanged the horrors of exile for the current State of Israel. They would have given anything for a Jewish government headed by Olmert and for a Jewish army –– despite the Expulsion. After the Holocaust, how can anyone deny the tremendous gift that we have received from the Creator –– the gift of the State of Israel?" There is certainly much truth to this claim, voiced primarily by the "state supremacy" side of Religious Zionism. On the surface, it is a decisive assertion, portraying those who disagree as ungrateful apostates. There is something demagogic, though, in this claim. Reality is measured not only by position on the time line, but also by direction. A baby's first hesitant steps are generally greeted with delight –– but not if he is heading toward an abyss. The inability of Religious Zionism to fight for its most valued principles does not necessarily prove singular love for the state; it shows sectarianism and the loss of its feeling of legitimacy in Israeli society. Is a prayer for Olmert the same as a prayer for the welfare of the state or the opposite? Does refusal to obey orders to destroy Jewish settlements destroy the army and the state or does it save them and delineate the borders beyond which the government cannot legitimately act? Experience from the Expulsion and its aftermath shows that the state-supremacist arguments against all conscientious objection deprived the state of the vital checks and balances that the faith-based public should have given it. The claim that the state is a holy tool –– no matter what –– leads to the extreme notion that the regime is also holy. A holy regime, of course, cannot –– by definition –– issue an illegal order. When the state began to strip itself of its basic Jewish values, when, during the Expulsion period, it sank into nihilism on the one hand and fascism on the other (the state is above all else, refusal to obey a criminal order is more dangerous than carrying it out, the will of the majority is insignificant, etc.), it was time for Religious Zionism to step forward. The struggle against the Expulsion was not for Gush Katif alone. It was a struggle over the moral foundation of the State of Israel. It was a struggle to allow the IDF to fight its true enemies. And believe it or not –– it was a struggle for democracy. The state-supremacy theories that led to our defeat in the struggle for Gush Katif paved the way for the unraveling of the state. These theories directly led to the IDF's defeat one year later in Lebanon. The defeat in Gush Katif led to the widespread despondency that we are now experiencing. The public has tasted Israeli "democracy" and understands that it has no real control over its fate. The public feels that the state is imploding and is helpless to stop it from happening. The faith-based public that was at the forefront of the struggle against this process –– and ran away from the confrontation –– bears major responsibility for today's sorry situation. Is the State of Israel really the forerunner of our redemption? I believe that it is. The dramatic historical events of the last sixty years cannot be ignored or dismissed. To do so would be to defy logic and to stifle the firm belief in redemption planted in our hearts. But on the other hand we must understand that what we are experiencing is the path to redemption –– not the redemption, itself. This can be compared to a prisoner who discovers a secret tunnel leading outside the prison walls. As soon as he enters the tunnel, he is at the beginning of the path leading to redemption. The prison guards cannot beat him and he is now responsible for himself and his fate. Not only that, but the farther that he proceeds through the tunnel, the more he distances himself from his previous state and nears freedom. But suddenly he discovers that the exit from the tunnel is sealed off and that its ceiling is about to collapse. Is the tunnel still the path to his redemption? Only if he manages to overcome the obstacles and exit the tunnel. We need the maturity to understand that overcoming our present obstacles depends on us. We can no longer stand at the blocked exit from the tunnel and cry, as we did at Gush Katif. We must take responsibility and open the exit of the tunnel for the entire nation. Exaggerated celebrations and flag waving at the blocked exit point to a lack of connection to reality –– not to extreme faith. I will say the Hallel prayer on Independence Day. But I will do it quietly. Maybe I will even wave a flag –– a small one. True, they defiled the flag at Gush Katif –– but we will purify it. We must tirelessly progress toward the steering wheel of our floundering national ship. We are not guests on board. It is our ship and we cannot abandon it. We may not know exactly how to get to shore, but we will know as we get closer, with G-d's help. Wishing you a happy Independence Day –– as happy as possible. Moshe Feiglin Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell) |
|
A BROOM AND A FLAG –– THANK G-D FOR THE STATE OF ISRAEL
Posted by Michael Freund, May 7, 2008. |
|
As Israel celebrates its 60th birthday, many Jews seem unsure of how to react –– whether to celebrate, despair or some combination of the two. But as I suggest in the column below from the Jerusalem Post, this uncertainty is rooted in a lack of historical perspective. For when we compare Israel at 60 with America at 60 (back in 1836), or recall what our people endured just six decades ago in Nazi Europe, it will help us to better appreciate and understand just what a miracle this country truly is. Comments and feedback may be sent to: letters@jpost.com or to me directly. Thanks, and Happy Yom HaAtzmaut (Israel Independence Day), Michael Freund |
|
I'm no psychiatrist, but as Israel turns 60, we seem to have developed an acute case of schizophrenia. You can almost sense the contradictory impulses at work, as many Israelis wonder whether to celebrate the country's numerous accomplishments, bemoan its agonizing disappointments or some combination of the two. Whether it is the various corruption scandals involving political figures, the latest child-abuse cases that rocked the nation a few weeks ago, or the ongoing assault on traditional Jewish and Zionist values, there would seem to be plenty of reasons to scratch our heads and speculate about where this country is headed. Add to that the continuing Palestinian rocket attacks against Sderot, the growing threat of a nuclear Iran, and the Hizbullah arms buildup north of the border, and it is no wonder that some of our fellow citizens would prefer to hide under the nearest bed until the storm passes. Quite frankly, it seems hard to blame them. But then there is the other side of the coin. Look at Israel's various triumphs in fields ranging from computer science to agriculture, note the optimists. Our ability to survive in a hostile neighborhood is an achievement in and of itself, they say. They, too, have a point. So which is it, then, on Israel's 60th Independence Day? Doom or delight, glee or gloom? Or perhaps some mixture of the two? The very question, I think, is remarkable, if only because it betrays an utter lack of appreciation for historical context and perspective. After all, in the life of an individual, a span of sixty years may represent the bulk of his productive days on this earth. But for a nation, it is an infinitesimal period, a mere episode or interlude in the great sweep of history. Nonetheless, look at what we the Jewish people have managed to achieve here since 1948. We've brought millions of immigrants from around the world, made the desert bloom, and built a free country amid a sea of tyranny, all in less time than it took to construct the Leaning Tower of Pisa (177 years), the Great Wall of China (centuries), or even Washington's National Cathedral (83 years). Not bad, don't you think?
CONSIDER, FOR example, where today's great superpower, the United States, was in the 60th year of its existence. Back in 1836, large swathes of the North American continent remained untamed, as Arkansas became just the 25th state to join the Union. Americans living on the periphery faced frequent Indian attacks and great uncertainty. In May of that year, Comanche Indians slaughtered five members of a family in Texas and then proceeded to abduct their 9-year old daughter, who was later forced to marry the tribal chief. Twenty-five years would pass before she was rescued from her captors. And then, of course, there was the Battle of the Alamo, where Mexican troops massacred hundreds of valiant American defenders in Texas, including folk hero Davey Crockett. Incidents such as these must surely have sent a chill down the spine of every citizen. Even America's democracy was struggling at the time, as the dispute over slavery continued to fester. In 1836, the House of Representatives went so far as to pass the infamous "gag rule" as a means of suppressing debate on this contentious issue. Nonetheless, despite the great challenges which America faced at the time, that did not dampen their sense of optimism or detract from their appreciation for what had been accomplished in the period since the nation's founding. Indeed, in his annual address to Congress in December of that year, President Andrew Jackson started off by saying, "it is a source of the most heartfelt satisfaction to be able to congratulate you on the high state of prosperity which our beloved country has attained." "With no causes at home or abroad to lessen the confidence with which we look to the future," he continued, "the general condition of our affairs may well excite our national pride." This, too, must be our approach as we mark Israel's 60th annual Independence Day, and as we face the future. Sure, there are still plenty of swamps left to be drained in this country. Swamps of Jewish ignorance, swamps of poverty and unemployment, swamps of callousness and despair. But that should never detract from our appreciation of the fact that we finally have a Jewish state, even with all of its faults. A moving story about the great Hassidic Rebbe of Sadigora, Rabbi Avraham Yaakov Friedman of blessed memory, bears this out. When the Nazis took over Vienna, where the rebbe lived, they sought to humiliate the Jews by forcing the great sage to sweep the streets of the city to the taunts and laughter of Austrian onlookers. The German soldiers handed the rebbe a broom, but while he swept, he recited a silent prayer: "Master of the Universe, may I yet merit to sweep the streets of the Land of Israel." The Nazis then gave him a large flag and forced him to hoist it over a tall building. This time the rebbe intoned, "Master of the Universe, may I yet merit to raise the flag of Israel over a high place in the Land of Israel." After surviving the war, the rebbe was determined to fulfill his vision. And so, each year, on Independence Day, he would rise early, take a broom in hand, and proceed to sweep the streets of Tel Aviv in honor of G-d's answer to his prayer. And then the elderly rabbi would ascend to the top of Tel Aviv's Great Synagogue, and raise a large Israeli flag proudly for all to see. So the next time you find yourself down in the dumps, wondering about this country and its leadership –– think back to the Rebbe of Sadigora, with a broom in one hand, a flag in the other, and a heart full of gratitude to G-d for the miracle that is the modern State of Israel. Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu.
This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at
|
|
REPORT: OLMERT GIVING AWAY 89% OF JUDEA, SAMARIA
Posted by Avodah, May 7, 2008. |
|
This is a news item from Arutz-Sheva
|
|
Palestinian Authority at least 89 percent of Judea and Samaria, according to Jordanian journalist Hamada Farana. Farana, who is considered an expert on Palestinian Authority affairs, said Israel and the PA are conducting serious talks over the border of a PA state in Judea and Samaria. However, Farana said, the two sides face serious disagreements. While Olmert has offered 89 percent of Judea and Samaria, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas insists that Israel hand over at least 98.5 percent of the area. Abbas's aides have warned that Abbas will take unspecified "dramatic steps" if his demands are not met. A senior PA official quoted Wednesday in Al-Quds Al-Arabi said that if Israel and the PA did not reach an agreement by the end of 2008, Abbas would announce the end of negotiations with Israel. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
WHY I AM A ZIONIST
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, May 7, 2008. |
|
Dear friends, The miracle called ISRAEL is 60 years young today. Here is a wonderful article representative of the feelings of the vast majority of Israelis.
It's by Gil Troy and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University and the author of Why I Am A Zionist: Israel, Jewish Identity and the Challenges of Today. This is an updated version of an essay he first wrote for Independence Day in 2001. This is what energizes and motivates us, despite our enemies. Here is what energizes and motivates us to continue the miracle for many generations to come. HAPPY ANNIVERSARY. Your Truth Provider, Yuval. |
|
Today, too many friends and foes define Israel, and Zionism, by the Arab world's hostility. Doing so misses Israel's everyday miracles, the millions who live and learn, laugh and play, in the Middle East's only functional democracy. Doing so ignores the achievements of Zionism, a gutsy, visionary movement which rescued a shattered people by reuniting a scattered people. Doing so neglects the transformative potential of Zionism, which could inspire new generations of Israeli and Diaspora Jews to find personal redemption by redeeming their old-new communal homeland. Tragically, Zionism is embattled. Arabs have demonized Zionism as the modern bogeyman, and many have clumped Zionists, along with Americans and most Westerners, as the Great Satans. In Israel, trendy post-Zionists denigrate the state which showers them with privilege, while in the Diaspora a few Jewish anti-Zionists loudly curry favor with the Jewish state's enemies. Jews should reaffirm their faith in Zionism; the world should appreciate its many accomplishments. Zionists must not allow their enemies to define and slander the movement. No nationalism is pure, no movement is perfect, no state ideal. But today Zionism remains legitimate, inspiring, and relevant, to me and most Jews. Zionism offers an identity anchor in a world of dizzying choices –– and a road map toward national renewal. A century ago, Zionism revived pride in the label "Jew"; today, Jews must revive pride in the label "Zionist." I AM a Zionist because I am a Jew –– and without recognizing Judaism's national component, I cannot explain its unique character. Judaism is a world religion bound to one homeland, shaping a people whose holy days revolve around the Israeli agricultural calendar, ritualize theological concepts, and relive historic events. Only in Israel can a Jew fully live in Jewish space and by Jewish time. I am a Zionist because I share the past, present, and future of my people, the Jewish people. Our nerve endings are uniquely intertwined. When one of us suffers, we share the pain; when many of us advance communal ideals together, we –– and the world –– benefit. I am a Zionist because I know my history –– and after being exiled from their homeland more than 1900 years ago, the defenseless, wandering Jews endured repeated persecutions from both Christians and Muslims –– centuries before this anti-Semitism culminated in the Holocaust. I am a Zionist because Jews never forgot their ties to their homeland, their love for Jerusalem. Even when they established autonomous self-governing structures in Babylonia, in Europe, in North Africa, these governments in exile yearned to return home. I am a Zionist because those ideological ties nourished and were nurtured by the plucky minority of Jews who remained in the land of Israel, sustaining continued Jewish settlement throughout the exile. I am a Zionist because in modern times the promise of Emancipation and Enlightenment was a double-edged sword, often only offering acceptance for Jews in Europe after they assimilated, yet never fully respecting them if they did assimilate. I am a Zionist because in establishing the sovereign state of Israel in 1948, the Jews reconstituted in modern Western terms a relationship with a land they had been attached to for millennia, since Biblical times –– just as Japan or India established modern states from ancient civilizations. I am a Zionist because in building that state, the Jews returned to history and embraced normalcy, a condition which gave them power, with all its benefits, responsibilities, and dilemmas. I am a Zionist because I celebrate Israel's existence. Like any thoughtful patriot, though I might criticize particular government policies I dislike –– I do not delegitimize the state itself. I am a Zionist because I live in the real world of nation-states. I see that Zionism is no more or less "racist" than any other nationalism, be it American, Armenian, Canadian, or Czech. All express the eternal human need for some internal cohesion, some tribalism, some solidarity among some historic grouping of individuals, and not others. I am a Zionist because we have learned from North American multiculturalism that pride in one's heritage as a Jew, an Italian, a Greek, can provide essential, time-tested anchors in our me-me-me, my-my-my, more-more-more, now-now-now world. I am a Zionist because in Israel we have learned that a country without a vision is like a person without a soul; a big-tent Zionism can inculcate values, fight corruption, reaffirm national unity, and restore a sense of mission. I AM a Zionist because in our world of post-modern multi-dimensional identities, we don't have to be "either-ors", we can be "ands and buts" –– a Zionist AND an American patriot; a secular Jew BUT also a Zionist. Just as some people living in Israel reject Zionism, meaning Jewish nationalism, Jews in the Diaspora can embrace it. To those who ask "How can you be a Zionist if you don't make aliya," I reply, "How will anyone make aliya without first being a Zionist?" I am a Zionist because I am a democrat. The marriage of democracy and nationalism has produced great liberal democracies, including Israel, despite its democracy being tested under severe conditions. I am a Zionist because I am an idealist. Just as a century ago, the notion of a viable, independent, sovereign Jewish state was an impossible dream –– yet worth fighting for –– so, too, today, the notion of a thriving, independent, sovereign Jewish state living in true peace with its neighbors appears to be an impossible dream –– yet worth seeking. I am a Zionist because I am a romantic. The story of the Jews rebuilding their homeland, reclaiming the desert, renewing themselves, was one of the 20th century's greatest epics, just as the narrative of the Jews maintaining their homeland, reconciling with the Arab world, renewing themselves, and serving as a light to others, a model nation state, could be one of this century's marvels. Yes, it sometimes sounds far-fetched. But, as Theodor Herzl, the father of modern Zionism, said in an idle boast that has become a cliche: "If you will it, it is no dream." Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL: AND TODAY?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 6, 2008. |
|
Late last night I consulted with my experts regarding the situation. Key among them is an Arabic-speaking Israeli journalist who is in contact with the Palestinians. "You will notice," he observed, "that all of the news about the progress being made is coming from Olmert's office. You can relax. They can't agree on anything." And indeed, my contact was totally on the mark. For today it is being reported by Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post that the Palestinians are complaining that all they're being offered in Judea and Samaria is a "mini-state of cantons," which was "completely unacceptable" and "provocative." What is more, they say the US Administration is supporting the Israeli position. Abu Toameh cites an unidentified PA official: "Today, it's clear to us that Israel has no intention of withdrawing from all the territories that were occupied in 1967. "If the Israelis and Americans think that they will ever find a Palestinian leader who would accept less than the 1967 borders (sic), they are living under an illusion." ~~~~~~~~~~ What is most significant is this: The PA officials alluded to maps presented in negotiations by Israel in the past few weeks. "We have made it clear to both the Israelis and Americans that they should throw away these maps. No Palestinian will ever agree to the presence of settlements or Israeli soldiers in the West Bank." But wait! Didn't Olmert say great progress had been made yesterday? Not according to the PA officials, who said they were unaware of significant changes in Israel's negotiating position and indicated that it was "premature" to speak of progress in the negotiations. And so Olmert's spin has been exposed. It seems he made no significant further concessions yesterday. ~~~~~~~~~~ And what of the American position, which seems frequently contradictory? According to my journalist source, Bush had told Abbas that he supported the promises implicit in his letter to Sharon in 2004 regarding retention of some major settlement blocs, and that he intended to express this publicly when he came here to celebrate our 60th. This was indeed enough to send Abbas into deep depression. I cannot explain why he smiled in yesterday's photo, after meeting with Olmert. Could be, as has been suggested, that he knows he's finished if Olmert's government goes, and so he wanted to help Olmert a bit with his spin. Could be a lot of things, including (as has also been suggested) a promise that Bush wouldn't go public with his position, or because he voiced a host of demands to Olmert who made vague promises to consider them. More importantly, the question is asked how this computes with regard to Rice's statements, which are totally hard line. (As are the statements of others such as National Security Advisor Steven Hadley.) My response to this is that there is not one coherent US policy and that Rice and her cohorts are pushing their own agenda. Bush, who seemed at first to truly "get it," has allowed himself to be led by Rice, as he has weakened politically. But on this issue, just possibly, he will come through. ~~~~~~~~~~ Rice, it should be noted, is sending her people out into Palestinian areas to see how the locals are doing with regard to freedom of movement on the roads and the ability to transport their goods. (She failed to mention also weapons.) She isn't sure that Israel has done enough yet, and wants first hand evidence of improvement in the Palestinians' quality of life. I would bet my life that she's not sending her people into neighboring Jewish communities to see how their quality of life is affected by the fact that they may now get their heads blown off. ~~~~~~~~~~ She's pushing hard for a "memo of understanding" when Bush comes next week. According to Ha'aretz, Israeli officials who have met with her "said their impression is that she is determined to produce an achievement at almost any price..." May she fall flat on her face. ~~~~~~~~~~ This still leaves the question of how much damage Olmert can do until the situation arises in which he is no longer in power. And this is a question that is fraught with complexities and technicalities. In a worst case scenario –– which seems exceedingly unlikely –– if Olmert were to make concessions to Abbas that allowed them to reach an agreement before Bush arrived, it would likely be a verbal agreement as time to draft a proper written one does not exist. Verbal agreements carry no legal weight. However, this does not mean there would be no damage to us. For each time a negotiation with the Palestinians is broken off, they resume by demanding to pick up where it left off, and our negotiators are mostly without the courage to refuse to do that. As far as a written agreement goes, the Israeli prime minister has considerable (indeed regrettable) latitude. He would be expected to bring an agreement to his government (i.e., the Cabinet). But while it is traditional to bring it to the Knesset, he is not bound to do so and what he signs becomes law without Knesset approval. There are currently efforts being made to change the law in this regard, so that it would more closely resemble US law, which calls for Senate ratification of treaties. At present it is my understanding that Netanyahu's recent threat to refuse to abide by any deal with the PA made by Olmert is meaningless if Olmert has signed a paper, but would be possible, were Netanyahu truly to find the stamina, if promises were verbal only. ~~~~~~~~~~ Whatever the law, however, there is enormous unrest within the government about the fact that Olmert is playing the negotiation cards so close to the chest. Members of his own Kadima party are incensed that he has not shared with them what is transpiring in the negotiations. It seems a bit unlikely that they would give him carte blanche on an agreement on which they had not been consulted. Members of the opposition, meanwhile, are protesting that Olmert has no right to negotiate at all when his authority and his future as the head of state are under a cloud. ~~~~~~~~~~ That investigation seems to be progressing apace, and the police have indicated that it is not yet time to remove the gag on the media other than to say a foreign (American) citizen is to be questioned. They say they will fight a lifting of the blackout as this might damage the case. And still there is talk of a "significant development." One other legal point to be made: After the police have done their job in garnering whatever evidence exists (which is related to a period before Olmert became prime minister), it falls to Attorney General Mazuz to make the final decision regarding indictment. In theory, if he were eager to allow Olmert to continue with negotiations, he could, legally, decide not to indict. (This would be a true worst case scenario.) But this is considered to be an unlikely outcome if the evidence is as ponderous as rumors suggest –– the pressure on him to indict would be enormous. ~~~~~~~~~~ But it's time to move past all of this, as Yom HaZikaron –– Israeli Memorial Day –– starts this evening. Here the day is immediate and painful, as people remember families and friends who have fallen in defense of the nation. Since 1860, 22,437 have fallen in defense of the Land. I say without fear of contradiction that we have the finest defense force in the world. The stories of their selflessness and bravery are stunning. Time and time again they've won against odds that would have been thought impossible. I would say that Heaven was (and is) with them. Tomorrow at 11:00 AM, a siren will sound and we will stand silently in memory of those who have fallen. Then again at 8:00 PM another siren will sound and we will move into Yom Ha'atzmaut –– Independence Day, our 60th! Already preparations for this are beginning, and flags are hung all over. How splendid to see them waving proudly in the breeze today. More on this tomorrow. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
FUNDING ISRAEL'S DETRACTORS
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, May 6, 2008. |
|
In the 60 years of Israeli independence, relations with Europe have gone through phases of cooperation as well as conflict. Some of the recent friction results from hidden European Union funding for anti-Israel "civil society organizations." While supposedly promoting peace and coexistence, these groups often preach division and confrontation. The secrecy of the NGO funding process also stands in sharp contrast to the EU's pious claims of transparency and accountability. There is no central database on NGO funding and many EU officials contacted proved unwilling or unable to provide any information. Among the recipients are a number of Israeli political groups that focus on allegations of human rights abuses, such as Machsom Watch and B'tselem. They diligently take down every Palestinian complaint at face value and write inflammable reports castigating Israel as the aggressor. They do so by leaving out essential context, such as the constant Palestinian terror attacks that prompt the criticized Israeli policies, including road blocks and incursions, in the first place. Even more radical are Israeli Arab NGOs, such as Adalah, Mossawa, the Arab Association for Human Rights (HRA), and HaMoked. Their titles and mission statements use the language of human rights and peace and they receive EU money in this guise. But actually they do the opposite. These groups poison any reasonable dialogue by demonizing Israel, for example by drawing parallels to the apartheid regime. Their advocacy for a single state, where Jews would quickly become a minority, is just another way of calling for the end of Israel as a Jewish state. The EU was also one of the main funders of the infamous NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban conference. Designed to fight racism, it turned into one of the most despicable displays of modern anti-Semitism. The Forum accused Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide, and called for "a policy of complete and total isolation of Israel as an apartheid state" through boycotts, divestment and sanctions. After leading the Forum, the Palestinian NGO Network became the primary sponsor of the academic boycott and divestment campaigns against Israel. Under the guise of promoting peace and understanding, the EU thus indirectly funds campaigns to ban Israeli academics from international conferences. In justifying support for groups which oppose the EU's own policies, officials claim that their funding is narrowly confined to specific projects that supposedly don't contradict EU positions. But given the fact that money is fungible, this is a rather weak excuse. Apart from funding Israel's critics, the EU is also surreptitiously trying to manipulate the Israeli democratic process. The EU's Partnership for Peace program, with an annual budget of over €8 million, lists a number of mysterious recipients, such as the H.L. Education for Peace Ltd. This organization has no Internet site, and a check at the Israeli government registry for non-profit organizations failed to turn up any trace of this group. Our research found that H.L. Education for Peace was a cover for the Geneva Initiative –– a controversial attempt to bypass the Israeli government and negotiate a private peace agreement between former (left-wing) Israeli officials and Fatah members. Furtively funded by the EU, this NGO bombards Israelis with exhortations to attend rallies and takes out expensive newspaper ads extolling the virtues of the initiative, while attacking the government's policies. It is hard to imagine the EU interfering in such blatant ways in the political process of any other democratic country. Among the numerous and highly confusing EU funding frameworks for NGOs claiming to promote democracy and peace, the European Commission's Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid (DG ECHO) is both the wealthiest and the most secretive. ECHO's 2006 budget was approximately €700 million, of which over €80 million was allocated to the West Bank and Gaza, including an unspecified amount for NGOs. As elsewhere, there is no public record of which NGOs receive the funds, the projects for which they are allocated, or the evaluation process, if any. However, many recipients advertise the fact that they receive EU support, thereby increasing legitimacy and visibility. In this way, we uncovered details of funding for groups such as Medical Aid for Palestinians, which received over €1 million in 2004-2006. Its full-page ad published in The Times in January proclaims: "After two years of sanctions, the cutting-off of fuel supplies, repeated military incursions and the closure of its borders, Gaza is in the grip of a humanitarian crisis." There is no mention of terror attacks, corruption, or Hamas. With the Durban review conference and another round of vitriolic NGO-led attacks against Israel scheduled for 2009, Jerusalem is watching for a change in European policy. Canada, for example, already said that it won't participate in Durban II because it's likely to become another anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli hate fest. Ottawa has also barred government funding for NGOs participating in the conference. Both Canada and the U.S. practice full transparency by providing details for their NGO funding. They have strict guidelines designed to prevent grant recipients from using the money for hostile campaigning instead for humanitarian projects. The EU could do worse than follow this example.
Mr. Steinberg is executive director of NGO Monitor and chairman of the Political Studies Department at Bar Ilan University.
This article appeared today in the Wall Street Journal Online
|
| NEXT YEAR IN JERUSALEM! Posted by Gennadiy Faybyshenko, May 6, 2008. |
|
This year I attended my synagogue's seder together with people mostly my age. The seder went, accordingly, "in order," and at the end we sang the traditional song "Next year in Jerusalem." When a gentile, taking this literally, questioned the specific "relocation plans," a Jew replied that it's only a saying, without really meaning it. This year seemed no different. The religious Jews chatted about their lives in the States and how it's great to be a Jew here. Please don't get me wrong. The United States is the best, most democratic country in the world, the country where dreams become realities, but for a gentile. A Jew, however, belongs in the Land of Israel; he is obligated to live there. When G-d took us out of Egypt, He did not transport us to America, Russia, Canada or Spain. He commanded us to settle the Land He gave to our forefathers. That is the true holiday of Passover, for us to be a free nation on our Land, the Land of Zion and Jerusalem. Even though many Jews feel free simply by celebrating Passover, in reality they are in a deep Galut, exile. The rabbis give inspirational speeches about bondage, freedom and redemption. The question is, are they spiritually ready to reach that level? Suppose Messiah were to come today and ask the Jews to follow him to the Holy Land. After all, that's what all religious and many secular Jews say at Passover –– to Jerusalem, speedily. Do we really think that Jews would jump and follow Messiah to redemption, or would they continue to stay in the Galut and assimilate? The question sounds so simple. And of course every Jew would immediately answer in the affirmative. Will he do that in practice? Would a Jew actually follow a Messiah? Ask a Jew to think on this one, is he ready to drop everything and go to a distant land where he has no idea what the future would hold for him? That question was asked and answered more than three and a half thousand years ago. Jacob with his family descended to Egypt due to famine in the Holy Land. At that time Egypt was a land of plenty, a place for opportunities to be realized, and a land to work and enjoy its produce. And so the Jews stayed there, reaping the benefits. However, G-d, blessed be He, does not want His people to stay in Galut because He chose His people for a special mission in this world, and His people belong in only one place, Eretz Yisrael. And whenever a Jew starts to get too comfortable in a foreign country, G-d will show the Jew all the misery he can experience, no matter how gracious He would be to the local gentiles. In Egypt, a Jew was loyal to his traditions. A Jew would never marry outside his faith, had Jewish names only, from generation to generation, was very kind and generous to his fellow Jews and did not commit incest or other iniquities. Then G-d decided to redeem His people from exile, and sent a messenger, Moses, to bring His people back to Israel. The ten plagues hit Egypt so hard that Pharaoh had no choice but to let the Jews go. All Jews celebrated their first Passover where they were asked to take the blood of a lamb (sacred to the Egyptians) and placed that blood on their doors and roasted the lamb openly. Each family had their first seder and proclaimed, this year in Jerusalem. Really? When it was time to go, all of a sudden some Jews took pause. Even though Jews were slaves, they had comfort, their food was always ready, Egyptians always provided for them, and they had homes to live in, with other basic necessities. A Jew had a lot of questions to ask himself: Were will he go? Follow Moses to where, a place that is so far away and desolate? What about food and water? He can easily starve in the desert. He has a home in Egypt and now he has to go and start his life again? What would he do in Israel? How to make a living? In Egypt, at least he had a steady albeit horrible job. In Israel he would have to start all over, change his profession, built new communities from scratch. Would he survive over there? Besides, other nations that are not very neighborly live there. So this means constant wars, always on guard against being killed, enemies surrounding on all sides, not like in Egypt, a stable country with good military, indeed the most dominant and economically profitable country in the world at that time. Those questions were very serious ones, they were not a joke, and we are talking about real life issues, not hypothetical. We are talking about a survival. Platitudes about idealism and nationalism are all well and good, but what about basic human needs? The time came for Jews to follow Moses and make a decision. The sages say that most Jews decided to stay in Egypt because it was not realistic to go somewhere completely unknown. Some sages say that only 20% of Jews went with Moses, some say that only 2% and some even say that only 0.2%. Let's err on the side of optimism and stick with 20%. That is a reality, because people living in comfort are not looking for challenges –– life is already complicated. We might ask ourselves the same question, if Messiah would come today, would we drop everything and blindly follow him? After all, we dance and scream "Next Year in Jerusalem!" Would we drop our jobs, our friends, our habits? Would we willingly go to a new country, learn a new language, build a new house and start a completely different life? To go to a country surrounded by hostile enemies, many of whom reside within our own borders-enemies sworn to our destruction? Are we to abandon America, the best country in the world, a country where dreams become reality, a stable country that has a strong military force, in favor of a faraway place with so much uncertainty? I can't tell you how many Jews would go when Messiah would show up. But I'm afraid that the story of the final exodus would be a repeat of the first. People naturally tend to stay where conditions are better. But a strong faith in G-d can take us anywhere. If you truly believe in G-d, you would not be afraid to go anywhere because G-d wants only the best for us. The bitter truth, as history attests, is that those who walk away from G-d, walk away from being Jewish. Those Jews that remained in Egypt assimilated, died out, and those who will not leave during the final redemption will die out as well. A Jew can truly actualize his Judaism only in the Land of Israel. So think deeply right now: Do you have faith that G-d will redeem you at the proper time? Besides, you study so much and claim to be an observant Jew. Well, G-d enables us to study so we can realize our potential at the proper moment. We observe so that finally, at the time of redemption, we can show that our studies were L'Shem Shemayim, for the sake of heaven. May we all be ready to drop everything we have, all that we've earned, and follow Messiah when he comes. I say with an open heart, G-d willing, please, next year in Jerusalem for sure. Amen. Gennadiy Faybyshenko is National Direct of Bnai Elim. Contact him by email at gennadiy1981@yahoo.com |
|
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH FROM 13 FORMER PRISONERS OF ZION
Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, May 6, 2008. |
|
Manhigut Yehudit hails the heroic Prisoners of Zion –– those Jews who spent years in the Soviet Gulags solely because they were Jewish. We salute them for their past, and we salute their current initiative to have Jonathan Pollard –– a current Prisoner of Zion –– released from his captivity. |
|
May 6, 2008... Dear Mr. President, We are a group of people who were Prisoners of Conscience in the USSR (Russian prisoners of Zion, Russian dissidents). Our principle of identifying with our brethren and with Israel, with justice, freedom and the battle against obvious and veiled anti-Semitism took a toll of many years of imprisonment in the Soviet Union. However, none of us even came close to the period of imprisonment of a quarter of a century as is taking place in your country in the case of Jonathan Pollard. We are referring to an ailing human being. If, God forbid, he passes away in prison, complex questions will remain unanswered that may damage the reputation and affect the conscience of America. Pollard functioned in a period when the evil Soviet empire of cruelty, espionage and world subversion was at its peak. Every clear-thinking person can ask himself: Is there any agent of this horrible and hostile power that remains in an American prison? We all know the answer is –– Nyet. Has anyone who operated against the USA during that period on behalf of any foreign intelligence service whatsoever been punished with such severity as Pollard? Again, we all know the answer is –– Nyet. Therefore, the question arises regarding the discrimination against Pollard. He exposed the ominous secrets of Iraq, not of the USA, in order to save a country friendly to America (the only one democratic, bona fide and reliable friend in the Middle East –– Israel). So why is he loathed more than any true enemy? Why is he treated in such a brutal manner? Why and for what reason is the earsplitting injustice? Is his Jewish origin or his devotion to Israel the cause of this treatment? Is there really equality before the Law in the United States of America or are there people of lesser value than others? You, Mr. President, have the power now to correct this injustice, but only as long as two flames remain: the flame of the life of Jonathan Pollard and the flame of your term of office. You have the opportunity to pardon Pollard and enter the history books as the one who removed this dark stain on the conscience of your country. This is an act of benevolence of the highest order, appropriate for the President of the world power, who supposedly stands for the struggle against world malice. We call upon you to respond in a positive manner to the call of the conscience of freedom-loving peoples everywhere. Sincerely yours, Ida Nudel
Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell) |
|
MY SOLUTION TO THE PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
Posted by Avodah, May 6, 2008. |
|
This was submitted by one of our members, John Wiggins. |
|
Hello my friends of Israel, I have a solution to the Palestinian conflict. All that I ask is that the Government of Israel hand me the controls of the Defense Department for one week. After one week if the missile strikes haven't stopped and after four weeks if the two soldiers aren't back in Israel, then I will turn back the controls to the Inepts –– heads that are now ruining the nation of Israel. I can't positively tell you there would be no retaliation but I would be willing to bet either my left arm or right one that there wouldn't be any. The first thing I would do is make a News Announcement to the world and to the Arabs that things have changed for the better for Israel. Next I would tell them as of the moment I started talking, all shipments to Gaza from Israel would stop. Permanently. Next, I would gather all Arab Israelis that have been a problem and banish them from all Israeli territory. Next I would gather the remaning Israeli Arabs and ask them to swear allegiance to Israel (again). After that, any Arab caught working against Israel in any way would have the choice of the firing squad or expulsion. I would then shut all entrances to Gaza and the West bank. All Arab cabinet members would be deported to any Arab city that would haave them. I would then give the order to the Air force that upon any missile being fired from the Gaza strip or anywhere else would lead to complete destruction of that neighborhood without any advance notice. I would have Prime Minister Olmert, Livni, Barrak, and other Governmental people in the Government that had anything to do with dividing up Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank, or giving up the Golan Heights, tried for treason and either sentenced to death or very long prison terms. Lastly, I would tell Condoleezza Rice not to make any more trips to Israel and tell George Bush the same thing. This would be a direct order, to forbid them to enter Israeli air space. As I said, I would announce all of these things first just so the Arabs and the United States would know where we stand. I would also remind the people of the world that Israel does have nuclear weapons and will use them in a heartbeat if it is necessary for the protection of the the Great Country of Israel. I would also open the Temple Mount to all Israelis to worship as they please or even to construct another temple there if they want. As for the Dome of the Rock, It could be removed by the Arabs if done so in a timely manner, or if not it would be blown to smithreens in a absolute certain amount of time. This sounds real crazy to people doesn't it? It would work. There'd be a lot of hollering and yelling and threatening but it would be to no avail. Also, as much as I love humankind I would not even consider the humanitarian problems with my actions. The Arabs have brought this upon themselves and they would pay for it with their blood not Israeli blood. There would be no negotiations. None-nada. This is a letter from a Patriot for Israel, from the United States. Whether you believe it or not "there are a lot of us" over here. Just give us a chance. Please! We can solve your little problem with the Arabs!!!!!!! John Wiggins Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
(NO) PEACE NOW
Posted by Joshua London, May 6, 2008. |
|
For 60 years Israel has triumphed against adversity and survived the continued onslaught of violence and hatred from its Arab neighbors. Yet now it is threatened by a basic refusal to learn from the past and an unwillingness to adapt to today's realities. Israel is in trouble. First, Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah party have failed to deliver on promises to Israel, to the West or to the Palestinian people, and so are perhaps not the best interlocutors for ongoing peace talks. Second, the aging framework of the peace process has not produced any sustained positive results. What have Abbas and Fatah accomplished? Since its inception in 1994, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has been ruled by Fatah, first under Yasser Arafat and now under Abbas. Abbas, the number two person in the PLO under Arafat, was a co-founder of the Fatah terrorist organization. Thus, he is partly responsible for decades of atrocities against innocent civilians, including the murder of 500 Israelis between 2000 and 2007. The Fatah movement's constitutional charter, similar to Hamas's founding document, still has 10 articles that call for Israel's destruction, approve use of terrorism against the country, oppose any political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and label Zionism as racism. Resolutions in both the U.S. House and Senate are now urging Abbas to rescind these articles. If actions speak louder than words, then the PA leadership has also failed to deliver on any of its signed commitments under all the various, and still binding, peace agreements. Abbas has yet to make real and sustained efforts to end terrorism, jail terrorists or confiscate their illegal weapons. More troubling, Abbas has done nothing about ending the incitement to hatred and murder against Jews and Americans that daily spews forth from PA institutions directly under his administrative and financial control: the PA's media, mosques, schools and youth camps. This 24/7 incitement has fomented an ideology of hate and a culture of violence, the focus of which is Israel, Jews in general, and the United States. This failure has radicalized the Palestinian populace, as demonstrated by the disturbing news images of Palestinians rejoicing on 9/11 and the habitual practice, often also caught on video, of Palestinians celebrating wildly every time a terrorist attack successfully kills Israeli civilians. Indeed, The New York Times reported on March 19th that the latest opinion polling data from the West Bank indicates that an overwhelming majority [84 percent] of Palestinians supported the attack on March 6 at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem, that 64 percent supported "the shooting of rockets on Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip and that [75 percent are] for the end of the peace negotiations." To Western journalists, Abbas speaks in moderate tones; however, to Arabic-speaking Muslim journalists he speaks more radically. In a February 28, 2008, interview in the Jordanian daily al-Dustur, for example, Abbas said: "At this present juncture, I am opposed to the armed struggle because we can't succeed in it, but maybe in the future things will be different." Abbas also bragged of his terrorist credentials: "We had the honor of leading the resistance and we taught resistance to everyone, including Hezbollah, who trained in our military camps." Until the Palestinians embrace a morally compelling leader who rejects violence someone who does not belong to a terrorist organization like the PLO, Fatah or Hamas, there will be little peace for the "peace process" to actually process. This situation has not stopped the United States from trying. The conceptual genesis of the peace process can be found in the "Rogers Plan" of December 9, 1969. Secretary of State William Rogers announced that, to maintain impartiality and fairness, the U.S. approach would be "to encourage the Arabs to accept a permanent peace based on a binding agreement and to urge the Israelis to withdraw from occupied territory." Politicians come and go, but the Department of State is eternal, and so the basics of the Rogers approach have permeated all subsequent administrations, from those of Nixon and Carter to George W. Bush. Instead of Bush's June 24, 2002, vision –– which called for the development of a viable, legitimate, moderate and responsible Palestinian leadership uncompromised by terror as a precondition for discussing Palestinian statehood –– we have the "Road Map" plan, which, as adapted by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for the Annapolis summit, is a tired re-working of Rogers' 1969 ideas. This "peace process" has been tested daily for decades by the misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance of the Palestinian Authority. The issues of international acceptance and legitimacy are no nearer to resolution than before, and the threats of violent Arab anti-Semitism and radical jihadism are greater than ever. Thanks to the peace process we now have a terrorist mini-state called Gaza right on Israel's border that attacks Israel daily, using Syrian and Iranian arms. We also have the peace process to thank for creating a chronically failing Palestinian Authority that, at terrific financial and human expense, is now little more than an unstable nexus of chaos, terror and hopelessness. Yes, Israel is in trouble. Joshua London is deputy director of government relations for the
Zionist Organization of America. Contact him at jlondon@zoa.org. This
article appeared as an Opinion piece in the May/June issue of
Moment Magazine
|
|
POLLARD –– THE MAN WHO KNOWS TOO MUCH
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, May 6, 2008. |
|
This was written by Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, Chief Rabbi of Bet El, and
translated by R. Blumberg of Machon Meir
|
|
Maybe somebody is ready to explain to me why Jonathan Pollard has been sitting in prison beyond any reasonable length of time? Why have spies many times as dangerous been released long before? Why should America behave that way vis-à-vis a country that is one of its "friends"? Also, why was Pollard accused of handing over to Israel a list of
all the spies of the United States operating in Russia, such that
after that, forty American spies were caught or murdered, since there
was a Russian spy operating within the Israeli espionage network? Yet
later on, the two spies who betrayed America were caught, Ames and
Hanson, and confessed. The proof of Pollard's innocence was sitting
right there the whole time right under everyone's noses: the list of
American agents in Russia was sitting in a safe, access to which was
permitted only by special authorization known as "blue stripe
clearance". The list could only be examined under the supervision of
security agents, and Pollard had no "blue stripe clearance" (Source:
John Loftus, who served as the federal prosecutor in the American
Justice Department
And I know how to answer the questions for myself: They would prefer for him to disappear off the face of the earth, as they said, including the American ambassador in his visit to Israel, who said that Pollard actually deserves a death penalty. Hence from day one they have been persecuting him to death. Yet what can you do? The fellow won't die. He won't die and he won't commit suicide. Apparently he is a very strong person. What is certain is that he has strong faith. He is a tower of strength. The very fact that he has survived, that he has remained alive and sane is a miracle, a miracle from heaven. Yet why are the Americans praying deep in their hearts: "Pollard! Die already!"? Apparently he knows too much. He knows too many dark secrets about people in high places. The first example of a dark secret is the following: The Americans wanted to expel the Russians from Afghanistan. Towards that end, they asked the Saudis to draft an army of Muslim terrorists, and they provided salaries and weaponry through the Saudis. Yet after the Russians were expelled, Saudi Arabia continued providing salaries to that monster created by America, including Al Qaida and Bin Laden, in order for them to act against Israel, and it was they who carried out the attack on the Twin Towers! Since Pollard warned about this in advance, many people at the top in America are going to have to be held accountable, and it doesn't pay for them that Pollard should go free (Loftus). A second example of a dark secret: The Soviet Union sent weapons shipments by sea to almost all the terror organizations in the Middle East. Pollard knew that American Intelligence had received orders, signed by the President, to share this information with Israel, but had not done so, and he, Pollard, passed on this information. This was very embarrassing for American Intelligence (Loftus). A third example: In 1984, Pollard discerned a fleet of ships sailing back and forth between Greece and Yemen, where the P.L.O. had a main base, and he passed this information on to Israel, which warned Greece. Greece then confiscated the entire ship's hold –– weaponry intended for the P.L.O. Yet the financing for the ship did not come from the P.L.O., but by orders of the American Vice President, as ransom money for Americans being held hostage in Lebanon. Later on, the enormous scandal broke out that was called the "Iran Contra" Affair, the darkest, most secretive operation of our times, involving the sale of American weaponry to Iran, including weapons for the P.L.O. The American Secretary of State was put on trial, sentenced to twenty-four years in prison, but he received clemency from the President. This alone is enough of a pretext for keeping Pollard in prison forever. A fourth example: In 2003, classified information was released in America, from which it emerges that America's proclamations against Iraqi manufacture of chemical weapons are only a fig leaf, and that they really are allowing the Iraqis to continue. Moreover, the U.S. was supporting them the whole time with funding for their purchase of chemicals, materials and technology. When Israel asked the United States about this, the U.S. denied it. Yet Pollard had passed on to Israel American satellite photos of Iraqi installations for the manufacture of chemical weapons. Parenthetically, production was with the assistance of German scientists, and, inter alia, with those same chemical materials that the Nazis used against us during the Holocaust... What is worse, the American company that supplied the chemical materials belonged to both the American Vice President and the Secretary of State. All of this is enough reason for America to want Pollard to sit forever in darkness and to die with his secrets, and we pray that he will go free, whereby a victory will be scored for justice. Yet we are bothered by something worse, something that affects us and our country. Why did Jonathan endanger his career and his freedom by handing over to the State of Israel enormously important information about the development of biological, chemical and atomic weapons and ballistic missiles in Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria, weapons meant to be used against us, and why did we bring his suffering upon him by throwing him out of the Israeli embassy where he was seeking refuge? Moreover, why did it take thirteen years until he was recognized officially as our agent, and that only after a petition to the Supreme Court? And why was he then not added to the official list of our Defense Ministry, such that in his American prison he still has the status of a criminal, and he is treated accordingly? And perhaps someone is willing to explain to me why he and his wife do not receive any financial assistance here in this country, especially medical assistance for his wife, who is very ill? And if I am already asking, then I will also ask why the request for clemency, signed by 112 members of our Knesset, was never submitted to the American president? And why does every government official in this country listen to us politely, seeming to identify with us, and promise to examine the materials handed over to him relating to Pollard, but never does a thing? Or he avoids the issue by saying, "You don't know what terrible things he did!" but he never shares the details. Why do they argue that we've got to work quietly –– so quietly that he has been rotting in prison for twenty-three years? I shall answer by myself: They'd prefer that he died, and then total silence would truly reign. Indeed, an Israeli agent was sent to him to convey to him that he would do well to commit suicide. Yet since he refused these orders, they relate to him as though he doesn't exist. Such marvelous harmony reigns between Israel and America, with both of them proclaiming as one: Pollard! Please die! Yet the question remains: Why does the State of Israel want him to disappear off the face of the earth? That question we have already answered: He knows too much. He knows about high-placed Israeli government officials who collaborated with America and handed over the materials leading to his conviction, containing his fingerprints, etc., etc. They are even afraid that the truth will be exposed by the State Controller who is presently examining the episode, and they are fighting against him. It is unpleasant for me to tell any more of this. It is easier for me to quote from an article by Rabbi Ya'akov Meidan, head of the Har Etzion Yeshiva: "Amongst the people with an influence today on the political system, there are three who are likely to be interested in Pollard taking his secret with him to the grave. One of them is the honorable President of Israel, Shimon Peres, who was Prime Minister at the time, and who with determination but a lack of sensitivity clung to the lie that Pollard acted of his own accord. Peres was the architect of the closing of all the files of those involved in the Pollard episode. I will just say one thing, that everyone knows. In 1987, a government investigation headed by Abba Eban presented its conclusions regarding who was the main person in Israel guilty in the Pollard case. For some reason, at that very moment, there were some people who made sure that Abba Eban's political career came to an end, and indeed, since then, we have never heard another word about him. Look through the various history books. Thus, we must decide once and for all if we are a sovereign state or a lowly American satellite; an honest, upright country or a tangle of base intrigues. Are we the disciples of Abraham and Moses or not? Do we want to fulfill "Do not stand idly by when your fellow's life is in danger" (Leviticus 19:16) or don't we? Are we following in the path of Jonathan, who risked his life for the sake of the Jewish People, and even now takes an interest, and lives and breathes and loves the people of Israel dwelling in Zion? Jonathan does not worry about himself, but only about the problems of the nation. He is truly a person concerned with the whole Jewish People. We shall continue to protest and to struggle for him. We have risen to rebirth out of love and brotherhood, peace and friendship, not in order to return to the dark abyss of the past. Certainly not! We shall build our lives on the foundations of morality and justice, gratitude, mutual concern and brotherhood. That is what affords our country its right to exist. Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com For information about Pollard and the struggle: see www.jonathanpollard.org for English, or www.FreePollard.org for Hebrew. |
|
ETHICS IN WAR; CAN ISLAM ALLOW DEMOCRACY?; WHY DID ISRAEL & THE US SHUN CARTER?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 38, 2008. |
|
MY WORK FOR YOU HAS ITS DIFFICULTIES Sources may tell a story, rather than present organized news. I have to read the story repeatedly, to get the sequence right and to keep the statements logical. Some sources omit key facts and explanations. Explanations may be crucial to assessing military responsibility and effectiveness. The government of Israel rarely assesses events. I don't know whether it is capable of doing so. If it did, it would have to conclude that its policies don't work. It finds it easy to continue its policies and accept its casualties. ETHICS IN WAR AND ABOUT WAR Commentary about the war's ethics is not the same as the ethics in the war. That is because commentators may not understand the war, may not want to understand the war, or may be an auxiliary part of the war. The NY Times, being anti-Zionist, is an auxiliary part of the war, generally siding with the Muslims. It reports Muslim civilian casualties primarily and more sympathetically. It emphasizes Arab civilian deaths without explaining much that terrorist attacks are war crimes that warrant military response on wherever the attacks originate from, and if they originate from civilian areas, then the terrorists have committed another war crime. Instead, that newspaper leaves it to readers to reach false conclusions about Israel picking on civilians. It fails to explain much about the measures that Israel takes to minimize enemy civilian casualties, measures far beyond its duty, measures that endanger its own people. Israel, which behaves in an overly civilized way most of the time, is denounced as barbaric, while the Muslims, who behave barbarically, hardly are denounced. Internet antisemites go further than the Times. They don't leave readers to reach false conclusions, they drum in those false conclusions. Their morality, being selective and false, is perverse. Waxing indignant against the Jews, they never condemn intolerant Islamic terrorism, the cause of the conflict. Here is a prime example. Hamas keeps attacking Israeli troops letting humanitarian shipments into Gaza. Israel, in my opinion, foolishly, continues to let such trucks through. By interfering with the shipments, Hamas causes some hardship among its people. Hamas blames Israel for it, caring more about making propaganda than relieving its people. Jimmie Carter and Internet antisemites don't condemn Hamas callousness; they claim that Israel is starving the Gazans. The Times reports the hardships as if it were Israel's fault, and hardly condemns Hamas. Where are their ethics, those indignant hypocrites? HIZBULLAH THREATENS OFFENSIVE Hizbullah threatened that if attacked (i.e., if it attacks Israel and calls that self-defense), it will take to the offensive. It plans to get Israeli and P.A. Arabs to rise up against Israel (Arutz-7, 4/17). What is Israel planning to do about it? It will wait for the uprising. The Hizbullah threat is what Barry Chamish and military strategists have been warning Israeli officials about for years. The officials assessed enemy capabilities as if most of the enemies were isolated. The strategists warned that the enemies are liable to coordinate their efforts. Thus, when assessing how long it would take Israeli reservists to mobilize, Israeli officials failed to take into account obstruction by Israeli and P.A. Arabs against the reservists before they are organized or fully armed. They failed to consider that the P.A. armies that they, themselves, have helped build up, could fall upon the reservists. They don't seem to add up how many missiles the enemy could fire from all fronts and all at once, something that no defensive shield could protect against. They let the enemy forces build up stocks of missiles. Notice how confident that Hizbullah is that Israeli Arabs are disloyal! Israelis have deluded themselves about that. When they bother to defend Israel's record, it is to deny that Israel expelled many Arabs in the War for Independence. Israel should have been admitting its mistake in not expelling all of them then, instead in letting many thousands stay and others enter. Israel should have been establishing policies that would get the Arabs to leave. Foolish policies in the name of Israeli tolerance will get many more Israelis killed in the future than they already have. One cannot be tolerant of an intolerant enemy and survive. CAN ISLAM ALLOW DEMOCRACY? It took the Catholic Church six centuries to reconcile itself with democracy. "...the anti-democratic law of Islam, the Shari'a, lies at the core of the problem. Developed over a millennium ago, it presumes autocratic rulers and submissive subjects, emphasizes God's will over popular sovereignty, and encourages violent jihad to expand Islam's borders. Further, it anti-democratically privileges Muslims over non-Muslims, males over females, and free persons over slaves." Reformation would require ending jihad and death sentences for blasphemy or apostasy. "In come individual freedoms, civil rights, political participation, popular sovereignty, equality before the law, and representative elections." Tribalism and Islamicism maintain and invigorate the old ways (Pipes #850, 4/17). Mr. Pipes, can we wait centuries for Islam to reform, or might it conquer us first? WHEN TO ACCOMMODATE ISLAM? Private US organizations are supposed to make minor accommodations to employees' religious practices, unless it seriously harms the organization. It is not fair for a private organization to enforce a religion's rules upon people. When Harvard planned a female only use of the swimming pool, its appeasement of Islam interfered with people who wanted mixed bathing (MEFNews, 4/18). JIMMIE CARTER, AGAIN Without setting foot in Gaza, Jimmie Carter accused Israel of starving Gaza residents to death. He did not mention that Israel lets food into Gaza, but that terrorists use those crossing for attacking Israel and firing rockets over the border. While he was leveling criticism, Hamas attacked again (Arutz-7, 4/18). He did not denounce Islamic terrorism. Nor are they starving, but their crimped circumstances are due to Hamas' war and years of P.A. mismanagement. The Arab standard of living was much higher in Gaza when Israel controlled it. WHY DID ISRAEL & U.S. CENSURE & SHUN CARTER? Carter wants negotiations with Hamas and to set up a Palestinian Arab state on part of the Jewish homeland. So do the governments of Israel and the US, though Israel refuses to negotiate with Hamas. The assumption is that the conflict is Israel's fault for holding on to some of the Territories (acquired as a result of the conflict). To give the Arabs autonomy, they let Arafat turn society there into the most jihadist of all. Now they favor Arafat's faithful successor who assists terrorism, negotiate away part of Jerusalem, block most Jewish construction in Judea-Samaria, allow terrorists to attack Israelis, promote a terrorist build-up, and call objectors "extremist" "enemies of peace." Since Carter's position is similar to Olmert's and Bush's, to Livni's and Rice's, why do their governments shun Carter? (Caroline Glick, IMRA, 4/20.) They are extremist. They shun him because his biased manner shows up his one-sidedness and foolhardiness. They use finesse in betrayals. They may get away with it, whereas he arouses opposition to their schemes. PALESTINIAN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS The Center complains that its lawyers are barred from visiting prisoners in Gaza (4/20). It has been complaining about various aspects of the brutal police state there and about the accidents from mishandling bombs. Those are real complaints, unlike its false propaganda against 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 US SHOULD HAVE INVADED SAUDI ARABIA, NOT IRAQ
Posted by Ted Belman, May 6, 2008. |
|
The best response to 911 is still the matter of heated debate. Obama wants out of Iraq and into Afghanistan and wants Pakistan bombed. Democrats generally argue we should have stayed in that theater and not gone into Iraq and what they want to do now is correct the administrations mistake. Hillary shares this view except for the bombing of Pakistan. I don't get it. They know chaos would ensue in Iraq but argue its not America's problem. But it is. If you remove Afghanistan as a safe haven, the terrorists will go elsewhere, possibly to Iraq or Sudan or Somalia. The Iraqi government is not strong enough to prevent the fracturing of the country creating chaos throughout the adjacent countries. Between the Middle East and Afghanistan, its a no-brainer. The Middle East has the oil. There is no question that we are worse off for having invaded Iraq, and will be worse off still if we get out. But what else should America have done. What was the proper response to 911? It wasn't a matter of revenge, it was a matter of making a difference. Bush announced his war on terror but never really fought it, not really. What War on Terror? Fifteen of the nineteen 911 highjackers were Saudis. The Saudis are financing jihad all over the world. Whether in the madrassas, the universities, the mosques, the prisons or the schools they are relentless in their zeal to propagate Islam including Sharia. They are the enemy, not terror. Ralph Peters makes this point in a NY Post article, "Saudi Stick-Up."
WANT to know a key reason why you're being robbed at the gas pump? Well, my fellow Americans, you're being punished –– for giving Iraqis a chance at democracy. The Saudis ordered President Bush not to remove Saddam. The last thing that the despotic bigots in Riyadh wanted was change in the Middle East –– especially change that empowered common men and women, Shia Arabs and Kurds. He complains about The Vast Power of the Saudi Lobby. and says, They only care about Islam. They'd sacrifice tens of millions of Muslims to further their perversion of the faith. I strongly disagree. It is not the perversion of their faith but the prorogation of it. In 2003 Rachel Ehrenfeld published a book Funding Evil in which she accused the Saudis of doing so and Perters agrees. Ehrenfeld was attacked in the courts for libel and held her ground in New York resulting in the Libel Terrorism Protection Act to protect American journalists and authors from overseas defamation lawsuits. Peters recommends, that when referring to Islamist terrorists or the Saudi royal family that nurtured them for so long, let's stop using the term "Islamo-fascists." As horrid as Italian or Spanish fascists could be, they were enlightened humanitarians compared to either al Qaeda or our Saudi "friends." Let's just call fanatics "fanatics." Again, I disagree. I go with "Islamists" thought this word and others like it, has been barred by the State Department. Peters goes further, "The stunningly hypocritical Saudis have used their wealth to cut out Islam's heart. The faith of Mohammed, peace be upon him, has no greater enemies." Can you believe this. Mohammed is the author of Jihad and Peters is wishing him peace? It doesn't get weirder than that. At least he concludes "In the heat of the moment, Iran appears to many to be our worst enemy in the Middle East. While the nut house government in Tehran is a deadly problem, it's ultimately one of lesser scale. Our greatest enemy, anywhere, is Saudi Arabia, the cradle of terror." Suppose that six years ago, the US had invaded Saudi Arabia after punishing the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The US would have proceeded to secure the oil fields and secure the oil supply and revenue. To avoid an insurgency, the US could have expelled all dangerous personnel and brought in oil workers from around the world including the US. This revenue would go first to reimburse the US for costs and then to create a fund for the poor in the Middle East and Africa. This money would have earned the US lots of good will and friends. If the US would have thus cut off the head of the snake, the body would have withered away. But the US would never do it. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
HAPPY 60TH BIRTHDAY, ISRAEL –– WE SALUTE YOUR MANY ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Posted by UCI, May 6, 2008. |
|
In spite of regular attacks from unfriendly neighbors, Israel has survived and thrived, accomplishing amazing technical, scientific and literary achievements in its brief history. In this week of Israel's 60th birthday, we are featuring some of these innovations. "What has been Israel's most important achievement?" Author Dara Horn believes it is the development of the Hebrew language (Hadassah Magazine, May 2008, p.56). "Israel's vibrant, fluid, critical and ever-evolving literature is perhaps not the most important accomplishment of the past 60 years, but the most exciting and intriguing one. To go from a language that had almost no mature native speakers in 1948 to one that has all of the literary variety and depth and breadth and sophistication of any language in the world –– the medium for everything from postmodern poetry to murder mysteries, from highbrow plays to TV comedies, from patriotic anthems to the most critical, subtle and nuanced explorations of what the country (and life itself) is, isn't and might be –– in less than a single reader's or writer's lifetime, is, to me, beyond astounding. But I suppose it isn't particularly surprising in a state created by the People of the Book." Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and writes frequently about the Arab-Israeli conflict. He wrote this: In spite of regular attacks from unfriendly neighbors, Israel has survived and thrived, accomplishing amazing technical, scientific and literary achievements in its brief history. In this week of Israel's 60th birthday, we are featuring some of these innovations. UCI –– The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) –– is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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!" |
|
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE MIDDLE EAST'S JEWS
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 5, 2008. |
|
Uh-oh! It's Israel's sixtieth birthday and that means articles on Israel in the news media and, in turn, that may often mean something between inaccuracy and slander. < p> I've been conditioned by now to know what to expect. Let's try a test. Read the following headline from a Reuters story, and guess the theme. Ready? Here we go: "Israel's Advent Altered Outlook For Middle East Jews." My assumption was that the headline implied a story saying: everything was fine for Jews in the Arab world and Iran until Israel was created and that fact was responsible for forcing them to leave. The article itself isn't that bad, does include material to the contrary, and doesn't directly blame the destruction of these communities on Israel's creation. Yet still this is an implication, no doubt, that many readers will take away from the text which can be found at:
Consider this formulation. The article states: "The 1948 war at Israel's creation, which forced some 700,000 Palestinians to flee their homeland, hardened Arab attitudes to deep-rooted Jewish minorities across the Middle East." Get it? First the Palestinians flee and then the Arabs get angry at the Jews. Up to then the Jewish minorities are "deep-rooted" which implies they were well accepted and secure. A couple of paragraphs down the article continues: "Israeli statistics show more than 760,000 Middle Eastern Jews had moved to Israel by 2006, with more than 40 percent arriving in the first three years of the state's existence." So let's summarize: Step 1: Palestinians become refugees In other words, the sins of Israel's creation include both Palestinian Arabs and Middle Eastern Jews becoming refugees, rather than it involving a de facto population transfer with an equal cost to both sides, and in which only the deliberate creation of permanent refugee status for Palestinians by their own leaders and Arab states produced prosperity on one side and ongoing problems for the other. What this concept also leaves out, at least in part, is: –– Centuries'-long discrimination against Jews, ranging from the mild to the violent, including forced conversions at times, a problem Moses Maimonides was dealing with nine hundred years ago. Of course, as in Europe, there were long periods (certainly in Iraq and Egypt, for example) in which Jews fared very well. This is not to say that all Jews lived terribly among their Arab neighbors but clearly this was a major factor in their lives. A strong current of anti-Semitism in Islam long preceded the origin of Zionism. Now to be fair the article, as I said I've seen much worse, does state: "Hundreds of thousands of Jews were displaced. Some migrated voluntarily from mainly Muslim countries to the newly proclaimed Jewish homeland. Others were forced out by dispossession, discrimination or violence. Thousands stayed on." Clearly, the great majority, however, were forced out. What percentage stayed on? Less than one-tenth. A key problem with the currently accepted narrative on Middle East history can be seen in a little two-line statement of fact: "Conflict in Palestine in the 1930s made life harder for Egyptian Jews, as militant nationalist groups became active." This relates the rise of militant nationalism to the conflict. Certainly, this was a factor (I wrote a whole book on it, The Arab States and the Palestine Conflict), but militant nationalism was due to far more than just the Palestine conflict. And this doesn't even mention the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1920s, seeking to transform Egypt into an Islamist state. It was first and foremost a response to conditions at home and to the kind of society that Arab activists wanted to build. As such, it is parallel to revolutionary, Communist, fascist, and nationalist movements in Europe and other places, all of which existed without Israel as a catalyst. Those two lines are a very powerful theme today: everything Arabs or Muslims do is merely a response to what Israel (or the West) does and not an expression of their own beliefs and goals. This robs others of their history, under the guise of humanitarian egalitarianism, and puts the blame on others for everything that happens. Here's another example: "Jewish emigration accelerated after Israel attacked Egypt in 1956 and economic pressures mounted at home." While there is some truth in the statement the "economic pressures" was the fact that the regime of Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled all non-Egyptians, not only Jews but large numbers of Greeks and others, due to xenophobia and militant nationalism. Even in tiny phrasing choices –– admittedly a matter of judgment but the judgments almost always go in the same direction –– are certain assumptions present. Consider this phrase: "Iran, seen by Israel as its deadliest foe...." But since the issue here is Iranian Jews why not write: "Iran, which views Israel as its deadliest foe...." From which direction, after all, does the aggressive view come? The article could easily have drawn a parallel between the Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians. Both were refugees but the Jews rebuilt their lives rather than nursing grievances and pursing violence for decades. Moreover, one could say that their sufferings and claims balance those of the Palestinian Arabs. None of these arguments –– very commonplace in discussion of these issues among Middle East-origin Jews –– are presented. Again, I don't mean to exaggerate the problems with this article, which does at least present the issue and some of the points that should be made. But it also shows weaknesses in dealing with Israel, some of the assumptions on which the contemporary hostile narrative is based. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is archived at
|
|
INCREASING DOMESTIC TURMOIL IN IRAN
Posted by Olivier Guitta, May 5, 2008. |
|
To many observers Iran is the big winner in the Middle East. While the end result remains to be seen, what seems certain is that the Islamic republic appears to be faring better geopolitically than domestically. And although uncensored information regarding the country's internal problems is scarce and tough to find, reports of increasing trouble in the country are starting to filter out. The situation in some provinces inhabited by minorities is far from ideal for Tehran. The Kurdish province has seen regular violent clashes between Kurds and Iranian forces. Consequently, Tehran has recently stepped-up its repression of the Kurdish population. Unrest, however, is not limited to the Kurds; the Baluch minority is cause of great concern to the regime. In fact, the newsletter TheCroissant.com reported that Iran is discreetly leading a violent military campaign in the Kerman province, bordering Baluchistan. The latest clashes have claimed dozens of deaths in the ranks of Iranian forces and many civilian casualties. According to the usually well informed Internet web site Elaph, "Jund Allah," a faction of the Iranian Sunni opposition in Baluchistan, claimed responsibility for the April 25 abduction in the town of Fahraj of Jawad Tahiri, supreme leader, Ali Khamenei's representative in the Kerman province. According to the Baluch opposition, Tehran has increased its operations since Tahiri's kidnapping. Despite the violent skirmishes between government forces and Sunni militias, the Revolutionary Guards involved in these operations have not managed to liberate Tahiri. Also on April 27, Hassan Bijari, a close ally of Tehran and the Shiite imam of a Zahedan mosque (in the Baluchistan province), was shot thrice while in his car. The situation of the economy is far from brilliant. One would think with the barrel of oil at about $115, and Iran sitting on the second-largest gas and oil reserves in the world, the country's economy would be thriving. But economic statistics show a bleak picture: officially, inflation stands at about 20 percent, and unemployment around 15 percent (while many estimate this rate to be around 30 percent). GDP's growth for 2007 could reach 4.5 percent instead of the 6 percent expected. Iran's economy is quite frail: indeed 85 percent of Iran's revenue comes from the sale of oil abroad but at the same time, Iran imports an important chunk of the refined products it uses, like gasoline (about 40 percent). Furthermore, it looks like not only the U.N. sanctions against Iran, but more importantly, the financial pressures imposed by the U.S. Treasury are having a significant impact on the economy. A recent French government report notes how dire the situation is for the Iranian economy. Because of a drying of foreign investment, vital to the survival of the economy especially in the oil and gas sector, Iran could become a net importer of oil within 15 years. In fact, about 18 months ago, a report prepared by the foreign affairs and defense commission of the Majlis (the Iranian parliament), acknowledged that an embargo would destabilize Iran's economy and weaken its rate of exchange, while discouraging private investment. As a result, the report says, Iran "would be forced to modify its national priorities, and to devote the bulk of its resources to preventing major social upheaval, which could cause a deterioration of living standards for an important part of the population." Already, UNICEF considers that close to 25 percent of Iran's population lives under the relative poverty line; other estimates are much higher. That leads to the third and potentially most threatening danger for the mullah's regime: the malaise within Iranian society. Poverty and unemployment are not the only ills eating up Iran. Oppression and clamping down on civil society add to that explosive mix. A clear indication of souring times; Iranian authorities have executed 357 people in 2007, almost one person a day, 40 percent more than in 2006. Repression has not only targeted minorities and other religions but also feminists and students asking for additional rights. In a country where 60 percent of the population is under 25, the regime is having a hard time keeping its young people happy. Some statistics do not bode well for the mullahs. Iran has at the same time one of the highest suicide rates among youngsters in the world, one of the highest drug consumption rate in the world and the fastest growing HIV infected population in the world. Suicide is the second leading cause of death in Iran and affects mostly young women who use self-immolation to commit suicide. There are close to 4 million drug addicts in the country and a recent official study revealed that at least 15 percent of the nine- to 25-year-old population bracket is using hard drugs. Needless to say that in light of the chaos in some provinces, a bleak economy and an increasing malaise in the society, the mullahs are facing a very tough domestic situation. Interestingly, the Majlis report previously cited stated: "the members of the regime who were interviewed by the commission indicated that any deterioration of the economic situation could cause social disturbances that would weaken domestic stability." Are these the rumblings of a potential popular uprising against the mullahs? The internal dynamics tend to indicate that Iran's current regime might not have such a long shelf life after all. Especially if the CIA thinks there is no chance whatsoever of a domestic uprising. Indeed if history is any indication, the day the CIA will bluntly state that there is no chance of a revolution happening in Iran, might turn out to be the day it will actually take place. At least that is what happened in 1979. Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant, is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com), which is available at $99/year. |
|
EXPELLED JEWS HOLD DEEDS ON ARAB LANDS
Posted by Avodah, May 5, 2008. |
|
The president of the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries said last November that the New York-based organization has decades-old property deeds from Jews from Arab countries. These deed represent a total area of 100,000 sq.km. in Arab Countries which is five times the size of the State of Israel. Of course Olmert and Condi refuse to help THESE people who were thrown out of their homes 60 years ago. This comes from Yid With Lid website
|
|
Expelled Jews hold deeds on Arab lands The government needs to bring up the issue of hundreds of thousands of Jews who left their homes in Arab countries following the establishment of the State of Israel as part of any future peace agreement with the Palestinians, the president of the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries said Thursday. About 850,000 Jews fled Arab countries after Israel's founding in 1948, leaving behind assets valued today at more than $300 billion, said Heskel M. Haddad. He added that the New York-based organization has decades-old property deeds of Jews from Arab countries on a total area of 100,000 sq.km. –– which is five times the size of the State of Israel. Most of the properties are located in Iraq, Egypt and Morocco, Haddad said. The Baghdad-born Haddad fled Iraq in 1951, and, after a brief stop in Israel, made his way to the United States where he went on to become a prominent New York optometrist. In an interview, he said that it was imperative for Israel to bring up the issue of the Jews who fled Arab countries at any future peace talks –– including those scheduled to take place in Annapolis in the coming weeks –– since no Palestinian leader would sign a peace treaty without resolving the issue of Palestinian refugees. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians –– with estimates ranging from 400,000 to 750,000 –– left Israeli-controlled territory in 1948 and 1949, and they, along with their millions of descendants, make up one of the prickliest issues to be dealt with by Israeli and Palestinian negotiators as part of any resolution to the conflict. Haddad said that the key to resolving the issue rested with the Arab League, which in the 1950s passed a resolution stating that no Arab government would grant citizenship to Palestinian refugees, keeping them in limbo for over half a century. At the same time, the Arab League urged Arab governments to facilitate the exit of Jews from Arab countries, a resolution which was carried out with a series of punitive measures and discriminatory decrees making it untenable for the Jews to stay in the countries. "No Jews from Arab countries would give up their property and home and come to Israel out of Zionism," Haddad said. He said that the Israeli government was "myopic" not to utilize this little-known information, which he said should be part of a package financial solution to solving the issue of Palestinian refugees. An Israeli ministerial committee on claims for Jewish property in Arab countries, which is currently headed by the Pensioners Minister Rafi Eitan, has been virtually dormant since it was established four years ago. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
WHY OUR ENEMIES WILL LOSE
Posted by Avodah, May 5, 2008. |
|
This was written by Leonie Ben-Simon and it appeared
yesterday in
Arutz Sheva
|
|
The Jewish State is very different from its image. Vested interests play their games in the Middle East. They tilt the balance up and down, depending upon what suits them at the time. Yesterday it was territory, then access to waterways, then oil. Their warships sit in Arabian and Mediterranean seas far away from home; their money pours in funding arms to try to kill us. Countries with no obvious connections to the area provide parts and know-how in an attempt to kill millions. Of Jews of course. The enemy plays the rules of war and terrorism based upon hatred, the brainwashing of a generation of children, and lies, in an attempt to build a nation that does not exist. They remain a collective of people who are being used as pawns by their own Arab brothers. The West refers to the textbooks of conflict resolution taught in their universities. What they didn't learn is that the enemies of Israel are playing a game that is tribal in nature, that Western mentality does not understand. As the products of Harvard proudly negotiate their way through, they honestly believe in the success of their game. Of course "yes" means "no", but when you don't grow up in the desert how on Earth could you know that? The answer "yes" to a ceasefire can mean, "Give us time to re-group, to re-arm, to access more funding, to train another lot of plainclothes soldiers." It also means, "Who are you to tell us what to do?" Or, "Stupid Americans, how much will you deposit in my bank account if I say yes?" The political negotiators are mentally and emotionally out of their territory. Incentives and bribery will be accepted, then the double-cross. The name of the game is to play for time, take the money and run, smile for the cameras, then give the truth to their people in their language. In reality, though, they are double-crossing their own kind. The taxes of the good citizens of the European Union and others help fund the war against Israel. Hamas howls and threatens, boasting of having 20,000 prospective suicide bombers. Does Israel have a chance of fending off the second attempt in a hundred years to annihilate the Jews? Mistakes have been made by leaders in Israel, and will continue, but the enemy has made a huge fatal mistake. The composition of the Jewish State is very different from that which the outside world believes it to be, and as portrayed in the press. It is different from the copycat of a book-type democracy that many would want Israel to be. The majority of Israel's newspapers do not reflect the demographics of Israel. The media's agenda is mainly controlled by the few secular leftists privileged to be in key positions in politics, government, the press –– but not the army. This will be the last generation to be in these positions of power. They are now a minority group, being overtaken by Middle Israel. Middle Israel is a different story. The majority of Israelis are now of Sephardi backgrounds, due to their high birthrate; their parents and grandparents having grown up with Arabs. Their socioeconomic status has risen to the stage where they have equal participation, but not majority leadership, in the economy and politics. The army is the exception, where leadership is now held by a broad representation of Israelis. Middle Israel understands how to deal with the Middle Eastern mentality. The enemy values death over life. It takes a lot of courage for a whole country to send their youth to the army when life, not death, is paramount, but when the very existence of Israel is at stake, it is done, no questions asked. This dedication is not only because we have our backs to the wall, but we have an absolute belief, transmitted to our children throughout the generations that Israel is the Jews' ancient home, given by G-d. Whoever comes to try to destroy Israel the personification of evil. Listen to our language and our daily prayers. The Sephardi rabbis have no hesitation in reinforcing this, making emphatic public statements of faith, damning those who want evil for Israel. It has been years since the world saw the real power of the Israeli army. Now, the enemy is being treated with kid gloves; great care taken for civilians who allow an army in plain clothes to operate from within their houses, their schools and their mosques. This terrorist army is also working under false assumptions. The Israeli military are not American soldiers transposed to fight in a foreign land such as Vietnam: these are soldiers who have their families within sight of the battlefield, their parents, their little brothers and sisters, and their whole lives. Terrorism might have worked in other countries, but it will not lead to any sort of victory against Israel. Gabi Ashkenazi, the Israel Defense Force Chief of Staff, said at the site of the Auschwitz concentration camp: "We've learned our lesson, to take seriously the threats made by world leaders calling for the destruction of Israel. We will continue to fight, out of a sense of responsibility to exist as a people in this country. We will not be deterred by any danger." Every single Israeli visits the Holocaust Museum. Each one is painfully aware that the world did not try to save the Jews then, just as it barely makes an effort to save victims of genocide going on now. What is being fed to the people of Gaza is untrue. There will be no green land waiting for them to conquer; there will be no capitulation of the Jews. They will live their lives out in misery as their leaders feed them lies and hatred. The Land of Israel is not their land and will never be theirs. Their financial backers are wasting their time and their money. Sixty years after the establishment of the State of Israel there is a determined, living nation of Jews capable of fighting back. It has yet to use its military resources, which could establish a crystal-clear victory to secure its borders and settle conflicts once and for all. Our nation will not go away. The deep-rooted spirit of the Jews and our attachment to the Holy Land is stronger than all of the efforts to destroy the only country that God has given us. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
DAHAF POLL: ISRAELI JEWS 91%:9% GOOD LIVING IN ISRAEL
Posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, May 5, 2008. |
|
Dahaf poll of 500 adult Israeli Jews conducted for Yediot
Ahronot and
publishedin Yediot Ahronot on 5 May 2008.
Is it good living in Israel?
Are you embarrassed sometime being an Israeli?
Of those embarrassed:
Ifyou had the possibility, would you move to live in another country?
Whatis the main thing that you would change in the State?
What is the main thing that could cause you to leave Israel?
What was the biggest personal-national crises in your years in Israel?
What is the greatest achievement of the State of Israel during its
existence?
What is the most Israeli thing?
Whois the most representative Israeli male?
Who is the most representative Israeli woman?
Whois the least Israeli of the following?
Whichof the following politicians would you most like to see return to life
andactivity?
What song would you replace Hatikva with if the decision was made
to replace it (AL: Song of Ascents –– (Shir Hamaalot) Psalms 126 was not
included as a option. For the benefit of readers and in celebration of
Israel's Independence Day the words of that Psalm is repeated after
this item.)
Wheredo you most like to hike in the country?
Most Israeli author?
Of the following who would you most like to have live in Israel?
Inconclusion what future do you see for the State?
A Song of Ascents (Psalms 126) http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt26c6.htm
"AinLi Eretz Aheret" –– I Have No Other Country [IMRA: Ehud Manor wrote song this in reaction to the war in Lebanon. During
theOslo years the same song was embraced by opponents of Oslo as an
expression of their commitment to a nation they felt had gone mad.
Words by Ehud Manor
Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis). This is a summary of the Yediot Ahronot Dahaf poll. |
|
THE PRESIDENT IS COMING TO ISRAEL'S BIRTHDAY PARTY!
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, May 5, 2008. |
| Here is a Dry Bones cartoon. Yaacov Kirschen, the Dry Bones cartoonist, adds some comment. |
|
The continued imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard has become an ugly
stain on the reputations of both the U.S. and Israel. Given the
ineptness of a succession of Israeli governments in handling the
"Pollard Affair", and the embarrassing silence of major American
Jewish organizations, we are reduced to hoping for a "birthday
present".
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com
|
|
THE NEW FATAH 'SOLDIERS' DEPLOY IN JENIN AS RICE PUTS THE SQUEEZE ON ISRAEL
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 5, 2008. |
|
This was posted by Freedom Fighter on the Joshua Pundit website
|
|
Yesterday 450 armed Fatah 'soldiers' were deployed in Jenin as the newest and best trained members of the Palestinian Authority armed security forces, courtesy of US General Keith Dayton and the American taxpayers. This was one of the gestures mandated by the Bush Administration
and agreed to by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to bolster the
foundering Fatah-run PA and its capo del tutti,
The idea,of course,is that these US trained Fatah security forces will act as a force to prevent Palestinian terrorism and strengthen 'moderate' Abbas. I'm sure that these stalwart Fatah troops will give just as good an account of themselves against Hamas as they did in Gaza. And since these forces include members of the al-Aksa Martyrs brigade,Abbas' own terrorist militia, the idea that they are somehow going to lift a finger to prevent their fellow Arabs from killing Jews is a particularly malignant fantasy. As a matter of fact,they will likely take the lead in the matter. The last time this was tried was under Yasir Arafat, and those US trained forces and their weaponry were simply turned on Israeli civilians when the timing was right. For that matter, the PA security forces under Abbas have already been implicated in the murders of Israeli civilians. You'll recall that Ido Zoldan(z"l) was murdered in cold blood near Kedumim by a PA police officer. And two off-duty IDF soldiers, Ahmikam Amichai and David Rubin(z"l) were also shot to death when they were ambushed in a drive by shooting while they were hiking near Hebron on the Israeli side of the border by a couple of PA 'security' personnel,neither of whom were punished beyond a quick showcase arrest and release. Meanwhile,Condi Rice proved the old dictum true about appeasement; given concessions totally unwarranted by the facts on the ground by the Olmert government..she wants more. In her recent visit to Israel, Condi's emphasis was not on getting the PA to stop the non-stop incitement against Israel in its mosques, schools and media,or for the Palestinians to take meaningful steps against terrorist violence emanating form th Palestinian occupied areas of the West Bank. No, her main concern was on even more Israeli concessions 'to make life more pleasant for the Palestinians'. The fact that what would make life more pleasant for them involves the wholesale murder or expulsion of every Jew in Israel seems to be beside the point. Accordingly, Condi apparently let Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni know that she would be strictly monitoring the Israeli side of things and insisted on even more Israeli checkpoints being removed regardless of the security aspect for Israel. She got her wish, as three important Israeli checkpoints were removed over the protests of the IDF:
Anyone familiar with the facts on the ground knows that the Palestinians have no compunctions about opening fire on civilian vehicles on the roads, or using the highways to facilitate homicide bombings and attacks on Israel. The areas in question are close together and often only minutes away from each other...which is why the checkpoints exist in the first place, and why since they went into place, together with Israel's still incomplete security barrier, attacks on Israeli civilians have declined considerably. It would make much more sense to eliminate the need for the checkpoints by leaning on Abbas to end the incitement in the Palestinian media, concentrate on creating a government that wasn't corrupt and incarcerating the al-Aksa Martyrs' Brigade terrorists on his payroll,rather than the other way around. But that might not sit too well with some of the Bush Administration's Arab friends, so the Bush Administration is much more interested in a cosmetic diplomatic process that above all please the Saudis,for obvious reasons. When the inevitable attacks occur, the president and the Secretary of State will be the first to condemn the violence directly attributable to their actions. Absolutely disgraceful. Editor's Note: This is called "Palestinian Recruits Hit Streets Unprepared" and
was written by Griff Witte and Ellen Knickmeyer for the
Washington Post There have been significant problems with the training of the first class of Palestinian security officers under a multimillion-dollar U.S. program to strengthen the Palestinian Authority, including a final round that one American involved in the program described as "a complete fiasco." The first 430 to be trained, members of the Presidential Guard, returned to the West Bank from Jordan in April. One American said the final field exercise included the "'killing' of civilians and blue-on-blue engagements (firing on friendly forces)." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WHO KNOWS?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 5, 2008. |
|
Who knows how this latest potential scandal with Olmert will play out... In spite of the fact that police are arguing that the investigation and its legal implications takes precedence over the public's right to know, word is that by tomorrow the gag will be at least partially lifted. Leaks have taken place that suggest unofficially that this is a new case of bribery –– with huge sums of money and an American businessman involved. We'll see... Officials involved say the evidence garnered so far is "reliable" and that the nature of the findings, when released, will "shock the nation." Olmert is going to be questioned several more times. Apparently because of his responsibilities as prime minister, any one session of questioning can last just so long. At least according to one knowledgeable source, there is a specific progression to the questioning, designed to avoid exposing the direction in which the investigators hope to go. ~~~~~~~~~~ Questions have been raised as to why this investigation happened so precipitously, and there have been too many different answers I've encountered to explain them all. One that makes potential sense is the need to act because there had been public exposure: There seems to be some sense of rush to avoid a chance for different persons involved to collaborate on getting their stories straight or to otherwise obscure evidence. ~~~~~~~~~~ It falls to Attorney General Mazuz to make the decision regarding indictment. If he proceeds with that, then Olmert must step down –– this is according to the precedent of court decisions and not law. And, according to what I've just read, the ministers of Olmert's gov't would have to resign with him. The most important question in my mind is what happens next if Olmert is gone, and the answers to that are not yet clear. While there is talk of Livni taking over for an interim, this is not necessarily the scenario that will take place (other than for some brief transitional period). It would most definitely not be a positive. Briefly now (with more to follow in short order, hopefully): There is the possibility of a vote of no-confidence, with the Knesset disbanding. Or of the current coalition imploding because others within the coalition decide it's time to leave. (This may refer to Labor or to members of Kadima.) There may be a reshuffling of power without an election –– which would require the president to call upon the head of a faction to try to form a new coalition –– or an election might be called. Were Kadima to retain control, there would, as I understand it, be a primary to determine who heads the party. ~~~~~~~~~~ While we all need a dollop of hope now and then, and this is what I offered yesterday, I realize that it can also be a dangerous thing, because of the potential for great disappointment. Earlier today the news was that negotiations with the Palestinians would likely be tabled until after the legal issues surrounding Olmert were resolved, because neither Olmert nor Livni was able to concentrate on this now. But since that news, there has been a meeting between Olmert and Abbas. A picture of a smiling Olmert and Abbas accompanied by a report that this was the most serious meeting they've had yet. The subject was borders and allegedly great progress was made. After my talk yesterday about the possibility of settlement blocs being retained and Abbas's depression... What would it take to make Abbas smile with regard to this? What has Olmert agreed to? Of course Rice's presence is likely a factor in this. But there is something else that also occurs to me. Until now, it was clear that Olmert was always looking over his shoulder at his coalition with regard to what he agreed to (at least publicly) with Abbas. If he lost his coalition (notably via Shas) then he would shorten his term of office and cut himself off from power and perks. But now, if he knows in his heart of hearts that he is likely to be indicted, then he may have a "damn it all" attitude –– a very dangerous feeling that he might as well agree to the maximum without regard for coalition partners' concerns. ~~~~~~~~~~ In line with this, and extremely worrisome, is a report on TV tonight that Rice is pushing for an announcement on borders before Bush comes next week. What is more, she is interested in having Olmert proceed as quickly as possible before the criminal investigation takes him out of play. ~~~~~~~~~~ Also extremely worrisome is a report from Arutz Sheva regarding an agreement by Barak to remove three checkpoints at the behest of Rice: Notable here is the checkpoint between the PA city of Ramallah and Beit El, home to 7,000 Jews. The IDF objected strenuously to this, as it will permit unhindered Palestinian traffic adjacent to Jewish homes in Beit El. "The IDF officials reminded Barak, to no avail, that shots were fired at Beit El in the past from this highway. They also told him that the nearby intersection between Ramallah and Beit El was the site of violent Arab riots when the Oslo War broke out in late 2000, and at least two separate lynchings were attempted against Jews there." Also removed was a checkpoint at the entrance to Nablus (Shechem), even though Nablus is a key center of terrorism. The IDF encirclement of the area –– which has been a major factor in decreasing terrorism in the area –– is now ended. A third, considered less critical, is outside of Hebron. "'The checkpoints are a most significant factor in the war against Palestinian terrorism,' a top IDF officer told [defense correspondent Haggai] Huberman, 'in thwarting attacks, in catching wanted terrorists, and in intercepting weapons... The number of checkpoints in Judea and Samaria at present is the absolute minimum necessary for Israeli security. Taking off even one more will lower the security level to "below the red line' of risk."' "...The Defense Minister gave the order to remove the checkpoints in accordance with Secretary Rice's wishes –– but in defiance of clear IDF warnings that shooting attacks against Israeli citizens and soldiers are likely to be renewed as a result. Senior Central Region officers told Barak directly that checkpoint removals in the past have led to significant increases in attacks." ~~~~~~~~~~ A pox on the houses of all those involved with political and defense issues here who put the lives of innocent Jews at risk. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE ORIGINS OF THE TERM NAKBA PROVES THERE IS NO PALESTINIAN NATION
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 5, 2008. |
|
Over the past few years, the term nakba (also spelled naqba) has become the favorite nonsense word of the Anti-Israel Lobby. Meaning "catastrophe" in Arabic, it has been embraced by anti-Semites all over the planet to refer to Israel's creation, which supposedly imposed a "catastrophe" upon the "disenfranchised Palestinian Arabs." Of course, the real catastrophe that befell the Arabs in 1948-49 was that they failed in their attempt to annihilate Israel and exterminate its population, and for that they paid a price. Meanwhile, Nakba Nonsense has been spreading. Google finds over 85,000 web pages referring to Israel's creation as a nakba, and a Yahoo search finds even more than that. The anti-Israel web magazine Counterpunch cannot mention Israel without using the term. Even Israel's leftist minister of education, Yuli Tamir, has ordered that the nakba be taught as partof the curriculum in Israeli schools, where Israel's schoolchildren can be taught to mourn their own country's existence. (Tamir, who was previously a professor of education at Tel Aviv University, is so bizarre that in the summer of 1996 she published an article in the Boston Review defending female circumcision in the Third World and denouncing those who expressed disgust at the practice –– see http://bostonreview.net/BR21.3/Tamir.html.) Nakba ceremonies are now held each year by leftist professors at Israeli universities who mourn the very creation and existence of their country. The nakba of the late 1940's and 1950's that befell large numbers of Jews living in Arab countries who were suddenly expelled, persecuted, and stripped of their property does not interest such people. Those Jewish refugees made new homes in Israel and actually outnumbered the Palestinians who fled. Meanwhile, an urban legend has been fabricated about the origin of the term nakba –– a fairy tale that claims the word was a banner waved by Palestinians starting in 1948, and that its very use shows how deep the roots of "Palestinian nationality" go. So here is a little current events quiz: What is the real origin of the term nakba and what is its original meaning? If you get the answer to the quiz wrong –– in other words, if you say it refers to the events of 1948 –– you are in very good company. I myself would have flunked the quiz up until a few days ago, when I stumbled on the correct answer. Not only does the bandying about of the nakba nonsense word not point to any "depths of roots of Palestinian nationality," it proves the very opposite: namely, that there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation or nationality at all. The authoritative source on the origin of nakba is none other than George Antonius, supposedly the first "official historian of Palestinian nationalism." Like so many "Palestinians," he actually wasn't –– Palestinian, that is. He was a Christian Lebanese-Egyptian who lived for a while in Jerusalem, where he composed his official advocacy/history of Arab nationalism. The Arab Awakening, a highly biased book, was published in 1938 and for years afterward was the official text used at British universities. Antonius was an "official Palestinian representative" to Britain, trying to argue the cause for creating an Arab state in place of any prospective homeland promised the Jews under the Balfour Declaration of 1917. By the 1930's Antonius was an active anti-Zionist propagandist, and as such was offered a job at Columbia University (where some things don't seem to change much). He served as an academic fig leaf for xenophobic Arab nationalists seeking to deny Jews any right to self-determination in or migration to the Land of Israel. And he was closely associated with the Grand Mufti, Hitler's main Islamic ally, and also with the pro-German regime in Iraq in the early 1940's. Antonius was so passionately anti-Zionist that he continues to serve as the hero and mentor of Jewish leftist anti-Zionists everywhere. For example, the late Hebrew University sociology professor Baruch Kimmerling relied on Antonius at length in his own pseudo-history, Palestinians: The Making of a People (Free Press, 1993). So how does Antonius provide us with the answer to the current-events quiz concerning the origin of nakba? The term was not invented in 1948 but rather in 1920. And it was coined not because of Palestinians suddenly getting nationalistic but because Arabs living in Palestine regarded themselves as Syrian and were enraged at being cut off from their Syrian homeland. Before World War I, the entire Levant –– including what is now Israel, the "occupied territories," Jordan, Lebanon and Syria –– was comprised of Ottoman Turkish colonies. When Allied forces drove the Turks out of the Levant, the two main powers, Britain and France, divided the spoils between them. Britain got Palestine, including what is now Jordan, while France got Lebanon and Syria. The problem was that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians and were seen as such by other Syrians. The Palestinian Arabs were enraged that an artificial barrier was being erected within their Syrian homeland by the infidel colonial powers –– one that would divide northern Syrian Arabs from southern Syrian Arabs, the latter being those who were later misnamed "Palestinians." The bulk of the Palestinian Arabs had in fact migrated to Palestine from Syria and Lebanon during the previous two generations, largely to benefit from the improving conditions and job opportunities afforded by Zionist immigration and capital flowing into the area. In 1920, both sets of Syrian Arabs, those in Syria and those in Palestine, rioted violently and murderously. On page 312 of The Arab Awakening, Antonius writes, "The year 1920 has an evil name in Arab annals: it is referred to as the Year of the Catastrophe (Am al-Nakbaq). It saw the first armed risings that occurred in protest against the post-War settlement imposed by the Allies on the Arab countries. In that year, serious outbreaks took place in Syria, Palestine, and Iraq." Yes, the answer to our little quiz is 1920, not 1948. That's 1920 –– when there was no Zionist state, no Jewish sovereignty, no "settlements" in "occupied territories," no Israel Defense Forces, no Israeli missiles and choppers targeting terror leaders, and no Jewish control over Jerusalem (which had a Jewish demographic majority going back at least to 1850). The original nakba had nothing to do with Jews, and nothing to do with demands by Palestinian Arabs for self-determination, independence and statehood. To the contrary, it had everything to do with the fact that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians. They rioted at this nakba –– at this catastrophe –– because they found deeply offensive the very idea that they should be independent from Syria and Syrians. In the 1920's, the very suggestion that Palestinian Arabs constituted a separate ethnic nationality was enough to send those same Arabs out into the streets to murder and plunder violently in outrage. If they themselves insisted they were simply Syrians who had migrated to the Land of Israel, by what logic are the Palestinian Arabs deemed entitled to their own state today? Palestinian Arabs are no more a nation and no more entitled to their own state than are the Arabs of Detroit or of Paris. They certainly are not entitled to four different states: Jordan, Hamastan in Gaza, a PLO state in the West Bank, and Israel converted into yet another Arab state via the granting of a "right of return" to Arab refugees. Speaking of Palestinians as Syrians, it is worth noting what one of the early Syrian nationalists had to say. The following quote comes from the great-grandfather of the current Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad: "Those good Jews brought civilization and peace to the Arab Muslims, and they dispersed gold and prosperity over Palestine without damage to anyone or taking anything by force. Despite this, the Muslims declared holy war against them and did not hesitate to massacre their children and women... . Thus a black fate awaits the Jews and other minorities in case the Mandates are cancelled and Muslim Syria is united with Muslim Palestine." That statement is from a letter sent to the French prime minister in June 1936 by six Syrian Alawi notables (the Alawis are the ruling class in Syria today) in support of Zionism. Bashar's great-grandfather was one of them. (From: Daniel Pipes, "Greater Syria: The History of an Ambition", page 179.) Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il This appeared April 30, 2008in the Jewish Press
|
|
SPECULATION ABOUT OLMERT'S CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 5, 2008. |
|
We are the NON-evangelical Christians who support the Patriots of Israel. (We do NOT support flim-flam, flip-flop Peres –– the architect of Israel's current miseries.) We say: Restore Jewish Palestine from the ocean to the sea, the way Israel was promised and originally intended to be ... until Peres and Clinton decided to submit Israel to Arafat (and the Saudi's) cunning schemes. Of course this is speculation, but we wouldn't be at all surprised if Olmert is guilty of taking funds and/or baksheesh, directly or indirectly, from Arabs who used him to help them destroy Israel. We wouldn't be surprised if Arab funds/perks were funneled to him through or under the umbrella of the US State Dept. From Israel National News: "In response to a request by Israeli media to allow them to publicize details of the latest criminal investigation of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz said Sunday night, "We will closely and constantly follow the new investigation of the Prime Minister, and we will publicize details as early as possible." The media request cited the "public's right to know," but Mazuz, together with the State Prosecutor and the Chief Detective of Israel Police, decided that a successful investigation is more important. "True," the three wrote, "a situation in which the Prime Minister is questioned by police under caution, but the public is not given even general information about the suspicions and suspects, arouses difficulties from a public standpoint, as well as a legal standpoint. This is clear." "At the same time," they continue, "it is important to clarify that, as opposed to the public's right to know, there is also the vital public interest of not harming the chance to get at the truth." Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
MERETZ PRAISES HAMAS; THE TRIAL/TRIBULATIONS OF A US JEW IN ISRAEL; IF YOU DONATE TO NEW ISRAEL FUND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 5, 2008. |
|
MERETZ PRAISES HAMAS Israel's Far Leftist party, Meretz, met with Jimmie Carter. Its youth group also praised Hamas' leader for stating a desire for form a state from the formerly unincorporated territory Israel acquired in 1967. What Meretz does not understand, or at least does not confront, is that Hamas seems to have adopted Arafat's phased plan for the conquest of Israel. This plan calls for the Arabs to accept and use sovereignty over any part of Palestine to conquer the rest. Does Meretz think that plan praiseworthy? (IMRA, 4/16.) Meretz is so appeasement-minded and self-deprecating about Zionism that it fails to think things through. It also, for all the Left's preoccupation with a non-existent Israeli racism, has a patronizing attitude towards the Arabs. It assumes that the Arabs think as it does. It thinks such an Arab state would be even-handed and therefore, since it values even-handedness, it supposes the Arabs do and that the Arabs therefore would cease struggling to conquer Israel. The Arabs think differently. Islam does not value even-handedness but supremacy. It considers an infidel state an affront. It would not cease struggling to conquer Israel. Hamas recently said that its state would not recognize Israel. ARAB DISUNITY "The polarization that defines the Arab world today revolves is defined by fault lines...:First, wealth vs. poverty: ...Second, growth vs. stagnation: ...Third, national cohesion vs. fragmentation: ...Fourth, pluralism vs. insularity: ...Fifth, order vs. disorder: ...Sixth, the rule of law vs. lawlessness: ... And seventh, religiosity vs. secularism: Some parts of the Arab world that enjoy material wellbeing and basic security tend to become more secular; other large segments of the Arab population increasingly turn to religion for the sense of hope and dignity that they do not receive from their status as citizens of a state." (Lebanon Star in IMRA, 4/16). What about Arabs in Europe and other colonies? HOW PERMANENT ARE GAZA ARABS? A poll found that 80% of Gaza residents are considering emigrating. 44% said they would leave immediately, if they could. Economic conditions are untenable for them (Arutz-7, 4/16). There lays the solution to the Arab-Israel conflict. If Israel focused on making conditions unbearable for the Arabs, they would leave. This wouldn't end Arab belligerence, but it would end most terrorism and nonsense about Palestinian nationalism. It would safeguard Israel's water and provide safe borders, thereby rendering war less likely and defense easier. THE TRIAL & TRIBULATIONS OF A U.S. JEW IN ISRAEL Emigrating from the US, Yitzchak Herskovitz bought land in Jerusalem, intending to build a house. His surveyor cannot operate, due to an Arab mob. (Israel does not reliably protect Jews from Arab mobs.) A P.A. clan, which evidence shows probably was evicted from its own village for crimes, squatted on the land, despite previous demands to evacuate. Mr. Herskovits brought suit as far back as in 1992. At one point, Herskovitz got a court order for the clan to evacuate. The police continually refused to enforce it; the court reopened the case. (The police lack official support, don't want to be attacked by Arabs, fear prosecution for defending themselves against Arabs, and often take the Arabs' side.) Although the issues are not complicated, the case remains at trial, because the clan testifies evasively and the court condones its deceitful changes in testimony (obvious to any reader of it). After four years of trial, the clan's former lawyer came up with a document that the land was security for a loan, later defaulted. Both witnesses signed with the same pen and handwriting as in the document. "The date was in a different pen and color, written in western numerals instead of the Arabic numbers used at that time by the Arabs. No subdivision, lot or bloc numbers are listed on it either. In addition, the seal on the document does not extend onto the paper –– it was taken from a different document." The lawyer who introduced the forgery has been made an Israeli judge! When the loan forgery was exposed, the clan claimed to have purchased the property. An amusing piece of duplicity was when the clan elder's wife was asked why her husband made such a poor agreement. She replied that he is an old man and not clear about what he does. But she was testifying about an event allegedly more than 40 years earlier, when he was of vigorous mind. After invalidating the document, the court decided to review all the evidence again, giving the Arabs an opportunity to devise a new case. Plaintiff's lawyer complains that the justice system does not prosecute Arabs for perjury against Jews, especially involving land ownership (and assault), and that courts find excuses to keep Arabs on land and expel Jews from it. He says that since the impoverished clan could not afford the lengthy suit, it must be getting a subsidy from outside sources, perhaps the PLO. The clan's new lawyer trains Arabs how to delay demolition orders against illegally built structures and tries to thwart excavations in Jerusalem's City of David area (which show the ancient Jewish connection to the Land). He wrongly claims that Jordanian law applies to cases in 1966, when Jordan occupied Jerusalem, so he gets clients to claim that they moved in at that time, although satellite photos, clan IDs, and witnesses prove the clan moved in afterwards (Arutz-7, 4/16). Concocting their testimony, he is part of the Arab attempt to usurp Israel, not a genuine counselor at law. THE TRIAL & TRIBULATIONS OF A U.S. JEW IN ISRAEL Emigrating from the US, Yitzchak Herskovitz bought land in Jerusalem, intending to build a house. His surveyor cannot operate, due to an Arab mob. (Israel does not reliably protect Jews from Arab mobs.) A P.A. clan, which evidence shows probably was evicted from its own village for crimes, squatted on the land, despite previous demands to evacuate. Mr. Herskovits brought suit as far back as in 1992. At one point, Herskovitz got a court order for the clan to evacuate. The police continually refused to enforce it; the court reopened the case. (The police lack official support, don't want to be attacked by Arabs, fear prosecution for defending themselves against Arabs, and often take the Arabs' side.) Although the issues are not complicated, the case remains at trial, because the clan testifies evasively and the court condones its deceitful changes in testimony (obvious to any reader of it). After four years of trial, the clan's former lawyer came up with a document that the land was security for a loan, later defaulted. Both witnesses signed with the same pen and handwriting as in the document. "The date was in a different pen and color, written in western numerals instead of the Arabic numbers used at that time by the Arabs. No subdivision, lot or bloc numbers are listed on it either. In addition, the seal on the document does not extend onto the paper –– it was taken from a different document." The lawyer who introduced the forgery has been made an Israeli judge! When the loan forgery was exposed, the clan claimed to have purchased the property. An amusing piece of duplicity was when the clan elder's wife was asked why her husband made such a poor agreement. She replied that he is an old man and not clear about what he does. But she was testifying about an event allegedly more than 40 years earlier, when he was of vigorous mind. After invalidating the document, the court decided to review all the evidence again, giving the Arabs an opportunity to devise a new case.
Plaintiff's lawyer complains that the justice system does not prosecute Arabs for perjury against Jews, especially involving land ownership (and assault), and that courts find excuses to keep Arabs on land and expel Jews from it. He says that since the impoverished clan could not afford the lengthy suit, it must be getting a subsidy from outside sources, perhaps the PLO. The clan's new lawyer trains Arabs how to delay demolition orders against illegally built structures and tries to thwart excavations in Jerusalem's City of David area (which show the ancient Jewish connection to the Land). He wrongly claims that Jordanian law applies to cases in 1966, when Jordan occupied Jerusalem, so he gets clients to claim that they moved in at that time, although satellite photos, clan IDs, and witnesses prove the clan moved in afterwards (Arutz-7, 4/16). Concocting their testimony, he is part of the Arab attempt to usurp Israel, not a genuine counselor at law. WHERE YOUR DONATIONS TO NEW ISRAEL FUND GO Adalah, an Israel Arab NGO that claims to support civil rights for Arabs, receives a subsidy from the New Israel Fund. Adalah calls the 10,000 or so security prisoners of Israel "political prisoners." This is as if terrorist attempts to murder Jews merely expresses political views. Adalah accuses Israel of segregation, in separating security prisoners from the rest. It calls this racism (IMRA, 4/17). If Israel didn't separate the terrorist prisoners out, the terrorists would be able to do in jail what they had attempted to do outside –– kill Jews. According to Adalah, protecting likely victims is racism, but victimizing another ethnic group is not. That is an example of the use to the New Israel Fund puts donations. The organization should not enjoy tax deductible status. It should be banned for being partially a terrorist front. Most of its other contributions are to groups that subvert the Jewish purpose of Israel. No self-respecting Jew should donate to it. FRANCE'S ONE-WAY FREEDOM OF SPEECH French actress Brigitte Bardot is being tried in her fifth case for "inciting racial hatred." This time, she accused Muslims of ""destroying our country and imposing its acts". (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/17.) As I interpret her statements, she is perceptive about the trend but impolitic in how she puts it. The hatred is not so much incited by her as earned by Muslim immigrants. French people have a right to alert their people to the dangerous invasion. Her opponents may contend with her, but I do not think it democratic to shut her up. They are not sincere or fair about it, because the Muslims incite religious and racial hatred falsely, constantly, and massively, with no penalty from the French who pursue her for her lesser but truer statements. The Left's hypocrisy about this indicates that they are the intolerant ones. TWO WOMEN VS. ISLAM Born a Muslim, a woman who became a Dutch legislator came to oppose Islam. She sees Islam as the opponent of civilization and progress, the Islamists just being more militant about it. She has abandoned faith. The other woman remains a Muslim but wants to reform it for opposing civilization and progress. She retains faith, including faith that Islam can reform itself. She is a lesbian (NY Times, 4/27). Since Muslims have neuroses about sex, what Muslims will listen to her? WHERE YOUR DONATIONS TO NEW ISRAEL FUND GO Adalah, an Israel Arab NGO that claims to support civil rights for Arabs, receives a subsidy from the New Israel Fund. Adalah calls the 10,000 or so security prisoners of Israel "political prisoners." This is as if terrorist attempts to murder Jews merely expresses political views. Adalah accuses Israel of segregation, in separating security prisoners from the rest. It calls this racism (IMRA, 4/17). If Israel didn't separate the terrorist prisoners out, the terrorists would be able to do in jail what they had attempted to do outside –– kill Jews. According to Adalah, protecting likely victims is racism, but victimizing another ethnic group is not. That is an example of the use to the New Israel Fund puts donations. The organization should not enjoy tax deductible status. It should be banned for being partially a terrorist front. Most of its other contributions are to groups that subvert the Jewish purpose of Israel. No self-respecting Jew should donate to it. FRANCE'S ONE-WAY FREEDOM OF SPEECH French actress Brigitte Bardot is being tried in her fifth case for "inciting racial hatred." This time, she accused Muslims of ""destroying our country and imposing its acts". (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/17.) As I interpret her statements, she is perceptive about the trend but impolitic in how she puts it. The hatred is not so much incited by her as earned by Muslim immigrants. French people have a right to alert their people to the dangerous invasion. Her opponents may contend with her, but I do not think it democratic to shut her up. They are not sincere or fair about it, because the Muslims incite religious and racial hatred falsely, constantly, and massively, with no penalty from the French who pursue her for her lesser but truer statements. The Left's hypocrisy about this indicates that they are the intolerant ones. TWO WOMEN VS. ISLAM Born a Muslim, a woman who became a Dutch legislator came to oppose Islam. She sees Islam as the opponent of civilization and progress, the Islamists just being more militant about it. She has abandoned faith. The other woman remains a Muslim but wants to reform it for opposing civilization and progress. She retains faith, including faith that Islam can reform itself. She is a lesbian (NY Times, 4/27). Since Muslims have neuroses about sex, what Muslims will listen to her? 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 |
|
A LIGHT UNTO THE NATIONS
Posted by Rabbi Adam Winston, May 5, 2008. |
|
Over the years it has been heart-wrenching to watch our fellow Jews react with pain, hurt, and a sense betrayal, when the nations of the world treat Israel and The Jewish People unfairly. We ask "How could they say/do/think such a thing?" "Can't they see that we –– according to any standard of even minimal objectivity –– are "the good guys". That we are trying?" So we "pull our hair out" in frustration. How can the world be so blind? Can't they see? Can't they hear? The problem is that they, in fact, see and hear very well. My dear friends, we Jews have in fact done them a terrible disservice over the years. We have brought them the limitations of a G-d given morality. Hitler understood the problem quite well. As Hitler said: "Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision."(1) This approach was not Hitler's alone, but it was the view of the Nazi Party: "In 1936 a Nazi Official, Supreme Group Leader Schultz, speaking at a meeting of the National Socialist Confederation of Students made this very point: "We cannot tolerate that another organization is established along side of us that has a different spirit than ours. We must crush it. National Socialism in all earnestness says: "I am the lord thy god, thou shalt have no other gods before me..." The war against the Jews was nothing less than a war against G-d and morality. Hitler sought to destroy truth, justice and morality –– so he attacked the people who have sought to convey these values to the world for thousands of years. The Nazis were even willing to damage their war effort –– in order to kill more Jews: "Late in the war, when the Nazis were losing, German troops were taken from the Allied fronts and deployed to murder Jews. In July 1944, when the Germans needed every train to begin their evacuation of Greece, not a single train was diverted from those taking Jews to the death camps. When the Germans declared a ban on all nonmilitary rail traffic in order to free trains for a summer offensive in Southern Russia, the only trains exempted were those transporting Jews to the death camps." (5) What, then, exactly was this "Jewish spirit" that the Nazis and others throughout history sought to destroy? Let a non-Jew, Reverend Edward H. Flannery of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, describe it: "It was Judaism that brought the concept of a G-d given universal moral law into the world. The Jew carries the burden of G-d in history and for this has never been forgiven." (6) Indeed, the Germans were clearly aware of this: On October 25, 1940, in a memorandum dispatched by I.A. Eckhardt, from das Reichssicherheitshauptamt –– the Central Office of the German Security Forces –– to the Nazi district governors in occupied Poland, instructs them not to grant exit visas to Ostjuden (Jews from Eastern Europe). The reason behind this order is clearly spelled out: they fear that because of their "Orthodoxen eisnstellung", their Orthodoxy, these Ostjuden would provide, "di Rabbiner und Talmudlehrere, the rabbis and teachers of the Talmud, who would create "di geistige Erneuerung" the spiritual regeneration of the Jews in America and throughout the world. (7) Unfortunately the Nazis succeeded all too well in their goals. By destroying almost all the rabbis and teachers of Judaism in Europe –– they left the Jewish people bereft of spiritual leadership and ripe for assimilation. The ultimate Nazi victory: Eradication of the Jewish spirit –– and with it –– all the positive values that the Jewish people can convey to the world. A Jew who has a comparatively superficial understanding of Judaism, can no longer effectively transmit the G-d given values of ethics, morality and justice that are Judaism's legacy to mankind. This is why the nations of the world stood by as the Jews of Europe were murdered –– because this is also what they wanted. This is why the nations of the world stand by mutely as terrorists kill Jews in Israel. This is why they are not terribly concerned by missile threats to Israel. This is actually what they want. Hitler did their dirty work then. Others do it now. By getting rid of the Jews, they can free themselves, they imagine, from the constraints of a G-d given morality. [Though actually they simply inherit destruction, for stubbornly refusing to heed G-d's instructions]. It has always been this way. It will continue. Our task as a People is to help them along the road to true civilization –– while under fire. As we said "A Jew who has a comparatively superficial understanding of Judaism, can no longer effectively transmit the G-d given values of ethics, morality and justice that are Judaism's legacy to mankind." If we are going risk our lives to do a job of being "A Light Unto The Nations" –– at least we should know what we are really supposed to be doing and how to go about it. Our goal must be to provide those Jews who have been robbed of their precious heritage –– with the chance to reclaim it. While those of us who were never given the opportunity to learn what their Judaism is really all about –– should do so now.
Footnotes 1. Rauchning, Herman "The Voice of Destruction". G.P. Puntam's Sons, NY 1940. p.223. 2. Ibid, p.225. 3. Robinson, Armin., "The Ten Commandments", Shimon and Shuster, 1943, Introduction. 4. Jackel, Eberhard, "Hitlers World View", Harvard University Press, London, 1981, p.50. 5. Ibid, p.56. 6. Ibid p.28. 7. Sherer, Rabbi Moshe, "A Window Into An Era, A Blueprint For The Years Ahead", The Jewish Observer, Summer 1995, p.6. Rabbi Adam Winston lives in Jerusalem. |
|
NAKBA CRAPKA...
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, May 4, 2008. |
|
Honigman... How can you be so insensitive!!!??? Perhaps the following will help explain... The lunar Hebrew calendar date for Israel Independence Day (May 14, 1948) falls on May 8th this year. The resurrected nation of Christianity's alleged Deicide People, the "Wandering Jews," and the Arabs' kilab yahud ("Jew dogs") and myself both turn sixty, G_d willing, on the exact same day. Shortly after the festivities, the world will face another "celebration" of sorts... the Arabs' "Nakba" day, on May 15th of each year. That's what the Arabs call their catastrophe... Israel's rebirth, placing a guilt trip for their own post-'48 predicament on Jews. They'll demonstrate all over –– including in Israel itself –– and assorted media will give them as much if not more coverage than they did for Israel Independence Day. While I don't deny Arabs attention, would the same protests of scores of millions of black Africans (in the Sudan and elsewhere), Copts, Imazighen (Berbers), Kurds, Assyrians, Jewish refugees from Arab/Muslim lands (and the few Jews still remaining there), and other non-Arab victims of Arab imperial conquest, forced Arabization, murder, expulsion, and so forth over years get the same media publicity? Of course not. None of the Arabs' multitudes of victims dare to even demonstrate without placing their own lives on the line. And when they rarely do, few –– if any –– people elsewhere in the world usually get to see or hear about such things anyway. It takes Arab mass murder of such folks as in the Anfal campaign in Iraq or in the Sudan before anyone even notices. So forget about what Arabs are doing to Kurds in Arab Syria right now without anyone saying a word. The murdered aren't numerous enough yet, I guess... forget about their on-going subjugation. All right... but, still, didn't Arabs also suffer because of the Jews' insistence on casting off their perpetual victim and statelessness condition? Yes, some did, but here's the main point... The Arab nakba was a catastrophe which didn't have to be. Arabs were mainly victims of self-inflicted wounds which occurred due to their own subjugating, racist attitudes towards all others daring to stake a claim, no matter how small, after the break up of the four century-old Ottoman Turkish Empire in what Arabs proclaimed to be –– as a result of their own earlier imperial conquests –– purely Arab patrimony. While no one is squeaky clean once hostilities erupt, the post-'48 Arab predicament was sired overwhelmingly by themselves. When bullets and bombs start to fly and comrades start to fall, too often all Hell breaks loose. But if Arabs had not repeatedly attacked Jews and invaded a reborn Israel in 1948, the Arab nakba would not have come to pass. Massive non-Zionist contemporary evidence (including from Arabs) testifies to this. And some Arabs (most new-comers themselves into the Palestine Mandate) would have come to live (as many now do) in one Jewish State –– which made Arabic a second official language and where Arabs who side with Hamas sit in Israel's Parliament –– as millions of non-Arabs (including many Jews) have lived in almost two dozen "Arab" states. Contrast the Israeli Arab example with many non-Arabs who had their own languages and cultures outlawed in "Arab" lands. In the State Department's current darling, Mahmoud Abbas's, own words, as quoted on March 1976... The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians...but instead they abandoned them, forced them to leave...and threw them into prisons (refugee camps) similar to the ghettoes in which Jews were earlier forced to live ( Falastin a-Thaura). So, then, when is a catastrophe not so? When it is –– or was –– totally avoidable and brought about primarily by oppressive attitudes and actions of the alleged victims themselves. While tragedy occurred, it was born of subjugating, racist attitudes and mindset which declared that none besides Arabs were worthy of political rights in the region. For Arabs, colonialism and imperialism are nasty only when someone besides themselves are the perpetrators. Unlike Arabs, who were offered repeated compromises over the land, no such accommodations were ever offered to the Arabs' national competitors. Think hundreds of thousands of murdered and gassed Kurds, even greater genocide in the Sudan, burned down Egyptian Coptic churches, what the real struggle is largely about in pre-Arab Lebanon (King Solomon built the Temple of the Jews in Jerusalem from his Phoenician ally, King Hiram's, famed cedars in Lebanon), and so forth. In 1922, Arabs were handed over three quarters of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine when they received all of the east bank of the Jordan River from the Brits. In 1947, they were offered about half of what was left in a second partition. Arabs rejected the above because dhimmi Jews –– as "People of the Book," one of the protected peoples who, after paying Mafia-style "protection money" via a special poll tax (the jizyah), were at least usually not massacred and forcibly converted en masse like others were with the spread of the Dar ul-Islam –– were entitled to no political rights whatsoever in Arab eyes. Had Arabs accepted the '47 partition, they would have wound up with two Arab states covering about 90% of the original territory of "Palestine." Thirty-five million truly stateless Kurds are still struggling to have the world recognize their own plight, with America's State Department Arabists –– key proponents of Arab State # 22 –– leading the opposition. The very name "Palestine" came to be only after the Roman Emperor, Hadrian, got so fed up with the Jews after their second major revolt for freedom and independence that he renamed Judaea "Syria Palaestina" after the Jews' already well-known, historic enemies, the non-Semitic "Sea People" originally from the area around Crete, the Philistines, in order to pour salt onto the wound. Rome's own contemporary historians wrote much about this themselves –– Tacitus, Dio Cassius, etc. Check out Dio... 580,000 men were slain, nearly the whole of Judaea made desolate. Many Romans, moreover, perished in this war ( 133-135 C. E., the Bar Kochba Revolt). Therefore Hadrian in writing to the senate did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the emperors, ' I and the legions are in health.' Hadrian was so enraged that, in the words of the esteemed modern historian, Bernard Lewis, Hadrian made a determined attempt to stamp out the embers not only of the revolt but also of Jewish nationhood and statehood... obliterating its Jewish identity. Despite all the whitewash, Arabs –– Abbas' Fatah Arafatians, Hamas, etc. –– still insist that their new State (again, second, not first, in "Palestine") will arise in place of Israel –– not along side of it –– as a quick look at any of their maps, websites, and such shows. Or try listening to or reading a sermon given by one of "moderate" Abbas' imams. He simply plays the Jew-baiting game better... i.e., with more dishonesty. Say one thing to the West, and another thing to your own folks in Arabic... although nowadays, much if not most of dhimmi Europe usually doesn't even expect that. Would that Jews possessed some two dozen other states like Arabs have, perhaps, one could argue, there would have been no need for the rebirth of Israel. But the Jew did not possess even one state, let alone two dozen. And, unlike Arabs, the plight of the Jew prior to 1948 was a nakba not of his own making –– despite the unfortunate "theological" claims of some. The sad reality is that the Arabs' misfortunes occurred because they insisted that the millennial nightmare of the Jews should continue into perpetuity. No compromise was feasible with "their" dhimmi Jew dogs in the Dar ul-Islam. And this goes beyond "merely" religious stuff... as fellow Muslim –– but non-Arab –– Kurds, black Africans in Darfur, Berbers, and others know only too well. Summing it up, had Arabs been willing to grant Jews a miniscule slice of the same human dignity and justice that they so forcefully demand for themselves, the Arab nakba could have been resolved decades ago. The day Arabs confess their own much greater original sin for all the above is the day they gain the right to protest others' imperfect struggles to obtain a modicum of justice for themselves. Until then, regardless of how politically incorrect it sounds... Nakba crapka. 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 |
|
FROM ISRAEL: COULD IT BE?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 4, 2008. |
|
Might the authorities really have something on Ehud Olmert serious enough to topple the government? It hasn't happened until now, in spite of the four investigations into his alleged wrong doing that have already been started. They all seem to hang in the air, going no where. But this one –– which I alluded to in my last posting –– has a different feel. The investigation was expedited, and he was questioned in his official residence for 90 minutes on Friday by the National Fraud Investigation Unit, under caution. Police would say no more that than this was a new issue and not connected to one of the other investigations. Precisely what is being investigated, however, is a mystery, because of a court gag order. Today it made the news that "senior law enforcement officials" are saying that this criminal investigation is so severe that he will have to resign. In the opposition, forces are mounting to bring the government down. MK Silvan Shalom (Likud), claiming that "the government of Ehud Olmert has reached the end of its road," said he was working to dissolve the Knesset when it opens its summer session in two weeks. And from Olmert's own coalition, MK Shelly Yacimovich (Labor) called on Olmert to suspend himself immediately because the scope of charges against him was "unprecedented." "It has been proven beyond any doubt that the prime minister can't be under serial investigations and also lead the country," she told Israel Radio. "Olmert is stuck up to his neck in investigations. We cannot have a prime minister who is serially investigated by police..." ~~~~~~~~~~ Of course, Olmert's office is issuing statements declaring that nothing is seriously amiss and that everything will work out. And there was someone else –– he should hang his head in shame –– who came out in defense of Olmert: Head of the Shas faction, Eli Yishai, who declared, "I am certain that the prime minister knows what to do, and when the investigations become clear, I'm sure everything will be fine." I was explaining to a native Israeli today about the American concept of politicians who are "Teflon," to whom no charges or accusations stick. "Ah," he responded, "Teflon does wear out." We can hope... ~~~~~~~~~~ Speaking of my mention of this last time, I thank all of those who caught my error: that I spoke of Attorney General Mofaz, when I clearly meant Mazuz. Two names, both starting with M and ending in Z. And I appreciate those who observed that I had just written about Mofaz, thereby compounding the possibility of this error. At any rate, please be alerted to my "goof" and the correction. ~~~~~~~~~~ This seems to be a time of hope dangled before us, without certainties: I wrote the other day about a report that our chief negotiator Tzipni Livni had enraged PA chief negotiator Ahmed Qurei by bringing to him a map that showed Israel retaining major settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria, as well as the Jordan Valley. On Friday, Khaled Abu Toameh, of the Jerusalem Post, who usually gets it right, reported on Abbas's deep depression after returning from his recent meeting with Bush. Seems Bush told him not to expect to have a Palestinian state in everything beyond the Green Line. Abbas was upset that Bush indicated he was not going to push Israel on the issue of settlements. ~~~~~~~~~~ This certainly provides a modicum of hope. First, in terms of what the US is seeking. "The Americans have adopted the Israeli policy," one Palestinian official said. "When you hear Bush, you think you are listening to Ehud Olmert." Well –– if you will allow a touch of black humor –– a Bush that sounds like Olmert is not necessarily terribly "pro-Israel." But there's an important issue being played out here. When Ariel Sharon was about to force through his "disengagement" plan for pulling Jews out of Gush Katif in Gaza, he touted a letter from April 14, 2004, that he had received from Bush, which said, in part: "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949...[essentially the Green Line]. Sharon said this was the trade-off for our pulling out of Gaza –– the US would support our right to retain major settlement blocs in any negotiations with the Palestinians. It has been a cornerstone of Israeli policy when existing major settlements have been enlarged to accommodate natural growth. Except that it hasn't exactly played out as Sharon said it would. Rice, certainly, has worked diligently to distance US policy from this letter, even criticizing Israeli building in eastern Jerusalem, which Israel considers fully part of the Israeli capital. And not so long ago, National Security Advisor Steven Hadley suggested that the letter had been aimed at securing domestic support for Sharon's plan, and must be considered in that context. Thus does Bush's current position potentially have real import. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then, too, there is hope because more and more it seems that there is not likely to be a meeting of the minds regarding a Palestinian state –– and thus no agreement of any sort between Israel and the PA before Bush leaves office. Abu Toameh cites that same PA official mentioned above as saying that the PA was no longer pinning any hope on the administration helping achieve an agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis. "The Bush administration has lost it credibility as an honest broker," he said. "We will now have to wait for the next US administration." ~~~~~~~~~~ And what will happen with a new US administration? From the US side that remains to be seen (and I shudder at some of the possibilities). But from the PA side, there are real concerns, which is one of the reasons Abu Toameh says Abbas is quite depressed: Abbas is afraid that if he doesn't forge a deal for a Palestinian state in the next few months Hamas is likely to take over Judea and Samaria. That, of course, leads to another question: Why would the US back an entity so weak that its own leader believes it may cave in a matter of months? Obviously, the answer lies with some notion that if only Abbas could present the people with a fait accompli regarding a deal for a state, then he would suddenly become strong enough to take on Hamas. But I'm not buying it. Because Hamas would work as the spoiler in such a situation. ~~~~~~~~~~ Before leaving this subject, I must point out that there are also rumors that are unsettling. Some, unconfirmed, refer to planned actions by the government that constitute a sort of pull out, leaving settlers high and dry with regard to security and support of various sorts –– this in order to "encourage" them to leave voluntarily. Additionally, Haaretz ran a piece about the mayor of Ma'aleh Adumim, who reported that after a visit from Tzipi Livni he had an uneasy sense that she was hoping to give away parts of Jerusalem and placate the people by joining Ma'aleh Adumim to what remained of Jerusalem. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas, by the way, has not been well since he returned from the US and underwent a heart catheterization procedure in Jordan last week. He's speaking about resigning, but I'm not yet ready to take that seriously, as he speaks about resigning frequently without quite doing so. ~~~~~~~~~~ Rice blew –– I mean flew –– into town last night. She has met with Olmert, and Abbas, and is scheduled to also meet with Barak and Livni, and Fayyad, in the course of her 36 hour visit. In a Ramallah press conference after meeting with Abbas, she said, a peace deal is still "achievable" by the end of year. This might lead one to wonder what she's been inhaling. She alluded to Israel's settlement policy as prejudicing the final outcome of an agreement. And she suggested we might be doing more to improve the quality of life for Palestinians. By this, she is –– ever oblivious to Israel's security needs –– making reference to the possibility of our taking down more roadblocks. We can always count on Condoleezza Rice. ~~~~~~~~~~ During that Ramallah press conference, Abbas, according to YNet, said that, "Ninety percent of the talks have been completed." Come on! Would he be depressed if this were so? Would he be upset at not having the '67 line as the border of a Palestinian state? The borders are theoretically the easiest of the core issues –– refugees and the status of Jerusalem being more thorny. If the border issue isn't resolved, where is the rest of it? It becomes farcical, really. ~~~~~~~~~~ Six hundred PA police have now entered Jenin, in a bid to establish law and order in a city that has been run by armed thugs. The PA police commander, Col. Wassim al-Jayoussi, said that "The police force came to Jenin to help in imposing law and order. There will be only one authority and one security force here." He called on all residents to hand over illegal weapons, and on all wanted criminals to surrender to the police, warning that anyone who did not comply would be arrested. ~~~~~~~~~~ Kassams fired at Sderot today hit a mini-market, a home and a cemetery. The Palestinians in Gaza today also fired mortar shells at trucks attempting to transfer food and fuel to the Gazans. As a result the IDF was forced to close the Karni border crossing and the Nahal Oz fuel terminal. Once again, the bewildering spectacle of terrorists undermining the possibility of help for their own people. Police said that approximately 50 trucks of supplies were forced to turn back. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
NEW WEB YESHIVA BRINGS THE WHOLE WORLD INTO THE STUDY HALL
Posted by Avodah, May 4, 2008. |
|
This was written
by Ezra HaLevi for Arutz Sheva
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) A new virtual yeshiva allows Jews worldwide to experience the intensive Torah study of a Talmudic academy from their own video-enabled personal computers. The Web Yeshiva (WebYeshiva.org) is a fully interactive Torah-study institution available online. Using video-chat and voice-over-IP web conferencing technology, students gather in a virtual classroom –– seeing each other and the teachers clearly and even raising their hand with a question at the click of the mouse. "I've been teaching Torah all my life and the audience has always been a live audience," explained Rabbi Chaim Brovender, the Rosh Yeshiva [yeshiva dean] of WebYeshiva.org. "It occurred to me that there has to be a way to reach people who cant come to the yeshiva, who can't come to the shiur [class] where it is given. What we have developed is the ability to teach a real class –– with preparation, homework and interaction –– over the Internet. As you see it is happening. You can ask questions, you see the page of Talmud being studied. And aside from the initial difficulties of launching any web-based project, it is working very well. There are real students all week long, from 5 in the morning onward." Offline, Rabbi Brovender heads the HaMivtar Yeshiva in the Gush Etzion town of Efrat, as well as Jerusalem's Midreshet Lindenbaum, a seminary for women. The idea behind the Web Yeshiva is not to create a database of classes for individual study –– something that is available in an ever-growing volume on various Jewish web site. The idea is instead to harness newly available technology to brings Jews from around the world together to participate in the give-and-take of a traditional Torah-study academy from the non-traditional setting of their own home, at hours of their choosing –– sometimes beginning as late as 11 PM or as early as a AM. It was initially assumed that most of the interested students would hail from "New Mexico or New Zealand," says Web Yeshiva Director Rabbi Yedidya Rausman. "But as it turns out, we are getting many people who in fact live in very concentrated Jewish areas who simply want to participate in yeshiva-style Torah study at a set time each day. Some are at their computers all day anyway for work and are able to fit in more Torah-study time by avoiding a commute to the closest yeshiva." That said, there are students hailing from Latin America, Europe, Thailand and even New Zealand. Rabbi Rausman says the fact that the classes are based in Israel is also a factor. "People want to learn Torah from the Land of Israel, even if they are not physically here," he said. Another group of interested students are those who studied with Rabbi Brovender or the other teachers involved and wish to reconnect. "Some people who have not seen their rabbi in 30 years are suddenly able to once again learn Torah with him face to face," Rausman marvels. Rabbi Brovender has big plans for the future. "We are looking to developing programs in Russian, French, Spanish and in Hebrew, of course –– all the languages Jews happen to speak today," he said. "We also have very serious plans about entering the high school market. There are a lot of high school kids in America, England and even Israel who don't live in religious centers –– who go to good secular schools but don't get the opportunity to receive a quality Jewish education." He hopes that the Web Yeshiva will be used as a supplement for such an education. In addition, practical skills such as being a Jewish scribe can be taught through the Web Yeshiva, Rabbi Brovender believes. "It is very visual and you will get the best teacher. It will be offered as a course, beginning to end, in becoming an expert scribe and you can see how everything is done along the way." An even broader application of the technology is causing a buzz among perspective olim (immigrants to Israel) as the Lamdeni individualized Hebrew-teaching service is finalizes a partnership with the Web Yeshiva. It is hoped that a program will be developed that will provide the opportunity for ulpan (Hebrew immersion courses) to be offered to every new immigrant before he or she even arrives in Israel. "Even people coming on Aliyah often don't have the time to go to an ulpan program prior to coming here," Rabbi Brovender explained. "The ability to take ulpan at their convenience in their home and for every student to get to speak Hebrew one-on-one with someone for a hour a week and test your own progress –– these things are invaluable." The second semester of the Web Yeshiva is scheduled to begin Tuesday, May 6. With a total of 46 weekly classes running through August 10, subjects include the standard yeshiva fare of the Babylonian Talmud, Bible and Jewish Law. In addition, classes on prayer, Jewish Business Ethics, Women and Jewish Law and the philosophies of Maimonides, Rabbi Chaim Luzzato and Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik are also being offered. In addition, local lecturers whose classes pack homes and study halls alike are now available to an audience where there is room in the front row for everyone. The famed Leah Golumb of Moshav Modiin, for example, is giving her class on the weekly Torah portion over the Web Yeshiva. Full-time and part-time students pay a tuition fee that includes lifetime access to archives of the classes they have attended, but the Web Yeshiva regularly offers seminars and study days open to the general public, free of charge. The next one will take place on Independence Day, which is observed this year on May 8. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
HAVE THEM GO
Posted by Avodah, May 3, 2008. |
|
This was written by Obadiah Shoher and it appeared on the Samson
Blinded website
|
|
Israeli rulers are racists. They agree to the Palestinian state because they don't want Arabs from the territories to inundate Israel, dismantling its Jewish identity. The inevitability of the Arab demographic threat to Jewish state, however, is a scapegoat. For one, Israel is not a state of Jews even now. Arabs already constitute 34% among her youngsters, and there are 19% of Slavs with ephemeral connection to Judaism. Other non-Jews constitute 6% of Israeli population. Additionally, there are huge swarms of Arab residents of Israel who won't move voluntarily to the pauperized Palestinian state when it is created, and Israel lacks the political will to revoke their residence permits and expel them. Even after a Palestinian state is created, Jews would hardly constitute a third of the young Israeli population. Arab international family reunions would drive the percentage of Jews still lower. This cannot be emphasized enough: Jews are already a minority in Israel. Israel is not a Jewish state. If, incredibly, the government would come up with some scheme of creating a Jewish majority in Israel: say, by purging birth records of Israeli Slavs, Israel would remain an un-Jewish state. A state which doesn't honor Sabbath or other basic tenets of Jewish religion, which abandons the Temple Mount to Muslims, cannot be meaningfully called Jewish. The Allies at Potsdam Conference explicitly sanctioned "orderly population transfers" of ethnic Germans from Poland and Czechoslovakia after WWII for a total of about 12 million. The Treaty of Lausanne provided for Greeks and Turks expelling each other's minorities a little earlier. The world did not care when Arab countries pushed out their Jews. The world accepted the Jews running out the Palestinians in 1948, and generally supports the Jews in refusing them back in. The world is sensible, and would tolerate expulsion of Arabs from Judea and Israel. The one thing the world hate, are calls for compassion, especially from TV screens. So whatever Israel does about the Arabs has to be done swiftly and irreversibly; no refugee camps. The Arab problem is not really so big. Israeli government prevents the West Bank Arabs from emigrating. Instead, teach them useful employment, and they would move out. Young Palestinians, educated as doctors or engineers, will move to other Arab countries in search of a better pay. A simple measure of distributing free condoms would considerably reduce the Arab birth rate. Boycotting Arab labor in Israel would push able males to emigrate, and their families will later join them. At least, crack on the illegal labor market; forced to pay Israeli taxes, economically inefficient Arabs would emigrate. Reining in the theft-based Palestinian economy would cripple the Arab industries dependent on stealing electrical power, building materials, and other goods from Israel. The number of Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is grossly overstated. Mortality is officially almost non-existent in Palestinian communities: Arabs receive the UN and EU subsidies for their long-dead relatives. For the same reason, the reported infant mortality in refugee camps and Palestinian towns is unusually low, much lower than in the similar places in the Third World. There are many documented cases of fake births, when Palestinian women borrow babies from each other to register more children and receive more subsidies. Many Arabs are counted twice: as Israeli Arab residents and inhabitants of the West Bank, sometimes thrice when a part of their family lives in Gaza. Arabs who moved from one West Bank town to another are often counted in both places. Illegal emigration from the West Bank and Gaza to Arab countries is not accounted for. Realistic estimates put the Arab population of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza at 1.5 to 2.5 million. Close to 60% in Judea and Samaria is virtually empty, settled by mere 1% of the total Arab population. Basic enforcement of Israel's laws on Arabs, such as making them pay taxes, serve in the army, and razing their massive illegal construction would make Israel unattractive to Arabs. Property buyouts at fair value would also induce some Arabs to leave Israel for cheaper neighboring countries. After Israel pushes some Palestinians out by economic policies, induces others to emigrate through compensations, the number left to be expelled won't be huge. Israel will be in existential danger regardless of the policies concerning her Arabs and the Palestinian state. A Jewish state among the sea of Muslims can never be safe, especially considering the Islamic prohibition of non-Muslim statehood in the Middle East. In any major conflict, Palestinians will be a fifth column because they are normal people and would like to have back the land they consider theirs. There is no reason for Jews to refrain from expelling the Palestinian Arabs. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL'S NEVER-ENDING BATTLE
Posted by Ted Belman, May 3, 2008. |
|
As the West ups the pressure on Israel to capitulate to Arab demands and return to the armistice lines, it is important to remember that all of Judea and Samaria were held in trust for the Jewish state from the singing of the Palestine Mandate in 1922, if not earlier from the time the San Remo Conference awarded these lands to the Jews. Throughout the thirties and forties the Arabs, with the Support of Great Britain, the Mandatory Power charged with the responsibilities of holding the land for the Jews, tried to thwart the intent of the Mandate and prevent the Jewish state from coming into being. Even the US helped in this endeavour. In 1947, UNGA Resolution 181, recommended a detailed plan for the Partition of Palestine knowing full well that such a resolution was contrary to the sacred trust for the Jews set out in the Mandate. Ben Gurion, knowing, how the winds had been blowing, decided that a half a loaf was better than no loaf and went for the deal. The Arabs didn't and invaded Israel instead. The War ended in an Armistice Agreement. Neither Res 181 nor this agreement vitiated the sacred trust and Jewish rights to Judea and Samaria and Gaza. While the West maintained its policy of preventing Israel from expanding these lines by forcing Israel to retreat in '56 from Sinai and negotiating Res 242 in '67 requiring Israel to return from territories occupied to secure borders, the Arabs continued in their efforts to erase the Jewish state. By accepting Res 242, many argue that Israel relinguished its rights to keep all the land described in the Mandate. Others dispute this interpretation and continue to argue that the Mandate still applies. Afterall, Res 242 was silent on the question of the Mandate and simply gave Israel the right to remain in occupation until they had negotiated "secure and recognized borders". It is noteworthy that no restriction was put on Jewish settlement of these lands as permitted by the Mandate. Myths and Facts has produced a very important presentation "Mandate for Palestine: The legal Aspects of Jewish Rights" confirming Israel's right to Judea and Samaria. Be that as it may, the government of Israel chose not to claim all the land as was its right, with the exception of Jerusalem and The Golan which it annexed. Nevertheless the west is not supporting Israel in any of its positions demanding that it share Jerusalem and return to "negotiated" borders near the armistice line. In time it will demand that Israel cede the Golan too. Although Bush is on record of leaving it to the parties to negotiate borders, only Israel is pressed to capitulate and the PA is allowed to be as inflexible as it wants. Under these circumstances, if Israel isn't allowed to say "no", their right to negotiate is vitiated. So now the West is getting ready to force Israel to accept the Arab demands. Unfortunately many Jews in Israel and the US support such a move. But the majority don't. Refugees In a fair world the refugees would have been resettled in the fifties when Jordan was in occupation. That was more of an occupation than that of the Israel's because Jordan had no legal claim to the land. Did Jordan welcome back the refugees? NO. Did the west resettle them elsewhere? No. Thus the West was fully complicit in supporting the "right of return" as the solution. At the Madrid Conference a Refugee Working Group was set up to try to resolve the plight of Palestinian refugees. The Arabs were adamantly opposed to resettlement of the refugees elsewhere. When Canada's Minister John Manley, sat as Chair of the RWG, he announced that Canada would accept a certain number of refugees and had similar commitments from others. He said, "We are prepared to receive refugees. We are prepared to contribute to an international fund to assist with resettlement in support of a peace agreement." The Palestinians burned him in effigy and said, "We refuse resettlement of refugees." That was the end of the RWG. An article in EretzYisroel.org, Palestinian Refugees, Invited to leave in 1948 clearly presents the history of this issue. The quote I like best is the one by Syria's Prime Minister, Khaled Al-Azm, after the 1948 war. Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees... while it is we who made them leave.... We brought disaster upon ... Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave.... We have rendered them dispossessed...We have accustomed them to begging... We have participated in lowering their moral and social level.... Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson, and throwing bombs upon ... men, women and children-all this in the service of political purposes .... [36 Commentary Magazine just published an article by Ephraim Karsh entitled 1948, Israel, and the Palestinians –– The True Story During the past decade or so, the actual elimination of the Jewish state has become a cause célèbre among many of these educated Westerners. The "one-state solution," as it is called, is a euphemistic formula proposing the replacement of Israel by a state, theoretically comprising the whole of historic Palestine, in which Jews will be reduced to the status of a permanent minority. Only this, it is said, can expiate the "original sin" of Israel's founding, an act built (in the words of one critic) "on the ruins of Arab Palestine" and achieved through the deliberate and aggressive dispossession of its native population.It makes for interesting reading. The Arabs will never make peace with Israel. Why should they. With the use of the peace process and the support of the West, they keep chipping away at the state of Israel. Israel must put an end to it. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
AP EXPLAINS TO YOU WHY ISRAEL SHOULDN'T EXIST
Posted by Professor Barry Rubin, May 3, 2008. |
|
If I would choose one article in the Western media that I have read over many decades as the worst piece of anti-Israel propaganda of all, it might well be Karin Laub's April 26, 2008 piece, "Palestinian plight is flip side of Israel's independence joy." Why? Because many articles have slandered Israel on various points or told falsehoods ranging from the disgusting to the humorous or been based on assumptions that were at odds with the truth. But in this case, the article encapsulates the way in which much of the world has turned from admiration to loathing of Israel, and the way in which Israel's destruction –– which in other contexts would be seen as genocidal –– has been justified. Sound exaggerated? No doubt, reading the above two paragraphs would shock the author who, I believe, had no conscious intention of perpetuating such a verbal atrocity. It is, once again, the unchallenged myths that are blithely assumed, that do so much damage. Let me explain, first briefly and then at length. Israel is the only country in the world which is regularly slated for extermination and it is certainly the one most reviled. Without entering into a discussion of why such extraordinary double standards are maintained the core issue is that Israel is allegedly an illegitimate country because it is founded on the theft of other's property and the suffering of other people. This is the modern equivalent of the blood libel, which held that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood for the Passover matzoh. But if that myth is too exotic for people remember that its "secular" equivalent was responsible for even more anti-Semitic persecution. That was the idea that any Jewish prosperity was based on the blood-sucking of Christian peasants or of society at large. In this case, Israel is said to have murdered, ethnically cleansed and otherwise persecuted the Palestinians. Therefore, nothing it does can be good, no achievement of itself counts, and it has no right to self-defense. Obviously, such claims are often greatly diluted but nonetheless rest on this basis. The Laub article is a systematic restatement of this thesis. To begin with, it is extraordinarily long for an AP article, 1,724 words. If this isn't a record for an AP dispatch, it must be up near the top. Obviously, this is a message that the AP editors are especially eager to convey: that everything Israel has is at Palestinian expense. That this is a lie can be explained on many levels but at least two must be presented here. First, why is this measure applied only to Israel, and certainly only to Israel on an existential basis? It is well-known, certainly, that Germany has taken responsibility for Nazi crimes, and also there are applications for reimbursement of Jewish property seized in eastern Europe during the Nazi period. Yet most countries are founded on expropriation, often of Jewish property. For example, Oxford University, where recently debates were conducted calling for Israel's destruction, was started on property stolen from Jews expelled in 1290. Far more recently, many Arab states received a huge infusion of capital from the expropriation of Jewish property after Israel's creation. Does France's or Britain's or Belgium's independence day require discussion of colonial depredations? We don't read articles that Japan's independence day is blighted by Chinese or Korean suffering, though the Japanese did engage in mass murder of those people. What about the fact that every country in the Western Hemisphere is based on the suffering of the indigenous natives? Or even in the case of Russia, given Czarist and Soviet behavior? In no case, however, is far worse behavior said to have poisoned any other country's very existence. But perhaps even more important is the question of where true responsibility for Palestinian suffering lies. Here is how Laub's article begins: "JALAZOUN REFUGEE CAMP, West Bank –– Mohammed Shaikha was 9 when the carefree rhythm of his village childhood, going to third grade, picking olives, playing hide-and-seek, was abruptly cut short. Uprooted during the 1948 war over Israel's creation, he's now a wrinkled old man. He has spent a lifetime in this cramped refugee camp, and Israel's 60th independence day, to be celebrated with fanfare on May 8, fills him with pain. Well, let us ask the following questions: How did Shaikha leave his
"carefree" utopia of Palestine? Most likely because his parents
decided to get out of the way while, they expected, the Jews were
exterminated by Arab armies. He was in fact "kicked out" by an Arab
decision to reject partition –– in which case at worst he would be living
as an Arab citizen of Israel and at best, depending on where he lived,
be a citizen of Palestine celebrating its own sixtieth birthday.
CONSIDER A WORST-CASE ALTERNATIVE HISTORY: Mohammaed Shaikha sat in his nice house and recalled how in 1948 his family left its village and moved a few miles into a village in the new state of Palestine. "It was rough for a while," he said. "But with the compensation money we got for making peace and aid from Arab states I was able to build a very nice life for myself." In fact, it was the Palestinian and Arab leadership which –– in contrast to every other refugee situation in modern history –– insisted on keeping these people suffering and in refugee camps to use as political pawns. They, too, rejected every offer of peace and resettlement. For example, if Yasir Arafat had negotiated a solution on the basis of the framework proposed at Camp David in 2000, Shaikha and the other refugees would have shared out over $20 billion in compensation and a Palestinian state might be celebrating its seventh birthday. The PLO refused –– a policy pursued since 1993 by the Palestinian Authority –– to move people out of refugee camps. They must be kept there as tools with which to blame Israel and also to continue the fires of hatred and violence burning. A hint of the truth is inadvertently given in the article –– though not explained –– by a Palestinian ideologue: "Anthropologist Sharif Kaananeh urges his fellow Palestinians to take the long view and learn from Jewish history: "If they waited 2,000 years to claim this country, we can wait 200 years." During those 2,000 years, however, Jews whenever possible built up their own lives and acted peacefully and productively. In Kaananeh's version, he is willing to keep Shaikha and his descendants in refugee camps for 200 years. And why not since the media will blame their suffering on Israel and provide it as a reason why Israel should disappear or make endless concessions or be denied full support despite the assault on itself. By the way, this is what the author prettifies as "perseverance" as if it were something admirable. Don't make a peaceful compromise; keep fighting and spilling blood unless or until you achieve total victory. In any other situation, this would be decried as a foolish, bloodthirsty, and fanatical world view. If the Palestinians want to make this their strategy they certainly should not be allowed to blame this on Israel. The true nakba (catastrophe) was not Israel's creation but the Arab failure to create Palestine and their continuation of conflict to this day. But only Israel is branded, in effect, as a war criminal nation. In this light, the hateful and vicious attacks on it make sense. Yet why don't we see the following headline: "Israeli plight a flip side of Palestinian celebration," or substitute "Israeli plight is flip side of [insert name of any Arab state name or Iran]" or "Israeli [or Jewish] plight is flip side of [insert name of any European state]"? This could be followed with interviews of displaced Jews (living in poverty since they never left post-World War Two refugee camps in Europe or the transit camps built in Israel to house Jewish refugees from the Arab world. Or interviews with Israelis who were maimed or whose families were murdered in wars or terrorist attacks? For, indeed, Israeli misery is built on the support of terrorism and hatred by Arab states, the incitement to murder and appeals for genocide among Palestinian groups. Even in direct Palestinian terms, the irony doesn't stop. The same week as this article was written, it was reported (by Reuters) that while Arab states have promised $717.1 million in aid to the Palestinians, only $153.2 million, that is a bit more than 20 percent, was actually delivered. If Palestinians are not well-off perhaps this is what one must examine, or at least acknowledge. How about this: "The 1948 war had largely separated Israelis and Palestinians, except for some 150,000 Palestinians who stayed put and became Israeli citizens." No mention of the fact that those Israeli Palestinians have prospered. And this: "The symbols of occupation, settlements, army bases, roadblocks, are visible across the West Bank." No mention of the fact that Israel has withdrawn from large parts of the West Bank, in all the populated areas (except a section of Hebron) Palestinians have had self-government, with massive international aid for 14 years! And this: "Palestinians under Yasser Arafat took to bombings and hijackings to make the world notice their existence...." So the sole purpose of terrorism was as a misguided public relations' campaign so the world would take pity on Palestinian suffering, not an attempt to destroy Israel. Or this, "Few refugees can realistically expect to go home again, because Israelis fear being swamped by a mass repatriation." That makes the Palestinian predicament especially harsh, said Karen Abu Zayd, commissioner of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency which helps the Palestinian refugees." While at least a motive is given for Israel's refusal (though not that the problem here is not just a massive influx of Palestinians might overwhelm social services but that the "returnees" goal would be turning Israel into a Palestinian Arab nationalist or Islamist state through violence), no other alternative is presented, not even resettlement in an independent Palestine. That last point was, after all, the whole idea of the 1990s' peace process. But the reporter collaborates with the Palestinian line: the only two choices are suffering or total victory, wiping out all other options. I could literally write a book on the misstatements and misleading basis of this article. But it can be summarized as follows: This is the Palestinian narrative adapted by a large sector of the American media, as well as academia: It is a zero-sum game in which either Israel must be eliminated or poor Palestinians suffer. That the continued conflict –– and their own suffering –– is due to Palestinian actions or that it could be resolved by the kind of compromises Israel has long been advocating (and Palestinians rejecting) and taking risks to bring about is not mentioned. Equally, the perspective that Palestinian radical leadership (by both Fatah and Hamas) and doctrine must be eliminated as the source of Israeli suffering is understated or ignored. The real victim here is both Israelis and Palestinians. The real cause of the suffering is Arab state intransigence and the kind of Palestinian leadership, strategy, goals, ideology, and behavior that this and so many media stories extol. Remember that the poisonous forest of hatred and violence grow from the acorns of articles like this. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is archived at
|
|
WHITEWASHING HAMAS
Posted by Marc Samberg, May 3, 2008. |
|
This was written by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared in
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. |
|
Another ordinary week has come and gone in southern Israel. Bombarded by rockets from Hamastan in Gaza, residents of Sderot, Ashkelon and nearby towns watched as their national leaders conducted negotiations by proxy with Hamas to release hundreds of terrorists in Israeli jails and consolidate Hamas's weapons supply lines by suspending Israeli counter-terror operations during a "cease-fire." Between trips to the local bomb shelter, they watched Israeli trucks deliver fuel and supplies to Hamas in Gaza in the morning; and they watched Hamas store the fuel and supplies in depots near the border in the afternoon. In the evening they watched news reports echoing Hamas' claims that Israel is depriving Gazan hospitals of fuel and Gazan civilians of basic foodstuffs. Wednesday night they tried having a Yom Hashoah ceremony in Sderot but it was interrupted by incoming missiles. For its part, Hamas marked the Holocaust with a documentary series claiming that the genocide of European Jewry was a satanic Jewish plot to cull the Jewish population of its handicapped and to manipulate the world media. Hamas captured headlines this week with its allegation that Israel was responsible for the death of a Palestinian woman and four of her children in an explosion in Bet Hanoun in Gaza as the IDF targeted Hamas terrorists from the air. The IDF conducted two investigations showing that the woman and her children were killed by something else: a secondary explosion caused by bombs the Hamas terrorists –– one of whom was her husband –– were carrying at the time the IDF targeted them. Hamas's allegations that the IDF killed four children and their mother were reported by both the international and Israeli media as facts. Those "facts" were only questioned when the IDF began its probes. Neither the local media nor the international media thought the fact that the source of their accounts was Hamas should make them question the veracity of the initial reports. When its spokesmen are not busy accusing Jews of planning genocide and Israel of killing mothers and children, Hamas devotes its efforts to accusing Israel of killing sick Palestinians by refusing to let them into Israel for free medical care. As no good deed by Jews goes unpunished by the UN, early last month the World Health Organization punished Israel for admitting more than 7,000 Palestinians from Gaza for free medical care during 2007. Echoing Hamas propaganda, the WHO accused Israel of causing the deaths of 33 sick Palestinians between October 2007 and March 2008. They died, the WHO claimed, due to the Jewish state's heartless refusal to allow them into its hospitals. The WHO report made mention of the fact that Hamas now controls the hospitals and clinics in Gaza. No mention was made of the fact that Israel bears no responsibility for providing health care to non-citizens from enemy territories, or of the fact that there is no place in the world where such care is provided-other than Israel. No mention was made of Hamas intercepting and hoarding hospital supplies for propaganda purposes. No responsibility was assigned to Egypt –– the other country bordering Gaza –– which does not admit any Palestinian patients. The report never questioned the credibility of its Gazan sources. As Andrea Levin, the Executive Director for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East reporting in America (CAMERA) noted this week in the Jerusalem Post, it was only due to the quick and detailed response of Israeli officials refuting Hamas's allegations that Israel wasn't widely condemned for murdering sick people. The most interesting aspect of these media reports is that for the most part, the news agencies reporting Hamas's wild allegations don't even have correspondents in Gaza. Hamas's habit of kidnapping Western –– even pro-Hamas –– reporters caused most Western media outlets to remove their correspondents from Gaza more than a year ago. The Israeli media has not had correspondents on the ground since Israel withdrew from Gaza in September 2005. Yet the same media outlets that realized Hamas is too radical to be trusted to respect their own reporters' lives refuse to question the veracity of their stories and are more than willing to credit them as fact well past the point of professional embarrassment. Indeed, no media outlet –– either Israeli or foreign –– has ever asked whether it even makes sense to run Hamas's propaganda in the first place. They have certainly not bothered to inform their audiences that the source of their stories is a genocidal terror group that is currently waging a missile campaign against Israeli civilians whose goal is to terrorize and kill them just because they are Jewish. But then, the media can perhaps be forgiven for their refusal to admit that their reports from Gaza are generally nothing more than terrorist propaganda for they are far from alone in their refusal to acknowledge the significance of Hamas's regime. From Jimmy Carter, to the Bush administration to the Olmert-Livni-Barak government, denial is the order of the day. Carter defends his decision to meet with Hamas's leaders in Syria and Judea by noting that the jihadist, genocidal, Iranian-sponsored terror group won the Palestinian elections. Since a majority of Palestinians voted for Hamas and still support it, the jihadist, genocidal, Iranian-sponsored terror group is legitimate, Carter argues. Certainly no peace agreement can be reached without it. But then as Hamas clarified just after its leaders met with Carter, any deal it may reach with Israel is merely a tactic in its ongoing war to destroy Israel. So while it may be true that no Palestinian-Israeli peace is possible without Hamas, it is absolutely true that no Palestinian-Israeli peace is possible with Hamas. The fact is that far from demonstrating the necessity of negotiating with Hamas, Hamas's popularity shows the futility of attempting to coax peaceful co-existence out of a Palestinian society committed to its neighbor's destruction. Yet just as the media and Carter refuse to acknowledge the significance of Hamas's terror regime, so the Bush administration refuses to acknowledge the significance of its broad-based popular support among Palestinians. In her remarks Tuesday before the American Jewish Committee, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that Palestinian society today overwhelmingly supports Israel's annihilation through terrorism when she said: "Increasingly, Palestinians who talk about a two-state solution are my age. And I'm not that old, but I'm a lot older than most of the Palestinian population." But then, after acknowledging that most Palestinians do not support peaceful coexistence with Israel, Rice argued that Israel must give them more land, more guns and more money because as she sees it, now is the time for a Palestinian state and leaders need to "make hard decisions confidently for the sake of peace and for the sake of their people." Rice went on to explain that this appeasement must be done while enabling the Hamas regime in Gaza to remain in place. As she put it, "the only responsible policy is to isolate Hamas and defend against its threats, until Hamas makes the choice that supports peace." So from Rice's perspective, not only must Hamas not be defeated, it would be irresponsible to even try to defeat it. The only "responsible" policy for Israel is to allow Hamas to continue stockpiling arms and building its army while trying to reach a ceasefire with it. Then too, as far as Rice is concerned, Israel must curb its counterterrorist operations in Judea and Samaria, dry out Israeli communities there and in post-1967 Jerusalem neighborhoods and allow US-trained and armed Fatah militias (who are also terror-supporting), to deploy in Palestinian towns and cities by the thousands. This, she believes is the best way to make Hamas transform itself into a peaceful political party willing to live at peace with Jews. As for Israel, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government clearly agrees with Rice, for it is following her policy. Wednesday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert refused to comment on his government's involvement in ceasefire talks with Hamas during the security cabinet meeting. When pointedly confronted by Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter about his apparent decision to allow Hamas to remain in charge of Gaza with its Iranian trained and armed terror army, Olmert simply said that it would be inappropriate to discuss such things. Thursday, the Jerusalem Post reported that the government is enthusiastic about the proposed cease-fire agreement with Hamas, strangely claiming that it may pave the way for a second and unrelated agreement in which Israel ransoms hostage Gilad Shalit from Hamas captivity by releasing hundreds of terrorists. Then too, the government claims triumphantly that Hamas has agreed to have Fatah forces deploy at the international border with Egypt. But since both Hamas and Fatah enjoyed a nearly unimpeded flow of weaponry through that border when Fatah was responsible for it, it is far from clear why this would be a positive development. The simple truths that the media, Jimmy Carter, the Bush administration, and the Olmert-Livni-Barak government are all unwilling to acknowledge are that Hamas is a genocidal terror group sworn to Israel's destruction and that it represents the will of the majority of Palestinians who elected it to office in 2006 and who continue to support it today. This plain reality demonstrates that there is only one responsible policy for Israel to follow and for the international community to support if they are truly interested in peace between Israel and the Palestinians. That policy is for Israel to lay waste to Hamas's terror army in Gaza and overthrow its regime. Only when they are forced to pay a real price for their support for terror and jihad –– as opposed to being rewarded for it with further Israeli land giveaways –– will the Palestinians will be forced to reconsider that support. Only when they realize that terror will get them nowhere –– as opposed to anywhere they wish –– will the Palestinians be forced to accept Israel as an unchanging reality with which they must live in peace. Dichter's condemnation Wednesday of his government's pro-Hamas policies was not the first time the Ashkelon resident and former head of the Shin Bet has argued that the Olmert-Livni-Barak government's policies are dangerous for the country. And Dichter, together with Transportation Minister and former defense minister Shaul Mofaz who has similarly criticized the government's policies as dangerous, could end the current situation if they had the courage to act on their convictions. Were they to band together with eight of their colleagues in Kadima's Knesset faction and leave the government, they would bring on new elections. Yet so far, they have refused to take action. Until they do, Dichter, Mofaz and their colleagues are enabling Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to continue endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands of Israelis through their bluster and appeasement of Hamas. Until they do, they are as guilty as the media, Carter, the Bush administration and their government colleagues of whitewashing and protecting Hamas to the detriment of their country and to the cause of peace. Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
FALSE MORALITY HANDICAPS IDF FIGHTING GAZAN TERRORISTS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 3, 2008. |
|
1 –– This could have all been avoided years ago. 2 –– If we would rid ourselves of the weak kneed leftist mentality, that has permeated into the IDF, thing might improve. 3 –– we are still in the same bad habits of letting the enamy decide what will or will not be, and reacting. Instead we should have some Jewish sechel plan an operation that has teeth and will not only send a strong message, but eliminate a lot of the enemy's ability to continue dictating the manner of how this war is to be fought. 4 –– I'm no military strategist, but to have the enemy concentrate their forces into one building or more should be an ideal situation to demolish and level the structure. They'll all cry, and go running to the UN but their tears will be worth the results. This is from Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis), and it appeared May 1, 2008 on IMRA. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il |
|
This is how Abu Rajah, a resident of Beit Hanoun in the Gaza Strip, described how Hamas gunmen take over apartment buildings when Israeli forces approach the area: "Scores of masked men rushed to the area. Most of them carried large bags full of weapons. They invaded our apartment buildings and demanded that the resident leave. In response the women asked the gunmen to distance themselves from the buildings and children. The atmosphere became tense and some of the residents were beaten by the gunmen, who were mostly from Hamas. In the end most of the residents left the buildings. We left the buildings in their hands. They brought sandbags into our bedrooms and living room. They set up heavy machine guns in the windows and planted large explosive devices in the sidewalks. " What is the operative message for Israeli policy makers from this report? Clearly, from an operational standpoint, the message is that the gunmen in Gaza are transforming civilian locations into dangerous military positions whose elimination and/or neutralization is required in order to insure the safety and efficacy of the IDF forces operating in the area. The Palestinian civilians certainly have every right to complain and protest that Palestinian gunmen commandeer their properties. But this is not Israel's problem. This is an internal Palestinian problem. Again. Israel's problem is dealing with the gunmen and the military positions they occupy. That these military positions were previously civilian apartment buildings makes them no less dangerous. As Israel prepares plans for a massive operation in the Gaza Strip it is imperative that this be understood. Unfortunately, there are indications that a distorted PC mentality may still have a heavy influence in the IDF. Yesterday Jerusalem Post correspondent Yaakov Katz reported that Col. Shai Alkilai, who was appointed by OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen.Yoav Galant to investigate the cause of Monday's explosion in northern Gaza that killed a mother and her four children, is looking into whether IDF commanders took into account the possibility that the terrorist duo was carrying large bombs –– that could cause damage to nearby homes –– when the decision was made to target them from the air. IDF forces were operating in the area at the time. The terrorists intended to use those bombs to kill IDF soldiers at the very first opportunity. Col. Alkilai's line of inquiry sends the wrong message to the commanders in the field and a disturbing message to the combat forces and their families regarding the apparent value placed on the lives of IDF soldiers. This is no time for vague positions that only serve to embolden and strengthen the terrorists. Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
ANOTHER PALESTINIAN 'ATROCITY ' CLAIM DEBUNKED
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 2, 2008. |
|
This comes from today's Joshua Pundit
|
|
Astonishing that anyone believes a word these people say anymore...about anything. You'll recall that there was a lachrymouse piece of garbage in al-Reuters and elsewhere, with a common headline along the lines of 'Israelis kill mother and four children at the breakfast table.' Funny thing...the IDF has finally learned not to take these claims at face value. They investigated, and it turns out –– surprise! –– the woman and her children were not killed by IDF fire. Instead, they died when the IDF hit four of Islamic Jihad's finest in a pinpoint heliocopter strike well away from the house who were carrying exlosives en route to launching them from Qassams against Israel. One tip off was that the secondary explosion was much larger than the explosion that was caused by the initial IDF bombing and the type of munitions it had used. Odd that it's the Israelis who get demonized, and not the brave Palestinian fighters, carrying stuff like this through residential areas and using civilians, in effect, as human shields. Just as point of reference, Article 28 of the Geneva Convention specifically states that enemy combatants using civilians as human shields are NOT immune from attack. Meanwhile 'Israeli Tank Shell Kills Gaza Kids' is the headline that's already been around the world –– and don't hold your breath waiting for a retraction. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
DONATE TO KEREN HAYESOD & THE JEWISH AGENCY...YOUR MONEY WILL GO TO ARABS!
Posted by Arieh King, May 2, 2008. |
|
My name is Arieh King and I am one of the handful of people that established the Israel Land Fund, after I finally understood that the JNF (KKL) is no longer a Zionist organization, It's become a post-zionist organization. I am writing a book to explain why. In short, they are supposed to purchase lands for the Jewish People, but they don't even budget 5% of their entire huge annual budget to do that. Despite a constant flow of offers. Further, they are letting Arabs build freely on lands that are already in their hands that were purchased with funds designated for buying lands for Jews. The subject of this particular email is not JNF but rather two other major "Zionist" organizations: The Jewish Agency & Keren Hayesod. If you think by that donating to The Jewish Agency & Keren Hayesod
you share in helping the Jewish People settle and live safely in
Israel, you are wrong. I know it is shocking. I have spent years
learning the details and must now go public with this.
LET ME GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE FOR NOW: Rabbis for Human Rights (RHR) an anti-Zionist organization, which fights even Israeli governmental efforts, is supported by the Jewish Agency. {All the information attached below is taken from the RHR web site} This is what they do. Defense of Palestinian Human Rights. See Preventing Home Demolitions. See
Agricultural Access. See
Separation Barrier See
And who are their supporters? YOU!!!!
MAJOR SUPPORTERS of Rabbis for Human Rights over the years have included: Alan B. Slifka Foundation
Now let me ask you: Did you know that this is where your money is going to? If you believe in the work of such organizations, that is your business, but when you gave to the Jewish Agency, is this what you counted on? The Jewish Agency has issued a poster for blessing Arabs for their religious holyday ... THIS IS YOUR MONEY!!!! Did they send a similar blessing to your brothers at Sderot? Netivot? Eshcol? Ashkelon? Tell me! Now please don't misunderstand me, If you donated in the past to Keren Hayesdo & The Jewish Agency, you must now choose one of these: a) stop donating to them OR b) continue
THE CONCLUSION IS: Instead of donating to Arabs through Keren Hayesod, JNF, Jewish Agency and Israel Government, donate to entities you can trust will never pass your money, that was specifically meant to help the Jewish people in Israel, to Arabs. And where you can check every minute where your money goes to! More information about: The high salaries,
With a lot of respect to the history of the organizations, Sincerely,
Contact Arieh King by email at kingshire@bezeqint.net |
|
UN: GAZA IS DUMPING SEWAGE INTO THE SEA –– IT'S ALL ISRAEL'S FAULT OF COURSE
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 2, 2008. |
|
This was written by Ehud Zion Waldoks. |
|
Gaza's water authority has dumped 60 million liters of partially treated and untreated sewage into the Mediterranean Sea since January 24, the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said in a report released on Wednesday.
A Palestinian rescue worker searches for bodies in raw sewage after a
cesspool embankment collapsed in the village of Umm Naser, in the
northern Gaza Strip. An earth embankment around a cesspool suddenly
collapsed, spewing a river of sewage and mud that killed at least 10
people. (Photo: AP)
"The sewage discharge is contaminating Gaza seawater and posing health risks for bathers and consumers of seafood. The sewage flows northward to Israeli coasts, including near the Ashkelon desalination plant. Urgent studies are needed to examine the extent of the impact," the report reads. The report's authors blamed Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip for the Gazans' inability to treat the sewage. "This sewage cannot be treated due to the lack of a steady electricity supply within the Gaza Strip, Israel's restrictions on fuel imports and prohibitions on the import of materials and necessary spare parts," according to the report. The UN said Gaza's water authority, the Coastal Municipalities Water Utility, required 14 days of uninterrupted electricity to treat the sewage. The utility provides more than 130 million cubic meters of water per year, according to the report, 80 percent of which ends up as sewage. Moreover, because of the restrictions on imports and exports into and out of the Strip, spare parts needed to repair the sewage treatment plants had not been allowed in. But a security source familiar with the situation told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday that the vast majority of Gaza's electrical needs were being met by Israel and Egypt. "Gaza is receiving 141 megawatts a day out of [its normal requirements of] 200 megawatts at this time from Israel and Egypt," the source said. He also said Hamas should be dealing with the issue. "Hamas is in charge there now and they should find a solution to the problem," he told the Post. Israel Water Authority spokesman Uri Schor said the problem was not new and that Israel was doing all it could to help Gaza process its sewage. "The Palestinians have been pumping partially treated or untreated sewage water into the sea for years, and not just since the beginning of this year. The State of Israel assists in various ways to the pumping and water distribution and to the continued operation of the sewage treatment plants. That assistance includes approval to transfer most of equipment the Palestinian Authority has requested –– the rest is in the process of being verified –– and all the diesel fuel necessary to run the plants," Schor said. These plants had not been affected by any cutbacks to electricity, he said. The sewage isn't just flowing into the sea, but into empty lagoons meant to handle runoff from storms, according to the UN. Lagoons in Gaza City and the Jabalya refugee camp have been turned into open cesspools. Long-term plans to improve the sewage treatment system have been drawn up, but were being held up by Israel, the UN report said. "KfW, the German government's development bank, has agreed to work with CMWU [the Coastal Municipalities Water Utility] on a project to upgrade the Gaza sewage treatment plant. The project, which will cost between $7 million [and] $15m., could begin by the end of April 2008 if the Israeli authorities allowed the passage of material and equipment. The project will allow the plant to treat 60 million liters of sewage per day and use the treated sewage for agricultural purposes or to directly replenish Gaza's depleted fresh water aquifer," according to the report. A plan to build a new plant in northern Gaza is also being held up, according to the UN. However, Schor said Israel was not holding up those projects but in fact actively aiding them. "Israel is very much assisting in the approval, funding [$45m.] and in executing a large project to deal with northern Gaza's sewage, despite the continuing situation," he said, "Likewise, the construction of a large treatment plant in central Gaza has also been approved, and Israel is willing to help build two more plants in the southern region of the Strip." Schor suggested the PA follow Israel's example and use treated sewage water for agriculture in place of potable water. "Right now, 70% of Israel's sewage is treated and recycled, and the plan is to recycle all of it. "In the PA, all of the agriculture uses freshwater, and using recycled sewage water would enable the Palestinians to redirect tens of millions of cubic meters of water for household use," he said. Responsible management by the PA would add a respectable amount of expensive freshwater to their supply, he said.
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
PLO IDEOLOGY; CAPITAL PUNISHMENT FREQUENT IN IRAN; ISRAEL'S RADIO REPORTS ON ABBAS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 2, 2008. |
|
PLO IDEOLOGY The P.A. ambassador to Lebanon said that when Israel gives up Jerusalem (or part of it), its ideology will collapse and the Arabs would be able to throw the Jews out of the whole country (Arutz-7, 4/14). I agree, except that the Olmert regime's attempt to give up key areas of Jerusalem already reflects abandonment of Jewish ideology and national security. Otherwise, the regime would cite the P.A. official's statement as an indicator that there is no peace process but just, as the ambassador said, Arafat's plan for the conquest of Israel. Why should Israel play into that plan? EGYPT-ISRAEL BORDER What does Israel call the Sinai border through which Hamas terrorists and Sudanese refugees sneak into Israel? The "peace border." (Arutz-7, 4/14.) Terrorists don't come to make peace. WHAT TO BASE POLICY ON? Critics accuse Pres. Bush of having been too optimistic about Iraq. (So were they, for they approved of the war, at first.) Then they turn around and are too optimistic about Iran, N. Korea, and other serious issues. Military action, alone, does not resolve nuclear proliferation. It merely delays the process. It may bring a stiff immediate price. Eventually, the offending country will develop nuclear weapons and seek deadly revenge. Depending on rogue regimes' sincerity about agreements is no solution, either. There must be a plan for preventing countries struck in pre-emptive attacks from rebuilding nuclear facilities. In the case of Iran, that would mean regional alliances (MEF News, 4/14) and changing the regime. Changing a regime may not still the nuclear drive, but at least it would stabilize the trigger finger and still the drive for war. P.A. DEMANDS EQUAL TREATMENT The P.A. complains that Bush visits Israel but not the P.A.. It wants him to recognize the Arabs' loss of land in Israel as much as the Jews' gain of statehood (NY Times, 4/25). Decades ago, everybody knew that the Arabs committed aggression against Israel. Now the Times makes the Arab case seem parallel. Bush ought to say the genocidal Arabs deserved to have lost. He won't. EGYPT TO PAY PRICE FOR DECEPTION? Word is that Hamas is preparing a major military operation against the new wall put up by Egypt. Last time, it allowed massive arms smuggling and put hundreds of thousands of troublesome Gazans on the loose. Hamas would blow up the tunnels under Egyptian troops (Arutz-7, 4/15). Those tunnels Egypt was supposed to detect and destroy. Instead Egypt allowed much smuggling. Now it may pay a price for that deception. On the other hand, a new break-through may give Egypt an excuse for demanding Israeli acquiescence to sending in stronger Egyptian forces, ostensibly to face down Hamas, but actually to prepare for an Egyptian invasion of Israel. SINCE CLERICS TOOK OVER IRAN IN 1979 Iran has publicly executed tens of thousands of people. It hangs them from cranes. The cranes are bought from Europe. Iran uses many Western products for military or repressive purposes. Iran copies Western weapons and makes them without paying licensing fees (IMRA, 4/15). ISRAEL'S RADIO REPORTS ON ABBAS Abbas has discretion and final authority for awarding the highest PLO medal. This year, he picked two female prisoners of Israel. One helped lure an Israeli youth to his murder, and the other was a driver for terrorists (IMRA, 4/16). Do Rice and Olmert seriously expect Abbas to fight against terrorism? No, they expect us to believe their assurances that he will. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION ON LEBANON "The UN Security Council today reiterated its commitment to the full implementation of all provisions of its resolution 1701, which in August of 2006 called for an end to hostilities between Israel and Hizbullah in South Lebanon and mapped out steps for a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution..." Secretary-Gen. Ban "was pleased that both the Governments of Lebanon and Israel expressed continued commitment to the implementation of resolution 1701, he was deeply concerned by Lebanon's ongoing political crisis, as well as by smuggling in the region and Israeli overflights." (IMRA, 4/16.) Hizbullah has fully rearmed and brought arms into the demilitarized zone, seeking resolution by another war, but Ban worries only about Israeli overflights! SELECTIVE ABOUT YOUR STORY? There always is some discretion and indiscretion in reportage. By the 1940s, America had developed academic integrity in journalism. The advent of advocacy journalism makes it difficult to differentiate news from reportage. When one cannot depend upon one's sources, it is difficult to counteract propaganda from totalitarians, who fabricate their assertions. That came to mind when watching an otherwise fine documentary, Constantine's Sword. The author, ex-priest Carroll, investigated the Air Force Academy's apparently sanctioned pressure on cadets to conform to Evangelical Christianity. The film and the now-fallen Evangelical leader, Jimmie Haggard, debated, though not face-to-face, what transpires at the Academy. If each told just his story, we could easily sort it out. Instead, each talks in generalities. Carroll juxtaposed facts as to lead to shallow conclusions not warranted by the facts presented. Generalities smooth out one's side and characterize roughly the other side. How far do the untruths go? How much credibility should one extend to either side? I had become proud of the US military for developing an efficiency and decency beyond my experience in it. I also had dismissed liberals' fear of the religious Right as exaggerated. Now I'm not sure about either conclusion. The film had enough in it to substantiate elements of official sponsorship of religion, indeed of a particular sect at the Academy, and elements of coercion. It would be one thing for cadets who knew the Jewish airman to discuss religion with him to the extent he was willing. But when they constantly trooped into his room and continuously accosted him, against his wish, they engaged in harassment. That is improper. The young airman was ready to fight with them physically, but that would end his career as much as their harassment made that career impossible. What kind of working relationship can someone have with Evangelical Christians who repeatedly threaten him with hellfire? Those Evangelists showed, by a combination of harassment and coercion (and I suppose by a lack of patience to hear any opposing arguments), an ugly side to their religious beliefs. Perhaps they wear people down, but they don't attract them that way. If their creed is like their behavior, it is repulsive. The 4/26 NY Times reported about similar Evangelical pressure in the Army. The Army needs to recruit more, but this melding of Church and State will discourage it. Who wants one's personal beliefs under daily attack on the job, from people with whom one has a life-and-death reliance? This is a case of America acting to some extent badly in the way we criticize in our enemies. It won't be long before the Muslims see here an opportunity to pretend to stand up for religious freedom in America, but to gain privileges for themselves. 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 |
|
UNRWA'S SCHOOL HEADMASTER'S DOUBLE LIFE AS AN ISLAMIC JIHAD COMMANDER
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 2, 2008. |
|
On Apr 29 2008 3:00PM ... we hear
The Secretary-General lauded the efforts of the UN Relief and Works
Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East Thursday, May 1 2008 ... we read UNRWA School Headmaster's Double Life CNN reported that an Israeli airstrike killed an Islamic Jihad
commander who also headed a UNRWA school in Gaza. The person killed was the deputy commander of the Islamic Jihad military wing, according to the Palestinian sources, who said he also served as a school headmaster at a United Nations Relief and Works Agency school. Bottom line: If other UNRWA school officials are leading
double lives, it would explain this video of mortars being launched
from a UNRWA school last year (see UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunnes said he could not immediately confirm that the person was employed by the United Nations, and added that staff members who bring politics into U.N. Institutions are fired immediately for violating staff rules. Because we all know the politics is the problem here, and not the
fact he was a freakin' terrorist.
Other Readings THIS IS THE UN's UNRWA.....
Mortar Attacks on Israelis from UN Safe Haven
UNRWA Summer Killing School
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT: A Rigorous Review of UNWRA Practices
Inside UNRWA: Special Investigative Report
Background to UNRWA Conference in Geneva
Congressman Eric Cantor (R-Va).Analyzes UNRWA Palestinian Refugee
Camps by Gordon Robertson Archive:
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
NEVER AGAIN –– WORDS WE DO NOT REALLY MEAN
Posted by Zeev Shemer, May 2, 2008. |
|
We stood still while the sirens were heard everywhere in Israel. We attended functions and remembered our connection to the Holocaust and its victims. We can only wonder how many geniuses we lost. How many teachers, scientists, artists and great minds vanished? We proudly uttered the words Rabbi Kahane used as his motto: Never Again! We meant it, at least for that moment. The IDF Chief of the General Staff for the 'March of the Living' spoke like a hero to his elite battalion in front of the Auschwitz Death Camp. Never Again, he said, never again will we stand idle while Jews are being targeted by murderers and anti-Semites. That is what he said. Those words got printed and recorded. And only one day later, as Kassam missiles were launched from Gaza into Sderot and the community farms of the Negev, our brave army did as it always does, it stood idly by. As Jewish men, women and children are targeted for murder every day with rockets launched from what used to be our land, the brave words Never Again are nothing but hypocritical utterances by people who either reflect Olmert's nonsensical 'I am tired of fighting and tired of winning' self-loathing ideology or they reflect a darkness in our very souls. "We are not like Rabbi Kahane" would be the politically correct answer when asked why we refuse to protect the Jews we have sworn to safeguard. Rabbi Kahane may I remind you all, proposed to transfer the Arabs out. At this point, any normal nation would respond to daily rocket attacks to any of its towns or cities with a mighty military strike. Only Israel sits idly by. "Go look for the heads of these terrorist groups" our soldiers are commanded. While a terrorist leader is taken out, only a few thousand remain anxious to take his place. If we continue targeting their leaders, I figure we should rid Gaza of all its terrorists within the next 300 years, give or take. I feel bad for people whose lives are in distress, but the Muslims of Gaza took a vow to eliminate the 'Jewish State'. As bad as I may feel for bystanders and victims of their democratically elected Muslim extremist leaders, my duty is to protect Israel. Therefore I would offer these Gazan Muslims a chance to relocate. Not long ago it was reported that half of them wish to emigrate. Why is it that neither Israel nor the UN are providing these people with the opportunity and financial assistance to leave? Are they being used as pawns against Israel? Could that really be the case? Is that why the 22 Muslim nations that surround Israel have not attempted to integrate and absorb these people? When I uttered the words Never Again, it would have meant leveling Gaza if attacked again by its inhabitants. But I do not wish to be an extremist. I rather do as Rabbi Kahane had proposed and help those loving rocket-launching Muslims find a home elsewhere. Our other last alternative would be to do as our IDF Chief of Staff does: Say nice things we do not really mean. Addendum: I pray we soon vote Labor, Kadima and Shas out of government together with the self-appointed leftist judges of the Supreme Cult (court?). It will mean to say 'thanks but no thanks' to Netanyahu as he has proven to be a flip-flopper. It will mean to embrace non-religious Jews such as Dr. Aryeh Eldad of Hatikva, as well as the religious ones: Effie Eitan and Baruch Marzel. The mainstream parties, both Labor and Likud (and their Kadima mutation) have brought nothing but hardship and bloodshed. With God's help, we can bring upon our land the changes we have longed for. Ze'ev Shemer is an instructor at Western Galilee College and Ort Braude Institute of Technology. He grew up in Colombia and moved to the US where he attended college and obtained his Master's Degree. Ze'ev made Aliyah in 2004 and lives in Ramat HaGolan. Besides being an academic teacher Ze'ev is a Martial Arts instructor for adults and pre-army cadets. Contact him at zeev.shemer@yahoo.com |
|
CONDI'S GIFT TO ISRAEL AT 60
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, May 2, 2008. |
|
"Israeli and Palestinian negotiators should decide once and for all where to draw the line between Israeli and Palestinian territory, ending the argument over Jewish housing expansion on disputed ground."
The Line Has Already Been Drawn and is Backed by International Law! On September 16, 1922, the final geographical area of Jewish Palestine was drawn by the League of Nations for the Jewish National Home. From the League of Nations Report: PALESTINE [Eretz-Israel] INTRODUCTORY. POSITION, ETC. 
"Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30° N. and 33° N., Longitude 34° 30' E. and 35° 30' E. On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: North. –– From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias. East. –– From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya'pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba. South. –– From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa. West. –– The Mediterranean Sea."
Eli E. Hertz is president of Myths and Facts,
Inc. The organization's objective is to provide policymakers, national
leadership, the media and the public-at-large with information and
viewpoints that are founded on factual and reliable content. Contact
him at today@mythsandfacts.org
|
|
SAUDI ARABIA: YOUNG WOMAN MARRIED AT 10 YEARS OLD, MUST PAY TO OBTAIN DIVORCE
Posted by Shariah Risk Due Diligence Newsletter, May 1, 2008. |
|
This was published in Media Center Adnkronos
|
|
Riyadh, 18 April (AKI) –– A 23 year old girl, forced to marry at ten in Saudi Arabia was ordered to pay the equivalent of 16,750 euros to obtain a divorce from his husband, according to Saudi daily al-Watan. The girl, deemed as a 'rebel' by a judge in the capital, Riyadh, was forced to marry a 67-year-old man due to her family's economic problems, in exchange for a dowry of 100,000 Saudi riyals (16,750 euros). According to the judge, the girl does not have any grounds for divorce, but if she wants to divorce the husband, she must return the dowry given to the family 13 years ago. The father of the girl, regrets having married her daughter so young, saying "I made a mistake by forcing my daughter to marry. If she wants to re-marry, it will be her decision who to do it with." The father of the 23-year-old woman also pleaded for help in order to collect the 100,000 riyal dowry that must be returned. "I ask those who have the possibility to help my daughter to find the money needed to return the dowry. I cannot help her because our family does not have the economic means," concluded the father. On Wednesday, a court in neighbouring Yemen annulled the marriage of an eight-year-old girl and a 30-year-old man. The girl alleged her husband had beaten and raped her although under Yemeni law a groom is not allowed to have sex with his child bride until she reaches puberty. Yemen is one of the world's poorest countries. Shariah Risk Due Diligence Newsletter is a project of The Center For Security Policy. It was established to defend the U.S. Constitution and to protect our political and religious liberties, which are all under assault by those seeking to legitimize Shariah law (i.e., Islamic law) and its economic tool, Shariah-compliant finance. Contact the Center at shariah@centerforsecuritypolicy.org |
|
TRAGEDY OF NETANYAHU; "FAR RIGHT" SURGES IN EUROPE; THE ISLAMIC BOMB
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 1, 2008. |
|
TRAGEDY OF NETANYAHU Like Rabin, Netanyahu was plucked from the rear of the line by Henry Kissinger to run Israel. Do you think that was because he would be good for Israel or because he would do the bidding of those who advanced him? Unlike Rabin, Netanyahu has great talent. He did save the Israeli economy, though one wonders why he did it only as Finance Minister and not earlier, when he was Prime Minister. Again, unlike Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon, and Olmert, Netanyahu understands how to defend the country from jihad. He articulates his case well. Some of his speeches as a member of the opposition are as fine as can be, as far as they go and as seldom as he utters them. All the more disappointing, then, that the speeches don't go so far and that in power, Netanyahu behaves like the other stooges. Now, he makes a speech once in a while. That is the mark of poor leadership or of the speech's content being perfunctory, politically correct for his current purpose. You know that Netanyahu let Pres. Clinton get away with keeping Israel's concessions made at Wye without keeping his promise to free Pollard, and that at Wye he gave most of Hebron to the enemy. Where was his stated anti-terrorism, his vaunted defense policy, his touted Jewish nationalism, then? The excuse is that he caves in under US pressure. That is no excuse, that is a disqualification for top office. But his caving in seems more pre-determined, to me. He, like Olmert, claims to have learned from experience, but won't say what that was. It makes one wonder whether Olmert did or can learn. Olmert has proved he didn't learn, by repeating his mistakes. Besides, with Olmert, it isn't a matter of particular mistakes, but of being so foolish and obstinate, he's bound to make new mistakes. Unlike Rabin, Peres, Sharon, and Olmert, Netanyahu did not use his political position to peddle influence. But Netanyahu used his knowledge of Peres' role in the assassination of Rabin to get Peres to throw the next election to him. Then he betrayed the patriots who had helped him attain top office. There's a lack of basic integrity in that. He could have exposed Peres, and won fairly. After winning, he took no steps to dismantle the anti-Jewish unit Peres had in the secret service. Neither did he reform the brutality modus operandi of the police or the broadcasting near-monopoly and leftist censorship by the government. Israel's ruling elite is too secular. Most don't know what the Jewish heritage means; Netanyahu does, but doesn't feel it. If Netanyahu were the champion of the Jewish people he poses as, he would rebuke PM Olmert daily and would explain to Congress why the State Dept. policy would get Israel destroyed and weaken America. What a disappointment! Netanyahu is no more the messiah than the deceased Lubovicher rebbe. Unrealized potential does us no good. TURKEY & IRAN MEET AGAINST TERRORISM They regularly discuss the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), seeking independence in both countries (IMRA, 4/13) and for autonomy in Iraq and Syria). How much of this coordination is because of PKK means –– terrorism –– and how much is because of PKK goals –– independence or minority rights? ISRAEL'S SHORT VISION Israel has no plan for getting rid of the problems from Gaza. It also imposes sanctions it knows it will have difficulty explaining to a skeptical world and that it will retract. It loses public relations in having to explain itself with what seem like excuses. It loses prestige in having to reverse itself. Problem is, Dr. Aaron Lerner finds, the government can't see past the next press release. It does not think anything through (IMRA, 4/12). A plan means that their actions bring them nearer their goals. That's not fair of Dr. Lerner. Israel politicians are not picked for intelligence. He shouldn't expect anything of them. If they could plan, wouldn't they? NO NATIONAL STRATEGY AGAINST THIS FORM OF JIHAD "Islamists with financial means have launched a "legal Jihad," filing frivolous and malicious lawsuits with the aim of abolishing public discourse critical of Islam and with the goal of establishing principles of Sharia law (strict Islamic law dating back to the 9th Century) as the governing political and legal authority in the West." "Islamist 'Lawfare' is often predatory, filed without a serious expectation of winning, and undertaken as a means to intimidate, demoralize and bankrupt defendants. The lawsuits range in their claims from defamation to workplace harassment and they have resulted in books being pulped and meritorious articles going unpublished." "Libel Tourism (going to where it is hard to defend from false accusation of libel) has also resulted in foreign judgments against American authors mandating the regulation of their speech and behavior. The litany of American anti-Islamist researchers, authors, activists, publishers, congressman, newspapers, television news stations, think tanks, NGOs, reporters, student journals and others targeted for censorship is long..." (Too long for me to include. Fortunately, there is some counter-attack.) " This is not a Left or Right issue. The Islamist Lawfare challenge presents a direct and real threat to our constitutional rights and national security. Left unabated, this phenomenon has the potential to seriously hinder public debate on the threat of radical Islam. The United States was founded on the premise of freedom of worship, but also on the principle that one should have the freedom to criticize religion." (MEF New, 4/14.) ISRAEL NOT TRYING TO WIN Israeli reserve general Amidror identifies six components of counterinsurgency warfare which he deems essential for effecting military victory over irregular forces. These components are: (1) A political decision by the government to defeat terrorism; (2) Winning and maintaining control of the territory from which terrorists operate; (3) Acquiring relevant intelligence; (4) Isolating the terror enclaves from outside supporters; (5) Multidimensional cooperation between intelligence gatherers and fighting forces; and (6) Separating civilians from terrorists." The Olmert-Livni-Barak regime undermines some of these components. Instead of striving to win, the government is striving (ineffectively) to hold down terrorist violence long enough to give up the Territories and hope that then the terrorists won't think Israelis are evil any more. That sacrifices items 1 and 2. As the P.A. ambassador to Lebanon reiterated, however, the PLO goal remains the same, destroying Israel in territorial phases (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 4/14). By abandoning territory, Israel loses sources of intelligence, item 3. By giving up control over the Gaza-Sinai border, Israel lets outside supporters and a terrorist enclave cooperate, item 4. By failing to enforce the law in Israel (and in the Territories), and by failing to arrest Israeli Arabs' pro-terrorist leaders, Israel fails to separate civilians from terrorists, item 6. THE FAR RIGHT, WHATEVER THAT IS, SURGES IN EUROPE Give imprecise labels to political groups, and the labels carry prejudices against the groups. That happens with the label "Right," or "Far Right," in Europe. What they all have in common is opposition to Muslim immigration and a defense of European culture. But some, such as Le Pen's movement, are antisemitic, and some look back nostalgically at fascism. Others, however, raise actual issues that properly worry Europeans, issues that the other parties ignore out of leftism or political correctness. Voters can see the Islamic intimidation of their societies, and support parties that would end it (MEF News, 4/14). EUROPE'S CHOICES Europe can succumb to Islam, fight Islam off, or integrate with Islam. Defeat is not inevitable. Europeans are showing signs of awakening to the danger of being overtaken. The third choice has little prospect. Young Muslims are cultivating grievances and thirst for strife. They don't integrate. Will Europe be able to halt the growth of Islam and its offenses against other groups without major warfare? (Daniel Pipes #814, 4/14). TURKEY BECOMING ISLAMIST? Just as France harbored Khomeini, whose return to Iran made it Islamist, the US is harboring Gulen, whose imminent return to Turkey may turn it Islamist. Gulen controls a vast organization and resources. Gulen acts quiet in the US, so many prominent Americans think he is a power-eschewing, mild, tolerant person. (Islamists are skilled at that, Americans na¨ve about it.) The French thought Khomeini was mild. Khomeini bided his time. Gulen is patient, too. He watched the Islamists of Algeria overplay their hand while the opposition still was strong. The government of Algeria crushed the Islamists. Gulen won't act prematurely. He will ease Turkey into clericalism. The head of Turkey already has taken over much of the media and arrests dissenting journalists. Gulen could assist him by issuing fatwas that promote the establishment of Islam. He could rally mobs to intimidate opposition MEFNews, 4/14). THE ISLAMIC BOMB Steve Weissman and Herbert Krosney co-authored that Times Books publication in 1981. Primarily about Pakistan's drive for nuclear weaponry, that exceptionally well-written book explained how international safeguards hardly safeguard. I figured that out a very few years ago, but Weissman and Krosney warned us about it long before Saddam had a reactor going hot. After the authors explained how talented third world scientists and businessmen can be, and that determination and money will prevail under the existing order, there was no excuse for the West to let Saddam and others proceed. What my friends still don't know about the subject, and is shown in this book, in my opinion, allowed proliferation, to make money. Then the US had to sacrifice troops to de-proliferate. The book is a fine exercise in investigative reporting. It differentiates between governments' public and private stands. It shows how power is utilized. It destroys many myths. Will human beings step back and stop being clever to attain ends that it would be wiser to eschew? 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 |
|
THIS WAS WRITTEN BY BEN HECHT IN 1943
Posted by Avodah, May 1, 2008. |
|
"Remember Us"
When the time comes to make peace, the men of many countries will sit around the table of judgment. The eyes of the German delegates will look into the eyes of Englishmen, Americans, Russians, Czechs, Poles, Greeks, Norwegians, Belgians, Frenchmen and Dutchman. All the victims of the German adventure will be there to pass sentence –– all but one; the Jew. There are two reasons for this. First is the fact that the Jews have only one unity –– that of the target. They have lived in the world as a scattered and diverse folk who paid homage to many cultures and called many flags their own. Under attack they have achieved falsely the air of "a race", "a people" and even "a nation." The Germans have animated the myth of the Jewish menace beyond any of their predecessors and have tried to prove their case by presenting the world with a larger pile of Jewish corpses than has ever before been introduced into this ancient argument. Despite this unity which death has given them, the peace will reveal that the Jews were diversified and harmless political nobody who had in common little more than the rage of the Germans. They have no country to represent them at the judgment table. The second reason why they will not be represented is even more practical. Outside the borders of Russia, there will not be enough Jews left in Europe to profit by representation were it given to them. They will have been reduced from a minority to a phantom. There will be no representatives of the 3,000,000 Jews who once lived in Poland, or of the 9000,000 who once lived in Rumania, or of the 900,000 who once lived in Germany, or of the 750,000 who once lived in Czechoslovakia, or of the 400,000 who once lived in France, Holland and Belgium. Of these 6,000,000 Jews almost a third have already been massacred by the Germans, Rumanians and Hungarians, and the most conservative of the scorekeepers estimate that before the war ends at least another third will have been done to death. These totals will not include Jews who died in the brief battles of the German blitzes, nor those who figure in the casualty lists of the Russians. Of the 3,000,000 Jews in Russia, more than 700,000 have entered the Soviet armies and fought and bled on all the valorous battlefields of the Muscovites. These are the lucky Jews of Europe and are not to be counted in the tale of their nightmare. The millions who were hanged, burned or shot did not die dreaming, like the valorous Greeks, Dutchmen, Frenchmen and Czechs, of abatements to be avenged and homelands to be restored. These great sustaining powers in the human soul are unknown to the Jews. When they die in massacre they look toward no tomorrow to bring their children happiness and their enemies disaster. For no homeland is ever theirs, no matter how long they live in it, how well they serve it, or how many of its songs they learn to sing. When plans for a new world are being threshed out at the peace conference, when guilts are being fixed and plums distributed, there will be nothing for the Jews of Europe to say to the delegates but the faint, sad phrase, "Remember us." The dead of many lands will speak for justice, but the Jew alone will have no one to speak for him. His voice will remain outside the hall of judgment, to be heard only when the window is opened and the sad plaint drifts in: "Remember us. In the town of Freiburg in the Black Forest, two hundred of us were hanged and left dangling out of kitchen windows to watch our synagogue burn and our Rabbi being flogged to death. These are only a few of the voices. There are many more and there will be yet more millions. When the German delegates sit at the peace table, no sons or survivors or representatives of these myriad dead will be there to speak for them. And by the that time it will be seen that the Jews are Jews only when they fall under German rifle butts, before German motor lorries, and hang from German belts out of their kitchen windows. Once dead it will be seen that the Jews are left without a government to speak for their avenging and that there is no banner to fly in their tomorrow. Only this that I write –– and all the narratives like it that will be written –– will be their voice that may drift in through the opened window of the judgement hall." Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
WHAT MY FATHER TOLD ME BEFORE HE WAS SENT TO TREBLINKA
Posted by Avodah, May 1, 2008. |
|
This was written by Naphtali Lau-Lavie , a former Israeli
diplomat and former consul-general in New York. It is called "My
father's will" and it appeared April 30, 2008 in the Jerusalem
Post |
|
Next he addressed me directly: "If you manage to get out of here, go and return to the Land from which we were expelled, because only there will the Jewish people be itself and become strong enough to prevent such tragedies." The last Jews of Buchenwald were lined up at the gate of the camp on April 10, 1945 –– I among them. We were to be marched off to our final destination. In the skies above, American bombers searched for targets. The nearby V-II rocket plants, which had produced missiles that killed so many in Britain, had already been destroyed, taking the lives of our comrades enslaved as laborers there. There remained one last target –– for the SS guards still standing atop the watchtowers and along the electrified barbed-wire fences: the surviving Jews of Buchenwald. That night we were kept in the central square, from which those who came before us had been taken to their bitter end. Many collapsed and died that night. Those who could stand on their feet, as well as those who were lying on the frozen ground still breathing, no longer believed in miracles. But about an hour before noon, the unbelievable happened. A gray-green jeep smashed through the gate and stopped in the center of the square. Suddenly we saw the Messiah before our eyes. Three American
soldiers –– I remember one was African American –– stood there in
olive-green uniforms we had never seen before. We burst into applause;
they stared at us, the doomed who had escaped the gallows by seconds,
those of us whose luck and strength had held out. We could celebrate a
"second birthday."
AS I REFLECT on our liberation all these years later, I think about the terms "Holocaust" and "genocide." Yes, there is bloodshed all over the world; it has existed since Cain murdered Abel. People, nations, tribes kill each other because of the unharnessed ambitions of rulers, because of unbridled instincts, border disputes and religious fanaticism. All these crimes have their names, but the terms "Holocaust" and
"genocide," in the sense of the industrial-scale and systematic
destruction of an entire people, are specific, unfortunately, to us,
the Jews.
RECENTLY, WHILE searching in the Yad Vashem archives, I came across the testimony of a survivor from Treblinka, who later immigrated to Chicago. This is what he wrote: "On the 9th day of the month Heshvan, 5703, came the turn of our city. 'Jews, find shelter. Hide yourselves and do not go like lambs to the slaughter,' the rabbi of our city addressed his people. "He himself, the rabbi and leader of the community, went out to the square –– umschlagsplatz –– with a small Torah scroll in his arm. The people asked him, 'Rabbi, why don't you hide?' He answered that he would not abandon his people on their last journey and would go with them wherever they would go." The survivor's account went on: "In the early morning we arrived at Treblinka on the transport from our ghetto. On the ramp the selection process had begun. Together with a group of youngsters, I was taken from the crowd and pushed aside. We stood and watched the groups being led in the direction of the gas chambers. "Suddenly, we heard the familiar, strong voice of our rabbi. He was standing in the midst of the Jews of his community reciting the confessional viduy prayer said when Jews know they are about to be martyred. The rabbi said a verse, and his "congregation" repeated it after him, verse by verse."
THIS HAPPENED on the 11th day of the Hebrew month of Mar Heshvan, 5703, corresponding to October 21, 1942. The Jews described were from the city of Piotrkow in Poland, and the rabbi referred to was my father. My father's life was taken at Treblinka after he said the viduy. He was a special man. At our last meeting, as I was taking my leave of him, he told me: "Gather strength and be strong, and God will watch over you." As we were standing on the doorstep, he recited from Jeremiah 16:6-7: "Both the great and the small shall die in this land; they shall not be buried; neither shall men lament for them, nor cut themselves, nor make themselves bald for them; neither shall men break bread for them in mourning, to comfort them for the dead; neither shall men give them the cup of consolation to drink for their father or for their mother." Then he stopped for a while, looked straight into my eyes, and continued, again from Jeremiah, 13:16: "And there is hope for thy future, saith the Lord, And thy children shall return to their own border." Next he addressed me directly: "If you manage to get out of here,
go and return to the Land from which we were expelled, because only
there will the Jewish people be itself and become strong enough to
prevent such tragedies."
THE PEOPLE of Israel returned to their land and regained independence. Yet it is not enough to be politically independent. In order to eliminate the poison of anti-Semitism which continues to pursue us, we have to be strong. We should learn a lesson from our tragic past and try to convey that message to others, who must know that the hatred of Jews knows no bounds. Today –– Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Day, corresponding to the the 27th of Nisan –– we bow our heads in respect for the victims whose lives were taken. This day is linked with Remembrance Day for the Fallen of Israel's Wars –– Remembrance Day for the IDF soldiers, underground fighters and members of the security services who gave their lives for the establishment of a Jewish state and for its defense. Remembrance Day precedes Independence Day –– which is no coincidence. There can be no independence without sacrifice. The generation of the survivors is now old. This period of commemoration also, in a sense, expresses the transition from our generation of destruction to the new one of revival, so as to fulfill the prophecy of Jeremiah: "And there is hope for thy future, saith the Lord, and thy children shall return to their own border." Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
COMMEMORATING HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY
Posted by UCI, May 1, 2008. |
|
Who were you?
by: Jerusalem Watchman How can I keep this death alive? How can I keep this alive in me,
[Written after making my way through the long tunnel of suffering depicted at the new Yad Vashem memorial] UCI –– The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) –– is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
TO THOSE BRITISH JEWS WHO ARE NOT CELEBRATING ISRAEL'S 60TH
Posted by Maurice Ostroff, May 1, 2008. | |
|
To the Editor,
Re "We're not celebrating Israel's anniversary" (The Guardian April 30), I believe the motivation of the signatories is sincere, though based on misinformation and I assume they would not have signed this letter unless they believed the accuracy of the contents. And because I believe in their sincerity, I assume they are open to consider verifiable information that may lead to reconsidering their opinions. For example "the infamous massacre at Deir Yassin" of which they
write, was contradicted by no less than Arab eye-witnesses in a 1998
BBC interview which can be viewed on YouTube at Nusseibeh, told the BBC that the fabricated atrocity stories about Deir Yassin were "our biggest mistake," because "Palestinians fled in terror" and left the country in huge numbers after hearing the atrocity claims. As the signatories seem to be under the impression that all Israeli attacks on Arab villages were unprovoked, I strongly recommend that they visit Arab villages, which remained neutral in 1948 such as the flourishing village of Abu Ghosh. Mohammed Abu Ghosh has been quoted as saying, "What we did, we did for Abu Ghosh, for nobody else. Others who lost their land, hated us then, but now all over the Arab world, many people see we were right. If everyone did what we did, there'd be no refugee problem ... And if we were traitors? Look where we are, look where they are." If, as concerned humanitarians, the signatories wish to contribute towards a better life for Palestinians, I respectfully suggest that they address the greatest stumbling block to a peaceful solution, the continuing daily inculcation of hate in mosques and schools. In a typical sermon, Sheik Muhammad Ibrahim Al-Madhi, called for turning Jews and Christians into Ahl-Dhimma [protected second rate citizens] under Muslim rule. Note that the hate is directed at Christians as well as Jews. Nor can the signatories be unperturbed by the indoctrination of
even infants as typified in an interview broadcast on Iqra TV in which
three-and-a-half year old Egyptian girl, Basmallah, is taught that
Jews are apes and pigs. (See
Contact Maurice Ostroff at maurice@trendline.co.il
|
|
IRAN LOBBIES EGYPT ON BEHALF OF HAMAS
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, May 1, 2008. |
|
A warming relationship will mean an easier road for Iran's client Hamas. Egypt and Iran joined forces in mid-April at the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) meeting in Cape Town, South Africa, to propose the adoption of a pro-Palestinian statement, Iranian news agencies report. The proposal held no authority, and the IPU is not an organization that commands even a modicum of international respect. But, when Egypt and Iran work together in any capacity, there is cause for concern. The acrimony between Iran and Egypt stretches far beyond the much-publicized Shiite-Sunni tensions. After the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the mullahs of Tehran, then led by Ayatollah Khomeini, renounced all ties with Egypt when Cairo provided asylum to the deposed Iranian Shah, Mohamed Reza Pahlavi. Ties worsened further after Egypt inked a peace deal with the state of Israel. Relations worsened further still with the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War in 1980, as Egypt backed its Sunni brothers in Iraq. In response, after the 1981 assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, Iran celebrated the occasion with a four-story mural on a large building in the Iranian capital that lionized Khaled Islambouli, the Islamic extremist who mowed down Sadat in cold blood with a hail of machine gun bullets. Cairo and Tehran remained at odds for the next 30 years. Tehran, the rogue state, continued to test the patience of Washington policy makers, while Egypt, a valuable U.S. ally, reaped a multibillion dollar windfall in foreign aid for merely maintaining a frigid peace with Israel. Indeed, Egypt and Iran appeared to hold diametrically opposed positions on U.S. policy in the Middle East. The rift between the two countries came into sharp relief amidst the crisis surrounding the ongoing violence in post-Saddam Iraq. Sunni Egypt grew alarmed over Iran's influence among Iraq's radical Shiites, and the potential for that influence to spread through the "Shiite Crescent" from Iran to Lebanon. President Husni Mubarak's regime grew even more alarmed over Iran's influence in Palestinian affairs. Iran, by sponsoring the violent 2006 coup that brought Hamas to power in Gaza, brought instability to Egypt's doorstep. Responding to reports of Hamas operatives training at military camps run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Egypt worked quietly in 2006 and 2007 to bolster Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction. Reports emerged that Cairo began training at least one Fatah battalion to be stationed in the Gaza Strip. In late 2007, though, the Iran-Egypt dynamic shifted dramatically. As Israel and the U.S. –– with the backing of the international community –– moved to isolate Hamas in Gaza, representatives from Cairo and Iran began to meet frequently. Even as Iran continued to supply weapons to Hamas through subterranean tunnels it helped build and finance between the Sinai Peninsula and southern Gaza, the mullahs publicly implored the Arab world to ease the isolation of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The Egyptian trade minister visited Iran on an official visit, and the speaker of the Iranian parliament, the Majles, came to Egypt for high-level talks. Did Iran effectively lobby Egypt? Questions arise over the way in which the Mubarak regime allowed Palestinians to stream into the Sinai Peninsula after the Hamas breach of the Gaza-Egypt border in late January 2008. According to the Egyptian daily al-Masry al-Youm, for 12 days the Egyptians allowed Palestinians to cross the border freely and without documentation, effectively ending the siege of Gaza. Given the chaos, it would have been possible for these individuals to smuggle additional weaponry across the border into Gaza for a terrorist attack. It quickly became clear that the fate of Hamas, Iran's new favorite client, was in Egypt's hands. The mullahs reached out to Cairo through the Iranian Foreign Ministry, which offered Egypt "assistance" and funds to help "control" the border. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad –– reviled in Israel for threatening to wipe the Jewish state "off the map" –– soon made a direct call to Husni Mubarak, offering to restore ties between the two countries, while pleading for aid to Hamas. "The time is ripe for assisting the Palestinians to survive this intolerable situation," Ahmadinejad reported told his Egyptian counterpart. Ali Asghar Mohammadi, a high-ranking Iranian diplomat, also visited Cairo to discuss the world sanctions isolating Hamas in Gaza. Iran's news agency and television confirmed that discussions were ongoing, publicly signaling that ties could be renewed. When Omar Suleiman, Egypt's top spy, made plans to visit Israel in February 2008, it was clear that he held the key to enforcing sanctions against Hamas or allowing it to arm. Iran has since made a concerted effort to influence Egypt policy on how to police its crucial seven-mile border separating Egypt from Gaza. Indeed, Iran knows that Egypt will determine whether or not Hamas stocks up on arms for its next Iran-sponsored conflict with Israel. According to recent news reports, Mubarak is still wary of Iran's growing influence in the region. Moreover, Egyptians widely believe that the enmity between the two countries is too entrenched to overcome. Nonetheless, there is cause for concern. Iran continues to lobby Egypt on behalf of Hamas. Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst for the U.S. Treasury Department, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and author of the forthcoming Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine. Contact him at jschanzer@jewishpolicycenter.org This article was published today in National Review Online
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: WORDS OF POWER
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 1, 2008. | |
|
A portion of the incredibly moving words of the IDF Chief of the General Staff, speaking at Auschwitz today to "The March of the Living": ~~~~~~~~~~ "Here, on this cursed land, saturated with the blood of our brothers and sisters, descendants of the Jewish nation; "Here, in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp, the most evil place on the face of the planet, where our people, whose only crime was being Jewish, were tortured and murdered in gas chambers and crematoria; "Here, in the place where the Nazi oppressor reduced our humanity to serial numbers –– no more names, no more faces, no identity –– all that remained was a number branded on the forearm; Here in this most dreadful place, I stand on Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day, as the commander of the Israel Defense Forces. "With hundreds of Witnesses in Uniform by my side –– joining the thousands of representatives of the IDF who come here every year, commanders of the ground forces, the Air Force and the Navy –– the defending force of the Jewish people, reborn in its land –– with tight lips, a coarse voice and tears in my eyes, yet still standing tall –– I salute to the ashes of our people and vow: 'Never Again.' "We, soldiers of the IDF, emissaries of a country and of a nation, stand here today wearing the IDF uniform and carrying the flag of the State of Israel with pride in the name of the tens of thousands of the IDF warriors and commanders. We consider ourselves the executor of the last will and testament, the dream and the silent prayer of our six million Jewish brothers and sisters whose existence was brutally expunged by the Nazi oppressor. "We remember, and will never forget, that from the killing and the destruction, from the ashes and the despair, we have risen to establish not only the Jewish State, but the military force that will forever provide security for the Jewish people, protecting it from any future attempts of persecution, torture and destruction. "These days, after sixty years of independence, the existence of an independent Jewish state is not a fact that should be taken for granted...We have learned our lesson. We take threats of leaders calling for the destruction of Israel very seriously. "From this sense of deep responsibility for our continued existence as a people in our land and for the continuity of our heritage, we have no choice but to continue the struggle. Since we are fighting for our very existence, we cannot afford to grow weary or be deterred in our struggle. "...Here on this cursed ground, from which still cry the voices of our slain brothers, and as commander of the Israel Defense Forces of the state of the Jewish people, I salute our six million brothers and sisters, who have been persecuted, deported, tortured and cruelly murdered, and swear that 'Jewish blood shall never again be spilled in vain!' "Blessed be the memory of those who perished in the Holocaust!" ~~~~~~~~~~ To which I say Amen V'Amen! How does one follow this with news? Briefs only, with more after Shabbat... ~~~~~~~~~~ Most pertinent: Gov't Minister Shaul Mofaz (Kadima), charged with handling strategic dialogue, is in the US, meeting with key officials on the matter of the urgency of stopping Iran's nuclear progress. At a talk at Yale he said, "Israel will not tolerate a nuclear Iran...all is fair in efforts to make sure this doesn't happen." Amen to this as well! Mofaz warned that time is running out –– with the possibility that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in a year –– and that appeasement is not a successful policy. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are hints, but no official statement, that the government might accept the truce proposal advanced by Egypt, now that the other terrorists groups have reportedly agreed to participate. Hints that it would also help get Shalit released. (And, forgive me for my terrible cynicism, but I wonder about officials seeing a way out of what has been threatened regarding a major terror attack on Yom Haatzmaut and breaking through the fence.) Bad news if the truce were to happen. But we're in the "wait and see" mode right now. Hamas officials want this so badly, it's obvious they're hurting. Do we move from squeezing this entity, directed by Iran and sworn to destroy us, to a situation that allows it to strengthen in preparation for the day when we'll again be hit? Only if we have a very very limited horizon and are led by officials who don't care what happens the day after tomorrow –– officials prepared to overrule the advice of the IDF –– is this possible. ~~~~~~~~~~ One of those officials –– Ehud Olmert, to be specific –– is about to be interrogated by the police. How nice it would be if this interrogation actually came to something. The reason for this is very "hush-hush" and there is a sense of urgency about the matter. Attorney General Mofaz signed the order permitting the interrogation. ~~~~~~~~~~ Incredible! Henrietta Fore, administrator of the US AID, is in London for a meeting of international donors who have pledged $7.4 billion to the Palestinians over the next three years. She was asked if the US would be receptive to a request from the PA for additional funds to offset a budget shortfall, and she replied: "Yes..It's important to support and back strong efforts of progress of people who are working for peaceful, prosperous solutions." I did not make this up. ~~~~~~~~~~ The IDF has announced an operation in which it targeted and hit Nafez Manur, terrorist who was responsible, among other things, for helping plan the Gilad Shalit kidnapping.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |