| HOME | Featured Stories | May 2010 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
NOTE: Links to Videos are at the bottom
of this page.
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: POPPIES IN THE JORDAN VALLEY
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, May 31, 2010. |
|
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. HOW I GOT THE SHOT: Anyone who observes me shooting at a simcha will often see me holding my camera hip high or resting it on a tabletop or on the floor, all while continuing to shoot the action. With automatic focus, I need only worry that my zoom is wide enough to encompass the entire subject area. A little practice makes perfect, but what I like about this technique is that the bugs-eye-view camera angle injects novelty and energy into subjects normally only seen from six feet above the ground. To get this shot of poppies growing in the Jordan Valley, I lay down on my belly and positioned the camera on a rock about five inches off the ground. Years ago I would have ripped out the foreground grass, preferring an unblemished view to my subject. Nowadays, I prefer to leave nature alone and record everything that the camera sees. The blurred foreground — which resulted from the blades of grass rocking in the wind — adds depth to the photo and creates the painterly effect I find so pleasing in many landscapes. It really did look that way, but you can only find it by "lowering" yourself to a new standard of shooting. Technical Data: Nikon D300, 28-105 zoom at 48 mm, f6.3 at 1/800 sec.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
FANCY RESTAURANTS AND OLYMPIC-SIZE POOLS: WHAT THE MEDIA WON'T REPORT ABOUT GAZA
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 31, 2010. |
|
This was written by Tom Gross, who is a former Middle East correspondent for the London Sunday
Telegraph and the New York Daily News.
This article appeared in the National Post (UK)
|
|
In recent days, the international media, particularly in Europe and the Mideast, has been full of stories about "activist boats sailing to Gaza carrying desperately-needed humanitarian aid and building materials." The BBC World Service even led its world news broadcasts with this story at one point over the weekend. (The BBC yesterday boasted that its global news audience has now risen to 220 million persons a week, making it by far the biggest news broadcaster in the world.) Indeed the BBC and other prominent Western media regularly lead their viewers and readers astray with accounts of a non-existent "mass humanitarian catastrophe" in Gaza. What they won't tell you about are the fancy new restaurants and swimming pools of Gaza, or about the wind surfing competitions on Gaza beaches, or the Strip's crowded shops and markets. Many Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza live a middle class (and in some cases an upper class) lifestyle that western journalists refuse to report on because it doesn't fit with the simplistic story they were sent to write. Here, courtesy of the Palestinian Ma'an news agency, is a report on Gaza's new Olympic-sized swimming pool.[1] (Most Israeli towns don't have Olympic-size swimming pools. One wonders how an area that claims to be starved of water and building materials and depends on humanitarian aid builds an Olympic size swimming pool and creates a luxury lifestyle for some while others are forced to live in abject poverty as political pawn refugees?) If you pop into the Roots Club in Gaza, according to the Lonely Planet guidebook, you can "dine on steak au poivre and chicken cordon bleu". The restaurant's website[2] in Arabic gives a window into middle class dining and the lifestyle of Hamas officials in Gaza. And here it is in English, for all the journalists, UN types and NGO staff who regularly frequent this and other nice Gaza restaurants (but don't tell their readers about them). And here is a promotional video of the club[3] restaurant. In case anyone doubts the authenticity of this video, I just called the club in Gaza City and had a nice chat with the manager who proudly confirmed business is booming and many Palestinians and international guests are dining there. In a piece[4] for The Wall Street Journal last year, I documented the "after effects" of a previous "emergency Gaza boat flotilla," when the arrivals were seen afterwards purchasing souvenirs in well-stocked shops. (You can also scroll down here[5] for more pictures of Gaza's "impoverished" shops.) But the mainstream liberal international media won't report on any of this. Playing the manipulative game of the BBC is easy: if we had their vast taxpayer funded resources, we too could produce reports about parts of London, Manchester and Glasgow and make it look as though there is a humanitarian catastrophe throughout the UK. We could produce the same effect by selectively filming seedy parts of Paris and Rome and New York and Los Angeles too. Of course there is poverty in Gaza. There is poverty in parts of Israel too. (When was the last time a foreign journalist based in Israel left the pampered lounge bars and restaurants of the King David and American Colony hotels in Jerusalem and went to check out the slum-like areas of southern Tel Aviv? Or the hard-hit Negev towns of Netivot or Rahat?) But the way that many prominent Western news media are deliberately misleading global audiences and systematically creating the false impression that people are somehow starving in Gaza, and that it is all Israel's fault, can only serve to increase hatred for the Jewish state — which one suspects was the goal of many of the editors and reporters involved in the first place. Footnotes [1] http://www.maannews.net/eng/ ViewDetails.aspx?ID=285242 [2] http://www.rootsclub.ps/services-ar.php [3] http://www.rootsclub.ps/index.php [4] http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ mideastdispatches/archives/001072.html [5] http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ mideastdispatches/archives/000973.html
|
|
THE REAL TRAITORS
Posted by Khaled Abu Toameh, May 31, 2010. |
|
The former PLO "ambassador" to Australia, Ali Kazak, believes that an Arab journalist who writes about financial corruption and theft in the Palestinian Authority is a "traitor" who should be murdered the same way as collaborators were killed by the French Resistance. Kazak told the newspaper, The Australian: "Khaled Abu Toameh is a traitor. Traitors were also murdered by the French Resistance, in Europe; this happens everywhere." Asked why he calls the journalist a traitor, the former PLO representative, who lives in Australia, explained: "Palestinians are the victims. He shouldn't write about them, he should write about the crimes of the Israelis." Kazak's threat does not come as a surprise to those who are familiar with the methods used by Arab dictatorships to silence anyone who dares to demand reforms and transparency. The threat reminds journalists like me how lucky we are that we live in Israel and not under the jurisdiction of the PLO or Hamas. We are also fortunate that Kazak and his radical supporters are sitting far away in Australia and not in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, where they would be lining up journalists and critics against the wall and shooting them like the "traitors who were murdered by the French Resistance." The PLO, like most of the Arab dictatorships, has a long history of targeting journalists who refuse to "toe the line." This clampdown is one of the main reasons why the Palestinian media is still far from being independent and free. One of the first things the PLO did when it entered the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1994 was to wage a campaign of intimidation and terror against Palestinian reporters and editors. Another photographer had his two arms broken by members of Fatah's armed wing, the Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, apparently after he had been heard bad-mouthing senior officials associated with Arafat. A photographer who took a picture of a donkey strolling along the beach of Gaza City was arrested and beaten by Palestinian security agents on charges of "defaming the Palestinian cause" by distributing a picture of the animal instead of documenting the "suffering" of his people. A newspaper editor who failed to publish a story about Yasser Arafat on the front page of his newspaper found himself thrown into a Jericho prison for a week. The offices of a newspaper in east Jerusalem were torched after the editor published an editorial denouncing financial corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The director-general of the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation was gunned down in Gaza City, and it's widely believed that Arafat had ordered the assassination. Earlier this year, the Palestinian Authority leadership instructed all Palestinian journalists and editors to refrain from publishing allegations of rampant corruption made by Fahmi Shabaneh, the former head of the anti-corruption department in the Palestinian security forces. The absence of a free and independent media in the Palestinian territories has driven many Palestinians to seek work in the Western media, including Israeli newspapers and radio and TV stations. But Kazak thinks that it is not enough that these journalists have been forced out of their own media. Now he wants to see them being murdered for working for writing about one of the most significant problem facing the Palestinians: financial corruption and bad government. Kazak needs to be reminded that the party he claims to represent lost the January 2006 parliamentary election largely due to its failure to combat corruption. The real traitors are those who established another corrupt dictatorship in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and stole billions of dollars of international aid that was supposed to improve the living conditions of their people. The real traitors are those who built a casino for the Palestinians instead of building them a hospital and a school. The real traitors are those who are trying to silence journalists and reformists who want to see a better life for their people. Khaled Abu Toameh is a writer for the Jerusalem Post. He is also
with the Hudson Institute-New York).
Hudson. This article is archived at
|
|
THE TERROR FINANCE FLOTILLA
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, May 31, 2010. |
|
The convoy of ships allegedly trying to bring aid to the Gaza Strip was organized by a group belonging to an officially designated terrorist organization. The Turkish organizers of the Gaza Strip-bound flotilla that was boarded this morning by Israeli commandos knew well in advance that their vessels would never reach Israeli waters. That's because the organizers belong to a nonprofit that was banned by the Israeli government in July 2008 for its ties to terrorism finance. The Turkish IHH (Islan Haklary Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi in Turkish) was founded in 1992, and reportedly popped up on the CIA's radar in 1996 for its radical Islamist leanings. Like many other Islamist charities, the IHH has a record of providing relief to areas where disaster has struck in the Muslim world. However, the organization is not a force for good. The Turkish nonprofit belongs to a Saudi-based umbrella organization known to finance terrorism called the Union of Good (Ittilaf al-Kheir in Arabic). Notably, the Union is chaired by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, who is known best for his religious ruling that encourages suicide attacks against Israeli civilians. According to one report, Qardawi personally transferred millions of dollars to the Union in an effort to provide financial support to Hamas. In 2008, the Israelis banned IHH, along with 35 other Islamist charities worldwide, for its ties to the Union of Good. This was a follow-on designation; Israelis first blocked the Union of Good from operating in the West Bank and Gaza in 2002. Interestingly, the Union of Good may not only be tied to Hamas. Included in the Israeli list of 36 designees was the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO). In 2006, both the U.S. government and the United Nations designated the IIRO branch offices in Indonesia and the Philippines for financing al Qaeda. French magistrate Jean-Louis Brougiere also testified that IHH had an "important role" in Ahmed Ressam's failed "millennium plot" to bomb the Los Angeles airport in late 1999. The U.S. government, it should be noted, also views the Union of Good as a terrorist organization. On November 12, 2008, a press release from the U.S. Treasury announced the umbrella group's leaders as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT), stating that the group was "created by Hamas leadership to transfer funds to the terrorist organization." "Terrorist groups such as Hamas continue to exploit charities to radicalize vulnerable communities and cultivate support for their violent activities," said Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey. According to Treasury, Hamas's leadership actually created the Union of Good in 2000 — just after the launch of the armed campaign against Israel — as a means to transfer funds to Hamas. At the time of designation in 2008, the Treasury believed that the Union of Good was transferring "tens of millions of dollars a year" to Hamas-controlled entities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. As the Treasury release explained, "The Union of Good acts as a broker for Hamas by facilitating financial transfers between a web of charitable organizations — including several organizations previously designated... for providing support to Hamas — and Hamas-controlled organizations in the West Bank and Gaza. The primary purpose of this activity is to strengthen Hamas' political and military position in the West Bank and Gaza." It gets worse. The Treasury, drawing from declassified documents, stated unequivocally that the Union of Good "compensated Hamas terrorists by providing payments to the families of suicide bombers. One of [the charities], the Al-Salah Society, previously identified as a key support node for Hamas, was designated in August 2007... The Society employed a number of members of the Hamas military wing and supported Hamas-affiliated combatants during the first Intifada." Then there's the leadership. Apart from the aforementioned Qardawi, Union of Good's top officials include Hamas members, as well as Yemeni national Abd al-Majid al-Zindani, who was designated by the U.S. Treasury as a terrorist in 2004 for providing support to al Qaeda. Thus, the convoy of ships allegedly trying to bring aid to the Gaza Strip could never be characterized as a "peace flotilla." With ties to Hamas and other dangers groups, the IHH can only be described as a dangerous organization. Its members only underscored this fact when they attacked Israeli naval personnel with iron bars and knives, ultimately leading to the regrettable deaths this morning on the Mediterranean Sea. Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst for the U.S. Treasury Department, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and author of Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine. Contact him at js@defenddemocracy.org This article appeared today in The Weekly Standard (online). |
|
CJHS DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM TURKEY OVER VIOLENT PRO-HAMAS GAZA FLOTILLA
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, May 31, 2010. |
|
This was written by Omri Ceren (omri@cjhsla.org). |
|
Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors is calling on the Obama administration to demand answers from the government of Turkey regarding Ankara's role in supplying the Gaza Flotilla that yesterday violently clashed with America's ally Israel. The group of six ships departed from Turkey and attempted to violate Israel's internationally-recognized blockade on the Gaza Strip, the territory controlled by Iranian-backed Hamas Islamists who have repeatedly pledged to wipe out the Jewish State. Israel offered to allow the group to unload its ostensibly humanitarian cargo at the Israeli port of Ashdod, after which the goods would be inspected for weapons and sent to Gaza via overland routes. When the fleet explicitly declared its intention to run the blockade, they were intercepted and stopped by the Israeli Navy. The ostensibly non-violent group of activists and militants then attacked the Israelis with knives and clubs, stabbing at least one soldier in the stomach. A firefight erupted after the gun of another Israeli soldier was torn from his hands and turned on the rest of the Israeli contingent. As of this morning dozens are reported wounded or killed, from both sides. "Turkey is supposed to be one of our NATO allies, and President Obama has gone out of his way not to offend the Turkish people or the Erdogan government," said Doris Montrose, President and founder of the Los Angeles-based non-profit. "But here we have Turkey inciting anti-Israel violence, supplying anti-Israel thugs, and then spearheading an international campaign to completely delegitimize the Jewish State." Montrose added: "now is not the time for the White House's famed delicate touch, which has already pushed Turkey into the Iranian orbit and away from America and the West. Over the last year we've seen an erosion of US power and influence across the Middle East, not least of all because this administration refuses to back our actual allies and call out our genuine enemies." "Turkey's ambassador recently returned to DC after a month-long snit over the House's Armenian genocide resolution. If President Obama is truly a friend of Israel, the Ambassador will be spending today providing 'clarifications' as to why his government is providing succor to genocidal enemies of our ally Israel." CJHS grounds its mission in the core insistence that the last Holocaust imposes upon all people of good will a moral and political imperative to prevent the next one. It works to bring public awareness to the diplomatic, geopolitical, and military dynamics that threaten the American way of life, the existence of the Jewish State, and the freedom of all Westerners. Find out more at www.cjhsla.org. Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org. |
|
RE ARAB SEA INVADERS
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 31, 2010. |
|
To: CNN International Online News Editor Leave it to CNN to commit agit-prop on behalf of the arab invaders. We fault Ted Turner and his poodle, Jimmy Carter, for fomenting war in the Middle East. You men DO know better than to scapegoat Israel while burying the crimes of your dear Saudi/UAE operatives under a cloak of Ted Turner's lies. You should understand that all decent people hold your editors and publishers responsible for the crimes committed by that thankfully dead Egyptian terrorist — Yasser Arafat — who was lionized by his poodle and your mouth-piece, Christianne Amanpour. We know the law, thanks to Prof. Howard Grief, and we support Israel should it succeed in retrieving all the land you people helped the Britz and their arabists steal from Jewish Palestine. And yes, we are proof that one need not be Jewish to support Israel. We are the Secular Christians for Zion and we say: Decent people want to know how Ireland would respond were it attacked by a flotilla of pothead-insurrectionists and known terrorists such as those attempting to attack Israel. Israel is in the right and a thousand euroid complaints cannot prove it wrong. These swinish invaders should be repeatedly reminded how much they deserve the very same fate urged for Jews by that thankfully-dead bloody Egyptian terrorist, Yasser Arafat. The law in on Israel's side. Israel has every right to retake Gaza despite Olmert's dreadful faux pas. BTW — Suha Arafat would make great fish bait. Is she aboard? Victoire and the SC4Z
To: Editor, USA Today Editor: Your reporting about the so-called 'aid' to Gaza invasion is utterly shameful. We ask you to carefully study what Ireland would do were it invaded by British NGOs intent on using charity as a cover for attacking Irish women and children. What would Ireland do? Study that! Now consider what Bahrain would do were it invaded by Iranian NGOs professing to bring aid to its indentured foreign servants. What would Bahrain do? Study that! The most productive thing you could do for world peace is to study Prof. Howard Grief's seminal treatise on international law. The title of his book is: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel — The Legal Foundation and Borders of israel under International Law. The Boundaries agreed to per the San Remo Resolution still hold and the US and Europe remain bound by international law to aid and support Israel and help Israel restore the lands of Israel (then commonly known as Jewish Palestine) that are encompassed by the boundaries established in 1920. These regions consist of what the British press calls the Gaza Strip; they include most of the Golan Heights, and all of the land you people wrongly refer to as "the West Bank" — and most what later became the new state of Jordan. Now, doesn't this help you understand why the arabs are desperate to go on the offensive and to do so thru false propaganda, invasion, and concerted lies? Doesn't this help you understand why the arab states multiply like cancer cells in order to rule UN policy-making? Doesn't this help you understand why the Saudis purchased controlling shares in Time Warner and other US media outlets? It makes not one whit of difference that the British gave the lands of Jewish Palestine to the Hashemite royals. Their acts can be set aside because they acted beyond their authority. They are ultra vires ab initio. That is, irremediably Illegal. What they did is not legally binding. In fact, whoever sponsored the divestment of Israel's lands could and should be prosecuted for violating international law. The lands wrongly severed from israel must either be restored to Israel, or else, if Israel agrees, confirmed by proper procedure to the arabs currently occupying the new state of Jordan — arabs who were allowed to call themselves 'palestinian' not only by the self-serving Saudis (who gifted millions to certain well known members of the US State Dept. to conspire with the arab invaders to violate international law) but by the British as well, who use carefully crafted propaganda to conceal their criminal activities during their mandate over the region that encompassed the Jewish Homeland, then known as Palestine. Ask yourselves what would happen should Saudi Arabia succeed in in quest to destroy Israel and seize control over Israel's land. Do you suppose the French would sit idly by? Or would they continue to nudge the US out of the Mediterranean and Europe and move in to fill the void with the French military-industrial complex. Ever consider that? Or the conflict that would arise between the UK and France? Ever since the Clinton Administration sponsored the consolidation of the US media, our news reports have been filtered by Reuters and the Associated Press and twisted and shaped and massaged to serve the political ambitions of the few (most of them foreign) at the expense of the American taxpayer who has been forced by the follies of the US State Dept. to underwrite America's destruction. We already have BHusseinO telling us that we should accept that the US will eventually become a second-rate "power". How prescient of him! We are taking note of Israel's valiant defense against the concerted thievery sponsored by the UN because we just might have to emulate Israel should your misbegotten editorials incite an "NGO" invasion of the US of A. If that sorry day comes to pass, you people will be worth less than the rats who crawl to the top of the rigging while their ships sinks due to the holes they chewed in the hull. Viva Israel from the Secular Christians for Zion. Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
ISRAEL SECULAR MIRACLE
Posted by Daily Alert, May 31, 2010. | |
|
This was written by Bernard-Henri Levy.
It appeared today in Ynet and is archived at
| |
|
At Tel Aviv conference, Jewish-French philosopher lauds IDF morals, calls Israel 'island of democracy where dictatorships rule'. Referring to the IDF, Jewish-French writer and philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy said, "Much can and should be learned from Israel." Addressing the French-Israeli conference on democracy in Tel Aviv Sunday, Levy said, "I've covered many wars, and I've never seen an army that asks itself so many questions related to morals." As for Israel's status in the international community, the French philosopher said, "There is a demonization campaign against Israel all over the world. "In a region where dictatorships and truly fascist regimes rule, Israel represents an island of democracy. Zionism is the only movement that has not failed and turned into a caricature. It is the only movement that has preserved its spirit," he told the conference. "Israel is a miracle because since its inception it has been in a constant state of war, yet it never gave up on the democratic values at its core," according to Levy. He added, "Democracy was created (in Israel) out of nothing. People had no experience in democracy, but through willpower and a miracle, they invented a functioning democracy. Israel is proof that democracy does not require time. In France a newspaper was shut down every two weeks during the war in Algeria." Levy also praised the Israeli government's treatment of the Arab minority during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, adding that Arab-Israel villages he had visited during the war "were on the brink of explosion." "I am not certain that (governments in other countries) would have acted the same. I remember a terrible atmosphere and my admiration of the Israeli authorities' level-headed conduct. Israel represents a secular miracle," he said. The renowned philosopher also said democracy was a Jewish idea. "The Talmud is democracy in practice. The Jewish nation invented the notion that the truth lies in the most heated argument," he said.
The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WE STOOD STRONG
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 31, 2010. |
|
It was inevitable, as things were going with the "flotilla" — for us there was no choice. And so I am enormously grateful that we stood our ground. Had we backed down in the face of extreme provocation that ultimately became physical attack, it would have been horrendous. A summary of events: Six boats were in the flotilla — two carried people and the rest supplies. During the night our Navy sent them multiple messages urging that confrontation be avoided. They were asked to return to Cyprus or re-route to Ashdod for unloading of the humanitarian supplies, but the "activists" on board rejected all offers. One boat — the Marma — carrying 600 people, was most problematic in its response. Yesterday, Al Jazeerah documented the cries of people on that boat: "Khaibar, Khaibar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad will return!" Explains Palestinian Media Watch, this is a reference to "Khaibar...the last Jewish village defeated by Muhammad's army in 628. Many Jews were killed in that battle, which marked the end of Jewish presence in Arabia. There are Muslims who see that as a precursor for future wars against Jews. At gatherings and rallies of extremists, this chant is often heard as a threat to Jews to expect to be defeated and killed again by Muslims." PMW put out the Al Jazeerah video report on its website:
See it, please! Save it and share it very broadly. It tells the story of what we faced more vividly than anything else. Most incredible was the statement of one Arab woman present: "Right now we face one of two happy endings: either Martyrdom or reaching Gaza." Hardly the statement of a humanitarian activist eager to supply food to hungry Gazans. This is the statement of a jihad extremist. Make no mistake about it. ~~~~~~~~~~ At about 3 AM, Navy commandos, trained and prepared for this, boarded the boat. They were met with premeditated violence. The IDF called it an attempted lynching. Those on board had weapons — guns, knives, iron bars, bats, clubs, slingshots with marbles — and attacked. In two instances, "peaceful activists" pulled the guns from our soldiers and began shooting. One soldier was beaten to the floor of the ship and pummeled, another was knifed in the stomach. As chaos ensued, our soldiers had no choice but to respond with fire — something they had hoped to avoid doing. In light of the circumstances, their response was controlled, and they have since been praised by their superiors for their proper action. In the end, seven of our soldiers were wounded, two seriously. Some ten people on the boat were killed. I have no information on who they were, but there was a large contingent of Turks among these fighters — the Turks, after all, were instrumental in the planning of this flotilla. ~~~~~~~~~~ "Live fire was used against our forces. They initiated the violence, that's 100% clear," said Mark Regev, spokesman for the Prime Minister's office. Defense Minister Ehud Barak expressed regret for the loss of life, but said that the flotilla was a provocation sponsored by extremists who support a terrorist organization. Indeed this is the case: The flotilla was organized by IHH (Insani Yardim Vakfi - "humanitarian relief fund"), a Turkish aid foundation which has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and global jihadi networks, as well as mujahideen groups in Afghanistan. It openly supports Hamas; members of Hamas had boarded boats at the Gaza coast and were waiting to "receive" the flotilla. ~~~~~~~~~~ At his press conference this morning, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said: "I want to report this morning that the armada of hate and violence in support of the Hamas terror organization was a premeditated and outrageous provocation. The organizers are well known for their ties with global Jihad, Al-Qaeda and Hamas. They have a history of arms smuggling and deadly terror. On board the ship we found weapons — prepared in advance and used against our forces. ~~~~~~~~~~ Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, on TV this evening, said, "Israel is a sovereign state and cannot accept the undermining of its sovereignty. Israel has stopped ships in international waters before and when ships refuse to accede to warnings and obey instructions, we have the right to board them under international law." (emphasis added) Additionally, he noted that passengers on board the ship "were not peace activists but terror supporters." ~~~~~~~~~~ Prime Minister Netanyahu, who was in Canada when this transpired, is on his way home. He has communicated to President Obama the impossibility of meeting him right now. Said Netanyahu, "Our soldiers acted in self defense": "I think both Prime Minister Harper and President Obama understand that Israel has a great security problem and I want to put that into context. The context is that Gaza has become a base for Hamas terrorists backed by Iran. They have fired thousands of rockets into Israel. They are amassing thousands more rockets to fire at our cities, at our towns, at our children. ~~~~~~~~~~ The ships have been brought to Ashdod. The "activists" will be either deported or arrested, and the wounded will be treated. The cargo of the ships will be unloaded and examined, and genuine humanitarian aid will be sent through crossings to the people of Gaza. Undoubtedly I will have more on this tomorrow. ~~~~~~~~~~ What is of enormous significance now is that each of you reading this should understand precisely what went on, what the true motivations and actions of those on the ship were — and what Israel's concerns and rights in the matter are. That we are going to take heat, big-time, is a given now. We'll hear, of course, from Turkey, the UN, Arab nations, etc., and likely some European nations as well. Each of us best serves Israel now by spreading this information at every turn, as broadly as you possibly can. I think you have what you need with the information above. Please use it. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
VIDEOS PROVE ISRAELIS WERE ATTACKED BY "GAZA FREEDOM FLOTILLA" BEFORE OPENING FIRE
Posted by Ron Mossad, May 31, 2010. |
|
Do NOT believe the hype. This was NOT a "peace mission" by any stretch of the imagination. Please send out this video: ronmossad.cnn.10dead." Please share with your friends/readers as we can be sure that all of us are going to get angry questions from the misinformed public. |
|
10 dead as Israeli forces storm "Gaza Freedom Flotilla" after soldier stabbed by peace activist Here's a great idea, why doesn't Turkey send a bunch of angry, Israel-hating "peace-activists" — armed with knives, axes and cudgels — to force a confrontation with the Israeli Coast Guard in what they bill as a "humanitarian mission" to break the "seige" of Gaza. What could go wrong? (CNN) — International condemnation poured in Monday after Israeli soldiers stormed a flotilla of ships carrying aid intended for Palestinians in Gaza, leaving at least 10 people dead in the resulting violence. Jackpot! More negative PR for Israel? Check. Jews supporting their enemies, thereby contributing to their own demise? Check. Demands from Hamas terrorists that the world rally to support their extremist dictatorship that steals from its own population and conducts attacks where it deliberately murders Israeli and Palestinian civilians? THAT'S a big check! European rush to support these terrorists and prove yet again they learned nothing in the 40's by blaming the Jews as usual? Chickity check check check! Angry protests from clueless college students? Oh wait, nevermind it's Memorial Day — they're all at the beach or still drunk from the night before! You'll notice by the way that the CNN article I quoted didn't mention anything about the Israeli soldier being stabbed repeatedly by one of these idiots, only this "Israeli military version" (Translation: PROPAGANDA) that included one quote and 2 out of 7 paragraphs talked about the dead activists and THEIR side of the account. Apparently CNN doesn't have anyone that watches the news in Israel because the stabbing was all over the place this morning over there. The video, short as it may be actually tells us a lot about the incident. Aside from the fact that this guy stabs the soldier what seems like 100 times you'll notice that there was no gun being fired and the stabber had enough freedom of movement to get behind the soldier in order to stab him. This suggests one of two things: 1. This happened AFTER the initial raid/attack by the Israeli military during which, after opening fire on the ship, they inexplicably did not restrain and subdue the crew and passengers nor did they apparently search them for massive daggers before turning their backs to them. For this scenario to be accurate, the stabber would have witnessed at least some of his friends being shot and still decided to forfeit his life by attempting to single-handedly defeat a heavily-armed commando unit with nothing more than a knife of his own. OR 2. The stabbing occurred BEFORE the Israelis opened fire, which is what prompted the soldiers — who no doubt had been taunted and threatened endlessly by the "peace activists" before boarding — to open fire in self defense.  Flotilla "Peace Activist" (photo from jpost.com) My guess is that it's option 2. Oh what's that you say, you're still unconvinced? Just WAIT — there's more! Here IS ACTUAL VIDEO from the time the FIRST SOLDIER was lowered onto the ship: You can see VERY CLEARLY that as SOON as the commando rappels down from the helicopter he is IMMEDIATELY surrounded and attacked in what several of the Israelis who were part of the operation referred to as a "lynching" — going so far as to compare it to the Ramallah lynching of two Israelis in 2000. Furthermore, the
Israeli Navy warned the flotilla to turn around — going to far as to
offer an escort to the Israeli port city of Ashdod where they would be
allowed to offload their materials and deliver them to Gaza by land as
literally hundreds of thousands of tons of aid have been delivered in
the past three years. In fact, after the commando operation — that's
EXACTLY
what happened. Oh and I should also add that along with Israelis
injured in the attack, their enemies who attacked them were ALSO
airlifted to Israeli hospitals and treated by the same doctors who
treated the soldiers. And the IDF is barbaric?! Unbelievable! But you see, this was no "peace" mission. It was a trap for the Israelis. Once more the "plight of the Palestinians" has been used to delegitimize Israel and support terrorism. And you're all falling for it. UPDATE: More coming in now from eyewitness accounts embedded with the Israeli commando unit — definitely mirrors what we saw in the second video. From the YNet: Navy commandoes slid down to the vessel one by one, yet then the unexpected occurred: The passengers that awaited them on the deck pulled out bats, clubs, and slingshots with glass marbles, assaulting each soldier as he disembarked. The fighters were nabbed one by one and were beaten up badly, yet they attempted to fight back. Paintball rifles!! You have to read the rest of that article, it's shocking. UPDATE 2: Again, please note that this is PRIOR to any shots being fired. UPDATE 3: More video of the "peace activists" emerging
from even before any encounter with the Israeli Navy shows what is
basically a Hamas terrorist rally happening right on the boats. Martyrdom, the "army of Muhammad" — wow these guys are just the pinnacle of peaceful coexistence. How are we letting the media spin this the way they are?! UPDATE 4: One of the assertions all over the media is that because this raid occurred in international waters it somehow illegitimate or worse an act of "piracy." As if. Unfortunately for the Gaza Flotilla supporters, the ACTUAL laws of international waterways do not support this AT ALL. Also unfortunate for them is that Yaakov over at newsvine.com has entirely dispelled this myth that Israel had no right to do what it did based on the location of the boats. From the article: I direct your attention to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea. Specifically, paragraph 67-68: Hmmmm. Breaching a blockade? Refusing to stop after being warned prior? Resisting visit, search or capture? I'm not international law expert, but would you say that based on what we saw in the videos above that the actions of the people on the boat would constitute "clearly resisting" a search?? Based on the law, Israel would have not only been justified in boarding the ship which was CLEARLY suspected on reasonable grounds of carrying contraband (being that they refused inspection by the nation that still maintains responsibility for the territory they sought to enter), they would have actually been justified in attacking the ships and sinking them entirely. It is only because they showed immense restraint that no other country ever would that this did not happen. And yet, we are allowing ourselves to be painted as aggressors, as oppressors and as persecutors when it is we who are actually being persecuted. The fact that I have to contend with JEWS who
parrot these ridiculous assertions just shows you how deeply ingrained
our need
to self-deprecate in order to please our not-so-gracious host
countries really is. Disgraceful to say the least.
Contact Ron Mossad by email at ronmossad@gmail.com
and visit the website: www.ronmossad.blogspot.com
|
|
INTL CRIMINAL COURT TO PROSECUTE 'AGGRESSION'?; ISRAELIS ON GAZA TUNNELS; US STANDING WITH ARABS DECLINING
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 31, 2010. |
|
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT TO PROSECUTE 'AGGRESSION?' More than a hundred governments and NGOs are meeting to consider expanding international law. Chief topic is whether to give the International Criminal Court power to prosecute "aggression" as a crime. That would add to the Court's power to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Would this new rule outlaw pre-emptive strikes for defense, or just invasions? Some governments are afraid that the court would enter a morass of politics. Members of the Security Council fear this change would dilute the Council. Another objection is that the Court, which started in 2002, has heard only 2 cases so far. Let it consolidate its ability to handle what already is in its jurisdiction. Temporary tribunals have handled cases that otherwise might have been handled by the Court. A great difficulty would lay in defining aggression, which a previous attempt failed to do. Another proposal is to ban weapons that cause more suffering than other weapons, in domestic problems and crowd control (Marlise Simons, New York Times, 5/31, A7). Other difficulties of such a proposal are that the world is polarized ideologically and politically. Some ideologies are unfair and dishonest. For example, the Arabs consider Israel's self-defense "aggression" and Arab aggression "self-defense." For reasons of economics, ideology, politics, and prejudice, people went along with the Goldstone report. The report turned reality upside down, as my articles have demonstrated. Like the UN, itself, an international court cannot be trusted. Liberals need to learn that just wanting a law to accomplish a certain result does not by itself accomplish it. Laws have unintended consequences. Implementation can be unfair.
ISRAELIS ON GAZA INFILTRATION TUNNELS Israelis were polled about the continued digging of tunnels in Gaza, for the purpose of infiltrating terrorists into Israel. People were asked whether they approve of: (1) Existing IDF policy of noting the location of such tunnels and bombing them only as retaliation after terrorists have fired rockets into Israel; or (2) Send in forces to destroy all such tunnels and make known that hereafter, they will be destroyed as soon as identified. 20% chose (1) and 67% chose (2) (IMRA, 5/30). ISRAELI-BUILT HIGHWAY RE-OPENS TO ARAB TRAFFIC 
Controversial Highway 443 re-opened to Arab traffic. People expected traffic jams. There was little Arab traffic. Just 13 cars tried to use it. There were more reporters and Israeli soldiers than Arabs in the cars. Arabs said that it didn't pay to wait to be inspected and use the few kilometers available, only to be diverted off it before they could reach their destination. The first one using it complained at being inspected, though terrorists have mingled with the general public before, on that highway IMRA, 5/30). Between the court's sympathy for Arab travelers and the government's need to protect against terrorism, the change appears to have been minor. It was not the great reform hailed by the plaintiffs.
U.S. STANDING AMONG ARABS IS DECLINING Daniel Pipes reviews three years of polls of U.S. standing among Arabs and Americans. Obama entered office with high hopes of winning Arab approval. His ratings have risen and then fallen. The most recent poll confirms a downward trend, though opinion in Egypt, on that downward slant, still is higher than it was in 2008. In Egypt, it still is 69%. In four other Arab areas, it varies from 16% to 30% (5/29/10) During the election campaign, Democrats complained most of all about foreign disapproval of the U.S.. They anticipated that Obama would reverse it. Apparently, his appeasement just forfeits both foreign respect and American interests.
GAZA FLOTILLA AND THE U.S. The flotilla announced that it would be holding a ceremony commemorating the controversial Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty, which had entered a war zone and which Israel claimed to have attacked by mistake. The flotilla did not announce a ceremony commemorating the clear-cut Arab attack on the U.S.S. Cole, U.S. or the World Trade Center (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/30/10). You can see that the announcement (by people not known for sympathy for the U.S.) is anti-Israel propaganda. It helps turn the flotilla is a dangerous circus. Some of the comments on my prior articles took too seriously the flotilla contention that it was humanitarian and necessary. They missed the points made that terrorists were participating and even sponsoring the flotilla, and that they could have delivered the goods the way other such goods enter, without risking people's lives. Those readers failed to ask what kind of humanitarians work with terrorists, who are the most inhumane people. (For pre-clash articles on flotilla,
click here.)
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
A BRUTAL AMBUSH AT SEA
Posted by The Israel Project, May 31, 2010. | |
|
Below is an article by Israeli journalist Ron Ben Yishai for the Israeli newspaper Yediot Achronot in which he provides a first hand account of the Israeli operation to take control of the Turkish-led flotilla. The Israel Project hopes you find this of interest. Ron Ben Yishai recounts bloody clash aboard Gaza-bound vessel: The lacking crowd-dispersal means, the brutal violence of 'peace activists,' and the attempt to bring down an IDF helicopter Ben Yishai, Ron, "A Brutal Ambush at Sea," YnetNews, May 31, 2010,
| |
|
Our Navy commandoes fell right into the hands of the Gaza mission members. A few minutes before the takeover attempt aboard the Marmara got underway, the operation commander was told that 20 people were waiting on the deck where a helicopter was to deploy the first team of the elite Flotilla 13 unit. The original plan was to disembark on the top deck, and from there rush to the vessel's bridge and order the Marmara's captain to stop. Officials estimated that passengers will show slight resistance, and possibly minor violence; for that reason, the operation's commander decided to bring the helicopter directly above the top deck. The first rope that soldiers used in order to descend down to the ship was wrested away by activists, most of them Turks, and tied to an antenna with the hopes of bringing the chopper down. However, Flotilla 13 fighters decided to carry on. Navy commandoes slid down to the vessel one by one, yet then the unexpected occurred: The passengers that awaited them on the deck pulled out bats, clubs, and slingshots with glass marbles, assaulting each soldier as he disembarked. The fighters were nabbed one by one and were beaten up badly, yet they attempted to fight back. However, to their misfortune, they were primarily equipped with paintball rifles used to disperse minor protests, such as the ones held in Bilin. The paintballs obviously made no impression on the activists, who kept on beating the troops up and even attempted to wrest away their weapons. One soldier who came to the aid of a comrade was captured by the rioters and sustained severe blows. The commandoes were equipped with handguns but were told they should only use them in the face of life-threatening situations. When they came down from the chopper, they kept on shouting to each other "don't shoot, don't shoot," even though they sustained numerous blows. 'I saw the tip of a rifle' The Navy commandoes were prepared to mostly encounter political activists seeking to hold a protest, rather than trained street fighters. The soldiers were told they were to verbally convince activists who offer resistance to give up, and only then use paintballs. They were permitted to use their handguns only under extreme circumstances. The planned rush towards the vessel's bridge became impossible, even when a second chopper was brought in with another crew of soldiers. "Throw stun grenades," shouted Flotilla 13's commander who monitored the operation. The Navy chief was not too far, on board a speedboat belonging to Flotilla 13, along with forces who attempted to climb into the back of the ship. The forces hurled stun grenades, yet the rioters on the top deck, whose number swelled up to 30 by that time, kept on beating up about 30 commandoes who kept gliding their way one by one from the helicopter. At one point, the attackers nabbed one commando, wrested away his handgun, and threw him down from the top deck to the lower deck, 30 feet below. The soldier sustained a serious head wound and lost his consciousness. Only after this injury did Flotilla 13 troops ask for permission to use live fire. The commander approved it: You can go ahead and fire. The soldiers pulled out their handguns and started shooting at the rioters' legs, a move that ultimately neutralized them. Meanwhile, the rioters started to fire back at the commandoes. "I saw the tip of a rifle sticking out of the stairwell," one commando said. "He fired at us and we fired back. We didn't see if we hit him. We looked for him later but couldn't find him." Two soldiers sustained gunshot wounds to their knee and stomach after rioters apparently fired at them using guns wrested away from troops. Two errors During the commotion, another commando was stabbed with a knife. In a later search aboard the Marmara, soldiers found caches of bats, clubs, knives, and slingshots used by the rioters ahead of the IDF takeover. It appeared the activists were well prepared for a fight. Some passengers on the ship stood at the back and pounded the soldiers' hands as they attempted to climb on board. Only after a 30-minute shootout and brutal assaults using clubs and knifes did commandoes manage to reach the bridge and take over the Marmara. It appears that the error in planning the operation was the estimate that passengers were indeed political activists and members of humanitarian groups who seek a political provocation, but would not resort to brutal violence. The soldiers thought they will encounter Bilin-style violence; instead, they got Bangkok. The forces that disembarked from the helicopters were few; just dozens of troops — not enough to contend with the large group awaiting them. The second error was that commanders did not address seriously
enough the fact that a group of men were expecting the soldiers on the
top deck. Had they addressed this more seriously, they may have hurled
tear-gas grenades and smoke grenades from the helicopter to create a
screen that would have enabled them to carry out their mission,
without the fighters falling right into the hands of the rioters, who
severely assaulted them.
Editor's Note The IDF ordered the boats to sail to Askelon, where the goods that were not military and terrorist material would be trucked to Gaza. Israel trucks tons of food, etc., to Gaza daily. In other words, after the 200 tons of weapons that were later found by the IDF were confiscated, the humitarian aspects would not have been stopped. All but one ship obeyed. The "activists" on board the Mavi Marmara attacked with knifes, metal rods, broken bottles and guns. See videos of the "humitarians" preparing for the IDF boarding here. The only point in favor of the Turks appeared to be that the IDF mounted the boat in international waters. However, as one reader, Martin R, pointed out, there's:
To contact The Israel Project: write Marcus Sheff at marcuss@theisraelproject.org or Leah Soibel leahs@theisraelproject.org |
|
THE GAZA FLOTILLA AND THE GALLANT RAPIST
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, May 31, 2010. |
|
Do you remember the gallant rapist? The criminal who would offer his victims a ride home after the rape? He apparently thought that his "good manners" would make his crime seem less reprehensible. In the end he was apprehended and sentenced like all the other rapists. Today, Israel is the gallant rapist. We declared to the entire world that Gaza is not ours, but theirs. The world was not particularly convinced, so we expelled all the Jews from Gush Katif in Gaza and destroyed their homes. We even dug up their dead for reburial "inside Israel." Let there be no mistake, dear world, Gaza is not ours. Look, we have even retreated from there — with sensitivity and determination, of course. Now, the world is convinced. Gaza is really not ours. But just a minute: If Gaza is not really yours, why are you blockading it from the sea and the air, allowing entry only from your territory following your security checks? What are you trying to do? To gallantly rape the "Palestinians" and convince us that they consent? If Gaza is yours — stay there and fight! If it is not yours, get out of there and do not interfere in their lives! You can't do both. You can't simultaneously rape and be well-mannered. Oh, you say that they are trying to smuggle weapons into Gaza? Well, what's the problem with that? Who are you to tell them what to bring into their territory? Aren't you constantly arming yourselves as you please? If the state of Gaza will declare war on you, then defend yourselves. But don't tell us that you left while you are still ruling there by remote control. What right do you have to prevent them from building their own army? What? They actually did start a war and they are constantly shooting at you? OK, then re-conquer Gaza and administer a military government, like the Allies did in Germany. What? That's impossible because you convinced your citizens that it is good to disengage from Gaza? Hmmm. We tried to fool the world, and first and foremost — ourselves. Now the entire house of cards is collapsing on our heads. The question is not who is more well mannered, us or them. The question is not how much violence was used to stop the flotilla. The question is who is the rapist. The question is who is just, who is the good-guy and who is the bad-guy in this story. Israel in flight from its identity lost justification for its existence — not just in the Land of Israel but on the face of the entire globe. It maneuvered itself into the position of the most despised nation on earth. Achmadinijad can travel Europe freely. Tzippy Livni and Bogi Ya'alon dare not land there. If we would have adopted the stance of the just, we could have acted according to the maritime international laws that were determined by Great Britain when it ruled the seas. Call to stop. First shell in front of the ship's nose. Second shell into the ship, and the story is over. But this law is for legitimate ships, not pirate ships, like us. It will not help us to base our justness on good manners. We will always turn out to be rapists in the end. It won't work even if we enlist the most professional soldiers in the world for the mission. "I don't see Israel as a Jewish state, but rather as a state of all its citizens," said former Chief Justice Aharon Barak, and we lost the most important weapon of all — our sense of justice. The problem is that the other side did not lose its sense of justice. For the Arabs, the Land of Israel is not merely real estate or some sort of security shelter. For them, this Land is holy and they are fighting for it (and rightly so!). But you cannot fight for a land that by your own admission is not yours. The only option open, then, is self-defense. Even rapists are allowed to defend themselves. And that is how Israel has become the state of roadblocks, barbed wire, security guards at the entrance of every café, iron domes, cement blocks, concertina, atomic detectors and mobile bomb shelters. We outfitted our elite units with tear gas and other ridiculous toys. Now we can explain to the parents of the naval commando how the best fighter in the world was injured by a club to his head. We have cloaked ourselves in a gown of cement and barbed wire to preserve the lie that Jews can return to their ancient homeland after 2000 years with a false identity: Israeli instead of Jewish. They can forget who they are and the dreams of their ancestors and be just a normal nation — a nation like all the nations. Just like in the Gulf of Mexico, we are trying to bottle up the murky reality that is gushing to our surface with an iron dome. But we cannot cover up for the sense of justice that we have lost. If we had retained our sense of justice, we would not be waiting for Turkey to expel our ambassador, being portrayed as the guilty rapist along the way. On the contrary, we would have recalled our ambassador from Turkey and expelled its ambassador for its declaration of war on our sovereignty. But we cannot do that, because the Turks are right. After all, we declared that Gaza belongs to the Arabs, didn't we? So what right do we have to blockade a Turkish ship outside our territorial waters? When, in the last 20 years, have you heard an official Israeli representative — the prime minister, our ambassador to the UN or our Foreign Minister utter the simple words, "This is our land?" You can't remember? That is because it simply didn't happen. Israel is fleeing its Jewish identity and cannot even say this simple sentence. We must return to our basic sense of justice — the justice that sustained us during our long exile and the only factor that explains why we are not rapists and why this entire Land — including Gaza, is ours and only ours. When we return to that point, we will be able to truly establish our sovereignty in this Land. As long as we continue to attempt to escape our identity, Israel will continue to slowly crumble as it hides behind its barbed wire, road blocks and most advanced defense technology in the world. Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell) |
|
ISRAEL, GET REAL! "PEACE" TALKS DANGEROUS FARCE
Posted by Batya Medad, May 30, 2010. |
|
Shavua Tov, Have a Great Week. If you want to read more of my writings, please bookmark my other blogs, Shiloh Musings and me-ander. I post there much more frequently. Generally, I try to put things as simply as possible, like: Hypocrites for "Human Rights." Now for this morning's post: |
|
There's no nice way to say this, especially considering how much hope, man-hours and money have been hyped into this Utopian idea that there can be "peace" between Israel and the Arabs, but the truth is that there's no way in this generation and probably the next, too, that there can be a genuine peace. I gave that long, probably run-on sentence its very own paragraph. The CPA's pragmatic daughter I am wants to make it very clear. Some people mock my strong religious belief as being rather "la la" or unrealistic, but I totally disagree. It's much easier to prove G-d's existence than it is to prove that the Arabs want to live in peace with the State of Israel. The internationally funded Appease aka Peace sic Now and all the related organizations and groups have been brainwashing Israelis for decades already. They've made such headway; we're in a real life episode of the Twilight Zone. To make things simple, like the popular modern child-rearing technique of "time-out," we should declare a one year postponement of negotiations for every single rocket or missile the Arabs launch at Israel, whether the rocket kills, damages or just malfunctions executing the very terrorists who launched it. Remind the United States, United Nations etc that this is non-negotiable. That's what a normal, self-respecting country would do, and didn't the early secular Zionists dream of being a normal country? I agree. We shouldn't agree to anything that any other country wouldn't agree to. We must ignore the bogus human rights organizations, because they consistently condemn Israel when Israel's actions would be praised if any other country had done it. We must, at the same time, use the military to go after those who attack us militarily. Nobody in their right mind would use body lotion on skin cancer. Would you? How about ointment on gangrene? I certainly wouldn't interfere with the PA's negotiating with the United States over issues between them, but not anything concerning Israel. United States President Barack Hussein Obama promised them a state. Well, there's lots of unoccupied land in the continental United States without the sort of documented history that our Land has. As I've written many times, since the western/Christian world swears on the Bible they should take it seriously. This is Jewish Land and only Jewish Land. If Obama sold them a can of worms, that has nothing to do with us. 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 essay is archived at http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/2010/05/ israel-get-real-peace-talks-dangerous.html, which has live links to additional material. |
|
AMNESTY INTERNATL DEGRADES HUMAN RIGHTS; IRAN NUCLEAR PLANT SOON BECOMING 'HOT'
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 30, 2010. |
|
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: UPDATE 
NGO Monitor finds that A.I. still exploits human rights issues to
degrade human rights.
When senior A.I.staff member Gita Saghal criticized A.I.'s alliance with a suspected Taliban member, A.I. suspended her. A.I.'s interim Secretary-General explained that that "jihad in self-defense" is not "antithetical to human rights." That A.I. explanation confirms NGO Monitor's complaint that A.I. degrades human rights. In 2009, A.I.'s focused primarily on Iran, but disproportionately on Israel. A.I. distorted the Gaza war. It led NGO campaigns and released more than 20 statements accusing Israel of "unlawful," "disproportionate," and "indiscriminate" attacks against Palestinian Authority civilians. A.I. had seven in-depth reports on Israel, fewer than on every other Mideastern state. Ideology drives A.I. more than does the cause of human rights. An 2009 report on water, claiming that Israel denies Arabs fair access "coincided with a campaign alleging that 'Israel's Control of Water [is] a Tool of Apartheid and a Means of Ethnic Cleansing.'" NGO Monitor's full report states that A.I. omitted evidence contrary to its claims that Palestinian Authority Arabs had less water than Arabs in neighboring states and omitted the quantities that they stole, which were considerable. AI's 2009 Annual Report on the Palestinian Arabs has "token mentions of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and condemnation of indiscriminate missile attacks from Gaza, in contrast to Amnesty's targeting of Israel." (IMRA, 5/28/10). When civilian sites are destroyed in war, the human rights organizations usually blame Israel, and not the Arab war criminals that booby-trapped those houses, stored ammunition in them, or fought alongside them so that civilian facilities took return fire. Some damage is accidental, so it should be noted that terrorist bombardment of Israel started that war, again a Palestinian Arab responsibility. If the human rights organizations cannot get that aspect straight, then one may suspect the rest of their presentation to be warped. I did not realize that the Taliban are engaged in "jihad for self-defense," did you? One can learn much about human rights from A.I.. But one could not learn enough about the other Mideastern areas of jihad and oppression. A tool of apartheid and ethnic cleansing? What ethnic cleansing? Arabs have been moving into Israel, and moving in and out of the Territories. To accuse Israel of a non-existent ethnic cleansing is to take up the Arabs' paranoid and propagandistic outlook. It is irresponsible. False accusations undermine the credibility of valid accusations when they were to be made. That does civil rights a disservice. People remember human rights organizations as reformers and media organs as watchdogs over government. They are less aware that some of those organizations and organs have been rich or powerful, ideological, and unfair. They are as much the enemy of decency and governments can be.
U.S. ASKED ISRAEL TO DEFER BOMBING OF HIZBULLAH ARMS SMUGGLERS "Security sources" find that Syria has set up bases near the Lebanese border. At those bases, Hizbullah men have their own barracks, arms warehouses, and trucks. The New York Times was shown satellite images of such a base near Adra, northeast of Damascus. Hizbullah transports the arms into Lebanon, at will. It prefers to do so when weather conditions prevent tracking by Israeli satellites. Intelligence agencies in the U.S. and Israel believe that Hizbullah has two Scuds. Israel was about to bomb one shipment, right after it crossed into Lebanon, but the U.S. asks Israel to desist, so it could ask Syria to halt the practice (IMRA, 5/28/10). If the US. diplomats thought they had a chance, what were they smoking in their pipedream? The more Obama sweet-talks Iran and Syria, the more their governments bad-mouth the U.S.. Likewise, the more checkpoints Israel takes down, the more trade barriers the Palestinian Authority put up. You see, weakness encourages defiance. Muslim Arab culture considers accommodation not decency but weakness. It is time the West learns the ways of the world.
IRAN NUCLEAR PLANT SOON BECOMING 'HOT' Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant is about to receive its fuel load. Western states had started the plan, but the U.S. asked them to desist. Russia finished the task (IMRA, 5/28/10). A rogue state can count on Russia to complete contracts. How honorable! When Menachim Begin was Prime Minister of Israel, he held off bombing Iraq's nuclear bomb factory, in the hope of effective international intervention. Unfortunately, the rest of the world does not prevent or halt much trouble. Shortly before Iraq's plant was about to go live and "hot,' so that a raid afterwards could spread radioactivity among civilians, Begin gave the order to bomb it. One of the byproducts of that raid was lower casualties among U.S. troops in the Gulf War. A U.S. official belatedly thanked Israel. It is not popular to thank the international scapegoat for its many services.
IRAN SPOTS U.S. NUCLEAR SUB IN GULF Iran has spotted the presence of a U.S. nuclear sub in the Persian Gulf. U.S. subs have collided with ships in that narrow area, causing oil spills (IMRA, 5/28/10). One of my more militant sources questions whether the U.S. forces are there to raid Iran or to prevent Israel from raiding Iran. A likelier possibility is that the U.S. forces are there to counter-act any Iranian reaction against U.S. bases after an Israeli raid. Shouldn't the Security Council be telling Iran that if one country attacks it, self-defense against that country does not justify its attacking other countries not involved but which Iran doesn't like? Shouldn't the UN be condemning the threat to attack the U.S. after any Israeli raid as blackmail? I fear for the U.S. Navy in a constricted waterway. There is a popular misconception that peace agreements between Israel and some Arabs states and organization offer a reasonable hope for general Arab-Israel peace. This view is naïve. It takes things at face value. In reality, the pacts are superficial, and the Arabs violate them. Egypt and Jordan signed peace treaties with Israel; the PLO and Palestinian Authority (P.A.) signed a series of Oslo Accords with Israel. All those pacts were supposed to normalize relations. The Arabs got concessions of land, water, and political power, but reneged on normalization. All continued their diplomacy, as an adjunct to their wars on Israel. Egyptian military doctrine treats Israel as the enemy. The P.A. preaches military aggression against Israel and Jews. Not a hopeful precedent. A treaty can be called a peace treaty, but the Arabs use those treaties and diplomacy to reinforce their belligerent goals. The mistake is in expecting a treaty to create peace. Usually, peace comes first, and the treaty ratifies and codifies it. The Muslim Arabs never reconciled with Israel first. How can they? Their reason for making war on Israel is religious. The treaty does not reform their religious reason for war. Therefore, while the treaty declares peace, the imams declare war.
SYRIA-EU MEETING A delegation from the EU met with Syria's President and other officials. The communique stated these points, some more than once: "The EU should play a more effective role in the peace process, launch new initiatives and assume the fair mediator role in light of its good relations with the parties concerned... the Arab Peace Initiative is a good ground for reaching a comprehensive peace in the region..." "Syria is an important regional power and assumes a basic role in the region." President al-Assad reviewed during the meeting the efforts being exerted by Syria to achieve security and stability in the Middle East, and Syria's continued work for the achievement of the just and comprehensive peace in the region in implementation of the international legitimacy resolutions, restoring the rights to their legitimate owners (5/28/10). It seems sophomoric of each delegation to tell the other how important it is. The EU relationship with Israel is that of slanted critic. Half the European diplomats sit at meetings at which others criticize Israel in antisemitic ways and ignore the accusers' own, real crimes. Let the EU concentrate on saving itself! The Arab Peace initiative has nothing to do with peace. It has everything to do with advancing jihad by rendering Israel vulnerable to conquest. (Earlier articles have explained how.) Syria is the major Arab instigator of instability in the Mideast. It recently destabilized Lebanon, which it is trying to absorb. A repeat aggressor, it has aligned itself with Iranian jihad. it arms Hizbullah terrorists. It sought to secretly build nuclear weapons. For years, Syria refused to negotiate an end to its state of war with Israel. Now it claims it would negotiate peace, if Israel returned the Golan. That is unconvincing, since Syria attacked Israel twice before Israel acquired the Golan. Experts believe that Syria has not undertaken effective economic reforms.
TODAY IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A CLASH OFF GAZA Today is supposed to be the day of a clash off the coast of Gaza. The flotilla carrying goods but also hundreds of activists, at least some of whom are terrorists, was due to arrive. However, the number of those ships has fallen to eight, and several were having difficulty loading activists against a Cyprus refusal to give permission. The Israeli Navy was set to intercept the ships. A hundred boats from Gaza, bearing relatives of prisoners in Israel and people killed in combat with Israel, were to greet the flotilla. The Israeli organization [whose U.S. counterparts' website I've used], StandWithUs plans to send out six boats bearing the slogan, "Free Gaza From Hamas." It is not stated whether participants other than the Navy are armed (IMRA, 5/29/10). This event has the ominous portents of propaganda, hatred at least from the more notorious "activists," accident, violence, and tragedy. It may hurt families to lose relatives or it may not, considering their views of jihad as entry to Paradise. But Hamas started the war and waged in an illegal manner guaranteed to result in more civilian casualties. The relatives should be complaining to Hamas, not against Israel. All the Gaza prisoners in Israel were convicted of terrorism. They deserve punishment, as barbarians, not sympathy.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTION 15: JEWISH 'SETTLEMENTS' ARE KEY OBSTACLES A common misconception is that houses built by Jews in the disputed Territories are obstacles to peace. Those who say so usually do not delve into the matter deeply. If they did, they would find no justification for the claim. Their claim is on the superficial level that since the Arabs demand that Israel relinquish the Territories to them, building there by Jews makes it more difficult to meet Arab demands. But peace is not simply a matter of meeting Arab demands and of having a double standard about who many build houses in disputed areas. The state of war did not arise from Israeli possession of the Territories. To the contrary, the Territories came into Israeli possession because of a war by Arab states. Israel was accepting a UN partition proposal to leave the now disputed Territories to the Arabs. Rejecting the UN proposal, local and foreign Arabs attacked the Jews in 1947 and 1948. Since Israel did not then possess those Territories, it could not then have been Israeli possession of those Territories that prompted the war. By the same logic that the Territories are not the cause of the Arab-Israel conflict, Israeli withdrawal from those Territories would not produce peace. There must be a reason other than those Territories for the Arab aggression of 1947, for the Egyptian-sponsored terrorism that led to the Sinai Campaign of 1957, and for the Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian aggression (joined by units from other Arab states) of 1967, all before Israel captured the Territories. Why no peace? Answer: the Arabs do not recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state. Abbas still will not recognize it. The Muslim Arab religious view maintains that once an area has become predominantly Islamic, it must remain so. They still consider Spain as lost Islamic territory. Why then, do Arabs and supporters in the State Dept. claim that Jewish construction in the Territories is an obstacle to peace? Because they seek a pretext for whatever Israeli withdrawals they can get. The State Dept. traditionally is anti-Zionist and an appeaser of oil exporting states. Arafat explained his strategy of using Israeli withdrawals as territory from which to conquer Israel. The more Israel retreats, the easier to conquer it. In other words, the claim is for propaganda. It hints that if Israel were to withdraw, peace would follow. That is a snare. Israeli withdrawals have been followed by more terrorism and by invigorated Arab demands for still more withdrawals. To the Arabs, Israeli withdrawals vindicate Islamic doctrine of triumph. Israel withdrawals, therefore, are an obstacle to peace. Israeli construction firms up Israel's position, making war by Arabs less feasible. Only making Israel so strong that none will attack her can bring peace. And strength, in part, depends on keeping vital territories.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
FLOTILLA FLOTILLER
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 30, 2010. |
|
Based on the hit song "Thriller" by Michael Jackson (or — for those of
you who read Tikkun magazine — Reb Michael) — original lyrics can be
found here:
Flotilla — Flotiller lyrics It's close to midnight and something evil's lurking in the dark
'Cause this flotilla, flotiller night
'Cause this is flotiller, thriller night
They're out to get you, there's demons closing in on every side
That this is flotiller, thriller night
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
THOSE WHO CANNOT REMEMBER THE PAST ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, May 30, 2010. |
|
This is by Dan Miller and it appeared May 29, 2010 in Pajamas Media. Dan Miller graduated from Yale University in 1963 and from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1966. He lives in a rural area in Panama. |
|
Having read Churchill's The Gathering Storm for the third or fourth time, it strikes me as frighteningly inauspicious, and not only for the United States today. Churchill was a leading proponent of stopping Hitler before stopping him would involve the massive devastation inflicted on much of the world when World War II eventually came. He noted: We must regard as deeply blameworthy before history ... during this fatal period. Delight in smooth-sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, desire for popularity and electoral success irrespective of the vital interests of the State, genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation ... the strong and violent pacifism which at this time dominated the Labour-Socialist Party, the utter devotion of the Liberals to sentiment apart from reality ... constituted a picture of British fatuity and fecklessness which, though devoid of guile, was not devoid of guilt, and, though free from wickedness or evil design, played a definite part in unleashing upon the world of horrors and miseries which even so far as they have unfolded, are already beyond comparison in human experience. Far worse horrors and miseries are now, decades later, easily possible. The world has changed dramatically and we are now in an exponential age[1]. Now, we have little more than "Churchillian resolution in the face of untrammeled cow flatulence" and the horrors of global warming[2]; this seems a misplaced priority. History remains important — perhaps to a greater extent than ever before. There are those who dilute the conception of what happened in and was done by Nazi Germany by drawing analogies to far less malign events. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles recently said[3] the following in reference to Arizona's new immigration law: "I can't imagine Arizonans now reverting to German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques." Ironically, he went on to say, "Let's not allow fearful and ill-informed rhetoric to shape public policy." We have also declared war on obesity and possibly acne. One petty example of the problem facing England was the 1933 Oxford resolution, which stated that "this House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country." This attitude (perhaps understandable not very many years following the end of World War I) and its all too adequate representation of the pacifist mood then pervasive in the country caused Churchill to write: Mussolini, like Hitler, regarded Britannia as a frightened, flabby old woman, who at worst would only bluster and was, anyhow, incapable of making war. Britain and France were both weary and reluctant to do much of anything about Hitler until too long after he had conquered territory which, had there been any showing of willingness to use force against his depredations, he would not have attempted. At the Nuremberg trials: Colonel Eger, representing Czechoslovakia, asked Marshal Keitel: "Would the Reich have attacked Czechoslovakia in 1938 if the Western Powers had stood by Prague? The Treaty of Versailles imposed grave and unreasonable burdens on a defeated Germany, and Hitler rose to power at least in part due to German resentment and his genius in taking full advantage of it. President Wilson's League of Nations was toothless and impotent, and its objections to such things as Mussolini's invasion of Abyssinia had no effect except, perhaps, to make it the butt of jokes. Would things have been different had the United States joined the League of Nations? I doubt it, but it is impossible to know. Churchill observed: The Americans merely shrugged their shoulders, so that in a few years they had to pour out the blood and treasures of the New World to save themselves from mortal danger. The world is quite different now than in the 1930s, but President Obama in some respects resembles both Neville Chamberlain and his predecessor, Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin. Baldwin found foreign affairs a bit of a bother but wished to be on good terms with the European dictators Hitler and Mussolini; he believed that "conciliation and the avoidance of anything likely to offend them was the best method." Chamberlain also "wanted to be on friendly terms" with them, and "conceived himself capable of achieving this relationship." He did not know what was going on between Mussolini and Hitler. Desirous of peace in our time, Chamberlain worked diligently to promote it. According to Churchill: His all-pervading hope was to go down to history as the Great Peacemaker; and for this he was prepared to strive continually in the teeth of facts, and face great risks for himself and his country. Unhappily, he ran into tides the force of which he could not measure, and met hurricanes from which he did not flinch, but with which he could not cope. Finally, when the Nazi aspirations toward much of Europe became so clear that Chamberlain had to face them, he did. By then, it was almost but not quite too late. Germany had for years, in gross violation of treaties but with the acquiescence of others, built up her army, her navy, her air corps and the materials needed to arm and otherwise to supply them. Britain had not and had instead pursued her own disarmament in the interest of parity and showing the way of righteousness to the rest of the world. Increasingly in recent years, the United States has seemed to be more intent upon ensuring political correctness[4] in the military than upon preparing for the next war, in the forlorn hope that there will never be another. She has seemed to be more interested in gaining popularity with our enemies — and turning upon our own military[5] in the process — by apologizing for perceived past slights and by assuming that they will, in turn, accept us as equals rather than as bullies. This has not been helpful. Instead, like the Oxford resolution of 1933, it has produced perceptions of weakness and submission; it has made the U.S. appear as an ally not to be relied upon. Historically, the U.S. has had a special relationships with Britain and Israel. Those special relationships are fast fading into history, and we seem willing to sacrifice[6] Israel,[7] Poland,[8] and the Czech Republic[9] upon the altar of good will toward their enemies. Perhaps the Obama administration "is incapable of believing that their actions can have marked consequences on the free world." In the late 1930s, Czechoslovakia and Poland were also sacrificed due to an illusion that Hitler's appetite for lebensraum would be satisfied; it wasn't. A few mild words are now occasionally spoken about the ill treatment of citizens in Venezuela[10], now becoming a Cuban colony,[11] and in Iran by their masters, but I strongly suspect that those words are more productive of giggles than of peace. Meanwhile, China is strengthening its military relations[12] with Cuba and, presumably thereby, with Venezuela. Russia[13] seems to be[14] doing much the same. The advice of "hold your friends close and your enemies closer" seems to have been misconstrued. Like (formerly Great) Britain in the 1930s, the United States seemingly lacks an overall strategic objective. This problem is made worse, if such is possible, by continuously making the gross mistake, as Churchill put it, of "behaving as if all the world were as easy, un-calculating, and well-meaning as herself." Poor England! Leading her free, careless life from day to day, amid endless good tempered parliamentary babble, she followed, wondering, down the downward path which led to all she wanted to avoid. Hitler's Germany during World War II may have wanted peace, but not until after she had achieved victory by subduing many other countries and harvesting their human and natural resources. Japan may also have wanted peace and prosperity on her own terms; peace was eventually accomplished, but not in the way she or Germany must have intended. China and Russia presumably want peace on their own terms as well and, like Germany under Hitler, seem more than willing to assist such useful idiots as Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and even the Obama administration as best suits their purposes. The United States can no more afford to be complicit in this process than could Britain in the 1930s. This article is in memory of Sir Winston Spencer Churchill (1874-1965), whose bronze bust was removed from the Oval Office less than a month after the ascension of President Obama to the United States throne. Footnotes [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY [2] http://article.nationalreview.com/432476/ human-rights-watch-and-the-nazis/conrad-black?page=1 [3] http://cardinalrogermahonyblogsla.blogspot. com/2010/04/arizonas-new-anti-immigrant-law.html [4] http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/to-keep- america-safe-we-must-remake-the-military-in-obamas-image/ [5] http://www.humanevents.com/ article.php?id=36699 [6] http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ world/Risk-grows-that-Israel-will-go-alone-to-take- out-Iranian-nukes-92138599.html [7] http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/ 2010/04/026148.php?utm_source=feedburner& utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29 [8] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ sep/17/missile-defence-shield-barack-obama [9] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ sep/17/missile-defence-shield-barack-obama [10] http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/are-socialist- worker-militias-coming-to-a-city-near-you/?singlepage=true [11] http://lucianne.com/article/?pageid= Benny_Marx [12] http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId= 355966&CategoryId=14510 [13] http://laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId= 12394&ArticleId=354706 [14] http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/ what-if-anything-are-russia-venezuela/ Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: GIVE US A BREAK!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 30, 2010. |
|
Netanyahu (who is in Toronto, where he participated in a pro-Israel rally) is going to the White House this week: It's a command performance — commanded by the president, that is. The prime minister couldn't easily say, "Sorry, I choose not to come." It wouldn't be realistic to expect that of him — he does not have that sort of resolute stamina. Though I not only wish he would, but think he should. Expectations are that the president will be all "kissy-kissy" as he endeavors to show how he loves Israel and the Jewish people. After all, he held a White House reception last Thursday for Jewish American Heritage Month. What could be bad? Hall of Fame baseball pitcher Sandy Koufax was his guest. Doesn't that fix things? Delegations from various Jewish federations across the country came to Washington in the last few days as well to meet with administration officials and receive assurances of how strong US-Israel ties are. I find it all rather unbearable. ~~~~~~~~~~ Theories abound as to why he's doing this: because he's concerned about Democratic success in the November congressional elections, because there's been too much pressure on him for how he's treated Israel, or because he thinks he'll get more concessions from us with regard to the "peace process," and thereby be able to flaunt his success. It may be one of the above, or all — I am not going to belabor this now. You may want to see Caroline Glick's take on the situation, in her article, "Netanyahu, Obama's newest prop":
Her point, basically, is that this is for show — for whatever reason, and that Obama has not essentially changed his policy towards us one iota. Not only do I concur, I offer disturbing evidence here of the underlying hostility the president bears us. He is exhibiting enormous willingness to undermine our security — and behave deceptively — even as he opens his arms to embrace Netanyahu. If I were the prime minister, I'd watch my back. ~~~~~~~~~~ As many of you are aware, Obama was tremendously supportive of, and even promoted, the international non-proliferation treaty review conference, which has just finished meeting at UN headquarters in New York. On Friday, the review conference passed a resolution, with 189 signatories, that calls for a conference in 2012 to push for a nuclear free Middle East, and speaks of appointing a special coordinator to visit the region and prepare for such a conference. The resolution singles out Israel — the only country mentioned by name — calling upon her to sign the NPT and open herself to international inspection. But it does not mention Iran, which is a signatory of the treaty and in violation as it seeks to develop nuclear weapons. ~~~~~~~~~~ To no avail in recent weeks, Netanyahu implored Obama not to pursue this path: At the conference on Friday, the US delegation voted for the resolution. Then, after the fact, Obama had the unmitigated gall to declare the resolution unfair to Israel. Yes, he said, he is for a nuclear-free Middle East, but first the nations of the region must recognize Israel's right to exist, sign peace agreements, enter into security arrangements, limit arsenals of weaponry, etc. There is no one, but no one, who imagines that all of this will happen by 2012. So, then, if these are necessary precursors to a nuclear-free Middle East, why sanction a conference in two years? This time he cannot play it both ways at the same time: his actions are too public and too blatant. What he has done is to betray Israel. As Yossi Melman put it in Haaretz: Obama sacrificed Israel for the success of the conference. ~~~~~~~~~~ The official response put out by the Israeli government said: "This resolution is deeply flawed and hypocritical: It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world. ~~~~~~~~~~ The statement also says that the prime minister will discuss this with the president when they meet on Tuesday. Unfortunately, it additionally notes "the important clarifications that have been made by the United States regarding its policy." That is, we've closed our eyes, at least publicly, to the duplicity of Obama, nodding in his direction with a note of appreciation for his objections after the fact. ~~~~~~~~~~ And so, let's go my friends. In the US, please, contact President Obama and tell him you are not fooled by Jewish receptions in the White House. With the US support for the NPT review conference resolution, he has gone further in undermining Israel's security than any US president ever has. There is no way that objections after the fact mitigate what he has done: He has betrayed Israel. Let him know that you are watching him closely and will spread the word everywhere you can. Numbers, my friends! Numbers count, so get this out to undermine Obama's complacency.
~~~~~~~~~~ These are only disparate hints, and yet... First, last week there was a report in the NYTimes indicating that last September General Petraeus signed a directive, the Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force Execute Order: "The seven-page directive appears to authorize specific operations in Iran, most likely to gather intelligence about the country's nuclear program or identify dissident groups that might be useful for a future military offensive. The Obama administration insists that for the moment, it is committed to penalizing Iran for its nuclear activities only with diplomatic and economic sanctions. Nevertheless, the Pentagon has to draw up detailed war plans to be prepared in advance, in the event that President Obama ever authorizes a strike. "'The Defense Department can't be caught flat-footed,' said one Pentagon official with knowledge of General Petraeus's order." No promise of anything, but nice to know. Means it's true, at some level, that nothing is off the table. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then, a report in today's JPost alludes to an article — "Can a Nuclear Armed Iran be Deterred?" — that appears in the current issue of Military Review. It is by Amitai Etzioni, American-Israeli professor at George Washington University. Attacking Iran's nuclear facilities might be very difficult, he says, because they are so well hidden and protected, in addition to which, some are in heavily populated areas. However, there is a "different military option": "The basic approach seeks not to degrade Iran's nuclear capacities...but to compel the regime to change its behavior by causing ever-higher levels of pain." What Etzioni is suggesting is bombing of military bases, airports, bridges, railway stations and other infrastructure. Notes the Post: "Neither Israel nor the United States has ever publicly spoken about the targets that they would bomb if they decide to attack Iran." All very interesting. ~~~~~~~~~~ Finally, today, the Sunday Times (London) reported that Israel is planning to permanently station at least one submarine carrying nuclear cruise missiles (we have three) in the Persian Gulf, within striking distance of Iran. Well...news from London is not authoritative. But this too provides a spark of hope. Maybe we won't be sitting ducks after all. It occurs to me that simply knowing the sub was there might have deterrence value sufficient to give Iran pause on certain matters such as unleashing Hezbollah on us with unconventional weapons. If this story is true... ~~~~~~~~~~ You may have seen a May 24th article in The Guardian (UK), or references to it, claiming that in 1975, then defense minister Shimon Peres offered to sell nuclear weapons to the apartheid regime in South Africa. Since I've been asked about this, I would like to offer my conclusion that there is nothing to this charge. The office of president Peres put out an unequivocal denial in response to the article: "There exists no basis in reality for the claims published this morning by The Guardian that in 1975 Israel negotiated with South Africa the exchange of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, The Guardian elected to write its piece based on the selective interpretation of South African documents and not on concrete facts. ~~~~~~~~~~ Elsewhere, as well, I've seen material that refutes this claim. My impression is two-fold: First that this charge is being made in part out of an attempt to link Israel, as an "apartheid" state, with the state that was apartheid. And two, I believe the South Africans may well have sought nuclear weapons from us — there is talk of "South African documents" — but that they did not receive a positive response from us. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Khaled Abu Toameh, over the weekend PA president Mahmoud Abbas declared that the PA considers the US and not Israel to be its negotiating partner. According to Abbas Zaki, member of the Fatah Central Committee, Abbas told US envoy George Mitchell that the PA does not believe that the government of Netanyahu is a real peace partner. Well, we knew this because of the dynamics that are clear for all to see. But here it is explicitly said. What nonsense. The PA cannot make "peace" with Israel by negotiating with the US, even though this is what it clearly hopes to do. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Flotilla is apparently on its way. Stories vary with regard to how many ships actually departed; they apparently left Cyprus yesterday and traveled a way and then stopped — either because of malfunctions or some convoluted plans in terms of how to proceed. Arrival is projected for tomorrow. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
US TRYING TO DEPORT 'SON OF HAMAS' WHO EXPOSED TERRORISM
Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, May 30, 2010. |
|
The "Son of Hamas," whose recent book reveals his path to Christianity and exposes Hamas terrorism, says that U.S. Homeland Security wants to deport him on charges that he is a terrorist. Writing on his publisher's blog, Mosab Hassan Yousef expressed his "outrage" and described what he called a "security system that is so primitive and naive that it endangers the lives of countless Americans." Yousef wrote that he faces a deportation hearing on June 30 at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Immigration Court in San Diego. He questioned why he is being deported. "For what? For risking my life fighting terrorism in the Middle East for 10 years? For saving the lives of Israelis, Palestinians and Americans?" His saga began in January, 2007 when he arrived at an American airport on a tourist visa without interference. "Seven months later, I went to the Homeland Security office, knocked on their door and told them, 'Hey, guys, I am the son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, my father is involved in a terrorist organization, and I would like political asylum in your country.'" "They were shocked," Yousef wrote on the blog. "I came to you and told you who I am to wake you up. I wanted them to see that they have huge gaps in their security and their understanding of terrorism and make changes before it's too late.' His application for asylum was rejected last February "because there were reasonable grounds for believing he was a danger to the security of the United States and [was] engaged in terrorist activity." In a hearing, he presented a draft of his book "Son of Hamas" as evidence in his behalf. Homeland Security senior attorney Kerri Calcador claimed that, "In the book, the respondent discusses his extensive involvement with Hamas in great detail. For example, in one portion of the book, a member of Shin Bet shows the respondent a list of suspects implicated in a March 2001 suicide bombing and asks the respondent whether he knows the individuals. The respondent indicates that he does know five of the people on the list and states that he previously drove them to safe houses." Yousef countered that he was working as a secret agent for the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) at the time. "No one — not me, not my father, not even Israel — knew at the time that these men were involved with suicide bombings," Yousef argued. "I was the one who connected these men with the bombing at the Hebrew University cafeteria in July 2002. And Homeland Security would do well to remember that there were five American citizens among the dead. Apparently the agency needs also to be reminded that I was the one who located the terrorists and led to their arrest or death." He also claims that he posed as a terrorist while working for Israel. "Yes, I carried a gun," he wrote. "Yes, I was in terrorist meetings with Yasser Arafat, my father and other Hamas leaders. It was part of my job. And I passed on to the Shin Bet all the information I gathered during those meetings and saved the lives of many people — including many Americans. "Homeland Security has absolutely no idea of the dangers that lie ahead. For nearly 30 years, I watched from the inside as Hamas dug its claws deeper and deeper into Israel. They started awkwardly, clumsily, but they got good at it. And al-Qaeda is becoming more like Hamas. "Al-Qaeda started with huge attacks like September 11. But bin Laden has learned from Hamas's war against Israel how to bleed its enemy. Al-Qaeda understands how effective the Hamas strategy will be on American soil." A former Israeli security agent, identified as "G," has confirmed Yousef's account as a secret agent and said that Yousef's spying saved the lives of many Israelis. This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu who writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION CONFERENCE; PAKISTAN HINDUS AND HERETICS; NIF CONDEMNS CRITIC, IGNORES CRITICISM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 29, 2010. |
|
NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION CONFERENCE RESULTS The conference on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty has concluded with setting a schedule for another conference, a regional conference on eliminating non-conventional weapons in the Mideast. They suggested that Israel, India, and Pakistan join the treaty. To produce a concluding document that would be generally accepted, provisions were inserted that all together disturbs most of the members. There is vague wording about being stronger. The document is considered a "great achievement." (Neil MacFarquhar, NY Times, 5/29, A11.) A "great achievement" for whom, how? Like American politicians not wanting to face a problem, the international politicians set a new date for a meeting, appoint a commission, or make a study, but do nothing. Considering the make up of the UN, doing nothing isn't as bad as the alternative, doing bad. The conference was an exercise in futility, like the UN sanctions on Iran that do not get passed unless watered down to ineffectiveness. The crucial flaw remains that nuclear scofflaws are getting away with proliferation and violation, unless Israel strikes their nuclear plants.
HINDUS AND HERETICS IN PAKISTAN HERETICS: Terrorists murdered dozens of people in two minority mosques in Lahore, Pakistan. As people prepared for prayer, nine youths burst in, opened fire at the helpless civilians, and some set off bombs that took their own lives, too. I spare you the details of the gore, but it is horrifying. The crime of the doomed? They belong to a sect that follows Islam except for believing that their leader is a "messenger" referred to by Muhammad. For that, the government has declared them heretics. it forbids them to call themselves Muslims and their temples mosques (Waqar Gilani and Jane Perlez). HINDUS: In one town of Pakistan in a single week, 57 Hindus in three waves converted under pressure to Islam. The pressure was from their employers and their neighbors. The employers were, themselves, under pressure from customers and suppliers, boycotting them for hiring Hindus. The Hindus converted in order to keep their jobs and ability to support their families. Such is life in the town of Sialkot, Pakistan. The source: "Diligent Media Corporation, which owns DNA (Daily News & Analysis), is a joint venture between two industry majors — the Dainik Bhaskar Group and Zee Group. With a reach of more than 120 countries and access to more than 250 million viewers globally..." CONCLUSION: The two incidents have in common intolerance by Pakistani society. It is not just terrorism, not just government, but government, terrorists, and society as a whole. This impression of Pakistan should inform U.S. foreign policy makers about what to expect from dealing with Pakistan. What temerity of callow youths to impose a death penalty on people who do them no harm!
NIF CONDEMNS CRITIC BUT IGNORES CRITICISM The New Israel Fund (NIF) advertised a defense against criticism by NGO Monitor that denounces NGO Monitor but ignores the actual criticism, based on detailed research. The ad called NGO Monitor "a mouthpiece for the extreme right. The ad further declared that NGO Monitor "distorts the facts," equates criticism (legitimate or otherwise) with "sedition," and denies "Israel's obligations to comply with international law." The ad also accused NGO Monitor of working against Israeli democracy. The ad adduced no evidence to support those contentions. NGO Monitor's denial states, "Instead of attacks on NGO Monitor, NIF needs to reconsider its support for groups that campaign to erase Israel's Jewish framework, promote anti-Israel boycotts, aid Goldstone and UN demonization, help prosecute Israeli officials abroad, and equate Israel with 'Russia, China, Sudan, and other authoritarian regimes.' These are the real 'attacks on Israel's democratic foundations.'" NGO Monitor said that the defamatory NIF counter-attack comprises irrelevant distractions from the controversy and themselves are attacks on Israeli democracy in the sense of attempting to cow or smear opposition. The ad answers NGO Monitor's legitimate criticism with false claims that the criticism is illegitimate, without backing up the answer (IMRA, 5/28/10).
NGO MONITOR'S CRITICISM THAT NEW ISRAEL FUND FAILED TO CONTEST` NGO Monitor had advertised in the Jerusalem Post its criticism of New Israel Fund (NIF). Their import is that NIF claims to love Israel, but gives millions of dollars to groups that defame Israel. Here are some examples of NIF's purported stance, and NGO Monitor's rebuttal: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/ 1, NIF: "If... [an NGO] denies Jews the right to self determination, that organization would not receive a grant from us." Rachel Liel, NIF-Israel Executive Director, April 2010 NGO: 'NIF grantee Mada al-Carmel ($200,000 in 2008) calls for a 'change in the definition of the State of Israel from a Jewish state,'" and bringing the Palestinian Arabs into Israel, which would effectively end Jewish self-determination. 2. NIF: "We deeply disagree with the use of 'apartheid' in the Israeli context." Daniel Sokatch, NIF CEO, March 2010 NGO: "NIF grantee B'Tselem's ($357,569 in 2008) Jessica Montell: 'I think the word apartheid is useful for mobilizing people because of its emotional power. In some cases, the situation in the West Bank is worse than apartheid in South Africa.'" 3.NIF: "None of our organizations appeared before the UN [Goldstone] commission." — Rachel Liel, April 2010 NGO: "NIF grantees (combined total $2.2 million in 2008) submitted a joint statement to Goldstone alleging 'human rights violations for which Israel must be held accountable.' Officials from one grantee, PCATI, gave anti-Israel testimony before Goldstone." 4. NIF: "NIF opposes the BDS movement... [and] believes these tactics to be unproductive, inflammatory and ineffective." — Daniel Sokatch, March 2010 NGO: "6 NIF grantees (combined total $477,974 in 2008) successfully petitioned the Norwegian Pension Fund to divest from Israeli firms." 5. NIF: "We...firmly oppose attempts to prosecute Israeli officials in foreign courts..." — NIF Website: FAQs NGO: "NIF grantee Adalah ($510,150 in 2008) submitted a legal opinion to a Spanish court in support of a lawfare case against Israeli officials." (IMRA, 5/28/10). If NGO Monitor's specific criticisms of NIF were incorrect, NIF easily could have challenged them. It did not. Based on that tacit admission that the criticisms were correct, is there are case for suing NIF for fraudulent solicitation? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
PRESIDENT OBAMA IS RIGHT
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 20, 2010. |
|
More Muslim terrorist cells were exposed in the US in 2009 than in any year since 9/11. Islamic terrorism constitutes a real and present danger to the US in spite of — and inflamed by — President Obama's appeasement of Islam, as demonstrated in his most significant speeches at the Turkish Parliament on April 6, 2010 and at Cairo University on June 4, 2010. The intensification of the Muslim terrorist threat, despite Obama's rough/critical/cold attitude toward the Jewish State, refutes the claim that the Arab-Israel conflict, the Palestinian issue or the US-Israel friendship are the root cause of anti-US Islamic terrorism. Anti-US Islamic terrorism has been bolstered by the expansion of Hizballah's operational, financial and political infrastructures in Latin America, notwithstanding the contention by Obama and his advisors that supposedly there is no global Islamic terrorism (only Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorism), that ostensibly there is no Jihadist terrorism ("because Jihad means to purify oneself...") and that terrorism has been seemingly a derivative of Western exploitation of the Third World. President Obama was right when he declared — at Cairo University — that "Islam has always been part of America's story." Indeed, Islamic terrorism targeted US ships between 1776 and the beginning of the 19th century. In fact, John Quincy Adams, the 6th president of the USA, researched the causes of anti-Western Islamic terrorism, concluding that its core cause was endemic hostility toward the "infidel." During the 20th century, the US became a chief-target for Muslim Brotherhood hate-education, which was transformed into a manufacturing-line of anti-US terrorists. In 1983 — when US tanks in Lebanon stopped Israel's hot-pursuit of Arafat — 300 US Marines were murdered by Muslim terrorists who blew up the US embassy and Marines Headquarters in Beirut. In 1998, 300 persons were murdered when Muslim terrorists hit the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In 2001, the British Muslim Richard Reid, the "Shoe Bomber," failed to blow up an American Airlines plane bound for NY. In 2009, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Muslim convert, murdered a US soldier at an Army recruiting post in Arkansas, Hosam Maher Smadi planned to blow up an office building in Dallas, Nidal Hasan murdered 13 US soldiers and injured 31 at Fort Hood, Texas, etc. in 2010, an Islamic terror act was foiled at Times Square, etc. The increase in Islamic terrorist operations in the US has been a direct result of the substantial growth in the number of Jihad-oriented Imams in US penitentiaries, seminaries and mosques: the dramatic boost in the number of Muslim Brotherhood-inspired US mosques: the expanded exposure of US Muslims to the Jihad ideology via Saudi and Qatari-funded Muslim TV channels and Internet; the rise in the number of Muslim terror organizations posing as charity foundations and summer camps, which benefit from tax exemptions; and, the surge in the number of activists, who draft American Muslims to training and indoctrination camps in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen and the Palestinian Authority. Most Muslim terrorists in the USA are Arabs and Pakistanis. The world leading Middle East scientist, Prof. Fuad Ajami of Johns Hopkins and Stanford universities, a Lebanese Shi'ite, wrote in the Wall Street Journal on May 10, 2010: "No strategy of winning hearts and minds, no great outreach, will bring this [Western democracies VS radical Islam] struggle to an end. America can't conciliate these furies." Ajami attributes contemporary Islamic fury and terrorism to the teaching of Egypt's Sayyid Qutb — one of the founding fathers of the Muslim Brotherhood — who considered the US a moral threat to Muslims and condemned Christians and Jews to hell. The inherent religious animosity toward the US has been intensified by Muslim leaders, who consider US values — such as freedom of expression, freedom of movement, freedom of religion, free election, free market and free Internet — as a present and clear danger to their own dictatorial regimes. Moreover, Iran considers the US as the most effective obstacle to the attainment of its megalomaniac aspirations. Syria views the US as a key obstacle to Damascus' historic goal of controlling "Southern Syria" — Jordan. Therefore, they support anti-US terrorism, irrespective of the Palestinian issue, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Jerusalem, settlements or the existence of the Jewish State. Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il This article appeared May 28, 2010 YnetNews (www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3895486,00.html). |
|
BEHIND THE AXIS: THE NORTH KOREAN CONNECTION
Posted by Jonathan Spyer, May 29, 2010. |
|
North Korean spokesmen reacted furiously last week to claims by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that Pyongyang is supplying weapons technology to Iran and Syria. Representatives of the regime of Kim Jong-Il described Lieberman as an "imbecile." The official Korean Central News Agency in a memorable phrase accused the foreign minister in an official statement of "faking up sheer lies." The indignant denials notwithstanding, recent studies indicate that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as North Korea is officially known, is indeed playing a crucial but little remarked upon role in facilitating the arming of the Iran-led regional axis, including in the area of weapons of mass destruction. The North Korean role is multifaceted, and evidence has emerged of direct links to terror organizations such as Hizbullah and extensive strategic relations with both Iran and Syria. A recent study by Christina Lin, a former US Department Defense official and specialist on China, looked into North Korea's strategic partnership with Iran. Lin noted that North Korea has been described as the "the most important single leak" in the international anti-proliferation effort in the Middle East. Iranian-North Korean strategic cooperation dates back to the first days of the Islamic Republic. Its basis is clear. Iran needs access to advanced military technology to underwrite its regional ambitions. Its main suppliers are Russia and China. But both these countries are active members of the international system, and hence are to some degree constrained by international pressures. North Korea, on the other hand, is an isolated country, indifferent to Western attempts to control the access of Middle East radicals to advanced armaments. North Korean assistance plays a vital role in the Iranian missile program. Its flagship Shihab missile project is a product of the relationship. The Shihab is based on North Korea's Nodong missile series. Iran is reported to have purchased 12 Nodong missile engines from North Korea in 1999, beginning the development of the Shihab-3. The Shihab-3, which has a range of 1,300-1,500 kilometers, places Israel within range. More recently, Iranian officials were present at the testing of the advanced Taepodong-2 missile in North Korea in July 2006. This missile is the basis for the Iranian development of the Shihab-6, which has not yet been tested. These are intercontinental, nuclear capable ballistic missile systems, thought to have a range of 5,000-6,000 kilometers. One report has also suggested that Iran and North Korea are jointly seeking to develop a reentry vehicle for the Nodong/Shihab-3, which would be intended to carry a nuclear warhead. In addition, an Iranian opposition report in 2008 identified the presence of North Korean experts at a facility near Teheran engaged in attempts to develop a nuclear warhead to be placed on intermediate range ballistic missiles such as the Shihab-3 and the Nodong. The report was cited by Agence France Presse. The North Korean strategic link with Iran is not limited to Teheran. Rather, evidence suggests that it extends to cooperation with other, more junior members of the Iran-led regional alliance. Thus, Iranian defector Ali Reza Asghari is reported to have confirmed that Iran helped finance the participation of North Korean personnel in the Syrian plutonium reactor at al-Kibar destroyed by Israel in September 2007. Iranian scientists were also present at the site, the goal of which was to produce weapons-grade plutonium. Three North Korean scientists were reported to have been among the dead following an explosion at a Syrian chemical weapons facility near Aleppo in July 2007, suggesting North Korean involvement in other areas of the WMD endeavors of Iran and its allies. And one must not forget also the extensive evidence which has emerged to suggest a North Korean role in the construction of the Hizbullah underground tunnel network which played a vital role in the 2006 Second Lebanon War. The network, according to the Intelligence Online Web site, was created by Hizbullah militants trained in the construction of underground facilities by North Korean experts. The tunnels in Lebanon are said to bear a striking resemblance to similar facilities discovered by the South Koreans in the Demilitarized Zone separating the two Koreas. So despite North Korean official anger at Lieberman's remarks, the evidence is well-documented and overwhelming. Pyongyang is a vital factor in the arming of the Iran-led strategic axis in the Middle East. But why is North Korea playing this role? There is, after all, little ideological common ground between the Shi'ite Islamists in Teheran and Baalbek and the servants of the bizarre "Juche" philosophy used by Kim Jong-il to justify his dictatorship. The factors underpinning North Korean support for Iran and its allies are as simple as they are powerful: common enemies and hard cash. As a known rogue WMD proliferator, and as perhaps the most repressive regime currently on the planet, North Korea faces diplomatic and economic isolation. Like Iran, it is the subject of UN Security Council sanctions because of its nuclear program. Iran is prepared to pay good money for military and scientific assistance, and to underwrite Pyongyang's own research and development programs, from which it stands to benefit. North Korea and Iran play a similar role in their respective regions of opposition and subversion toward the US and its allies. A cynic might add that the tendency of both regimes to indulge in the faking up of sheer lies is a further point of commonality between them. These firm foundations mean that — short of action taken to disturb it — the friendship between the Kim Jong-il dictatorship in North Korea and the Iran-led "resistance bloc" in the Middle East is likely to flourish and continue to mutually benefit both partners in the years ahead. Dr. Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Herzliya, Israel. This article is archived at
|
|
ISLAM IS FRIGHTENINGLY TIMELY AMID STRAINED U.S.-ISRAELI RELATIONS
Posted by Chuck Morse, May 28, 2010. |
|
"Uncle Ho and the 2-state solution" Soviet archives, declassified shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990, indicate that in 1973 Yasser Arafat's PLO operatives were advised by North Vietnamese political trainers in Hanoi to promote the so-called "two-state solution" as a negotiating tactic, as opposed to their previous policy of calling for the complete destruction of Israel. Arafat admired the North Vietnamese for their ability to garner sympathy and support within the American left, and he sought to emulate that success. By 1973, it had become clear that the crude PLO rhetoric, which included calls to drive the Jews into the sea and slaughter them all, was not winning any friends. Ho Chi Minh's advice worked like a charm while the PLO terrorism against Israel nevertheless continued unabated. Palestinian terrorist Abu Iyad, in his memoir published in Arabic and entitled "Palestinian Without A Motherland," recounts North Vietnamese political advisers suggesting to him that the PLO "stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand." The North Vietnamese had experienced amazing success in terms of convincing the American left that they were not engaged in an aggressive war of conquest against South Vietnam but were rather spearheading an effort to liberate the South from American oppression and establish independence for Vietnam under their rule. To truly understand anti-Israel vitriol in Middle East read Chuck Morse's "The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj Amin Al-Husseini" The North Vietnamese propaganda failed to mention the fact that Ho Chi Minh, whose real name was Nyugen ai Quoc, had been a Soviet agent for 20 years before he became a public figure in North Vietnam in 1945. Hindsight indicates that the South Vietnamese people did not feel either liberated or independent due to the North Vietnamese conquest in 1975, as evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese who braved shark-infested waters and pirates in their quest to escape the socialist paradise by getting on rickety boats. Neither did the people of Laos or Cambodia appear to appreciate the wonders associated with the communist takeover of their countries. The collectivization programs caused one of the worst genocides of the century, as radical Marxist Pol Pot collectivized Cambodia leading to millions of deaths. The PLO was no doubt encouraged when the U.S. Congress, having elected a new crop of young liberals in 1974, including Patrick Leahy and Joe Biden, cut off all aid to South Vietnam in March of 1975, which led to a full-scale invasion from the north and the fall of Saigon two months later. This disgraceful betrayal of America's ally occurred two years after the signing of the Paris Peace Accord in January of 1973, a treaty that resulted in the end of the war and the full withdrawal of American troops. The sellout of South Vietnam by American liberals, both on the street and in Congress, no doubt fostered hope in the souls of the PLO and their allies that American liberals would one day also sell out Israel — and they had reason to be encouraged. Ho's advice, which was to employ Marxist rhetoric when describing the Palestinian Arabs as oppressed and occupied, while referring to Israel in language that was probably borrowed from the chapters pertaining to Jews in Hitler's "Mein Kampf," a very popular book in the Arab world, was wildly successful in terms of garnering support from the international left including, to varying degrees, the Jewish left and even the Israeli left. The pressure in the ensuing decades led to the Oslo Accords, signed by Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Yatzak Rabin in a White House lawn ceremony presided over by President Bill Clinton on Sept. 13, 1993. On that same day, in a pre-taped interview that ran on Jordan TV, Arafat explained in Arabic that: "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do it in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine and establish sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel." Chuck Morse is a syndicated columnist and author of several books dealing with issues affecting Israel. He is a renowned radio talk show host where he co-hosts "The Fairness Doctrine" along with Dr. Patrick O'Heffernan in his home region of New England and was a candidate for US Congress in the 4th District of Massachusetts in 2004. Read a review of Morse's "The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj Amin Al-Husseini" here. To interview Chuck Morse, please contact Ben Kilgore or Jess Segovia at (781) 698-9454 or media@wnd.com |
|
MOHAMMED'S KARTOON KAFIRS
Posted by Bill Warner, May 28, 2010. |
|
This was written by Kenneth Roberts. |
|
In the TV sitcom 'Green Acres', Oliver Wendell Douglas, a New York attorney runs for public office against the popular incumbent. A rumor starts, suggesting that Douglas had been debarred as a lawyer. Though not true, the rural folk keep repeating the lie during the campaign, until everyone accepts it as an established fact... and besides, it's highly amusing to repeat the slander. Candidate Douglas is frustrated beyond endurance. Even though he is an accomplished attorney, he doesn't stand a chance against this entrenched prejudice. In the Koran, Mohammed uses the same technique. All sorts of things in the Koran are no more than cartoonish misrepresentations of people and other religions, but Moslems have no problem accepting them as established facts, merely because Mohammed said so and repeated them over and over, giving them divine authority... and besides, Mohammed's caricatures are highly amusing! Cartoons work. Hyperbole works. They entertain. They work viscerally by circumventing the intellect and appealing directly to the emotions through laughter and sneering mockery. A thing doesn't have to be true to be fun! Mocking outsiders is fun! It puts 'them' down, puts 'us' above them and thus dehumanizes 'them'. 'We' get control of 'them'. According to Mohammed, not only do kafir-subhumans deserve to be mocked, but they basically lack a right to share the earth with Moslems. They are on earth by the kind permission and mercy of Moslems who magnanimously restrain themselves from removing the kafirs altogether. By mocking their legitimate overlords (the Moslems), kafirs lose their right to exist on earth. That is the Sunna, the example, of Mohammed. In the TV episode, lawyer Douglas starts shouting, 'I was not debarred!' but no one hears him over the howls of bemused laughter. Mohammed discovered how effective laughing at one's opponents could be. He mocked all who didn't follow him, starting with the Jews, calling them sons of pigs and apes, and at other times calling them 'donkeys carrying the Taurat'. Mohammed refused to pronounce it 'Torah'. He distorted the names of people in the Bible as well, no doubt to make them sound funny. He told humiliating stories about Biblical heroes. Abraham had a humorous scrotal hernia. Talking rocks stole Abraham's clothes and ran away with them. Solomon bends over and overhears the language of ants. Trees, clouds and other objects in nature come alive and speak. Such imagery could come out of Tom and Jerry, but it is there in Mohammed's holy book revealed by his god, who only communicated with Mohammed. Mohammed also hired writers to lampoon his enemies in limericks. Mohammed could not take a joke at his own expense. No! Mohammed's narcissism was sacred! And poking fun at it was an unforgivable act of high treason punishable by death! He had writers assassinated who lampooned him. Of course, as with other matters, Mohammed gave himself a monopoly on cartoons. He wanted his opponents to be unarmed in the matter of satirizing him...as do pious Moslems today. Today, Moslems claim the right to satirize Jews, Americans, the British, the Pope and anyone else. But no one may satirize them. Moslems place themselves and their collective offended narcissism above comment. To criticize Moslems is an act of high treason against our divinely-appointed overlords! We are never told why Mohammed's narcissism needs defending more than another's narcissism. We are merely told that Mohammed taught his followers to defend his narcissism by assassinating critics...and that this is confirmed in Islamic law. Since Moslems claim a monopoly on lampooning, Moslems expect to fight opponents whose two hands are tied behind their backs. They expect to control all debate, so no one talks back. They expect to behead all verbal critique of Islam by removing freedom of speech from our writers, teachers and politicians. They would behead kafirs societies by silencing their leaders who are charged with hearing, speaking and thinking for the benefit of the body politick. They would silence opposition to Islam with a slice of the scimitar of censorship! This is being done by violence and threats of violence. Mohammed considered resistance to his censorship as unspeakable insolence that must be attacked with the utmost fury! Mohammed's narcissism would not bear the smallest slight. So he found a way to stop it. All laughter stops when a person picks up a knife. According to Mohammed, such murder pleases Allah. When Mohammed sent out his followers armed with knives, the mockers stopped mockery in Arabia forever. Anyone who disagreed with Mohammed left the country immediately, leaving Mohammed in complete control of all communications. Today Moslems still demand a monopoly on mockery, a monopoly on satire, a monopoly on cartoons. They want a safe position above the debate from which they can verbally lay into others. Islamic mockery goes only one way...towards the kafirs. Mohammed's mockery of Christian doctrines was as satirical as his mockery of the Jews. Mohammed's slanders of Christianity are some of the worst examples of his cartooning! The easiest and most distinctive Christian doctrine to remember is that of the divine Trinity, three persons in one God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Rather than admit he understood the clearly worded message, Mohammed intentionally distorted it as 'Father, Mother Mary and Son of God'. He obviously knew Mary was not part of the Trinity. He knew what he was doing. He was drawing a cartoon in which he removed the Holy Ghost from the picture. The first cult object tossed from the Kaaba by Mohammed was an image of a dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit. Why was the Holy Ghost such a danger to Mohammed? Sometimes people reveal what frightens them by never mentioning what they fear! Mohammed never mentions the Holy Ghost. The gentle dove represents spiritual stillness, tameness and the Golden Rule. Their opposite qualities are activity, ferocity and opportunism. A world-conquering empire needed energetic warriors with the latter qualities, rather than contemplative Christian monks in a monastery preaching benevolence towards one's enemies. Mohammed's ultimate mockery of Christians was to mock the Virgin Mary by flying to heaven and make her his bride. Mohammed became the father of all Christians. His mockery of Christians was then almost complete. Practically everything Mohammed said about Christianity was a caricature and a distortion. In a final cartoon of Christianity, Mohammed claimed Jesus would return to betray and butcher his own followers and then break the crosses they possessed as the symbols of the Golden Rule! This is an astonishing cartoon caricature of everything Christians consider holy and a revelation of Mohammed's psychology of betrayal! The worst part of Mohammed's cartoons is that not only is he caricaturing the original doctrines, but he then claims that his cartoon represents THE TRUE IMAGE of them! Jewish and Christian doctrines as defined by the Jews and Christians themselves are wrong! Only Mohammed's cartoons are THE TRUE doctrines. No professional cartoonist would ever claim that! Cartoonists live enough in reality to know that their cartoons are highly exaggerated misrepresentations emphasizing a humorous aspect of events or personalities. If Mohammed thought his cartoons were REAL, he had obviously left reality. Koranic cartoons misrepresenting Jews, Christians and the pluralistic, cultured Arabs of Mohammed's day are not reality, but Mohammed's distorted comic strips, which Moslems have accepted as THE TRUTH ever since. Mohammed could not tell the difference between a cartoon and reality...or at least he pretended not to, if it was in his own political interest. This makes Mohammed a cynical, scheming politician, rather than a sincere spiritual leader. Was he mad or a schemer? Mohammed's cartoons of 'others' in the Koran are no more real than the evil and dehumanizing cartoons of Jews that appeared for 20 years in the Nazi propaganda newspaper, Der Stürmer. The purpose of these cartoons was the same as Mohammed's Koranic Kafir Kartoons ...to dehumanize the victims, make them out to be diseased animals and give Moslems the emotional freedom to treat these subhumans violently. Bill Warner is Director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. Contact him at bw@politicalislam.com and visit their website at http://www.politicalislam.com/ |
|
PROF CHANES ON ANTI-SEMITISM; OBAMA'S TROUBLING STATEMENTS ON ISRAEL; PA ECONOMIC GROWTH REAL?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 28, 2010. |
|
NEW YORK SCHOLAR ON ANTISEMITISM Part 1: Professor Jerome A. Chanes Professor Jerome A. Chanes, author of the award-winning A Dark Side of History: Anti-Semitism Through the Ages, among other books, spoke last night at the Fifth Ave. Synagogue in New York, on current antisemitism. Humorous and perceptive, the scholar had insufficient time to do justice to his subject, though he strove mightily to make proper distinctions. He explained that antisemitism is a reaction to broad events in society, events independent of what Jews do. Thus antisemitism has different motives at different times: religious, political, cultural, and racial. People like to hate. For instance, Chanes explained, If a sociologist asks Americans whether "the Jews" have too much power in the U.S., many will say "yes." But if the sociologist lists a couple of dozen major U.S. groups, Jews rank about the second from the bottom, thought to have too much power. America never had much of the ingrained antisemitism in institutions of state power, as did Europe. Antisemitism here has waned with each generation. Jewish defense organizations, such as ADL, work hard to sway individuals from antisemitism. Chanes finds no proof that approach works. Prejudice is generational, each generation coming under the influence of its own times. As a result, Jews have never been less disliked in America, nor have they ever felt less secure. Mr. Chanes did not get to explain his paradox, but he did mention the convergence of the new font of antisemitism, by the radical Muslims, with the new Left. A popular misconception, we were told, is that antisemitism kept the Jews together. No, Jewish vitality did, Chanes asserts. When is anti-Israel sentiment antisemitic? This question particularly riveted audience attention. Chanes defined ordinary criticism of some Israeli policies as not antisemitic. After all, Israelis themselves are divided over such policies. It is antisemitism when those criticisms extend to the legitimacy of the Jewish state and Jewish nationality, a legitimacy that the critics do not have for other ethnic groups [including the Palestinian Arabs, who are not a nationality and have current events but no separate history]. Elaborating, Chanes explained that driving that kind of antisemitism among non-Muslims in Europe is Europe's movement beyond nation states into international organizations. As a result, the pacifistic Europeans hate Israel and the U.S. for acting as nation states and defending themselves, The speaker applied his sense of humor somewhat at my expense. I asked, "If Europeans hate Israel for being a nation state, why are they striving to bring into statehood the Palestinian Authority?" He answered, "Richard, your mistake is in being logical." That reminds us that antisemitism is not logical but hysterical. I would explain European support for Palestinian Arabs both as appeasement of the Arabs and as driven by a hatred of Jewish statehood that exceeds their dislike for nation states in general. My comment on the antisemitism promoted by Muslims in the Mideast and in Europe: Antisemitism was the preeminent principle of the Nazis. After all, during WWII, the Nazis gave priority to trains carrying Jews to extermination camps, and not to trains carrying troops to the hard-pressed German fronts. The Muslim Arabs have added Nazi-style antisemitism, a racist variety, to their religious antisemitism. When my critics call Israelis "Nazis," they use words as weapons of deceit rather than as conveyors of information. They seek to divert attention from the Nazi-like ideology of totalitarian Muslims, and the fact that the main Nazi book is a best-seller among the Arabs. Part 2. Racial aspects The scholar did not define "antisemitism" nor elaborate on its racial aspect. He quoted a humorous comment that antisemitism is hating Jews more than absolutely necessary. He acknowledges that it can hardly be defined, but a sensitive Jews knows it when he sees it. Experts have explained that Islam started with antipathy toward Jews of that era, expanded that antipathy with blood libel and other features learned from European priests, and tinged their bigotry with Nazi racism. Nazi ideology, not just German opposition to colonial rule over the Arabs, was and is popular among the Arabs. The term, "racist," is so abused, that I usually avoid it. A racist holds descendants responsible for crimes of their forebears generations earlier, and holds responsible a whole nation responsible for what may have been done by a small portion of that nation and not because of that nation's culture. Nazism was indeed popular among Germans not purged by Hitler and inherent in their culture. Nazism had a theory of Jews being a race not fully developed except in evil. The mass-murdering Nazis, who dictated, warred, and looted, called other people evil! But contemporary Germans are much different and should not be judged the same. It is even less fair to call contemporary Jews "Christ-killers" for what a small proportion of the nation was accused of doing, out of context of its culture, and anyway had no power to execute and did not execute, two thousand years ago. The Islamist view extrapolates the religion's differences with a few Jews 1,400 years ago, into a genetically inherited plot to corrupt and conquer the world. They got that from the Nazis, who rely upon an antisemitic Czar having forged from a work of fiction not involving Jews, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That is racist. An Austrian coined the word, "anti-Semite," as my series on Major
Mideast Myths explains. (For start of the series, goto:
He originated it to mean hatred of Jews, his sentiment. He did not include Arabs in that. A persistent critic of mine misuses that word in two racist ways. First, he repeats the Arab excuse that Arabs are Semites and therefore cannot be antisemitic. "Semitic," however, is a language grouping. The critic is using the term as if designating a race. Of course, it is not logical, either, because some Jews are antisemites, too. Second, that critic resurrects the genetically disproved theory that modern Jews are descended from Khazar converts in what became Russia. There was barely contact between the Jews of Europe and the converted Khazar rulers. The theory also fails to account for the half of Israelis expelled by the Arabs from their ancient Mideastern communities. The critic suggests that modern Jews are not real Jews, because, he asserts incorrectly, they are not descended from them. However, Judaism recognizes converts. Therefore, the critic's view is racist, again. He relies on his mistaken notion of race, to claim that Khazar descendants never were in the Land of Israel. What a fantasy he must have, that the millions of Jews who dwelt in the European part of the Roman Empire, met and converted the Khazars, disappeared, and then the Khazars, whom the Russians conquered, moved into Europe, revering the Torah but not being, according to the critic, Jews! Beware of critics who accept almost any canard against the Jews, and who, as this one does, makes up his own blood libels almost daily. For example, he accuses the Israelis of murdering masses of Arabs to take their land, and cites no specifics. The Arabs used to be satisfied with the whopper that Israel expelled the Arabs. The critic embellishes it. His creativity in falsity indicates design, a combination of the very deceit, ignorance, and racism that he accuses others of.
OBAMA TROUBLING STATEMENTS ON ISRAEL: Part 1. Ten Statements 1. Upon signing the Daniel Pearl Press Freedom Act, President Obama said that the "loss" of Mr. Pearl "reminded us of how valuable a free press is." Actually, Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded for being a Jew. The murderer admitted it and made Pearl acknowledge his being Jewish. Obama talked out of context, and without the indignation warranted, as if avoiding condemning radical Muslim murders of Jews. 2. In June, 2009, Obama visited the Buchenwald death camp, used primarily for Jews. He mentioned "Jews" only once, instead using innocuous wording, such as "where people were deemed inhuman because of their differences." 3. Usually, presidents refer to this country's Judeo-Christian origin and tradition, but in his inaugural, he said, "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non believers." In January, 2009, he told the Saudis that we are "a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers." Note the odd sequence. 4. At Cairo in June, 2009, Obama used the self-serving Islamist estimate of 7 million. He said we have one of the largest Muslim populations in the world [actually no more than a few emirates have]. "The U.S. has about 6 million Jews. The 2007 Pew Research Center study estimates a U.S. Muslim population of about 1.8 million. A 2008 American Religious Identification Survey puts the figure even lower, at 1,349,000." 5. Obama equated the suffering of the Jews during the Holocaust with the recent suffering of Palestinian Arabs. [That compares victims of genocide with attempted perpetrators of genocide, who lost their property as a result, and whose fellow Arabs confiscated a greater amount of property from Jews]. He also equated the Arab situation with that of blacks during U.S. slavery and S. African apartheid, implying that this was Israel's fault. 6. Jerusalem should be a place for all faiths, Obama said. That is not fair. Israel has made it such, but when the Muslims ruled, it was not. 7. Also at Cairo, Obama referred to the Koran, the Christian Testament, and the Talmud, but only the first two as holy. 8. He named other countries that helped Haiti, but omitted Israel, which helped more than any of those others. 9. When Israel announced another step in the approval process for some housing in Jerusalem, breaking no agreement with the U.S., Obama used such words as "insult," "affront," and "condemn." He did not use such words for Iran's nuclear programs or oppression nor for the Palestinian Authority's indoctrinating in bigotry and naming places in honor of terrorists. 10. Obama let himself be photographed talking by phone with Israel's PM Netanyahu, showing the soles of his shoes, which to the Arabs signifies insult, in this case, to Netanyahu. Some of the lesser incidents by themselves would not be troubling. However, they are part of a pattern. Obviously, Obama treats Muslims more considerately than Israelis. Like Israel's virulent critic, Jimmie Carter, Obama has appointed Jews and held Jewish ceremonies. But Obama's appointees share his policies harmful for Israel (5/27/10 press release by Zionist Organization of America, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member). Let us not make the simple-minded, incorrect assumption that if someone is Jewish, he automatically is pro-Israel. Same for politicians who say they are pro-Israel. They may not mean it. Part 2. Double standard If Israel lobbied to expel the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) from the UN, would Obama ignore it? The P.A. lobbies to expel Israel from the UN and Obama does ignore it. If Israel boycotted P.A. businesses, would Obama ignore it? The P.A. boycotts Israeli businesses in the Territories, and Obama ignores it. If Israel declared that all Jewish terrorists convicted of attacking Arabs should be released, would Obama ignore it? The P.A. declares that all Arab terrorists convicted of attacking Israel should be released, and Obama ignores it. Obama has a double standard, prejudiced against Israel. He lets the Arabs get away with every way by which they work against peace (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 5/27/10).
P.A. ECONOMIC GROWTH? 
By now you may have heard that the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) in Judea-Samaria enjoyed economic growth of 8.5% last year. P.A. Prime Minister Fayyad got the credit for it. The international monetary fund, however, gives the credit to increased foreign aid. There has not been much private investment representing real growth. Funds pumped in account for the real estate boom in Ramallah (IMRA, 5/27/10).
IRAN-RUSSIA ROW OVER SANCTIONS Iran and Russia have had their wars and other differences over the centuries. Many times in recent years, Russia saved Iran from UN sanctions, and has helped Iran's military industry. Iranian dissembling, however, has made Russia look foolish for it. Finally, Russia got the most recent UN sanctions watered down, and then approved them. That was not good enough for Iran's President Ahmadinejad. He warned Russia to think carefully before crossing a great nation such as Iran. He said that if Russia persisted, Iran would consider it an enemy. Russian President Medvedev told Ahmadinejad to stop his demagoguery. A specialist told Reuters that Ahmadinejad was attempting to blame his problems on others (IMRA, 5/27/10).
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
LANDAU LAMBASTES BARAK FOR LEBANON WITHDRAWAL
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, May 28, 2010. |
|
Ehud Barak, aka; the coward of Lebanon, seems to only be able to wage war against Yeshivah students and their Rabbis. His hysterical, middle-of-the-night withdrawal from Lebanon succeeded in elevating a rag-tag street gang into international prominence. It is petty, incompetent bunglers like Barak that offer the greatest and most self evident proof for the existence of G-D. If Israel, and the rest of the world as well, were actually run by these low lifes, the world would not last till the end of the day. This a news brief from Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). |
|
Infrastructures Minister Uzi Landau said Friday that Defense Minister Ehud Barak caused harm to Israel when, as prime minister, he ordered Israeli troops out of Lebanon. Interviewed by Arutz Sheva television in Hebrew on the 10th anniversary of the pullout (finished on May 24, 2000, the 19th of Iyar on the Hebrew calendar), the Yisrael Beiteinu lawmaker noted the way it left depicted the Israel Defense Forces as fleeing for their lives from Hizbullah terrorists, leaving them equipment and making the South Lebanese Army look abandoned. Asked why Barak is proud of the retreat, Landau asked, "Do you want him to come and admit all his mistakes publicly, as well as the heavy price the people have paid because of them? He's a politician, and not every politician admits his mistakes." Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
THE CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG
Posted by Robin Ticker, May 28, 2010. |
|
This was written by Nadia Matar of Women in Green.
Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow
(Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their
email address is wfit2@womeningreen.org and their
website address is
|
|
I was happy to read the reports in the media on Wednesday, May 26, 2010, that dozens of lecturers from the Hebrew University set out with hundreds of their students on a march to the "Sheikh Jarah" (Shimon Hatzaddik) neighborhood in Jerusalem "to demonstrate against the entry of Jewish settlers to the neighborhood and the removal of Arab families from their homes." The photographs accompanying the reports show the demonstrators with signs such as: "Students and Lecturers against Settlements," "Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's House," and the like. According to the report on Ynet, during the course of the procession the students and the lecturers voiced calls such as "We will not sit in classrooms when, outside, rights are being trampled" and "Civil rights will not be taught with racism in Sheikh Jarah." They also bore banners stating, among others (in a slogan that rhymes in Hebrew), "There Is No Sanctity in an Occupied City." The report quotes various lecturers who explain why they came to demonstrate: Dr. David Tsafti, a lecturer in genetics: "I don't agree to the expulsion of families from their homes. They say that the houses belong to Jews, and maybe that is correct, but it certainly isn't right [...] people have lost the ability to see Arabs as human beings." [Interestingly, five years ago Dr David Tsafti was not seen demonstarting against the expulsion of our brothers from Gush Katif...but let's go on to the next lecturer] Ruti Bettler, a professor of education, said that she has been active in this struggle [against Jews settling in Jerusalem's neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah] for a long time. "The attempt to expel these families from their homes is an injustice in the human and moral plane." [She too somehow, who is active on behalf of Arab squatters in homes they grabbed and stole from the original Jewish owners, did not decry the expulsion of Jews from their real homes.] Let's go on to the next leftist professor quoted in the article: Professor Tamar Rappaport said that no less than 10 lecturers in education came to the demonstration. "Word of the demonstration went though the social networks and [e-]mails, and reached people. In the final analysis, lecturers, too, are people, and in this land it's impossible not to be political." She made clear that the lecturers did not come to the demonstration in the name of the university, and rather were speaking for themselves, but she emphasized: "I think that the struggle of Sheikh Jarah is closely connected with academy." The professor of anthropology Yoram Bilu told that during all his years in academe, he did not encounter such a broad and diverse response by lecturers and students for such cooperation." You'll be surprised to hear this, but I am very glad that such a demonstration was held by the left. For years we have been trying to persuade teachers, educators, and rabbis in our national camp that it is inconceivable that they and their students would not be involved, even during study hours, in the struggle for Eretz Israel. During the Oslo period I attempted to persuade teachers to join the demonstrations against the Oslo accords, together with their students, during study times, as well. How is it possible to continue to study when the house is on fire, we told them? And likewise during the period of the expulsion from Gush Katif and northern Samaria, and likewise right now: when the Arabs, who are financed by international bodies, are stealing and grabbing thousands of dunams of state lands, tens of thousands of yeshivah students in the state-religious or hardal (semi-ultra-Orthodox) religious educational institutions continue with routine life as usual, continue to study in air-conditioned study halls — as if there were no physical war, on the ground, for the land. Don't misunderstand me. I am not calling to stop Torah study, or any other study, but I am calling to combine study with the actual struggle on the ground, as I will explain in detail below with practical examples. Once I also tried to persuade Bnei Akiva counselors to organize setting up new me'ahazim (outpost settlements), or to distribute informational material against the Oslo accords and for Eretz Israel as a whole. In all these instances described above we were confronted by the same puzzling response: "It is forbidden for us and our members to participate in "political" activity." Now, after dozens of Hebrew University lecturers, who publicly proclaimed their views, unabashedly participated in a demonstration by the left, I want to hope that in our camp, as well, educators, rabbis, teachers, lecturers, and their students will begin to arise and go out to defend Eretz Israel, on the ground. Ideas for action:
Robin Ticker writes: "This email is L'Ilui Nishmat Yisrael ben David Aryeh ob"m (Izzy Kaplan) a great activist and lover of Eretz Yisroel, Am Yisroel and the Torah. Yehi Zichrono Baruch." Contact her at faigerayzel@gmail.com |
|
THE FLAG OF KAVEH
Posted by Jaff Sassani, May 27, 2010. |
|
Jaff Sassani from the Sassanian Kurd Defense Committee (KDC) writes We are about three million people in Iran and Iraq. Our people are called the "Jaff" we are originally Sassanian people. We are acceptable by the Persian and Kurds people and other Iranian nations because of our origin. Read more about them here. |
|
THE FLAG OF KAVEH True or mythological, the story of the blacksmith Kaveh goes back to an era before The Medes and Sassanian Empires. Kaveh led a popular uprising against the foreign demon-like ruler Dahag (Modern Iranian: Zahhak). Using the blacksmith's leather apron on a spear as a flag, Kaveh lead the Aryan people to destroy Zahhak, the Arab tyrant who unjustly ruled over the Aryan people's lands. The founder of the Sassanian Empire was the Great Spirit and tireless son of the Aryan people, Ardashir Sassani. Once more the flag of the blacksmith Kaveh was used. Sassani used this flag as his own, as a symbol to liberate and build an independent country for the Aryan nation. We hope that someday the Aryan people will once again come together to form a united front, similar to the Europeans union. Every Aryan nation should have the freedom to form the country and Government for themselves separately. Instead of trying to destroy each other, we should try to help each other to form a free country like those in Europe so that we can live with each other in peace. Racism will cause divisions, no matter whether it is Persian racism, Kurdish racism, Afghani racism or any other Aryan racism. Considering and accounting for each others interests, will bring the Aryan people together and get us united. The many languages used in Europe have not stood in the way as they form a solid European union. We, the Aryan people, have languages very similar to one another; it should be much easier for us to get united. We have a lot of powerful enemies, like families from the Islamic Sayed, with Arabic origins and Turks. They would not like to see us united. That is why they work to inject division among us. The Sassanian Empire was an independent Aryan country that followed the Zoroastrians religion. It was not solely a Persian country. Even Ferdawsi are questionable. Those who follow the racist Persian policy are enemies of the Aryan people without any doubt. It is possible that Shitte Islamic Sayeds or Turks injected this racist belief among the Aryan people to keep them from becoming united forever. But enemies of the Aryan peoples plans are useless because the Aryan people are much more knowledgeable and smarter than they are. The Aryan people's eyes were truly opened following the Islamic revolution of Iran. Sayed Allotola Komani's, along with his disciples, ruled as a tyrant and abused many. They are no longer accepting the propaganda and they are not getting fooled in the name of Shitte any more. There is hope for a better future and happier days for the Aryan people. Contact the Jaff Sassani by email at jaff.skdc@gmail.com or
visit their website:
|
|
RE: THE JEWISH INTELLECTUAL PREDICAMENT
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 27, 2010. |
|
We respond to Isi Leibler's article in the Jerusalem Post — November 25, 2009 which asks this question: "Why does so much of the world hate us?" We think what we have to say here in response to the JP article synchronizes with the views so brilliantly articulated by David Solway in his editorial "The Jewish Intellectual Predicament" — FrontPageMag.com May 27, 2010. We are the Secular Christians for Zion. We believe there are many answers to Isi Liebler's question: Here's some of our thoughts: 1) You ask for hatred whenever a Jew plaintively cries "Why does so much of the world hate us?" because this question rings a bell in the minds of people who would nor ordinarily think to hate you and so they prick up their ears out of curiosity and search in all the wrong places for answers that very question and of course they find your enemy's propaganda instead of your own. Therefore a small part of this animosity toward Israel reposes with Jews who have failed, utterly, to develop and passionately express effective propaganda to rebut the insults contrived by the Islamics. Instead, you produce reams of yackety-yak by prominent Israeli in-tell-leck-shu-alls who write boring tracts in rebuttal to the scurrilous accusations contrived against Israel. Like the dullest of pedants they carefully recite, paragraph after paragraph and word for word, the spurious accusations against Israel and then analyze them for paragraphs more. Worse still, these well-meaning bores are prone to conclude their magnum opus with so few words in defense of Israel — and these in phrases so coldly dispassionate and so tediously logical — that an uninformed reader will more often than not come away with the feeling that Israelis are actually confessing their guilt. The unintended consequence of this Hebraic intellectualism has been most unfortunately reinforced by Israel's peculiar leadership who repeatedly offer to make "painful concessions" for "peace" — words uttered not by the righteous and never by the virtuous but rather by persons who are necessarily presumed to be "down, dirty, and guilty-as-sin." What else would explain why a Jew would offer tribute to those who profess to despise them? Which begs another question: Do you really believe that your God commands Jews to offer "mitzvahs" to those who slaughter your children and stone your unarmed countrymen? (If so, its no wonder that people are so readily persuaded that you've got more than a screw loose, in which case they will feel not just tempted but rather entitled to take advantage of you.) 2) Then you have amongst you a large cadre of frightened Jews who are quick to agree with their Islamic accusers in order to dissipate their fear of receiving a thrashing at the hands of their clever enemies. They suffer from what we refer to as the "running Jew" syndrome and their trembling faints invite the very attacks they hope to avoid. We suspect these Jews whom you refer to as "leftists" are at bottom glued to each other in fear. And their fears might very well be justified because Israel's leadership has been, at least during their lifetimes, such a profound and unsettling disappointment. Ever since Israel defeated its enemies in 1967 and thereafter proudly relinquished their gains and abandoned their hard-fought advantages with such bravura displays of foolishness, the "running Jew" cadre has had every right to fear that their leaders are either corrupt or else nuts and hence willing to sacrifice their brethren for the sake of self-aggrandizement. Shimon Peres' ridiculous behavior turns the stomach of all who observed him simpering over Yasser Arafat even as Arafat's myriad goon gangs slaughtered Israeli women and children. Peres' response? He kissed his "dear little arab" and clutched him even closer to his sagging bosoms. How many Jews were aware that while Arafat's goon-gangs paraded through the streets of Jerusalem that Peres and Arafat were planning to do business together through their respective Cayman Islands tax haven corporate-NGO nominees? 3) Jewish hypersensitivity to criticism: Instead of responding to Euroid slurs with a loud "How DARE You!" the Jew, embodied in the personae of such senile old men as Sharon and the ever-plumping Ehud Barak, are prone to crouch down and then with rounded backs meekly offer to make "painful concessions" for "peace" with the arab squatters occupying Israel's lands. This knee-jerk psychological self-mutilation has encouraged the Islamics to hate Jews even more because arabs despise weakness even more than they fear power. Jews who offer "painful concessions" in the hope of parading "superior sensitivity to civilities" and who lack the will to confront their bullies invite disrespect instead of admiration. And once disrespect sets in, it can swiftly resolve into loathing. In short, far too many Jews give the impression that they are willing to rush to the cross and nail themselves up in order to forestall their enemies from dispensing worse punishment. 4) Jews have little or no experience when it comes to acquiring and then holding onto land. Islamics, on the other hand, have over a thousand years of experience when it comes to taking land and subjugating the natives. How do you think Abdullah grabbed almost the entire Arabian Peninsula for himself? By the wages of terrorism and wholesale slaughter of anyone who stood in his way, that's how! 5) We beg to differ with your opinion that Europeans have abandoned their "nationalism". To the contrary, the Euroids remain as nationalistic as ever. Have you forgotten how the UK bashed Argentina (with US support) in order to retain ownership and control of the Falkland Islands? Have you forgotten how Spain sent warships to evict a few arabs from the disputed island known as "Perejil" (to the Spaniards) and "Leila" to the Moroccans? And are you unaware of the fact that Spain refuses to cede even so much as an inch of its lands to the Basque? 6) Jews mistake their own mental laziness for enlightenment when they refer to every arab occupying the region between the ocean and the sea as a "palestinian". We shouldn't have to be the ones to remind Jews that the only true Palestinian is a Jew. The Islamics are fakers and false takers. Israelis should have declared so years ago. And all Jews, in unison, should have loudly reminded the Euroids that Jews also have "rights of return" to the lands from which they were driven by the arabs when Israel became a nation in 1948. Truly, more Jews were forced to become refugees and to flee for their lives than the arabs who now claim, without any proof, that they were "driven" from the remnant of Jewish Palestine that became the tiny nation of Israel. Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z! Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
TALE OF TWO EMBASSIES
Posted by Shelley R. Neese, May 27, 2010. |
|
It's 1979. Iran's monarchy lay somewhere between impotency and total collapse. The Islamic Revolution rolls full steam ahead as one of the largest protest movements in history. Millions take to the streets in anti-Shah demonstrations throughout Iran. On January 17, the Shah and the rest of the Pahlavi dynasty flee the country. Two weeks later, exiled Revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini returns to Iran from Paris; millions of cheering well-wishers greet him at the airport. In a matter of ten short days the Ayatollah and his Revolutionaries overwhelm the last military forces loyal to the monarchy, ushering in the Islamic Republic. Hundreds of American and Israeli citizens in Iran evacuate during the February chaos. Key Embassy officials are an exception. Their governments fear that if they completely jump ship, their countries will never be allowed back. The remaining personnel at the American and Israeli Embassies hunker down and wait for Khomeini's next move. On February 10, Revolutionaries holding a political demonstration call for an end to the Israeli presence in Iran. Thousands of political demonstrators, chanting "Death to Israel, Long live Arafat," march to the nearby Israeli Embassy. According to Ronen Bergman in his book The Secret War with Iran, before the mob climbs over the walls and surround the building, the Israelis inside set fire to the few documents remaining. Most of the classified files were mailed back to Israel months ago. Personnel narrowly escape out the back gate, as the mob storms the embassy. Looting is rampant. The Israeli flag is torched. But, they are too late to take hostages or find intelligence. Later that day, Yasser Arafat, visiting Iran as the first foreign "head of state," gives a speech from the Israeli Embassy's balcony, declaring it the new headquarters for the Palestinian Liberation Organization. "Under the Ayatollah's leadership," Arafat announces, "we will free Palestine!" The deposed Israeli diplomats hide in Tehran apartments for a week until they secretly board a plane with eight hundred evacuating Americans. Fast forward nine months. The plight of the American Embassy is a story much more familiar. Diplomats remain in Tehran on the principle that the U.S. should not evacuate on its own accord. The State Department assures employees that everything is "perfectly safe." On November 4, 1979, a group of Iranian students and militants seize the compound. Calling themselves the "Muslim student followers of the Imam," they take fifty-three American staffers hostage, parading them in front of news cameras bound and blindfolded. The marauding Iranian students find a treasure trove of classified documents, many destroyed through a one-way shredder. They form teams to gather all the shreds and spend the next two years reassembling them. They publish sixty-five volumes of classified documents from what Khomeini referred to as the "American spy den." Consider for a moment the very different fates of both embassies. On that February day, when the Israelis heard boots marching, they ran for their lives and incinerated their secrets. Nine months later, when buses of Iranian demonstrators arrived at the American embassy, they met zero resistance. The Marine security guards were armed but refused to use force. According to the testimony of William J. Daughtry — an American hostage — one security guard announced he was going to "reason" with the mob. Shortly after, Daughtry spotted him blindfolded with the rest. In the throes of Khomeini's Iran, the Americans took little caution in improving the vulnerable security situation at the American compound. This is especially surprising considering that Revolutionaries had taken over the Embassy once before on February 14, 1979. Embassy personnel were held hostage for several hours in what became know as the St. Valentine's Day Open House. That event foreshadowed worse things to come. Even as the mob took over every Embassy office, the Americans requested Iranian police or military to intervene for their protection. The Americans assumed up to the bitter end that Iran would abide by international law that says embassies are sovereign space and diplomats are immune from arrest. Khomeini never got that memo. The Islamic Revolution took most of the world by surprise, including Western intelligence agencies. Israel's Ambassador to Iran, Uri Lubrani, was one of the few who predicted the fall of the Shah. In a letter to Prime Minister Begin in June 1978, he warned that the Shah's regime would collapse within two to three years. In the fall of 1978, the Central Intelligence Agency informed President Carter there was no chance of the monarchy collapsing. The CIA assessed that Iran was "not in a revolutionary or even a pre-revolutionary situation." According to predictions of the 1978 National Intelligence Estimate, the Shah would rule for another decade. Such estimates are a risky way of deciding business when it comes to Iran. America hoped the Revolutionary shakeup was an internal Iranian issue; the State Department thought if they kept a low profile then the anti-American rhetoric would blow over. The Israelis in the Embassy ran and hid because they took the enemy at their word. When crowds chanted "death to the Jews," they assumed they meant exactly that. As a result, the Israelis had a close shave but they came out unscratched. The Americans, for their part, got a black eye and a 444-day hostage crisis. The Iran of 2010 is on a path to nuclear armament. The Western world has been unable to stop or even stall these aspirations. Israel is taking Iran at its word and understands what's at stake. The U.S. is assuming benevolence, taking no heed to Iran's continued apocalyptic threats and diplomatic obstinance. The writing, however, is on the wall, literally. The former American Embassy, now housing Revolutionary Guards, is covered in Anti-American graffiti. A skeletal Statue of Liberty is spray painted along one wall with a scrawled message that translates "We will make America face a severe defeat." This time will America listen?
Shelley Neese is the managing editor of
The Jerusalem Connection. Visit the website at
|
|
VOLUNTARY PALESTINIAN UNEMPLOYMENT — ON THE EUROPEAN DOLE (AGAIN)
Posted by David Frankfurter, May 27, 2010. |
|
After decades of milking the European public to fund a corrupt and violent Palestinian regime, while deliberately keeping the average Palestinian in poverty, the cycle has started again. With the Palestinians supposedly " proximal" to the peace table, Abbas has decided to ignore his responsibilities to peace, to his own people and to wise fiscal management. He has also decided to ignore the dire situation of the taxpaying public of his European sponsors — and sidestep the fact that whenever under Israeli " occupation" the Palestinian areas have grown economically, and whenever under Palestinian "resistance" they have declined. Abbas has declared "voluntary" (under pain of traditional
Palestinian punishments) unemployment for the 20,000 or so
Palestistians gainfully employed in industries in Israeli communities
— at a self estimated cost of $50m which he assumes/demands will be paid for by the European taxpayer.
(Read about it here:
I would have thought that Europe has enough unemployment problems, without taking on new voluntary or political unemployed. I would also have thought that the Americans would consider this as deliberate sabotage of the so-called "proximity" peace talks. I would have also thought that after various "goodwill gestures" by the Israelis at Palestinian and US insistence, the Israeli negotiating team must be wondering if they are just wasting their time — and have once again been tricked by a duplicitous Palestinian leadership. David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive
and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East.
To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at
david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/
This article is archived at
|
|
FORMULATING A RESPONSE
Posted by Ari Bussel, May 27, 2010. |
|
At times, it is the outside observer who sees the obvious, yet those engrossed in the details fail to see the larger picture. Observations rather than being characterized as "lucid" are viewed as "rancid;" systems are adverse to change. Thus, even the most astute observations are neither incorporated in the decision making process nor translated into necessary action. In the 18th Knesset, ministerial positions were determined by bazaar-like negotiations on which the formation of a coalition government was dependent. These perks, paid by Israel and her citizens, are the price for a faulty electoral system. Among the many ministers and their deputies, aides, assistants, relatives and other salary-getters, there are two in particular who are likely candidates to lead the current process of fighting delegitimization of the Jewish State: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) led by Deputy Prime Minister Avigdor Liberman and the Ministry of Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs led by Minister Yuli-Yoel Edelstein. The MFA has representatives throughout the world in embassies, consulates and local offices. As a body, it could be most useful in presenting Israel's position. Since humanitarian aid to Gaza has been a hot topic since, at the very least, December, 2008, when Israel embarked on Operation Cast Lead, the MFA has had a year and a half during which not only to "formulate a response" but to put such a plan (or plans) into action. Every week the IDF puts out a summary of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Every foreign journalist receives a copy from the Prime Minister's Government Press Office (GPO). The GPO acts under the guidance of the Ministry of Public Diplomacy. Thus, it is reasonable to expect that despite arguments that the IDF's or GPO's dispatches are mere propaganda, the fact that 30,920 trucks containing 800,000 tons of supplies were transferred into Gaza during 2009 would not be lost on those reporting from Israel. At the very least, a reputable journalist could venture out to the field and attempt to verify the information or discredit the disseminator. Other facts, like the 3,676 trucks that went from Israel to the Gaza Strip with 48,000 tons of food products, 40,000 tons of wheat, 2,760 tons of rice, 1,987 tons of clothes and footwear, 553 tons of milk power and baby food all during the first quarter of 2010 (January to March), cannot be hidden. These are simply too many truck trips. It is simply too large a quantity to be left in a warehouse or a field and disappear unnoticed. Moreover, anyone visiting Gaza and seeing the flourishing trade there, the abundance of products in the markets and restaurants or even the active nightlife will be wondering about the real propaganda being used against Israel. Then again, it is easier to falsely accuse, as long as the accusation sounds bad and damaging enough to Israel's reputation. As far removed from reality as they may be, false attacks and their wide and warm reception reflect the world's eagerness to believe the worst about the Jewish State, no verification needed. While Hamas' Charter calls for the destruction of Israel and its operations are sponsored and supported by the Iranian regime, Israel is good for the Gazans. During 2009, 10,544 residents along with twelve thousand accompanying individuals were transferred to Israel to receive medical treatment. Likewise, there were 382 emergency evacuations from Gaza for medical purposes. Also last year, 7.5 million flowers and 54 tons of strawberries were exported from Gaza. Admittedly, these figures are provided by the IDF spokesperson's office, although they are easily verifiable. "Israel is putting stickers 'made in Gaza' to avert the world's scrutiny of the real genocide she is committing" will say the enemies. They may add: "How can the poor Gazans grow flowers, when Israel has been thirsting the Palestinians for 62 years, preventing them from fresh, running water?" Since journalists can travel to and from Gaza, they can check for themselves. Alas, there is only one small issue: If their reports are not liked by Hamas, they can either be executed while in Gaza or the next time they enter. Truth (thus reporting) is a risky proposition in this part of the world. Several weeks ago plans were announced for a sailing of another in a series of humanitarian aid convoys to Gaza. Promises were made that Israel's blockade will be broken at all cost. Hundreds of human rights activists gathered in Turkey for a journey to "Gaza under Siege," willing to sacrifice their freedom so that the Gazans will not starve. Alas, the Gazans are not starving for food nor is there any real need for medical assistance, water or electricity or even construction materials. All are supplied by Israel. There are limits, though, on what may pass into Gaza, for the Gazans have used certain materials to build and improve rockets, explosives and other terror-related means. I marked my calendar for Monday, May 24th, the official sail date of the mission. It is not the first time that such a mission sets sail toward Gaza. These missions are most effective: If they are allowed to reach Gaza, the participants are viewed as victors. If anything happens to them, if Israel boards the vessels and takes control or worse, if anyone gets hurt, Israel is seen as the aggressor. This time, however, Turkey vowed to retaliate if Israel does any harm to the journey of the "peace activists" and "humanitarians." Israel responded that any humanitarian aid can be offloaded in the Port of Ashdod or in Egypt and passed by land into Gaza according to the guidelines set forth which maximize transfer to those who really need the aid (rather than be hijacked for profits or other motives) while minimizing the usage for terror purposes. A group of Israeli boat owners have — of their own volition and initiative — decided to set sail to meet the incoming "Messengers of Peace." The official government response was congratulatory, although officials kept emphasizing the counter-sail is a private initiative. Minister Edelstein said, "the answer was given by citizens who I am not clear if they belong to the right or the left, but certain these are people who did not forget what is Zionism. When there is unity and we understand the hypocrisy, the goal has been reached." Israel seems to want to distance herself from necessary action. Thus, private individuals or NGOs have to take charge. Will Israel's culpability or liability differ any if she takes the lead? On the contrary, it would be most beneficial, for Israel will send a strong message: WE TAKE A STAND. It is easier, instead, to let the others do the work. Yigal Palmor, the Spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has repeated Israel's invitation for the organizers of the "humanitarian attempt to breach the blockade" to use the land crossings, in the same manner as all reputable international organizations. However, he states "they are engaging in political propaganda and not in pro-Palestinian aid." Palmor reiterated, "If the organizers were truly interested in providing humanitarian aid — as opposed to engaging in publicity stunts — they would use the proper channels to ensure delivery of any supplies." So what do we have? A private initiative, an IDF data sheet and a MFA interview. After the ships sailed on their wanted collision course, activity from Israel has intensified. "Suddenly" fact sheets are being provided, interviews are being given, information supportive of Israel's claims disseminated. The GPO even sent out a list of recommended restaurants in Gaza and others followed suit. Guess who is going to gain more credence, Israel's last-minute attempt at a reply or the organizers now on the way to Israel? Who will emerge with an upper hand from this repeated exercise? Who will perfect their modus operandi for the next attempt to breach the "blockade?" Who will eventually win this public diplomacy war? For those in doubt — it will not be Israel. Success will not happen miraculously when procrastination has characterized the response. In fact, why even bother after the vessels have already set sail? Defense Minister Barak has already advised several Foreign Ministers, including those of Ireland, Cyprus and Greece (under whose flags some vessels are sailing) that the Israeli Navy will prevent access. Possibly one should study what has prompted Israel's waking up at all? I am reminded of a time not that long ago that Judge Goldstone was in Israel "researching" (or more correctly conjuring findings). His stay did not warrant an equally forceful plan of action until after his report was published and caused major damage in its detached-from-reality conclusions. For those in America who have had a taste of what is happening on university campuses, the situation is similar. Our enemies have used the guise of "free speech" and "academic freedom" to hijack our system to attack Israel and prevent free speech from anyone not in agreement with their radical agenda. The response? Organizations like Stand With Us are doing the work, individuals from Israel come to speak, but this is the job of the MFA and the Ministry of Public Diplomacy. They, apparently, were quite surprised when the Israeli Ambassador to the USA was not as welcomed during a speech he attempted to give at the University of California Irvine. Alas, like the current sailing, it was not the first, nor the last occurrence. There are many capable, thinking persons in Israel. "Formulating a response" or "coming up with a coherent approach" should have been concluded long ago. It was time for action not for academic discussions while Israel is being beaten and defeated on the public diplomacy front. The time is long past for the official echelons in Israel, the Government and the Israel Defense Forces to PROTECT ISRAEL. To do so, Israel taught the world, one must go on the offensive. There is no time to be waste. Israel must regroup and attack. Clearly she will be able to do an amazing work if she only sets her heart and mind to the task. Israelis were able to come up with microscopic cameras to travel the human body's blood vessels, devised drip irrigation, developed vaccines and medications and are working on the forefront of discoveries that will continue to benefit humanity. They must now focus some of that same ingenuity and creativity to defend their nation. If Israelis do not rise to this challenge, there may one day no longer be a country for Jews around the world to call their home. Sadder yet, the words "never again" once again fall on deaf ears, and the world is eager to witness another Holocaust as the job of exterminating the Jews was abruptly stopped 65 years ago but has finally resumed. In the series "Postcards from Israel — Postcards from America," Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers to view and experience an Israel and her politics through their eyes, an Israel visitors rarely discover Contact Ari Bussel at busselari@gmail.com |
|
THE WAR OBAMA AND HIS ADVISORS NEED TO STAY IN POWER
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 27, 2010. |
|
President Barack Hussein Obama seems to be an anomaly — in the general scheme of politics. We know that Obama has no military experience but, those he chose to advise him supposedly have both the military expertise and the global experience as high ranking political players from past regimes. It has been observed that Obama and family have a repugnance for the American military, political speeches of approval notwithstanding. In the lore of political history, when leaders are losing the confidence of their people, starting or participating in wars has often been the preferred method of maintaining power. The people at large are generally loath to change rulers just before or during a war. There are several reasons why a war would be beneficial to the Obama regime and his currently dominant Democratic Party. Note that the upcoming November mid-term elections already show a high probability of the Democrats losing control of Congress and their 'right' to spend without restraint. Unfortunately, Obama has shown that he is not competent to lead or protect America from normally occurring disasters, whether they are financial meltdowns, natural or man-made disasters like the oil contaminating the Gulf of Mexico, or from a nuclear-armed rogue state such as Iran or North Korea or the Taliban in Pakistan.... His deliberate bumbling to stop Iran from going nuclear within a very few months is reminiscent of a second-rate prize fighter agreeing to take a dive in a certain round. Obama's advisors are "experienced" in making threats for public consumption but, dealing under the table to insure they would never have to live up to their bluster. We have observed Obama and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, bluster about how they will pressure Iran to behave and not to advance their nuclear plans. But when Iran ignores every threat with impunity, Obama shifts the blame over to Israel. As Muslims around the globe attack every outpost of the West, including their infiltration of radica Muslims Terrorists into democratic nations' areas of vulnerability and influence, Obama and his cohorts find ways to blame Israel. While Israel is barely a dot on the map of the Middle East and Obama is representing the world's major Super-Power, he genuflects in Muslim style to a people who pledge to make America adopt Islam as part of their goal for a Global Caliphate. In addition, as always, the radical Islamist Muslims proclaim they will wipe the Jewish Nation/State of Israel off the map — with fire. Obama gets daily briefings on the advanced state of weaponry accumulated by Iran and Syria who duly pass much of it on to Hezb'Allah (now a controlling hostile force in Lebanon) and Hamas (ready to begin a Third Intifada in Israel). Much of these weapons' systems originate in Russia or China and North Korea. But, Obama bows, scrapes and genuflects to all of these nations while attacking Israel's right to defend herself. Obama even has top ranked General Keith Dayton training the Muslim Palestinian paramilitary forces to attack Israel when the time comes. Let's not forget Egypt's recent war-game exercises called "Badr 2010", where the targeted enemy was known to be Israel — despite the supposed Camp David peace treaty. ["Badr" refers to the first military victory of Mohammed in 624 CE which damaged Meccan prestige and established Islam as a viable force. (1)] Many experts in analyzing the prospects for imminent war are deeply aware that Iran and Syria are preparing for all out war, using their proxies of Hezb'Allah and Hamas to start the action. Obama must know this but, to protect his political behind here in America, he has sent some minor munitions to Israel so he can brag: "See, I am protecting Israel as I promised." Reports coming in speak of three American aircraft flotillas heading toward a position off the coast of Iran. The next questions: Are there orders to attack Iran's Nuclear facilities or to strike a potential Israeli attack formation, claiming that America is keeping the peace? Is Obama to be trusted with the life or death of Israel? I personally would not trust Obama and his advisors — like James Baker III, Zbigniew Brzezinski, or any of his court Jews, such as Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod with any semblance of protection for a Jewish ally. Note! This lack of trust does not apply to the American people or the American Congress, who have demonstrated that they are stalwart allies and supporters of Israel. Regrettably, the American government is filling up with Arabists whose loyalties lie with hostile Arab nations who just happen to be sitting on pools of oil. If there is a war this summer between Israel vs. Iran, Syria, Hezb'Allah, Hamas, the pertinent questions are: 1. Whose side will the Obama Arabists stand with? Therefore, is Obama's intention, on advice from his Arabist advisors to rescue Israel when it no longer exists or is too weak from inside attacks to resist surrender in compliance with Obama's Middle East plans to assist the Muslims' declared goal of a Global Caliphate? The next questions are: 1. Will Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu accept these results? ### (1.) "Battle of Badr" (Islamic History) Britannica Online
Encyclopedia
Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
PROTEST SONG for MOSQUE at GROUND ZERO
Posted by Rock Peters, May 27, 2010. |
|
To see and hear the 9/11 memorial music video "Lady Liberty" go to www.youtube.com/keepsafe2da A mosque on the hallowed earth of Ground Zero would absolutely be sacrilegious; even the thought of putting a mosque near the site of 9/11 mass murder is such a complete outrage, so vile an obscenity that it truly offends all human sensibilities. May the blood of the innocent victims of the September 11th MUSLIM terrorist attack on America cry out to the Lord: "GOD FORBID THERE BE A MOSQUE at GROUND ZERO!" Yours in Liberty,
Rock Peters is an author, songwriter, poet and patriot. His multimedia website — www.godsaveusa.com — is dedicated to fighting Muslim terrorism. It is both factual and attractive. Contact him at rockpeters@aol.com |
|
JEWS OF JUDEA-SAMARIA TO TAKE IN ISRAELIS, IF WAR; GAZA BLOCKADE;
EGYPT-ISRAEL RELATIONS DEPEND ON MUBARAK'S LONGEVITY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 27, 2010. |
|
JEWS OF JUDEA-SAMARIA TO TAKE IN ISRAELIS, IF WAR 
The Jews in Judea-Samaria are preparing to host up to half a million Israelis, in case of war. They base this on experience in prior wars, when their areas were more remote from combat. And they care about their fellow Israelis (IMRA, 5/26/10). Experience does not always get repeated. This time, the Arabs have several times as many rockets. If Israel gives away Judea-Samaria, it would have no strategic depth for its population against its war criminal enemies who bombard civilian populations. The Israeli Left often maligns "settlers," but those are the people who would give them refuge and without checking their politics. The photo here is about a Bedouin attempting to squat on public land just outside a Jewish community, which countered by putting up its own tent near the Bedouin tent. This A.P. photo has a caption that explains only that the settlers set up a tent next to the Bedouin tent. No mention of the squatting and that the reaction to it was a form of self-defense. The caption slants the issue. (For more on Israeli civil defense,
click here)
EGYPT-ISRAEL RELATIONS DEPEND ON MUBARAK'S LONGEVITY Egypt is Israel's regional ally and energy supplier. Haaretz journalist Aluf Benn writes that relations between Egypt's President Mubarak and PM Netanyahu are good. Israel wants to keep them that way. Mubarak shakes Netanyahu's hands in public. Mubarak tells people he is sure that Netanyahu "will do the right thing." Egypt shares in Israel's partial blockade of Gaza, to protect itself from terrorism, but Israel takes the whole obloquy over it, so as not to roil Mubarak. For the same reason, Netanyahu has curbed the tempers of Cabinet Ministers who tend to lash out at foreign leaders, including Mubarak. The treaty with Egypt has enabled Israel to reduce defense expenditures. Having Egypt as an enemy would be a greater danger than Iran poses. Since Iran poses a danger to Egypt, as by subversion and terrorism, [and by taking up the mantle of Mideast leadership that Egypt feels entitled to], Mubarak drew closer to Israel. The U.S., including the current Administration, is careful not to use human rights issues to undermine Mubarak's rule as a bulwark against Iran. Netanyahu must wish Mubarak longevity. He is up in years, no successor declared, and if the Moslem Brotherhood succeeded him, Israel would be in trouble. Israeli intelligence believes that the Egyptian military intelligence will not let the Brotherhood take over their country. Mr. Benn fails to link the precariousness of Mubarak's relations with Israel, the possibility that the Moslem Brotherhood may take over Israel, and proposals that Egyptian forces be let into Gaza to unseat Hamas (IMRA, 5/26/10). http://www.imra.org.il/ Israel had better beef up its defenses. Like Americans, Israelis casually label other countries "ally." For Americans, it suffices that a foreign country accept U.S. subsidy. Pakistan took American aid, but for its own purposes, purposes contrary to American interests and to peace and freedom. Egypt is no ally of Israel, though the two countries have some temporary, common, non-ideological interests. The military doctrine of Egypt identifies Israel, though by location and not by name, as the enemy it trains against. That military just held war games about invading Israel. Egypt wages a diplomatic offensive against Israel, the current one being to deprive Israel of its nuclear deterrent. Egypt's leader shakes hands with Israel's. So what! Arafat shook hands with Rabin, and then made war on Israel. Israel's enemies are divided between those who shake hands and those who do not. Haaretz has an ideology that the Arabs are making peace with Israel. When this leftist ideology clashes with reality, leftists thrust reality aside.
It does not take much to make my fellow Jews feel accepted. A shake of the hand or a pat on the head. The Jewish people developed an inferiority complex from centuries of political powerlessness.
And so a fellow Jew told me today that he thought that Presidents Nixon, Clinton, and Bush were pro-Israel. The media told him so. Very comforting. Facts? Not his area of expertise.
Israeli politicians should learn not to sound off and when to speak up. Speaking up should be channeled by policy to accomplish something and not offend unnecessarily.
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 1. LEGALITY OF BLOCKADE 
Israel's Foreign Ministry explains the legality of its partial Gaza blockade: 1. Israel withdrew all its residents and military forces from Gaza. It cannot honestly be said to be occupying Gaza. It withdrew to foster good relations. Instead, the entity in Gaza turned the opportunity into a state of armed conflict. 2. Hamas prosecutes this war by bombarding Israeli citizens and by sending terrorists to infiltrate into Israel. 3. Sovereign countries have a right to decide who and what may go into and out of its borders. The U.S. restricts trade with many offensive regimes. Israel does not have to trade with Gaza. Being in a state of armed conflict, why should it? 4. Israel does let in humanitarian supplies, a million tons in the past year and-a-half. Israel's purpose is not to punish the people there but to pressure the regime to cease its armed hostilities. 5. The wherewithal for Hamas' war is imported, including smuggling by sea. Therefore, Israel gave due notice of a partial blockade. "Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no vessels can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian vessels and enemy vessels." The blockader has the right to bar foreign ships from entering the waters of the blockaded entity. This right is recognized by international law. Many countries engaged in it (IMRA, 5/27/10). Ending the blockade is up to Hamas. All it has to do is end its state of armed conflict and preparation for war, such as building tunnels to infiltrate forces underground and across the Israeli border. Foreigners who would like to see the blockade ended should press Hamas to end its state of armed conflict. The explanation of the blockade shows that Egypt considered itself in a state of armed conflict with Israel, when it imposed a blockade of Israel's Red Sea port, Eilat, in 1967. That was before Israeli forces fired a shot. That blockade is one of the ways by which Egypt started that war.
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 2. WEEK'S GOODS LSRAEL LET INTO GAZA "Last week, between May 16th and May 22nd,2010 a total of 523 truckloads, consisting of 13,517 tons of humanitarian aid were transferred into the Gaza Strip from Israel via the various crossings," including: "938,127 liters of Heavy-Duty-Diesel fuel for the power station.
"Additionally, 281 medical patients and accompanying individuals
from the Gaza Strip crossed into Israel and the Judea and Samaria
region for medical treatment. 158 staff members of international
organizations crossed into the Gaza Strip, and 150 crossed from the
Gaza Strip into Israel." (IMRA, 5/26/10 from IDF).
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 3. TERRORISTS FOR FLOTILLA 
The IDF cites a report by the Intelligence & Terrorism information Center that the Gaza-blockade-running flotilla was launched by radical human rights violators, in the name of human rights. Attending the ceremony "were Mahmad Tzoalha and Sahar Albirawi, both top Hamas terrorists who today operate in Great Britain, and Hamam Said, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan." "Bolant Yilderim, the chairman of the IHH, a Turkish based pro-Palestinian organization that is spearheading the Gaza flotilla, delivered a radical speech at the ceremony to the applause of Turkish politicians and radical Islamic activists: 'Israel behaves like Hitler did towards the Jews. Hitler built concentration camps in Germany, and today the Zionist entity is building concentration camps in Palestine.'" [Of course there were no facts to back this up.] Also present was Sheikh Raed Salah, head of the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement. "Salah has previously admitted in an Israeli Court to conferring with foreign agents and assisting unauthorized organizations," such as Hamas. "He often voiced anti-Semitic hate messages that are based on the most ancient blood libels: 'We are not the ones who eat a meal based on bread and cheese in children's blood.'" He had called the Jews "butchers of pregnant women and babies... Thieves, you are the bacteria of all times... The Creator meant for you to be monkeys and losers..." The head of the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Reuven Ehrlich, said that if the flotilla sponsors were humanitarian, all they need do is send the goods to Israel, through legal channels. He explained that they just want to provoke and embarrass Israel, and to help Hamas, hardly a humanitarian organization (IMRA, 5/26/10). Hamas has stolen humanitarian aid and fired upon the land-based portals for the goods' entry. No noticeable international humanitarian protest over that. Bigots used the flag of humanitarianism to cover their own moral nakedness.
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 4. TERRORISTS WHO SPONSOR FLOTILLA Israel found that one of the sponsors of the flotilla, IHH, Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation, plays an important role in international fund raising by Islamist terrorists, and banned it from its territory. Close to the Moslem Brotherhood, IHH openly associates with the Brotherhood offshoot in Gaza, Hamas. IHH works with Hamas terrorist fronts posing as charities. IHH substantially helps finance Hamas and its regime. At conferences, IHH officials support Hamas against the Palestinian Authority, and support Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians, in other words, terrorism. IHH dispatched Azat Shahin to open an IHH branch in Judea Samaria. During his stint there, he transferred tens of thousands of dollars from IHH to Hamas organizations. Israel arrested him on suspicion of financing terrorism and supporting Hamas. Turkey got him extradited (IMRA, 5/27/10). http://www.imra.org.il/
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 5. ISRAEL'S OFFER TO FLOTILLA Israel has warned the governments of the countries from which the flotilla is sailing that entering Gaza waters would violate international law (as explained in Part 1). The Foreign Ministry explained that Gaza is run by a terrorist organization that commits terrorist aggression, to the neglect of the people. As an alternative, Israel invited the flotilla to unload its goods at the Israeli port of Ashdod, after inspection. Israel would deliver any humanitarian goods through the usual land portals to Gaza (IMRA, 5/27/10).
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 6. ISRAEL PREPARES, AND NOTE TO READERS Israel is warning the flotilla at every stop it makes en route, to turn back. If the ships run the legal blockade, the passengers would be arrested and deported. The goods, however, would be delivered. The government advised its troops to be wary of provocations and of the possible presence of terrorists. The IDF has been practicing for its interception of the flotilla (IMRA, 5/27/10). My newspaper had a photo of Hamas ships in Gaza practicing, too. How will the Israeli Navy cope with them? Is Hamas' purpose to provoke shooting, so by reflex action, the "humanitarians" will blame Israel? Some of my readers fail to distinguish between what the sources report and my comments after citing the course or in ellipses, and between what Israel does and I do. They get personal, which no editor permits and I have warned them against. They contradict each other over whether I am a liar, stupid, or cunning but working at some lobby's behest. Do they know something about my finances I don't? A particularly persistent one makes derogatory comments about my ethnic group, up to the point of history-distorting blood libel. He smears, but I'm a "racist." I'm a liar, but he claims I delete articles for disagreeing with me, though since he obviously reads my articles, he can see the disagreeing comments that are relevant and not personal, which I do not delete. I'm stupid, but he wonders why I delete his personal and antisemitic comments, false and generalized without backing. (I have deleted comments that agree with me but which mock Muslims for being Muslims. Commentary must be respectable, as with any American newspaper.) Such readers call me uninformed, but fail to deal with the dozen or so
specific points in each article. Are they keeping some great font of
information to themselves? All they do is raise irrelevant and
discredited revisionist theories about the origins of the Arab-Israel
conflict. Irrelevant generalities neither debate nor enlighten. I
discuss, they defame.
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 7. UPDATE ON HUNGER AND ACTIVISTS In today's news, Isabel Kershner presents a somewhat different story from my earlier reports, so today I bring you the other side. Whereas another source put the total weight of humanitarian goods that Israel let through into Gaza, in the past year and-a-half at a million tons, as according to Israel's Foreign Ministry, Ms. Kershner puts it at this year as 100,000 tons. Another difference in Kershner's report is a UN claim that the partial embargo has repressed Gaza's agricultural sector, leading to a food shortage in 60% of Gaza households. No further details provided (New York Times, 5/28, A10). If Kershner's tonnage figure were correct, and if it were comparable to transfers for the past year and-a-half, then the earlier figure would be not 1.5 million tons but about 400,000 tons. It would have been useful to know how the partial blockade impaired local agriculture. What kind of food shortage is there? How extensive is "insufficient" food? Was any appeal made to Israel on it? Israel has been amenable to humanitarian appeals, such as to let Gaza patients transit through Israel. Surely Israel would prefer Gaza self-sufficiency in food production, rather than have to manage food shipments through Israel. Another difference between the New York Times report and my
series is the Times omission of the terrorist support and partial
sponsorship of the flotilla. Kershner refers to passengers as
"activists." That word is vague. Some of the passengers are customary
anti-Israel. To them, the blockade is another opportunity to denigrate
Israel. But it also is another lost opportunity for supposedly ethical
people to denounce the terrorists who run Gaza oppressively and for
the purpose of making war, a war that led to the very blockade
purportedly offending the "activists."
GAZA BLOCKADE: PART 8. ON THE PASSENGER LIST One of the passengers on the "Free Gaza" flotilla is Greek Catholic Archbishop Hilarion Capucci. He had been convicted by Israel in 1974 of smuggling guns from Lebanon to the PLO. The Vatican got Israel to release him from jail (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/27/10) with a promise he stopped intruding into Israel affairs. He soon broke that promise. So when the New York Times refers to the passengers merely as activists, it is covering up for a multitude of sinners. Many are not humanitarians.
ISLAMIST KIDNAPS AND FORCIBLY CONVERTS HINDU GIRL IN PAKISTAN The Pakistani Daily Times reports an alleged kidnapping and forcible conversion of a 13-year-old Hindu girl in Pakistan. Mehnga Ram has a shoeshine booth in Rahim Yar Khan in Bengal, Pakistan. His daughter, Radha, has been missing for months. He and family looked everywhere. Then friends informed them that the girl had been adducted by the head of a madrassa, Darul Aloom in Khanpur. The family says that first the madrassa people denied taking the girl. Then they claimed that she has converted to Islam and refuses to meet with her family. The family when to the police, but police refused to act, on the grounds that she had converted. Police advised the family to forget their daughter. Forget their daughter? Yes. The family pleaded with respectable personages and various officials who gave them false promises but did nothing. Finally, the madrassa arranged for the girl's older brother to have a brief meeting with the girl. They told him she had married a Muslim. At the meeting, the girl was crying, but tried to say something reassuring. The "husband's" family gave the brother a non-working phone number for contacting her. Human rights activists say this is a clear-cut case of forcible conversion. The distraught father laments the poverty that limits his ability to fight back. My comment: Note the series of criminal and inhumane acts: (1) Kidnapping; (2) Forced conversion of a child; (3) Forced marriage; (4) Protection of the criminals. Where is the morality in those acts done in the name of a religion? I have read of similar cases in Egypt. In such cases, as well as in cases of Muslim attacks on Egyptian Christians or against Christians in Nigeria, the authorities stonewall. That is what life is like in a Muslim country lacking the rule of law or equal protection of the law. When Jews lived in Yemen, Muslims would take away their children when their fathers died, even if the family could support them. I attended a hair-raising lecture on that.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE UNWILLINGNESS OF TAU OFFICIALS TO STAND UP TO WHAT BECAME AN ORGANIZED CAMPAIGN OF THE VILIFICATION OF ISRAEL
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, May 27, 2010. |
|
A letter from Edgar Pick, Professor emeritus at Tel Aviv University to Mark Tanenbaum, resigned TAU governor. |
|
May 24, 2010
Dear Mr. Tanenbaum I am a Professor of Immunology at the Sackler School of Medicine, since 1970, when I joined the academic staff of Tel Aviv University, following postdoctoral studies at the Scripps Research Foundation in La Jolla and the University of London. I am attaching a brief Curriculum Vitae. The reason behind this letter are the recent events at Tel Aviv University, following the speech by Mr. Dershowitz and your resignations from all your Tel Aviv Universityrelated functions, after many years of serving this institution in more than one way. Your letter of resignation of May 11, 2010, was made public and the tumultuous events at the Board of Governors meeting have been aired in the press. Not having been present at this event, my knowledge of what went on is based on what we scientists would define as incomplete and possibly biased evidence. I do, however, believe that your description of what happened, in your letter of resignation, is accurate, meaning that the President of Tel Aviv University refused to allow a vote on your very important proposed resolution. I understand that your resolution dealt with the issue of some radical Tel Aviv University academics promoting a worldwide boycott of our own university. I shall state from the beginning that I would like to congratulate you on your courageous stand at the Board of Governors meeting and after the meeting. As someone who has been with Tel Aviv University for forty years, I am well familiar with the intensive, unrelenting and extremist activities of a number of the members of the academic staff of our University, who will not miss a single occasion to accuse this country of the worst crimes, support the most extreme forms of academic boycott against the Israeli academia, and offer support and encouragement to those whose explicit purpose is the elimination of Israel, as the home of the Jewish people. The purpose of this letter is not to reiterate what is known to all who are honest enough to admit it, but to draw your attention to lesser known facts about the unwillingness of the officials of Tel Aviv University to stand up to what became an organized campaign of the vilification of Israel. Any attempt to put a halt to it is countered by the argument that the "McCarthyites" are trying to suppress academic freedom and free speech on the campus. I would, thus, like to draw your attention to the more subtle ways by which Tel Aviv University is condoning activities that endanger the very existence of the university as an academic institution where the quality of research and teaching should be valued more than political sympathies. I shall not bring up the well known names mentioned by Alan Dershowitz but point out some of the events taking place on the campus under the very eyes of the present and past Presidents and Rectors.
I would like to congratulate you on your decision to stop all financial support to Tel Aviv University. I hope that you can recruit other donors to direct their donations for this University elsewhere, until the time that a new, honest and courageous leadership takes over. In the dire financial state that they are in, they should be taught a lesson. That playing Chamberlain to the threats from within the academia, mentioned in the Dershowitz speech, comes with a negative price tag. Once again, thanks for your honesty and courage. Many of us were waiting for a long time for a Mr. Tanenbaum to appear on the scene. With best regards, Edgar Pick, M.D.,Ph.D.
Contact Israel Academia Monitor at email@israel-academia-monitor.com |
|
PROXIMITY TALKS
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, May 26, 2010. |
|
part 1Palestinian Arab aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel cannot and should not be rewarded. Professor, Judge Schwebel, the former President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) explains why Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem: "(a) a state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense; part 2Palestinian Arab aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel cannot and should not be rewarded. "No Legal Right Shall Spring from Wrong" [1] "Territorial rights under international law ... By their [Arab countries, E.H.] armed attacks against the State of Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, and by various acts of belligerency throughout this period, these Arab states flouted their basic obligations as United Nations members to refrain from threat or use of force against Israel's territorial integrity and political independence. These acts were in flagrant violation inter alia of [UN, E.H.] Article 2(4) and paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the same article." [2] Because the Arabs were clearly the aggressors, nowhere in UN Security Council Resolutions 242 or 338 — the cornerstones of a peace settlement — is Israel branded as an invader or occupier of the Territories and there is no call for Israel to withdraw from all the Territories. Palestinians allegations that the wording of 242 was 'deliberately ambiguous' or misconstrued are unfounded. [1] Professor, Judge Schwebel "Justice in International Law," Cambridge University Press, 1994. [2] Professor Julius Stone "Israel and Palestine, Assault on the Law of Nations" The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981, p. 127. Professor Julius Stone was recognised as one of the twentieth century's leading authorities on the Law of Nations. His work represents a detailed analysis of the central principles of international law governing the issues raised by the Arab-Israel conflict. He was one of a few scholars to gain outstanding recognition in more than one field. Professor Stone was one of the world's best-known authorities in both Jurisprudence and International Law. 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 |
|
SINK THE BISMARCK, ER, UH, WE MEAN THE "RACHEL CORRIE"!
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 26, 2010. |
| This was written by Justus Reid Weiner and Itai Eres. |
|
Radical groups are hijacking her name for their purposes. International "activists" are at it again. A nine-ship flotilla of "peace activists" is on its way from Turkey, Greece and other European countries toward the Gaza strip, laden with left-wingers and a variety of goods to supplement those available to Gaza residents. This represents the latest effort by a radical group known as the Free Gaza Movement (FGM). In an attempt to galvanize support and sympathy, and achieve a better result than the three earlier abortive attempts, the group has chosen to name the lead ship the Rachel Corrie. For those who don't recall, Rachel Corrie was a 23-year-old American student activist killed in a tragic accident in 2003 while attempting to block an IDF bulldozer. Corrie arrived in Israel as part of an independent study program during her senior year at Evergreen State College. It was there that Corrie first heard of going to Gaza with the loosely affiliated assortment of left-wing radicals known as the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). Evergreen's faculty also displayed gross negligence in allowing her to spend a semester abroad, for course credit, in the West Bank and Gaza during the height of the second intifada. After a mere two days of ISM "training," Corrie and her fellow activist trainees were sent to the Rafah crossing, described by IDF spokesman Capt. Jacob Dellal as "the most dangerous area in the West Bank and Gaza." Ironically however, Corrie is perhaps a more apt reference than the FGM organizers realize. The tragedy of her death is that it was completely avoidable. Moreover, her behavior, flouting local and international law, raises the question of what role, if any, small groups of extremist activists have in interfering in the counterterrorism measures of a democratic state. Despite dishonest testimony by the ISM, subsequent developments revealed that the driver of the bulldozer likely couldn't even see Corrie. The most startling discovery was the recklessness of the ISM in dealing with its volunteers. They were encouraged to prevent the demolition of buildings and smuggling tunnels by using their bodies as shields against trucks and bulldozers. Although the volunteers were provided with visibility vests and megaphones, it was only a matter of time before the folly of the ISM led to catastrophic results. If playing chicken with cars is suicidal, doing so with an armored bulldozer, more difficult to control and with less visibility, borders on insanity. Yet that is exactly what the ISM advocated, while making sure to record all their encounters for use in the event of just such an accident. As one of Corrie's colleagues stated, "Several times we had to dive away at the last moment in order to avoid being crushed. This continued for about two and a half hours."
WHILE THIS may not have been exactly what Evergreen College envisioned as Corrie's independent study, the ISM was complicit in these dangerous antics, having promoted activism that would "more directly challenge the Israeli military." The ISM views its volunteers as pawns in a political game, fully aware that some gambits require the loss of a pawn. Corrie's death, a terrible accident for the IDF, became a propaganda weapon for the ISM. ISM is an organization that recognizes a Palestinian "right" to resistance via "legitimate armed struggle." Its "accolades" include preventing IDF demolition of bomb-making factories and weapons-smuggling tunnels as well as the aiding, abetting and protecting of terrorists. In addition, the ISM also encouraged confrontational, reckless resistance by its international volunteers. In 2002, in the midst of a violent takeover of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem by Palestinian terrorists, 10 ISM members ran in to act as human shields. The same year as Corrie's death, a popular bar in Tel Aviv, Mike's Place, was attacked by two suicide bombers who had had tea with ISM members only five days earlier. The ISM's behavior is typical of such radical groups. Purporting to protect human rights, they are often callous toward human life in general. What legitimacy is warranted by NGOs that have no respect for the lives of their volunteers? Additionally, these groups fail to recognize that Israel abides by both local and international law. It has a well-developed judicial system, with the authority and will to limit its executive and legislative branches, one that has already delineated Israel's commitments, obligations and rights in Gaza. The potential harm to local interests and stability caused by the audacious interference of a handful of people from other continents is tremendous. Individuals in Europe or North America may read about the plight of Palestinians in Gaza and wish to help, but chartering boats to sail to foreign waters is a misguided effort. To promote their personal delusions, the ISM and FGM neglect any legal, judicial, diplomatic or otherwise politically palatable routes. While their personal risks are less than those taken by activists illegally entering Iran, North Korea or China, they still choose to waste public and private resources while violating domestic and international law. The Rachel Corrie ironically represents a seaborne version of the organizational callousness and disregard that led to Rachel Corrie's death in 2003. With such dubious priorities, these activists continue to be a part of the problem, not a legitimate attempt at a peaceful solution. Instead of being embarrassed by their role in Corrie's death, these radical groups are hijacking her name for their current efforts to help Hamas dominate Gaza. Let Rachel Corrie rest in peace. Justus Weiner is an international human rights lawyer. He is currently a Scholar in Residence at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and an adjunct lecturer at the Hebrew University
2. That Bumsky, Chomsky "Thoughts On Israel's Chomsky 'Ban'"
It seems the only nation not allowed to ban people with belligerent, racist or hostile political views is Israel. Recently, MIT professor Noam Chomsky was prevented by Israel from entering the country via Jordan. Chomsky was on his way to give an anti-Israel speech at a university in Ramallah in the West Bank. (Instead he gave the speech by videoconferencing from Jordan.) Chomsky had been in Israel for visits before, and the "ban" was evidently nothing more than some bureaucratic glitch in the instructions to Israeli border passport checkers. Chomsky was invited at the Jordan River to enter the country through the Tel Aviv airport. This did not prevent a worldwide campaign of anti-Israel vilification by the usual crowd blasting Israel for "banning" Chomsky, complete with denunciations of "Israeli fascism." Chomsky himself denounced the Israeli decision to block his entry as "Stalinism." To tell the truth, when I first heard that Chomsky accused Israel of Stalinism I assumed he meant it as a compliment. Chomsky has gone out of his way to defend Stalin and publishes his articles on all the best Stalinist websites. Ironically, the bureaucratic glitch resulted in Israel's accidentally doing the right thing. Just a few individuals have been prevented from entering Israel because of their ties to terrorists or their involvement in anti-Semitic or anti-Israel political activities. One of them was Norman Finkelstein, the hatemonger fired by DePaul University, who was banned from entering Israel a couple of years back due to his public championing of Hizbullah terrorists. Another was Richard Falk, the retired Princeton propagandist who's made a career out of denouncing Israelis as Nazis. Falk was denied entry into Israel as a UN "investigator," though earlier he had been allowed to enter as a private citizen. In Chomsky we have someone who has pow-wowed with Hizbullah terrorists and promoted Holocaust deniers. Like Finkelstein and Falk, Chomsky has long led the campaign to boycott and "divest" from Israel. The very same people who whined about Israel's refusing Chomsky entry into the country to engage in anti-Israel agitation were strangely silent when Britain banned 16 people on grounds they held politically incorrect opinions. These included radio host Michael Savage. Before that the UK banned Rev. Fred Phelps from entering the country because he is anti-gay. Few on the enlightened Left denounced the UK for fascism for those decisions. Dutch politician Geert Wilders, a candidate for prime minister of the Netherlands, was barred from entering the UK because of his opinions. The Brits have banned a host of Israelis from entering their country, including activist Moshe Feiglin. Not a single Israeli leftist tearing out hair at the barring of Chomsky has spoken out against that. The United States has banned all sorts of people, not limited to those suspected of having ties to terror groups. In some cases it was because of their political views. Journalist Robert Fisk was banned for that reason. Professor John Milios from Greece was banned. Tariq Ramadan, the darling of the pro-jihad Left, was barred until recently from both the U.S. and France. Adam Habib, professor of political science and deputy vice chancellor of the University of Johannesburg, was barred from entering the U.S. for three years. Liberian President Charles Taylor and other leading Liberians were banned from entering the U.S. because of their support for rebels in Sierra Leone. Canada has also banned people because of their views or behavior, most famously George Galloway, the British member of Parliament who enjoyed close ties to Saddam Hussein. Germany, Austria and some other European countries routinely ban neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers from entering their territories and sometimes jail them when they enter. In the late 1970s, a professor of literature at the University of Lyon named Robert Faurisson wrote two letters to Le Monde claiming the existence of gas chambers in concentration camps used by the Nazis to exterminate Jews was a hoax. Faurisson was convicted of Holocaust denial and hate speech in two trials in France, in 1983 and 1990. Faurisson has also suggested that the diary of Anne Frank is a Zionist forgery and has spent much of his career smearing Nobel Prize-winning Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel. Noam Chomsky has long been Faurisson's most prominent defender. In the 1980s he signed a petition denying Faurisson was an anti-Semite and saluting Faurisson as a "respected professor." In defending Faurisson, Chomsky wrote: "I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers or even denial of the Holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the Holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence. I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson's work." Personally, I would have let Chomsky enter Israel and then immediately arrested him for Holocaust denial (if not the Holocaust of the Jews then surely the genocide against Cambodians). Holocaust denial is illegal in Israel, though the law is never enforced against anyone, even Arab politicians. Indicting Chomsky would have made such a wonderful legal precedent. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
G-D DWELLS IN OUR MIDST
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, May 26, 2010. |
|
Sing and rejoice, daughter of Zion; for, I will come, and I will dwell in your midst says G-d. And many nations shall join themselves to G-d on that day, and shall be My people, and I will dwell in your midst; and you shall know that the Lord of hosts has sent me unto you. And G-d shall inherit Judah as His portion in the Holy Land, and shall choose Jerusalem again. Be silent, all flesh, before G-d; for He is aroused out of His holy habitation. (From this week's reading of Prophets, Zecharia 2: 14-17) Behold I will come and dwell in your midst. True, you thought that you could live here without Me. You thought that you could be "normal" like all the other nations. Your left hand replaced me with socialism and universalism. Your right hand banished me with nationalism and state supremacism. The non-Jews whom you so desperately wanted to imitate are waiting for My message of redemption and they are sure that you are the bearers of My word. On the one hand, they turn their backs on you, deny that you have a legitimate right to exist and arrest your leaders in Europe. If you are not My daughter, they wonder, what are you doing in My royal palace? On the other hand, they are counting on you to bring them closer to Me when I will dwell in your midst. You have fled your destiny, you have denied your connection to Jerusalem. You surrendered it in 1948, you gave your beating heart — the Temple Mount — to the Moslem wakf in 1967 and now — you are freezing, tearing and dividing My holy city. But I will choose Jerusalem once again and nobody will dare protest — not Iran and not Washington. Nobody will utter a word when I will restore My presence to Jerusalem. 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)
|
|
OBAMA PLAN: GLOBAL TROOPS TO PROTECT ISRAEL
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 26, 2010. |
|
Hmmm... so good to see that Obama is deeply concerned about Israel's security. Let's see: global troops...this raises a few hypothetical ( nor not so hypothetical questions) which UN member countries will volunteer their troops for this job? (likely not canada or usa) once stationed on Israel's border, will these troops do what the UNFIL troops have done in Lebanon? (and if you think the answer is "no"....tell us why you think that) How about what the UN peace keeping force in Sinai did on May 15, 1967? (in case you don't know, they fled the scene within a few days of Gamal Abdul Nasser's demand of U-Thant (UN Secretary General, aka the "bungling Burmese") How about what UN observers have done to prevent Hamas weapons smuggling in Gaza Strip since 9/2005? (aka: nothing, have actually helped Hamas) How about what UN forces have done in retaliation to Hamas' attack on UN summer camp for under-priviledged Arab children? (Hamas burned it down, because it was teaching the kids very un-Islamic, vice-promoting stuff like sports for girls, gymnastics for girls, etc.). How about what UN peace-keeping forces in the Congo have done? (in case you don't know, some of them have been replaced due to well-substantiated evidence of sex-for-food deals with under-aged starving Congolese girls). And, as noted in the article below, such troops could easily, intentionally or accidenally, get in the way of Israeli hot pursuit of terrorists; and they could impede or prevent Israel from penetrating "Palestinian" state territory in chase of terrorists. Bottom line, such troop deployments would help the terrorists and hinder israel, (especially when you recall that the states most likely to offer their troops could be Libya [member of the UN human rights council], other Arab states [since they are all so anxious for peace and good fellowship with their neigbhoring non-Mulsim state], many Muslim states [since they are so commited to peace in the middle east], and far away neutral states like China [who would like to impress Iran with its stand on peace in the middle east so that Iran would buy more gasoline and WMDs from china]. Not a pretty picture. And all of this instead of simply acknowledging the real problem, and demanding that the PA and Hamas and Hezbollah stand down from their genocidal terrorist goals, stop the violence, stop the incitement, and start cooperating with all of their neighbors (including Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, etc.), and putting pressure on them to do so. david ml This below is by Aaron Klein and it was posted yesterday in WorldNetDaily. It is called "The New World Disorder". |
|
NEW YORK — A U.S. plan envisions stationing international troops along Israel's border with a future Palestinian state, WND has learned. Palestinian Authority officials privy to the plan say the Obama administration proposed deploying NATO soldiers along the Palestinian side of a future border with Israel as well as along the borders of Jordan and any future Palestinian state. Israeli government sources confirmed such a plan has been proposed. The sources said the concept is not exclusive to the Obama administration. Both Presidents Clinton and Bush broached the idea of stationing international troops along the borders of a future Palestinian state. International troops and monitors do not boast a positive track record in fulfilling their protective duties on behalf of Israel. Monitors previously stationed along the Gaza-Egypt border fled their duties multiple times amid Hamas threats and attacks. The monitors were deployed to report any instances of weapons smuggling or terrorist infiltration along the border. Also, following the Second Lebanon War in 2006, about 15,000 soldiers under the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, deployed in South Lebanon with the objective of ensuring a truce between Israel and Hezbollah as well as to stop the Hezbollah terror group from rearming. According to reports, Hezbollah, with international troops present, has acquired more rockets and sophisticated weaponry from Syria and Iran than before the 2006 war. The group reportedly has enough rockets to blanket Israeli population centers for a prolonged period of time. Israeli security officials told WND the Israeli army routinely passes to UNIFIL commanders aerial photographs and video images of Hezbollah weapons smuggling routes. But with few exceptions, the international forces have not taken action. The security officials are concerned the UNIFIL forces could get in the way and impede any future Israeli defensive action needed against Hezbollah. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
WHAT BARACK OBAMA IS THINKING
Posted by Truth Provider, May 26, 2010. |
|
Dear friends, This is a very serious political topic that has direct bearing on what is happening in the Middle East. President Obama's kudos to the Muslim world and his policies which cause a sharp decline in America's deterrance are too serious to be ignored. Following are two important articles on the disturbing subject.
The first is by Peter Ferrara
and it appeared on American Spectator
The second is by"Great power no more?" By Arthur Herman and it appeard in You should also consider reading Newt Gingrich's new book: To Save America. Your Truth Provider, Yuval. |
|
"What Barack Obama Is Thinking"
Students of history will recognize the method to President Obama's madness. The parallels in both policy and politics to the Roosevelt Administration are too striking not to be deliberate. President Obama is consciously modeling his Administration on the Roosevelt Administration. But just as the liberals of the 1930s graduated to the New Left of the 1960s, President Obama's policies and politics transcend the liberalism of the 1930s. He is building what Newt Gingrich rightly calls a secular socialist machine in his new book To Save America. Unreconstructed Keynesian Economics Roosevelt's Keynesian economics was left for dead in the 1980s with President Reagan's supply-side revolution miraculously ending the stagflation of the 1970s with a 25-year economic boom. But President Obama came into office talking as if that never happened, casting it down the memory hole. While Reagan's early 1981 budget cuts slashed the federal budget by about 5%, Obama rammed through an almost $1 trillion stimulus package of nearly all Keynesian economics from the 1930s, laughing at his astounded critics with the question, "What do you think a stimulus is?" Economically, it didn't work, just as it didn't in the 1930s or the 1970s. Now 29 months after the recession officially started in December, 2007, unemployment is 10% and rising, and the stock market is again stumbling, with the Dow still 4000 points off its last highs. The recovery was overdue a year ago, and even now economic growth is not half what it should be. But note how the stimulus spending was structured so that more is spent this year than last. Was the goal to reduce unemployment as quickly as possible, or to use the guise of Keynesian stimulus spending for a political slush fund to buy as many votes as possible in this political year? Note also that about half of the direct "stimulus" spending went to state and local governments to prop up the employment of public employees, the most reliable supporters of liberal Democrat candidates. The only thing President Obama's stimulus is stimulating is a left-wing Democrat political machine. Attack on Wall Street Another early central theme of the Roosevelt Administration was a searing attack on Wall Street. The famed Pecora hearings, led by the Chief Counsel to the Senate Banking Committee Ferdinand Pecora, crucified top Wall Street bankers and brokers as the cause of the Depression. Despite the hallowed political propaganda long taught to American schoolchildren, Wall Street misdeeds played only a minor bit role in the Great Depression. The real causes were Fed mismanagement enabling a drastic collapse of the money supply, causing ruinous deflation, followed by brutal tax rate increases, and the soaring protectionist tariffs of the Smoot-Hawley Act. Roosevelt's massive overregulation and Keynesian economics draining private sector investment were additional factors extending the Depression for a decade, putting the "Great" into the "Great Depression" as Amity Shlaes put it in her eye-opening book, The Forgotten Man. But the Pecora hearings and Roosevelt's class warfare rhetoric excoriating "the malefactors of great wealth" successfully shifted the blame politically from the government to the private sector. The result was passage of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, imposing extensive new regulation on Wall Street, as if that would resolve the causes of the Depression. The measures did not produce economic recovery, but rather mostly just decades of voluminous securities filings filled with meaningless boilerplate that nobody ever read. Today we see President Obama trying to pull off the exact same thing. The Democrats managed to inspire union-generated civil unrest with their incendiary rhetoric regarding contractually specified Wall Street "bonuses." The statesman Obama then poured oil on the fire, explaining, The people on Wall Street still don't get it. They're still puzzled why is it that people are mad at the banks? Well, let's see. You know, you guys are drawing down 10-, 20-million-dollar bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it's gone through in decades, and you guys caused the problem. And we got 10% unemployment. But actually, no, Washington, it was "you guys" who caused the problem. The Fed again started it, this time with excessively loose monetary policy during the Bush Administration keeping real interest rates below zero for years, as explained by Stanford monetary policy guru John Taylor in his book Getting Off Track. That policy essentially subsidized excessive leverage and runaway risk. Those cheap dollar, easy money policies joined with the "affordable housing" policies of the Clinton Administration and Congressional Democrats to create the housing bubble, pumped up by subprime mortgages going to people who couldn't afford them, or who were just speculating and willing to abandon their homes if they got into trouble. The Congressionally sponsored, financial terrorist organizations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac then spread trillions in toxic securities backed by these subprime mortgages throughout the global financial system, ultimately threatening to bring it all down. Following Roosevelt, President Obama again used the crisis to enact further government regulation of Wall Street in the financial regulatory reform bill. But Obama's regulatory monster makes Roosevelt's Wall Street regulation look like a sellout. Obama's bill effectively takes over Wall Street, institutionalizing bailouts with comprehensive new federal authority to seize any institution the government deems troubled. That power does not even have to be used, for the financial industry to become a house pet of the Democrat political machine, with President Obama's new billy club always ready and waiting in the closet. Don't expect to see any Republican fundraisers on Wall Street any time soon. Those are all Democrat affairs now, collecting protection money. Further following the Roosevelt model, the Obama Administration inaugurated the Congressional debate on the financial regulation bill with a trumped-up, show-trial securities fraud suit against Goldman Sachs. Any free market advocate has to detest Goldman, which already has long been a central cog in the Democrat political machine. But the civil fraud suit against Goldman is an abuse of power, alleging essentially that Goldman defrauded itself into $75 million in losses in sponsoring an investment vehicle demanded by the market, which enabled investors to bet either for or against the subprime housing bubble. The suit is so contrary to legal precedent and the basic facts that the government prosecutors richly deserve sanctions, and if it ends with the deserved judicial excoriation, remember you read it here first. In the end, two of the actual malefactors of the great wealth of government power themselves at the root of the housing bubble crisis, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, stood taking credit for the financial reg reform bill, which will only add to the secular socialist machine rather than address the root causes of the financial crisis. Crony Capitalism Another major portion of the stimulus went to subsidies for so-called "green" energy, solar, wind, biofuels, etc. This was supposed to create "green" jobs, with President Obama proclaiming, "The nation that leads the green energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy." (The global warming scientific grounds for such subsidies are sheer fantasy as discussed at length in this column many times before). Last year, a study of the experience with such subsidies in Spain found that they destroyed 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy for every green energy job created. High cost energy that has to be heavily subsidized with taxpayer dollars is not a good strategy for creating jobs. More recently, a leaked Spanish government study estimates even greater net job losses. As Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute reported last week at Pajamas Media, the Socialist Party Spanish government has publicly acknowledged that its green energy subsidy program has to be drastically curtailed if not abandoned altogether, "lest the experiment risk Spain becoming Greece." Investors Business Daily further reported last Friday a new study of green energy subsidies in Italy considering the full impact of the higher energy costs on the economy, and concluding, "Each green job cost 6.9 jobs in the industrial sector and 4.8 jobs across the entire economy." Indeed, high energy costs kill manufacturing. But while green energy corporate welfare fails miserably as economics, it succeeds politically in building the Obama/Democrat political machine. All the "businesses" that exist, whether wind, solar, ethanol, or others, solely because of their Democrat party benefactors now also have trade associations that will join in contributing and openly campaigning for continued Democrat party majorities, especially as Tea Party conservatives exhibit greater clout in the Republican Party, defeating RINOs. The same strategy is now being pursued in the new Kerry-Lieberman cap and trade bill, structured to deliver billions and billions to corporate interests to buy off their potential opposition. If that bill becomes law, all these businesses will be added to the Obama/Democrat political machine as well. Government Dependency President Obama has also followed Roosevelt's creation of massive new entitlements with the Obamacare takeover of health care. If not repealed, that government takeover will mean the end of high quality American health care, with government bureaucrats ultimately deciding what health care you can receive in service of the cause of "social justice" rather than your personal health. But in the process, the legislation massively increases government dependency with an estimated trillion dollars in increased welfare providing health insurance subsidies for families making as much as $88,000 per year. Those cost estimates will prove woefully inadequate, as the legislation will likely cost at least 3 times as much, if not following Medicare in costing 10 times original estimates. But the ultimate cost does not matter to President Obama. What matters is that he considers the votes of everyone receiving the new entitlement benefits to be bought and paid for as part of the New Left political machine. The same politics are reflected in the one-third increase in federal welfare spending President Obama has already adopted in his first two years alone, with total national welfare spending now to cost an astounding $10.3 trillion over the next 10 years. Like Roosevelt, Obama has thoroughly aligned himself with the labor unions, even though the great majority of workers today have rejected unionism as not in their best interests. Just as Roosevelt's 1935 Wagner Act heavily favoring the institutional interests of unions over the interests of workers until corrected by the 1947 Taft Hartley Act, Obama today seeks to pass card check legislation that would take away the vote of working people over unionization. It would effectively turn small and medium businesses over to union organizers as well through mandatory, 90 day arbitration dictating the terms and conditions of union contracts. Besides the massive auto bailout, actually a bailout for the UAW, Obama seeks to overturn the careful balance of traditional labor law through every means possible, including the appointment of radical leftists like Craig Becker to controlling labor-related government positions. Expanding unions, of course, just further expands the Obama/Democrat political machine. President Obama's misrepresentation and defamation of the Arizona immigration control law is a further, naked attempt to build his secular socialist machine. That law was carefully crafted only to enforce current legal requirements of federal law. It also expressly prohibits racial profiling, allowing officers to investigate immigration status only during otherwise lawful contacts arising out of other matters, and only when there is probable cause to question such status. Yet Obama sponsors Mexican President Felipe Calderon before a joint session of Congress misrepresenting the Arizona law and effectively denouncing America, to the great applause and glee of Congressional Democrats, while Mexico maintains punitive immigration laws. Obama here is simply trying to rile up his Hispanic voter base for this year's elections. In short, President Obama and the Democrats are trying to nationalize the urban political machines dating back to New York City's Tammany Hall that have long been the backbone of the Democrat party. It Won't Work But it won't work. Only an intellectually cloistered prep school Marxist could think the politics of the 1930s would be an effective model for today's modern America 75 years later. While America's old media and brain freeze academia are part of the Obama/Democrat New Left political machine as well, they are effectively countered today by the modern media of the Internet, cable and satellite TV, talk radio, nationally distributed conservative newspapers and magazines, and the conservative and libertarian think tanks and grassroots organizations. In this environment, the Obama/Democrat political machine cannot survive the substantive policy failures that will blast it to smithereens over the next 24 months. We are enjoying now the high point of the Obama economy, a natural cyclical recovery that Obama has already managed to stunt to my own surprise. Yet the ultraliberalism of Washington's ruling Democrats is already cratering their political fortunes. When the concrete economic disasters of the 1970s begin to reappear next year with a new economic downturn, President Obama and his propagandists are not going to be able to talk their way out of political chaos. The American people are far too sophisticated now and have experienced too many years of bountiful prosperity to settle for the stagnation of European and Latin American socialism that Obama and Pelosi are brewing. Compounding this is a trajectory of grievous foreign policy reversals, with President Obama inviting War through Weakness in the Middle East and elsewhere, and mushrooming nuclear proliferation in response to the now emerging nuclear Iran. The likely result of all this is a geometrically worsening downward spiral of political collapse for the Obama Democrats. The better political survival strategy for the Democrats is the Blue Dog Democrat ploy that continued to work in the Pennsylvania 12 special election last week. But even that shows the weakness of the Obamunistas. In a two to one Democrat district, represented by Democrats for decades, with the national union infrastructure able to focus all of their resources on that one race, the Democrat won campaigning against the Obama agenda on a Rush Limbaugh platform. Will Obama really be able to maintain his leftist agenda with a Congress increasingly populated by those winning in this way? Republicans must and will learn to counter this more effectively by aggressively attacking and exposing Blue Dog double dealing. Even more important, they must get much better at projecting a vision and theme of renewed American prosperity and growth. Peter Ferrara is director of entitlement and budget policy at the Institute for Policy Innovation, a policy advisor to the Heartland Institute, and general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. "Great power no more?"
It seems Barack Obama has a new presidential role model, at least as far as national de fense is concerned: Dwight Eisenhower. But the Ike that Obama likes isn't the easy-going golfing geezer — and certainly not the grim Cold Warrior who promised massive nuclear retaliation on the enemy if they started any serious trouble. No, this is the Ike who slashed America's defense budget by more than a quarter after the Korean War, and who, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, was willing to "make hard choices" about where American military might should be used, and where it shouldn't. That was the message Gates conveyed in a May 8 speech at the Eisenhower Library on the future of America's national defense — echoing Obama's own praise for Ike at West Point Dec. 1. To the Obama team, the Eisenhower years represent an America aware of its strategic limits and willing to just say "no" to more money for the Pentagon. "The gusher" of post-9/11 military spending is going to be shut off, Gates announced, for "a good period of time." The fact is, America is being set up for a sharp decline in our ability to project military force and protect vital interests. In that vein, Gates mentioned Ike more than a dozen times — and Ronald Reagan not once. Our nation's soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors know how to take orders and salute. The problem audience here is America's enemies, present and future. The Navy is down to its lowest number of vessels since the Carter years. The next generation of destroyers has been cut from a planned 32 ships to 3. The F-22 Raptor advanced-fighter program will soon be as extinct as the dinosaur it's named after. We're already planning to peel out of Iraq and Afghanistan; the jihadists have the dates marked on their calendars. Evoking the name of America's greatest soldier-president since George Washington won't cover the fact that the new "Ike" approach looks like a formula for America's demise as a great power. Five days before the Eisenhower speech, Gates spoke at the Navy League conference in DC. According to one eyewitness, you could've heard a pin drop among the assembled ex-sailors and navy contractors as Gates announced that "we simply can't afford to perpetuate a status quo" of 11 aircraft carriers and 57 nuclear submarines. This is the Obama Pentagon Two-Step. Last year, we had the cuts in specific military programs, including the Raptor. This year, with deficits soaring thanks to Obama's gusher of domestic outlays, will come the actual cuts in spending — including mothballing ships, shutting down bases, reducing the number of officers and trimming raises and health benefits for service personnel. It is important to realize this is not the result of rethinking our defense priorities, as Gates and his supporters like to insist. Of course the Pentagon could use some cost-cutting; yes, certain weapons programs like the Littoral Combat Ship have involved a disgraceful waste of time and money. No one denies that we need to be ready to face the military challenges of the future, rather than the past. But we just don't have the leisure to hit the "reset" button on our military. We're entangled in two major conflicts, Iraq and Afghanistan, involving every military service — and may be unable to avoid others in the near future, including possibly Iran. Yes, Eisenhower trimmed defense after Korea, much as Obama wants to do after Iraq. But even at their slimmest, Ike's defense outlays were 10 percent of GDP; we're at less than 4 percent today. By Ike's standards, our defense budget should be at least double the current $786 billion. And Ike got "more bang for the buck" by putting his defense dollars into nuclear weapons, ready to be carpeted across Russia and East Europe by Air Force bombers if the Soviets made a major move. Red China, even Albania, were slated for annihilation whether combatants or not. That's hardly the kind of "balancing of strategic options" that Obama and Gates say they want — or that our forces are capable of doing right now. We've been here before. In the '70s under Jimmy Carter, and in the '90s under Bill Clinton, Democrats tried to cash in their peace dividends after Vietnam and the Cold War by cutting the Pentagon to pay for domestic spending. Carter's cuts yielded the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Soviet troops in Cuba. The Clinton-era cuts — in the case of the Army, almost 40 percent — left us gasping to catch up when Afghanistan and then Iraq beckoned. The US fleet of aircraft carriers that Gates sees as "wasting assets" are in fact the guarantors of our great-power status and our strategic reach. The post-9/11 "gusher" of spending he refers to was actually the result of trying to make up for a decade of neglect — almost certainly what a Republican president will have to do after Obama. In fact, a revolt against the Obama-Gates crash diet is already starting in Congress. Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) is pushing for proscribed limits on how many Navy vessels can be retired before replacements must be ordered. And bigger resistance looms after November. Gates certainly doesn't want to be remembered as the architect of America's military decline. Sadly, there may be some in the Obama White House who do. Arthur Herman's most recent book is Gandhi and Churchill. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
PM: IRAN-BRAZIL-TURKEY URANIUM DEAL IS AN ACT OF DECEPTION
Posted by Gil Ronen, May 26, 2010. |
|
`Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu broke his silence Tuesday regarding Iran's enriched uranium deal with Turkey, calling it "an act of deception." Until this statement, the Israeli government had offered no official comment on the deal, apparently preferring to let other countries react to it first. Iran announced last week it would ship its nuclear reactors' low-grade uranium to Turkey, which in return will give Tehran fuel rods of medium-enriched uranium for a "medical research reactor." The deal was also signed by Brazil. Speaking before the Knesset plenum in a special session convened at the request of 40 Knesset members, Netanyahu said: "This is transparently an Iranian act of deception that is meant to divert international opinion from the sanctions against Iran in the [United Nations] Security Council." The deal between Iran, Turkey and Brazil is "a bogus suggestion," he said, "because it leaves Iran with enough uranium to manufacture nuclear weapons." "It is commendable that the United States has decided to move forward in pushing through sanctions," said the Israeli head of state. "This is an important move in a symbolic sense, but it is clear to us that these sanctions will not stop Iran. Harsher sanctions will make clearer the determination to prevent Iran's arming with nuclear weapons, but it is not certain that even they will stop it." Regarding indirect negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, which began recently and are to last four months, Netanyahu said: "The primary and most important principle, which I am glad that the United States adopted and made clear to the Palestinian Authority, is that there are no preconditions. This should not prevent the discussions from taking place." "The second principle that we and the United States agree about — and I would like to hope that the Palestinians understand this too — is that the proximity talks are the initial stage and a short corridor to direct talks." Gil Ronen served n the IDF as Army Radio's Knesset and Territories correspondent and later reported for Koteret Rasheet and Ha'ir and serving as Editor at Haaretz and Yediot Aharonot. |
|
IDF MAY FIGHT US-TRAINED PALESTINIAN ARAB ARMY
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 26, 2010. |
|
Could US-Trained PA Military Turn Guns on Israel? This was written by Avi Yellin. |
|
During a military exercise with the IDF's elite Kfir Brigade last week at the Tze'elim base in Israel's south, GOC Central Command Maj.-Gen. Avi Mizrahi warned soldiers of potential challenges they may face in the near future. The Kfir brigade, created December 2005 to deal with unrest in Israel's Judea and Samaria regions, trained extensively in urban warfare and simulated a scenario in which IDF soldiers were pitted against the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority's new American-trained military. Mizrahi told soldiers that the PA security forces, trained in Jordan by United States Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, is a formidable potential enemy and that the IDF needs to know how to fight them if the need should arise. "This is a trained, equipped, American-educated force," Mizrahi said. "This means that at the beginning of a battle, we will pay a higher price. A force like that can shut down an urban area with four snipers... It is a proper infantry force facing us and we need to take that into account. They have attack capabilities and we do not expect them to give up easily." Keith Dayton himself has expressed belief that his PA army would likely attack the Jewish state in the event that Israel does not give in to the demands of the Middle East Quartet, comprising America, Russia, the United Nations and European Union. At a May 2009 lecture in Washington, Dayton indicated that if Israel does not surrender Judea and Samaria to the PA within two years, the Fatah forces he and his fellow American officers are currently training could easily turn their guns on the Israelis. "With big expectations, come big risks," Dayton said. "There is perhaps a two-year shelf life on being told that you're creating a state, when you're not." Following these remarks, United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates extended Dayton's tour of duty for an additional two years and gave him the added responsibility of serving as deputy to President Barack Obama's Middle East Envoy George Mitchell. The United States has already poured over $300 million into the new PA army and the acknowledged prospect of that army attacking the State of Israel has not deterred Washington from continuing to arm, train and finance it. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
THE FLOTILLA TO GAZA: A PUBLICITY STUNT, NOT A GENUINE AID CONVOY
Posted by Anglican Friends of Israel, May 26, 2010. |
|
We received this statement from the Israeli Embassy on the 'Flotilla to Gaza': |
|
The Flotilla to Gaza: A publicity stunt, not a genuine aid convoy Since last year's January cease fire, 133 million liters of fuel entered Gaza from Israel — That's more than enough fuel to fill the fuel tank of every car and truck in Israel! Since the ceasefire, well over a million tons of humanitarian supplies entered Gaza from Israel — That's almost a ton of aid for every man woman and child in Gaza. Israel transfers food, medicines, clothing and school-books for all Gazans, but Hamas demands concrete for its reinforced bunkers, from which they will be able to continue to fire rockets at Israeli schools and hospitals. Nevertheless, despite the need to restrict the supply of building materials for this reason, Israel has this week allowed 6 trucks loaded with 250 tons of cement, one truck loaded with 5 tons of iron and 15 trucks loaded with gravels to enter Gaza for building projects operated and executed by UNRWA. Israel transfers 15,000 tons of real aid to Gaza each and every week — so a flotilla claiming to carry 10,000 tons of concrete is clearly about a different agenda. International aid groups send their aid to Gaza through the Israeli humanitarian pipeline, while publicity seekers merely exploit the humanitarian agenda to promote their own media stunts. In 2009 alone, 10,544 patients and their companions left the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel. Humanitarian aid flows into Gaza daily, except when the crossings are rocketed by the Hamas regime. In 2009, 21,200 international organization staff members entered the Gaza Strip, and some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine were brought in. Israel is now coordinating the transfer of 200,000 laptops for Gaza schoolchildren. Transferring Aid to Gaza through Existing Channels Israel maintains land crossings into Gaza, through which food, fuels and other materials are supplied. These transfer points operate despite numerous Palestinian terrorist attacks on the crossings, which have cost Israeli lives. There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, although Hamas attempts to portray the situation as such. Enormous amounts of supplies and humanitarian aid cross into the Strip on a regular basis. Each day, many dozens of trucks carrying supplies are transported from Israel to the Gaza Strip. The land crossing points remain the most efficient means for the transfer of goods. Reputable international organizations, such as the Red Cross, regularly use these crossings to deliver supplies and transfer personnel. Israel is very willing to assist the organizers of the flotilla in using the land crossings, in the same manner as it does for the other international organizations. Given that sufficient land crossings are open and that Israel has invited the organizers to use them, the flotilla clearly is both futile and a publicity stunt. If the organizers were truly interesting in providing humanitarian aid, as opposed to engaging in publicity stunts, they would utilize the proper channels to ensure delivery. Millions of dollars worth of international food aid continually flows through the Israeli humanitarian apparatus, ensuring that there is no food shortage in Gaza. Food and supplies are shipped from Israel to Gaza daily. Despite attacks by Hamas, Israel maintains an ongoing humanitarian corridor for the transfer of food items to Gaza. This conduit is used by internationally recognized organizations including the United Nations and the Red Cross. Large quantities of essential food items like baby formula, wheat, meat, dairy products and other, are transferred daily and weekly to Gaza. In a typical week the IDF coordinates the transfer of hundreds of trucks containing about 15,000 tons of supplies: during the week of May 18, 2010 there were 65 trucks of fruit and vegetables; 22 truckloads of sugar, some 27 truckloads of meat, poultry and fish; and 40 trucks of dairy products and more than 100 truckloads of animal food. During the first quarter of 2010 some 553 tons or 40 trucks of milk powder and baby food were shipped to the Strip. One hundred and eight trucks of rice, 164 trucks of clothing and shoes, 1,115 trucks of wheat and 1,753 trucks of various food products including vegetables and cheese went through. These items were channeled through aid organizations or via the private sector. In 2009, more than 738,000 tons of food and supplies entered Gaza. During holidays, Israel increases transfers. During the Muslim feast Eid al-Adha, Israel shipped some 11,000 head of cattle into the Strip. Maintaining Medical Aid for All in Need No Palestinian is denied medical care in Israel. Israel maintains a corridor for the transfer of medical patients out of Gaza, and about 200 medical staff go through the crossings every month. Israel helps coordinate the transfer of Jordanian doctors into Gaza. In 2009 alone, 10,544 patients and their companions left the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel. The Israeli Hadassah Medical Organization in Jerusalem donates $3 million in aid annually to treat Palestinians in Israel. Since 2005, Palestinians exploited medical care arrangements more than 20 times to carry out terror attacks. In the first quarter of 2010, Israel shipped 152 trucks of medical supplies and equipment into Gaza. A new CAT scan machine was recently shipped to Gaza. In a typical week (in May 2010), some 37 truckloads of hygiene products were shipped to Gaza. In 2009, 21,200 international organization staff members entered the Gaza Strip, and some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine were brought in. Contact Anglican Friends of Israel at their website: www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com. |
|
SHAMMAI LEIBOWITZ NEEDS SOME SMOKES TO BUY PRISON SUNDRIES
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 26, 2010. |
|
1. You will all be pleased to hear that Noam Chomsky again met with
the Hezbollah in Lebanon this week and attended a Salute to Nasrallah
event
2. When does the Israeli Moonbatocracy NOT scream against
destruction of Arab homes? See this:
3. Well, one of the happiest events of the week — nay, of the year — was the (re-) sentencing of ultra-leftist shyster Shammai Leibowitz to 20 months hard prison time in the US. Leibowitz, the 39 year old grandson of the late Yeshayahu Leibowitz (himself a fascinating mix of serious knowledge of Judaism with leftist flakiness) is best known for his campaigns on behalf of Arab terrorists and his defending arch-murderer and terrorist Marwan Barghouti (with New Israel Fund money!!). Before that he was the lawyer of choice for International Solidarity Movement accomplices to the Hamas. As you may recall, Shammai got himself into a jam in the US when the FBI discovered he was leaking to the media documents he had been hired by the same FBI to translate. Shammai has been living in the US (he has dual citizenship) and got a job working as a translator for the FBI. The fact that the FBI would hire this collaborator with terrorism from Israel tells you a lot about how much "intelligence" there is inside the skulls of the heads of the FBI these days. Shammai had signed a plea agreement last year but evidently tried
to back out of it. In it, he confessed to engaging in the leaking of
sensitive documents to bloggers and to a pro-terror Palestinian group,
the "Electronic Intifada." See
Anyway, evidently Shammai tried to back out of the plea and the matter went to DC court, where Shammai this week got sentenced to doing the 20 months he agreed to in his plea. Lawyer tricks did not help him this time. Now here is a math problem for you. If Shammai gets 20 months in the US slammer for leaking two documents to the media, just how much jail time should the leftist spy Anat Kamm and her Haaretz handler Uri Blau, the current darlings of Israel's Left, get for stealing more than 2000 military documents and leaking their contents? Why he was not given a sentence at least as long as Pollard's is not clear. Well, yes, it IS clear. Evidently Shammai was spying for the Palestinians! Did he also leak materials to the New Israel Fund? Enquiring minds want to know! I just love the idea of Shammai making license plates and serving as a prison sissy for some big tattooed gangbanger missing his front teeth and wearing gang colors. I will try to get you his prison mailing address in case you want to mail him a carton of cigarettes or maybe a cake with a rubber file inside?
See also this:
He has his own blog here:
4. I have a confession. I despise the TV show "Sex and the City," fantasize about slapping and then sending the characters in it to a nunnery, and think that Chris Noth should have ended his acting career getting shot in "Law and Order." The "Sex and the City" movies are even worse. Nevertheless, I am suddenly tingling with delight that the four skanks in their new movie go to Abu Dhabi and upset the Islamists. Radical Moslem blogs are already threatening a new wave of violence against the offenders, which will recall their anti-cartoon riots. See this.
I had a dream last night of Islamists throwing shoes at the
visiting hussies — all Gucci designer shoes from Fifth Avenue.
5. "Elvis" Costello, a "singer" in the loose sense of the word,
decided he is boycotting Israel and will not perform here. See
I think we should all say a Birkat Ha-Gomel for being rescued from that imminent musical threat to our health and well being. 6. University of Haifa anti-Zionist "New Historian"; Discovers that Israel Itself Caused the 1973 Yom Kippur War because it refused to make peace with Egypt
7. Tel Aviv University — On anti-Semitic web site, TAU's Ran
HaCohen (Dept of Comparative Literature) explains that Israel is
"Colonizing" ... Israel
8. Tel Aviv University — Ariella Azoulay (Dept of Arts) has
Nightime Fantasies about the Palestinian "Right of Return"
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
WHAT IS MOST IRKSOME IMO ABOUT ANTISEMITES
Posted by Post Futurist, May 26, 2010. |
|
What I don't like is how Israel is being used as a 21st century Christ to as be nailed to the cross for the sins of humanity. Contact Post Futurist by email at p0stfuturist@yahoo.com |
|
NUCLEAR FORUM MENTIONS ISRAEL, NOT IRAN; MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO; ARE GAZA ARMS TUNNEL WORKERS 'CIVILIANS?'
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 26, 2010. |
|
NUCLEAR FORUM MENTIONS ISRAEL BUT NOT IRAN The draft declaration at the nuclear forum mentions Israel, India, and Pakistan as non-signatories to the non-proliferation treaty. It names North Korea as a violator of the treaty but not the IAEA determination that Iran is a violator of the treaty for many years and in many ways. Iran warned that if it were mentioned, it would cite Western powers as violators for spreading nuclear technology. Iran gave no specifics. Iran may suppose that the U.S. helped Israel gain nuclear technology (IMRA, 5/25/10). The U.S. had no interest in Israel acquiring that technology, would have preferred Israel not get it, and did not help it. Some people suspected that the purpose of the conference was an Obama desire to "get Israel" and score PR points with the Muslims. His neglect of Iran is not strengthening U.S. national security.
GAZA ECONOMY AND HOW THE MEDIA REPORTS IT The BBC and other media write about a non-existent humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The flotilla is launched to generate more anti-Israel propaganda over it. Reporting is slanted to omit the affluence in Gaza. When passengers disembarked from the prior flotilla, they went souvenir-shopping in well-stocked shops. On the other hand, poverty exists almost everywhere, including parts of Tel Aviv and backwater Negev towns in Israel. Journalists rarely report that. They report what they want you to see. In both parts of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), there is a middle and upper class. There are Olympic-sized swimming pools, fancy restaurants, crowded malls, and wind-surfing competition on Gaza beaches, as well as the much-reported lower class, used for propaganda. The media laments shortages of water and building material, and ignores the Olympic-sized swimming pools. The Lonely Planet guidebook mentions "steak au poivre and chicken cordon bleu" at the Roots Club in Gaza. The menu is in English, to attract people from the UN, NGOs, and the media, which do not report about it. The manager told the source that many Palestinian Arabs dine there. The media drums upon a theme of poverty caused by Israel. This theme leads to hatred of Israel, probably its purpose (IMRA, 5/25/10 from Tom Gross). When Israel ran Gaza, it greatly increased the standard of living and the longevity of life. Afterwards, the Palestinian Authority ended much of the market economy and rule of law. It further discouraged enterprise by extortion, monopoly, and war. The media's anti-Israel slant reminds one of the false reports from the first Lebanon War that the IDF had devastated most of Lebanon's cities. The truth is that most of the cities were spared, but the photos showed the few blocks of destruction. Some photos were of earlier, Lebanese civil war damage. The same kind of alarmist reporting exaggerated many-fold the number of casualties and the damage in Jenin. The damage was confined to a portion of the so-called refugee camp within the much larger city. Casualties turned out to be a small fraction of what originally was claimed and proclaimed. Some of those casualties and some of the damage occurred because the PLO had booby-trapped their own people's apartment houses, causing them to collapse. If the Arabs did not fight like war criminals, by fighting from among civilian populations whose lives and property the terrorists therefore risk, how little civilian loss of life and property there would be! Jihadists do not care about their own people. The terrorists are responsible for their own people's suffering but get the media and UN to blame Israel for it. The predictable media and UN reaction bears some moral responsibility for Arab suffering, too. So much for humanitarian sentiment by the media, UN, NGOs, and other Israel-bashers!
MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO 
A Manhattan community board approved the project to build the bigger of two mosques near where radical Muslims bombed the World Trade Center. Some members of the audience, who lost relatives there, protested. Their sensibilities were disregarded. Someone from the area thought this is a good area to teach tolerance (Javier C. Hernandez, NY Times, 5/26/10, A23). [People in the neighborhood as well as firefighters from all over the country have suffered from cancer caused by the gases released from the destroyed and burning buildings. Some of that suffering continues.] Bret Stephens reports and interprets the event differently, as a test case for tolerance by Muslims. The Kuwaiti-born project sponsor, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, portrays the project as leading to Muslim Americanization. His wife, who runs the American Society for Muslim Advancement, foresees interfaith activity. The imam's Americanization and tolerance self-portrayal is reported by some to be a sham. One is that he denies that Muslims perpetrated 9/11. Another is that he urged the U.S. to let religions judge their members by their own religious law. That means replacing some American law with Islamic law. Mr. Stephens suggests that the $100 million to be raised for the New York Islamic center would be better spent on interfaith activity in Arab and Pakistani cities. Here is what Stephens thinks the Community Board should ask the imam and wife: 1. Who attacked New York on 9/11, and what was their religion? [And was it a factor?] Beware, interfaith activity often is a vehicle for an aggressive
religion to chip away at other religion(s), rather than recognize
their legitimacy! Beware, radical Muslims are skilled at portraying
themselves as moderate, in order to gain acceptance rather than
deportation. I have reported on this a number of times.
REHABILITATING ISLAMISTS IN YEMEN, S. ARABIA, U.S., ETC. The U.S. has concentrated on fighting Islamists. But they keep coming. This compels other approaches, such as deprogramming and rehabilitating radicals. Egypt let terrorist organizations stay together in prison, where reformed leaders might persuade followers to reform. They discuss their ideology and what is wrong with it. This approach has had some success. Without research on recidivism, it is difficult to tell whether such programs are sincere. Yemen had a program for rehabilitating captured jihadists that was too lax. Little retraining and supervision involved. It was a form of parole [like American "liar mortgages.'] Recidivism was high. The program was canceled. Saudi Arabia fleshed out a program. Applicants underwent psychological evaluation and other screening. There follows extensive re-education, mostly of recruits and those poorly educated in their religion, using Islamic scholars whose religious authority the prisoners respect. Inmates can debate or discuss with scholars via intercom. Ex-prisoners stay at comfortable half-way houses. Then they are paid to start a new life. The difficulty with the Saudi program, aside from its expense, that other countries cannot readily afford, is that the Saudi's Wahabi version of the faith encourages jihad. The program therefore does not prohibit jihad but differentiates sanctioned from non-sanctioned forms of it. Recidivism is not studied there. Is the program effective or a show for the West? President Obama praised the program, but is he over-eager to transfer Guantanamo inmates to Saudi Arabia? U.S. detention centers in Iraq initially allowed extremists to turn moderate Muslim inmates into Islamists. Now the U.S. separates extremists from moderates. "Each incoming detainee now undergoes a thorough background check, and psychologists analyze education, skills, motivation, and religiosity..." Vetted imams talk with prisoners. They educate the majority in several ways, including work training and in how to read the religious texts for themselves. Again, estimates of recidivism vary. However, inmates due to be released prefer to complete their programs. Iraqis ask the U.S. to enroll their non-incarcerated children in the program. Singapore believes that it takes a man of God to revise a terrorist's belief he is serving God. Its program involves one-on-one conversations between imam and convict. The family is screened, too. When the case officer, imam, and psychologist agree to release the inmate, he goes out with help in getting work, appointments for future counseling, and support for the family. No known recidivism, but the number of graduates is small. British police work with Muslims to identify youth having radical tendencies. Rehabilitation includes not only anti-radical reprogramming but efforts to alleviate feelings of alienation. However, some of the youths who turned radical were not alienated. Britain may be picking radicals, such as Tariq Ramadan may be, to do the rehabilitation. Many British Muslims refuse to join the program. British Muslim prisoners may be in process of getting more radical. A moderate Canadian Muslim has developed a program emphasizing tolerance, peace and a broader-minded faith than the Wahabbi sect has. This program emphasizes Islamist misinterpretations of history. No recidivism figures for it. Such programs need to eradicate sympathy for jihad, or else ex-inmates may assist jihad by fundraising or other activities not in themselves violent (Katherine Seifert, Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2010, pp. 21-30) The U.S. program respects the Islamic religion while it tries to defang the aggressive violence of the Islamist interpretation.
ARE GAZA ARMS TUNNEL WORKERS 'CIVILIANS?' In retaliation for Gaza terrorists firing four more rockets and mortars into Israel, the Israeli Air Force bombed two tunnels built to permit terrorists to sneak into Israel from below ground (IMRA, 5/26/10). Who digs those war facilities and arms smuggling tunnels? Who smuggles the arms in? Not troops. Are they therefore civilians? In my opinion, no. They may not be on the Hamas payroll, and they may not themselves carry weapons, but either they are part of the immediate war effort or are responsible for the risk to themselves when they build or use the war facility. When they get killed, they should not be considered civilians, as if Israel did something wrong in liquidating them. Calling the bombing of tunnels "retaliation" is peculiar The tunnels exist primarily to boost Hamas war materiel and maneuvering for terrorism. They are legitimate targets whether Hamas or its allies fired rockets that week or not. By waiting to call a limited destruction of tunnels "retaliation," Israel misses the opportunity to crimp Hamas' armaments sooner. Since apparently Israel knows the location of many tunnels, it should bomb all the ones leading to Israel. It should advise Egypt of the locations of all tunnels leading to Sinai, to see whether Egypt would wreck their Sinai portion. If Egypt does not, then Egypt's complicity with jihad would be demonstrated. Perhaps Israel is afraid to confirm that complicity, since it is pretending that Egypt is a constructive force. In any case, what Egypt does not demolish, Israel should, but from the Gaza side.
U.S. RECONNAISSANCE A WAWRNING TO IRAN? General Petraeus has ordered widespread military reconnaissance over Iran and more clandestine military activity in the Mideast. Whether intended as a signal of U.S. determination or not, it appears to signify that. U.S. officials acknowledge that the reconnaissance prepares for possible raids (IMRA, 5/26/10). The New York Times indicated that the Pentagon may be gathering some of its own intelligence, rather than relying upon the over-stretched staff of the CIA. Reconnaissance over Iran may be intended to prepare to squelch Iranian attacks on U.S. facilities, if Israel raids Iran. It also may be just a bluff, for Iran, Israel, and the American public, while the Obama administration dithers until doomsday.
U.S. ON ISRAEL, ABBAS, AND HAMAS U.S. envoy Mitchell said that both Israel's PM Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority head Abbas both are sincere in wanting negotiations to succeed and to make peace. He said Hamas, an extremist organization that uncompromisingly calls for the destruction of Israel, complicates the process. When the time comes, however, he said that any party that accepts principles of peace and democracy is eligible to participate (IMRA, 5/26/10). That is like saying, we'll end WWII or the Cold War if the Nazis or the Communists, fresh for making aggression for fanatical reasons, suddenly promise to behave, we will make peace with them. No suspicion that they may be faking it? Why expect Hamas to embrace democracy and peace, when Abbas does not? He runs a dictatorship. Mitchell is being misleading about that, inasmuch as what Abbas demands would get Israel conquered — admission into Israel of millions of vengeful Arabs. Abbas has said that if he does not get what he wants, he would make war. Indeed, he indoctrinates his people in its desirability. Some peace maker! Nor does he compromise on anything. Considering that the Arabs already have a state in Palestine, called Jordan, true compromise would involve the Arabs of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza moving there and leaving the rest to the Jews. Mitchell is not being truthful about Abbas in other ways. He said he is not in a hurry for negotiations, he can ask the UN to make him a state. By taking the Arabs' side, Obama reduced any slight inclination to compromise.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
GAZA BELONGS TO ISRAEL, ALWAYS HAS ...
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 26, 2010. |
|
We are the Secular Christians for Zion — the SC4Z. We support the Patriots of Israel not because of matters of religion but because we regard Israel as the boulder on the path of Islamic imperialism. We want a larger boulder. No, we NEED a larger boulder! We understand you are a visiting professional in the journalism department at Stanford University. We read your article about Gaza and your stated objections to the blame being cast upon Israel for the supposedly hapless condition of the Arabs occupying that region. Your article dwelt at length on the supposedly wretched living conditions in Gaza. However, this emphasis upon the latter point begs several questions: 1) If these Arabs who now call themselves "Gazans," are so hapless and impoverished, why do they all look so well dressed and well fed? In the photos we have seen, both online or as presented by Reuters, the Arabs who are hurling rocks and lobbing bombs at Israeli civilians are seemingly all the same age and none of them appear to be poor little ten year olds. More like ages 18 to 30 and shod in new shoes and designer jeans; the same age as most of American troops in Iraq. Why, if you intend to defend Israel, do you not buttress your argument on behalf of israel with reference to established international law which almost a hundred years ago — in 1920 — decided the legal foundation for and delineated the boundaries of the Jewish Homeland? These boundaries encompass Gaza, the entire West Bank, most of the Golan Heights, and most of the region that became the new Hashemite nation of Jordan. For a refresher course in international law pertaining to the
Jewish Homeland, we recommend Prof. Howard Grief's meticulously
researched and recently published book The Legal Foundation and
Borders of Israel under International Law reviewed by Wm. Mehlman
at:
Quoting from the review: "With The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law (Mazo Publishers, Jerusalem — available at www.amazon.com) Canadian-born Israeli constitutional scholar and lawyer Howard Grief has given us a book that shatters every myth, lie, misrepresentation and distortion employed over the 61 years of Israel's existence to negate the sovereign rights of the Jewish People to their national home." Our position: International law ends land disputes and resolves them in favor of Israel. We say: No more begging for peace: International law prevails over all Islamic claims to the lands of Israel. All Jews "wherever they are to be found" must demand the restoration of the lands of "Jewish Palestine" to Israel and the US is bound by Treaty to support these demands or else the US and the Euroids will fall victim to the schemes of the UN and its Islamic functionaries. We predict that Israel can expect many loud and underhanded skirmishes from Israel's resident seditionists and their Euroid enablers because application of international law will end their careers. The actions of Jewish leaders who agreed to cede away Israel's lands were "ultra vires" (beyond the scope of their legal authority) and therefore such concessions can and must be renounced and reversed. The next question a journalist should ask is whether the US State Dept. is now utilizing the same persuasive tools on Netanyahu as were applied to Gorbachev, to wit: offering him a promise of a comfortable future lifestyle either in the US or some other hidden place. Funds to be provided to Netanyahu if he "cooperates" — and withholding funds to the nation of Israel and increasing US funds to Mubarak, if he doesn't. We think a review of the rewards accorded to Gorbachev and how the State Dept. turned him might shed some light on Netanyahu's secretiveness and his double-talk to the people of Israel. Turning Gorbachev served the national interests of the free world, but turning Netanyahu away from Israel will accomplish just the opposite and prove disastrous not only to Israel but to the US and the rest of the free world. Viva to Professor Howard Grief and the Patriots of Israel. Respectfully yours — Paul la Demain Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
FACING IRAN'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM: ISRAEL'S TIME FOR DECISION
Posted by Professor Louis Rene Beres and Major General (IDF/Res.) Ben-Israel, May 25, 2010. |
|
Israel's Strategic Future, a special report of the Project Daniel Group, was presented to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on January 16, 2003. Among other things, the report asserted that under no circumstances should Iran be allowed to "go nuclear." This firm position stemmed from our understanding that stable deterrence could never exist with a nuclear Iran led by the current extreme regime, and that Iran's belligerent stance toward Israel had remained openly genocidal. Iran has moved steadily forward with plans to build and deploy nuclear weapons. On April 8, 2008, Iran's "National Day of Nuclear Technology," President Ahmadinejad announced his intent to install 6,000 additional centrifuges at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility. Now no serious observer could any longer accept the argument that Iran seeks nuclear power only for peaceful purposes. International law is not a suicide pact. Every state has not only the right, but also the obligation, to protect its citizens from aggression. This expectation is beyond any moral or legal question when a determined and possibly irrational enemy seeks nuclear weapons. Ideally, Israel could deter any Iranian WMD attack by maintaining a credible posture of nuclear deterrence. But this is not your father's Cold War, and Israel's notably small size leaves Jerusalem very little room for strategic error. Not surprisingly, Israel continues to maintain a prudent plan for active defense against future Iranian missiles. The plan's indispensable core is the Arrow anti-ballistic missile. Still, no system of active defense can be "leak proof." And terrorist proxies, rather than missiles, could also be used to deliver Iranian nuclear weapons. It follows, as Project Daniel had advised PM Sharon, that Israel must consider and codify appropriate preemption options. Under international law, these essential options are known as "anticipatory self-defense." For Israel, time is quickly running out. The Jewish state cannot fully depend upon its anti-ballistic missiles to defend against any future WMD attack from Iran any more than it can rely entirely upon nuclear deterrence. Even a near-perfect Arrow complemented by credible nuclear threats would not obviate Israel's preemption option. Israel has the right of all states to act in anticipatory self-defense when facing an existential assault. The 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice even extends this right to the preemptive use of nuclear weapons in certain residual circumstances. These are "live or die" situations where the only expected alternatives to preemption would be unendurable assaults by enemy states or their surrogates. Israel certainly has no wish to act upon the 1996 ICJ Opinion. But it must continue to prepare for certain critical non-nuclear preemptions, and also to implement a maximally efficient missile interception capability. Should Iran somehow become nuclear, Israel would then have to significantly enhance the credibility of its nuclear deterrent (including a prompt end to the doctrine of nuclear ambiguity or "bomb in the basement"), and to deploy a suitable second-strike force. This recognizably invulnerable (hardened and dispersed) "countervalue" force would be fashioned to inflict a decisive retaliatory blow against selected Iranian cities. Whenever possible, Israel will continue to seek security by peaceful means. But under no circumstances will it allow Iran to imperil its citizens with nuclear harms.
Louis Rene Beres of Purdue University is a long-time expert in
international law. His articles have been published in Israel in
Nativ; Btzedek; Haaretz; The Jerusalem Post; The Jerusalem Letter;
Bulletin Of The Jerusalem Institute For Western Defence; and the
Policy Paper Series of the Ariel Center. Professor Beres is Strategic
and Military Affairs Analyst for The Jewish Press. He was Chair
of Project Daniel.
Contact Professor Beres by email at lberes@purdue.edu |
|
FROM ISRAEL: INEXPLICABLE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 25, 2010. |
|
Yesterday the IDF put out an announcement regarding "gestures" to the PA that are about to be instituted: removal of some 60 (no this is not a typo) dirt roadblocks, opening of a checkpoint near Hevron, and unrestricted movement for Palestinian Arabs on the Kedar Road south of Ma'aleh Adumim. As always, these "gestures" present security risks to Israeli civilians. But hey, the Palestinian Arabs have been so peaceful, so conciliatory in their outreach to us that they deserve this. Right? Those threats of violence, their boycott of our goods, their failure to even pretend to be negotiating in good faith — none of this matters. I titled this post "Inexplicable," but actually it might better be called "Disgusting." In point of fact, what has happened is quite explicable: We are not "negotiating" with the PA at all, and not doing this for them. We are negotiating with the US administration, and moving to keep Obama happy. This is clear. ~~~~~~~~~~ In fact, on Sunday Netanyahu actually complained that Mitchell is talking about different things to each side — allowing each side to raise the issues it wants. This means there is no give-and-take back and forth between the two sides, which is what"negotiations" are all about. It's a farce of considerable proportions. But, I am assuming, at some level this makes the man in the White House happy because he has "restarted" negotiations. ~~~~~~~~~~ In the course of his statement concerning "negotiations," Netanyahu denied that he discussed a land swap (which is what Abbas had claimed). In truth, we have no way to be certain, but if the two sides are talking about different things, maybe Abbas discussed this with Mitchell, and that's as far as it went. ~~~~~~~~~~ One of the so-called "gestures" that was advanced was permission for 50 licensed Israeli tour guides to bring groups into Jericho and Bethlehem, areas under the control of the PA. But the Israeli Tour Guide Association has put out a statement "forcefully" objecting to this and demanding the cancellation of this provision. Tour guides would be exposed to danger, the statement says. Besides which, they would be confronting additional competition, as a commensurate number of Palestinian Arab tour guides would be permitted to lead tours inside of Israel. Is anyone thinking, when these "gestures" are proposed? ~~~~~~~~~~ There is increased movement in the international community to make nice with Syria. French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner has just called on Syrian president Bashar Assad. While German foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, who visited two days ago, went on record as saying, "Whoever wishes to support the peace process in the Middle East must also seek talks with Syria." Considering Syria's role in smuggling weaponry to Hezbollah, this is a decidedly bad turn of events. And it is the US we have to thank for it. For it was a shift in US policy that took Syria out of diplomatic isolation. Among those visiting Syria in the last few days was Senator John Kerry, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a strong proponent of engagement with Syria; this is his third visit since 2009. ~~~~~~~~~~ If you doubt that a shift in US policy has radically effected the situation vis-a-vis Syria, please consider Assad's words: In an interview with the Italian paper La Republica, yesterday, he said that Americans have lost their influence. Now he blames it on the fact that they "don't do anything for peace," but put more broadly, it means that Obama has pulled back, declining to be a strong force in this part of the world. Said Assad: "Out of this failure, what's emerging out of necessity is another alternative — a geostrategic map that aligns Syria, Turkey, Iran and Russia linked by politics, common interests and infrastructure." Scary stuff, and this is not about "peace" but power. Russia is eager to be a counterweight to US influence, while Syria is more closely allied with Iran than ever, and the Turks also see the handwriting on the wall. No "engagement" with Kerry is going to change this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile we are engaged in our fourth annual nationwide civil defense drill — this simulates the situation we would have to deal with if attacked by Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Hamas. Syria responded with unease to this, seeing in it a bit of saber-rattling. Netanyahu was quick to offer reassurance: "I would like to make it clear that it is not the result of any exceptional security development. On the contrary, Israel wants calm, stability and peace. But, said our prime minister, it was "important to bolster citizens' awareness vis-a-vis the protection issue..." ~~~~~~~~~~ Myself, I'm not adverse to a bit of muscle flexing — this seems to me part of deterrence. What is deplorable for me — and many others — is the sense of our being "sitting ducks," with Hezbollah acquiring those rockets and missiles in the north. Such acquisitions are not intended for peaceful purposes, we can be sure. Sooner or later... Material has come out on the Internet, some of which has been shared with me by deeply worried readers, indicating a possibility that we will get hit by Hezbollah — using non-conventional weapons — this summer. I've checked several sources, and all confirm my gut feeling on this, which is that such predictions are very "iffy." One knowledgeable source said that Iran wants things to remain quiet right now and is unlikely to stir up Hezbollah within the next few months. Bottom line for me here is that whatever intelligence has been acquired by sources predicting such attacks is also in the hands of our IDF — such intelligence and a great deal more. At the end of the day, nothing I can write, or encourage my readers to promote, will make an iota of difference with regard to this. It falls to the IDF and our intelligence services to stay on top of the situation and to respond with appropriate force when the time comes. I trust that they will. Would I like to see a pre-emptive attack on our part at the appropriate time? Oh yes! But, needless to say, this is not in my hands. Our leaders, our defense decision-makers, our intelligence brass, all have to do their utmost — with fierce determination to protect our people and our nation. But at the end of the day, it's in the hands of Heaven. ~~~~~~~~~~ A "Freedom Flotilla" of ships is in the Mediterranean headed toward the coast of Gaza, with the declared intention of breaking the (non-existent) "blockade" being maintained by Israel. I want to address this is some more detail tomorrow, for the PR being put out misleads severely. The goal of this project, very clearly, is political and not humanitarian. See this statement by Yigal Palmor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman: "Since the ceasefire in January 2009, well over a million tons of humanitarian supplies entered Gaza from Israel — that is almost a ton of aid for each man, woman and child in the Strip. "The land crossings remain the most efficient system to transfer goods to Gaza, and the flotilla organizers are well aware of this fact. The organizers also know that since December 2008, their ships have been denied permission to land. "Israel has invited the organizers of the flotilla to use the land crossings, in the same manner as all the reputable international organizations. "However, they are less interested in bringing in aid than in promoting their radical agenda, playing into the hands of Hamas provocations. While they have wrapped themselves in a humanitarian cloak, they are engaging in political propaganda and not in pro-Palestinian aid. If the organizers were truly interesting in providing humanitarian aid — as opposed to engaging in publicity stunts — they would use the proper channels to ensure delivery of any supplies."
~~~~~~~~~~ See also, with thanks to Jacob G., this link to a Palestinian magazine from December 2009, which shows some of the products in generous quantities, agricultural and otherwise, available to Gazans, who are said to be totally without:
~~~~~~~~~~ It's good news, and way past due, that we are likely to see a bill passed by the Knesset that would severely limit the perks provided to security prisoners (largely Hamas) in our prisons. What we offer them now — which is insane — far exceeds what is required by international law. There are different versions being proposed, but support for this is strong and whatever final version emerges is highly likely to pass, with three readings required. This is, to begin with, simply the right thing to do. There is no reason why Arabs who killed Jews or attempted to do so, or are allied with those who seek to do so, should be able to acquire degrees while in our prisons, or watch television, or have parties in their cells. Beyond this, the desire to secure the release of Gilad Shalit is motivating this legislation. The hope is that families of those in our prisons will pressure Hamas to let Shalit go, in order to secure more leniency in the conditions for their relatives. Keeping Shalit becomes, at least in theory, a liability. ~~~~~~~~~~ Astrophysicists at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, and some of their associates abroad, have identified a new type of exploding star. Prior to this, two kinds of supernovae had been identified — hot, young giants that collapse under their own weight, and old, dense white dwarves that blow up. The newly discovered supernova fits a different pattern — with high levels of calcium and titanium being thrown out as the star explodes, suggesting a nuclear reaction involving helium. It is believed that this discovery may shed light on some previously unexplained phenomenon in the universe. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHY DIDN'T THIS MAN GET A NOBEL PEACE PRIZE?
Posted by Brother Shane, May 25, 2010. |
|
As a disturbed individual was randomly shooting his colleagues at Virginia Tech, a Jewish Holocaust survivor blocked a classroom door to protect his students from the shooter. This 77-year-old engineering professor heroically sacrificed his life on Holocaust Memorial Day by taking bullets the shooter meant for his students. Rest in peace, Liviu Librescu At least Romania knows how to honor their heroes... Librescu was posthumously awarded the Order of the Star of Romania, Romania's highest civilian honor.
From the looks of it, he should've gotten 2 or 3 Nobel Prizes... Life and career Liviu Librescu was born in 1930 to a Jewish family in the city of Ploieşti, Romania. After Romania allied with Nazi Germany in World War II, his father, Isidore Librescu, was deported to a labor camp in Transnistria, and later his family, along with thousands of other Jews, was deported to a ghetto in the Romanian city of Focani.[5][6] As a boy, Librescu was interned in a labor camp in Transnistria. He may also have spent time in a Soviet labor camp.[6] His wife, Marlena, who is also a Holocaust survivor, told Israeli Channel 10 TV the day after his death, "We were in Romania during the Second World War, and we were Jews there among the Germans, and among the anti-Semitic Romanians."[5] Dorothea Weisbuch, a cousin of Librescu living in Romania, said in an interview to Romanian newspaper Cotidianul: "He was an extraordinarily gifted person and very altruist. When he was little, he was very curious and knew everything, so that I thought he would become very conceited, but it did not happen so; he was of a rare modesty."[7] After surviving the Holocaust, Librescu was repatriated to Communist Romania.[5] He studied aerospace engineering at the Polytechnic University of Bucharest, graduating in 1952 and continuing with a Master's degree at the same university. He was awarded a Ph.D. in fluid mechanics in 1969 at the Academia de Ştiinţe din România.[8] From 1953 to 1975, he worked as a researcher at the Bucharest Institute of Applied Mechanics, and later at the Institute of Fluid Mechanics and the Institute of Fluid Mechanics and Aerospace Constructions of the Academy of Science of Romania. His career stalled in the 1970s because he refused to swear allegiance to the Romanian Communist Party and was forced out of academia for his sympathies towards Israel.[5] When Librescu requested permission to immigrate to Israel, the Academy of Science of Romania fired him.[5][9] In 1976, a smuggled research manuscript that he had published in the Netherlands drew him international attention in the growing field of material dynamics.[10] After years of government refusal, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin personally intervened to get the Librescu family an emigration permit by directly asking Romanian President Nicolae Ceauşescu to let them go.[5][11] They moved to Israel in 1978. From 1979 to 1986, Librescu was Professor of Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering at Tel Aviv University and taught at the Technion in Haifa.[11] In 1985, he left on sabbatical for the United States, where he served as Professor at Virginia Tech in its Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, where he remained until his death.[11][12] He served as a member on the editorial board of seven scientific journals and was invited as a guest editor of special issues of five other journals.[13] Most recently, he was co-chair of the International Organizing Committee of the 7th International Congress on Thermal Stress, Taipei, Taiwan, June 4-7, 2007, for which he had been scheduled to give the keynote lecture.[4][13] According to his wife, no Virginia Tech professor has ever published more articles than Librescu.[11] Just an "average" Israeli citizen...
Contact Brother Shane by email at wisevirgin_777@yahoo.com
|
|
STOP MEDIA BIAS. RECLAIMING LANGUAGE FROM THE LEFT
Posted by Susana K-M, May 25, 2010. |
|
This was written by Caroline B. Glick.
Leftists, stop making money from Arab sources. Shame on you! |
|
Over the past generation, the Left has inverted the terminology of human rights, freedom, morality, heroism, democracy and victimization Courtesy of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on Thursday Israel will again be the target of a jihadist-leftist propaganda assault. A flotilla of nine ships which set sail for Gaza from Cyprus earlier this week is scheduled to arrive at our doorstep. The expressed aim of the flotilla's organizers is to unlawfully provide aid and comfort to Hamas — an illegal terrorist organization. Since it seized power in Gaza three years ago, Hamas, which is openly committed to the genocide of world Jewry and the physical eradication of Israel, has transformed the Gaza Strip into a hub of the global jihad. It has been illegally holding hostage Gilad Schalit incognito for four years. And it is continuously engaged in a massive, Iranian-financed arms buildup ahead of its next assault. Beyond providing aid to Hamas, the declared aim of the "Free Gaza" movement is to coerce Israel into providing Hamas with an outlet to the sea. This too is in contravention of international law which expressly prohibits states and non-state actors from providing any support to terrorist organizations.
IN SENDING out the latest group of ships, Turkey and its Irish, Greek and Swedish partners seek to appropriate the imagery of the Jewish pre-statehood struggle for independence from Britain. In a bid to appease Hamas's jihadist precursors, in 1939 Britain's Mandatory authorities broke international law and prohibited Jewish immigration to Mandatory Palestine. The League of Nations' letter of mandate for Britain specifically enjoined the British to facilitate Jewish immigration to the land of Israel. Yet following the Arab terror war from 1936-1939, the British issued the White Paper that all but prohibited Jewish immigration. This move blocked the one place on Earth where European Jews were wanted from accepting them and so trapped 6 million Jews in Hitler's Europe. In the aftermath of the war, the British maintained their prohibition on Jewish immigration. To fight this British policy, the Zionist leadership in pre-state Israel organized the Aliya Bet program of illegal immigration. Jewish agents scoured the world for ships large enough to bring Europe's Jewish refugees to the land of Israel. The ship most emblematic of the era was the Exodus. The Exodus which set sail from France in July 1947 with 4,515 Jewish Holocaust survivors on board was the Zionist response to a new British policy to force illegal immigrant ships to return to Europe. The British rammed the Exodus in Haifa. They boarded and killed three Jewish defenders. They then forced its passengers to board British prison ships that would return them to Europe. French authorities denied the ships the right to land in France, so the British sailed on to Hamburg, Germany, where the refugees were forced to disembark. The international outcry against Britain in the wake of the Exodus affair shamed London into cancelling its new policy. It also paved the way for Israel's independence 10 months later. Now the Turkish, Greek, Swedish and Irish governments are colluding with Hamas to purloin the imagery of the Exodus and the heroism of the Jewish people in the years leading up to statehood and project that imagery onto a terrorist organization that seeks to complete Hitler's work. They further seek to invert reality by portraying Israel, which in accordance with international law is trying to contain and defeat Hamas, as a combination of the German Nazis and the British imperialists.
SO FAR, they are getting away with it. So far, for their efforts on behalf of a genocidal terrorist organization Erdogan and his ilk are being extolled as human rights champions. Barring any unexpected events, Israel will suffer yet another public relations disaster on Thursday when the ships approach Gaza. How has this happened? How is it that we have become so overwhelmed by the Left's propaganda that most of our political leaders and intellectual elite are incapable of even describing the evil that it being advanced against us? Over the past generation, the Left has commandeered our language. It has inverted the terminology of human rights, freedom, morality, heroism, democracy and victimization. Its perversion of language has made it nearly impossible for members of democratic, human rights respecting, moral societies to describe the threats they face from their human rights destroying, genocidal, tyrannical enemies. Thanks to the efforts of the international Left, the latter are championed as the victims of those they seek to annihilate. Two incidents in recent weeks make clear just how disastrous the Left's wholesale theft of language and through it, their inversion of reality has been for Israel. Last Monday, Noam Chomsky arrived at the Allenby Bridge and requested a visa to enter Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The police at the border refused his request. The radical leftist Israel-basher made a fuss and waited around for several hours before he went back to Jordan. Chomsky left Jordan at the end of the week and travelled to Lebanon. For the second time in four years, on Friday Chomsky toured southern Lebanon with a Hizbullah guide. Now an official guest of Hizbullah, Chomsky is scheduled to give an address in Beirut Tuesday to celebrate the IDF's pullout from south Lebanon 10 years ago. As David Hornik detailed in FrontPage Magazine on Friday, the leftist-dominated Israeli media went nuts when they discovered Chomsky had been turned away at the border. Yediot Aharonot and Haaretz heralded Chomsky as a great mind and proclaimed hysterically that the refusal to allow him to enter the country marked the end of Israeli democracy and the start of a slide into fascism. The Western media quickly piled on and within hours Israel's right to deny its avowed enemies entry was under assault. And Chomsky is Israel's enemy. As Hornik pointed out, Chomsky has repeatedly defended Holocaust deniers while accusing Israel of being the ideological heir of Nazi Germany. When he hasn't been too busy championing the Khmer Rouge and Josef Stalin, and attacking the US as the Great Satan, Chomsky has devoted much time and energy to calling for Israel's eradication and defending Palestinian and Hizbullah terrorists.
IT WAS the government's job to point this out. But instead, faced with the leftist onslaught against its right to control its borders, the government crumpled. Instead of explaining that Chomsky is an enemy of Israel and an abettor and defender of genocide, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's spokesman Mark Regev apologized for the unpleasant reception Chomsky received at the Allenby Bridge. Regev also promised that if Chomsky returns, he will be granted an entry visa. The government's cowardly handling of the Chomsky incident is testament to the Left's success at intimidating Western leaders to the point where instead of standing up to leftist propaganda and lies, they accept them as truth and even collaborate in disseminating them. Probably the PMO figured no one would listen if it told the truth about Chomsky. It probably felt that defending the decision to bar Chomsky from the country would only elicit a second barrage of media attacks. And perhaps they were right. But the fact that the Left would have remained unconvinced doesn't excuse the government's abject surrender of the truth about Chomsky to Israel's enemies on the Left who portray the MIT professor as a human rights activist and a great intellectual humanitarian. As David Horowitz and Peter Collier prove in their book The Anti-Chomsky Reader, there doesn't seem to be a tyrant that Chomsky hasn't championed or a victim that Chomsky hasn't demonized in the entire span of his 50-year career as a radical activist. The government is not alone in its fear of exposing and fighting the Left's campaign to demonize the country.
THE RADICAL left's ability to block voices of dissent from its anti-Israel and anti-freedom positions was similarly demonstrated two weeks ago at Tel Aviv University's annual Board of Governors meeting. For several years, a large, vocal group of tenured professors from the university have actively participated in the international campaign to boycott Israeli universities and academics while actively supporting Hamas and Hizbullah. That is, many Tel Aviv University professors, whose salaries are paid by university donors and Israeli taxpayers, have been using their university titles to undermine the university and to advance the cause of Israel's destruction. This year the university's Board of Governors bestowed an honorary doctorate on Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz. In his acceptance speech, Dershowitz called these professors out for their vile behavior and named three of the most vocal enemies of the university and Israel on the international stage: Profs. Anat Matar, Rachel Giora and Shlomo Sand. The university's tenured anti-Zionist activists were quick to retaliate. More than 80 professors signed a letter to university president Joseph Klaffter demanding that the university disassociate itself from Dershowitz's statements. Klaffter was quick to oblige. At the Board of Governors meeting, Klaffter silenced board member Mark Tanenbaum when he tried to put forward a resolution calling for disciplinary action against university professors who use their university titles to defame the university or Israel. Klaffter, who isn't even a member of the Board of Governors, reportedly grabbed the microphone away from Tanenbaum and adjourned the meeting. Klaffter justified his physical denial of Tanenbaum's freedom of speech by claiming that he was defending academic freedom. Like the Prime Minister's Office's apology to Noam Chomsky, Klaffter's action — aside from arguably being prohibited by his own university's constitution — was further proof of the Left's success in appropriating the language and imagery of freedom and tolerance in the service of forces that seek to destroy freedom and end tolerance.
ON THURSDAY Hamas's maritime enablers from Europe, Turkey and beyond will arrive at our doorstep. The navy will block their entry to Gaza. Israel will be demonized by terror-abettors disguised as human rights activists and journalists worldwide. And the story will pave the way for the next assault on Israel's right to exist. This endless circle of demonization and aggression will continue to widen and escalate until our political leaders and our intellectual elite reclaim our language from those on the terror-abetting Left. True, our reclamation of our language will not go unopposed. But if we do not reassert our right to describe objective reality, our inability to explain why we are right and our detractors serve evil will be our undoing. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
RED LINES, NOT THE GREEN LINE
Posted by Michael Freund, May 25, 2010. |
|
As Israel prepares to mark the anniversary of the June 1967 Six-Day War, it is time to recall what prompted the outbreak of the conflict, and the Palestinian terror and rejectionism which preceded it. Indeed, with Washington now laying heavy pressure on Israel to retreat to the "Green Line" and create a Palestinian entity alongside our borders, we need to remind the world that Israel did not occupy Judea and Samaria — we won them fair and square in an act of self-defense. As I suggest in the column below from the NY Jewish Press, it is time to stand firm and be strong, and declare once and for all that the "Green Line" has forever been replaced. In its stead we now have Red Lines, and chief among them is this: we will never, ever give up territory again. I would welcome your comments and feedback. thanks, Michael Freund May 21, 2010
|
|
Next month marks the 43rd anniversary of the June 1967 Six Day War, when the Jewish state went from the brink of extinction to breathtaking victory. Few times in the modern era has the guiding hand of Divine providence been as plain and clear for all to see as it was during that heady period, when our Arab neighbors threatened to annihilate Israel and cast its citizenry into the waters of the Mediterranean. But the Jewish people turned the tables on our foes, and in less than a week, with G-d's help, we managed to reclaim the cradle of our civilization in the form of places such as Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. It was an emotional reunion, one that had taken more than 19 centuries to occur. But the love and the longing of the Jewish people for their G-d given land could not, and would not, be denied. Sadly, however, with the passage of time, memories tend to dim and emotions often fade. And so instead of celebrating this annual miracle with all the verve and joy that it deserves, many on Israel's left descend into a state of semi-mourning. In columns and editorials, they regularly bemoan the outcome of the war, grieving over the "occupation" of the territories and fantasizing about how good life would be without them. Indeed, it almost seems that many would have preferred that Israel had lost the battle rather than having emerged victorious with the blue-and-white flag flying over Hebron and Jerusalem. But what they conveniently ignore is everything that preceded the 1967 war: increased Palestinian terrorism, a large Arab military buildup, and the brazen threats by Arab leaders to exterminate the Jewish state. In effect, left-wing Israeli proponents of withdrawal have cast a fog over history, shifting the focus away from the "whys" of the 1967 war, and replacing them instead with "why us?" Most people forget, but two years prior to 1967, back when Israel was narrow and tiny and did not yet "occupy" anyone else's land, Prime Minister Levi Eshkol unveiled a peace plan that could have resolved the Arab-Israeli conflict once and for all. Speaking in the Knesset on May 17, 1965, Eshkol proposed to open direct negotiations with the Arab states with the aim of turning the 1949 armistice agreements into full-fledged peace treaties. Pointing out that Israel's four Arab neighbors — Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon — together had 60 times the land area of the Jewish state, Eshkol suggested that the pursuit of war by the Arabs was a needless waste of human and material resources. Instead, he laid out a vision of peace that would have included open borders, freedom of transit and communications, bilateral trade and economic cooperation, as well as access to the holy sites of all religions. All he asked from the Arabs, said Eshkol, was "full respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of all the States in the region." It was a simple, yet compelling deal: peace for peace, with no strings attached. But Israel's offer was met two years later with a clear and unequivocal Arab response. Egypt and Syria mobilized their armies and vowed to destroy the Jewish state. Here is just a sampling of some of the Arab rhetoric at that time: On May 20, 1967, Hafez Assad, who was then serving as Syria's defense minister, said, "Our forces are now entirely ready to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation." On May 26, Egyptian president Nasser declared in a speech to his nation, "Our basic aim will be to destroy Israel." At a press conference the following day, PLO founder Ahmad Shukeiry said, "D-Day is approaching. The Arabs have waited 19 years for this and will not flinch from the war of liberation." And on May 30, Cairo Radio was even more explicit: "Israel has two choices, both of which are drenched with Israel's blood: Either it will be strangled by the Arab military and economic siege, or it will be killed by the bullets of the Arab armies surrounding it from the south, from the north and from the east." A week later, the war began. And a week after that, it had ended, leaving Israel in control of Jerusalem, along with Judea, Samaria, Gaza, Sinai and the Golan Heights. Ever since, the world has been pressing us to go back to the pre-1967 frontiers and to give our foes the territory from which they sought to launch our destruction. As a matter of fact, Washington is now laying heavy pressure on Israel to retreat to the "Green Line" and create a Palestinian entity alongside our borders, as though our acquisition of these territories was somehow illicit from the start. But nothing could be further from the truth. Israel did not occupy Judea and Samaria — we won them fair and square in an act of self-defense, and we should have no regrets for doing so. The war of 1967 was one that Israel neither asked for nor initiated. And the time has come for us to stop apologizing for winning it. Instead, let's embrace the great gift that G-d has given us, by settling the land and filling it with Jews. Our ancestors walked these areas centuries before the advent of Islam, and thousands of years before the establishment of the PLO, and we need not apologize for returning to the heartland of our proud and ancient heritage. It is time for Israel to stand firm and be strong, and declare once and for all that the "Green Line" has forever been replaced. In its stead we now have Red Lines, and chief among them is this: we will never, ever give up territory again. Michael Freund is the founder and chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which assists Anousim in Spain, Portugal and South America to return to the Jewish people. |
|
DERSHOWITZ CONTINUES SUPPORT FOR POLLARD
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 25, 2010. |
|
Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, a former lawyer for Jonathan Pollard, says, "We must keep up the pressure regarding Pollard... he has served more than he should have." Winding up a nine-day visit to Israel, Dershowitz says the continued incarceration of Pollard, in his 25th year of a life sentence in the United States, "is a scandal — not only for Israel; it's a scandal for America. He was treated so unfairly. America broke its deal; [it] broke its promise with him." Pollard, in jail since 1985, was convicted on one count of releasing classified information to a U.S. ally — namely, Israel. The normal sentence for this crime is 2-4 years, whereas Pollard received a life sentence. In a message to the Yeshivat Hesder of Sderot in honor of its upcoming annual dinner, Dershowitz said, "We must keep up the pressure regarding Pollard. I wouldn't ask for a pardon — I would ask for a commutation. A pardon suggests that he didn't do wrong, [but] by American law standards, he did. A commutation suggests that he served more than he should have and at this point it's due to free him." "Cruel Hamas" Holding Shalit Dershowitz also spoke about Natan Sharansky and Gilad Shalit: "We took that attitude [requesting commutation] with Sharansky. I was Sharansky's lawyer and we got him free, as well as many of the leaders of Israel today who were Prisoners of Zion and served in prison. Sharansky left on his own terms. When they tried to take away his Book of Psalms that kept him so vibrant in prison, he refused to let them... He was strong, he stood up to them, he looked them in the eye — and I hope that Gilad Shalit is doing the same thing. We have to have all of our efforts behind him, a young boy missing out on his youth because of the cruel, cruel Hamas not allowing proof if he's alive, not allowing the family, not allowing the Red Cross [to visit him]..." "Goldstone Didn't Visit Him" Prof. Richard Goldstone, author of the controversial Goldstone Report accusing Israel of war crimes in defending itself against Hamas terrorism, once again did not escape Dershowitz's wrath. "Goldstone had an opportunity, when he was in Gaza, to ask to see [Shalit]," Dershowitz said, "or to do something about it — and he did nothing. I think we all have to keep up our efforts on behalf of Gilad Shalit [and] on behalf of Jonathan Pollard." The Affidavit: False Information "Weighed Heavily" in Life Sentence Prof. Dershowitz filed an affidavit in March 1990 in which he quoted former Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg as having accused the Justice Department of improperly "pandering" to the racial sensitivities of Pollard's sentencing judge. The affidavit states that this was done by providing Judge Audrey Robinson, a black man, "with false, inflammatory, ex parte information" regarding allegations that Pollard had helped the South African apartheid regime with secret information on nuclear technology. "Justice Goldberg told me," Dershowitz stated in the affidavit, "that Judge Robinson had told him that the Pollard-South African connection had weighed heavily in his (Judge Robinson's) decision to impose a life sentence." As the JonathanPollard.org website states, "This allegation [that Jonathan Pollard spied for South Africa] is completely false... Jonathan Pollard was never indicted for spying for South Africa." US Apologized for Calling Pollard "Traitor" In addition, the U.S. Government was forced to apologize for allegations that Pollard is a "traitor" to the United States. The Pollard website states as follows: "Over the years American Government officials and other enemies of the case have falsely accused Jonathan Pollard of treason, and have referred to him as a 'traitor'. When challenged, they implausibly try to justify their use of this terminology by claiming that they intend the term 'traitor' according to some sort of popular usage and not in a legal sense. But even the Courts reject this kind of spurious rationalization, and they categorically reject the Government's attempts to slip-slide on this issue. During the oral arguments of September 1991, the Courts forced the US Government to apologize to Jonathan for falsely identifying him as a traitor in the Weinberger memo and in other statements. The Court notes the Government's apology in its 1992 decision." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com). |
|
US TRAINS PA FORCES FOR WAR AND PA THREATENS WAR;
>NEW ISRAEL FUND AND EU FINANCE CAMPAIGN TO DISSOLVE ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 25, 2010. |
|
GUNMEN SABOTAGE UN CHILDREN'S CAMP IN GAZA 
About 20 armed men raided a children's camp that the UN is constructing in Gaza, and destroyed water tanks and other facilities. Hamas said it is investigating. Hamas runs rival summer camps. The Hamas camps teach Islam; UN camps feature painting, swimming, and singing. A Hamas legislator has called the UN summer program "a plan to spoil the growing generation of Gaza." (Isabel Kershner, Fares Akram, New York Times, 5/25/10, A10.) Connecting the dots, Hamas runs Gaza strictly and tightly, but implies it was unaware of the attack on camps that rival its own totalitarian program. Perhaps, but not likely. Dictatorships have thugs do their dirty work and then disavow it. Here, the UN is trying to do something decent, and Hamas is abusing childhood to serve its totalitarian and imperialist statelet. Just as there is very little international condemnation of Islamic oppression of women, there is even less international condemnation of Islamist abuse of children. The world pretends that the big threat to Gaza children is Israeli raids. The pretense includes willful blindness to the fact that in storing weapons in private houses and in firing alongside schools, Hamas commits war crimes. Therefore, under international law, Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties there. Unfortunately, the Goldstone Report ignored Hamas responsibility. Without evidence and contrary to Israeli military doctrine, it accused Israel of deliberately firing at schools, etc., in order to kill children. Then why not schools where no Hamas forces were engaged? By contrast with Israel not bringing the battle alongside UN schools, as Hamas did, and not trying to destroy UN facilities (I reported extensive IDF coordination with the UN to avoid that), Arab terrorists actually do attack UN facilities or rob humanitarian aid convoys. Isabel Kershner and Fares Akram of the New York Times report the same news as my prior article, but cast it in a different light. Fact: "The five-day exercise, designed to test the readiness of civilians, the emergency services, and the local authorities in the case of war, is taking place for the fourth consecutive year. It comes amid growing concern in Israel about the rocket and missile capabilities of militant groups on its borders and the potential threat of a nuclear Iran. Slant: The reporters describe Arab objections to the drills as a "rattling of nerves." (5/25/10, A10.) Is the drill causing a "rattling of nerves, or is the response an attempt to rattle nerves? The newspaper reports what people say, whether what they say is truthful or not. This gives the benefit of the doubt to Islamist ideologues whose code encourages deceit of the West, which deceit is further encouraged by the seemingly naïve reporting in the West. But I do not think that the reporting is naïve, considering the Times' traditional anti-Zionism. I think it is malign or politically correct. A realistic explanation is that the Lebanese response to Israeli drills is a combination of paranoia and propaganda. Arab propaganda is relentlessly aggressive, poses the Arabs as being the ones with grievances, and poses Israel as plotting against them. Actually, Iran is the puppeteer, pulling the strings in Iran and Gaza and plotting, having turned Hizbullah into an army. The notion that an annual, civilian drill, Israel's duty, and whose theme takes into account new military developments, is a plot for war, should be scoffed at. The Times treats the plot accusation with respect. Its readers will not understand much about the issues here.
NEW YORK HINDU LEADER: PART 5. ANTI-TERRORIST'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR U.S. Naïve, democracy allows Islam to exploit it. Just as Islam creates fear and its people live in fear in Muslim countries, so, too, in the U.S.. America's careless immigration policy enables terrorists to draw upon a pool of violent sympathizers. American critics of jihad receive death threats. Some anti-terrorism experts, such as Steve Emerson, live practically in hiding. Some governments, such as Syria and Iran, operate secret enforcers abroad. Besides natural hesitancy in going to police, immigrant communities may be afraid of retribution from violent elements among them. The authorities move slowly if at all. The U.S. still has not grasped the fact that radical Muslims have a fanatical, religiously motivated, collective and international terrorist movement, Kataria laments. For example, over mere cartoons published in Denmark, Muslims murder Hindus and Japanese. "Since 9/11/2001, the followers of the so called 'religion of peace' have carried out 15,101 deadly terrorist attacks and killed more than 75,000 people. "Pakistan is the nursery of terrorism." That other U.S. "ally," Saudi Arabia, spent $100 billion in that three decades, spreading hatred. Kataria foresees that in 30-40 years, the U.S. will find itself in the same divided and besieged position that India does. People are getting cowed. The future is in doubt. Americans need to make distinctions, so that they are not against Islam but do oppose the totalitarians who want to take over here and everywhere, in the name of religion. "Take this advice from someone who has seen it happen in South-East Asia." Kataria urges Americans to "visualize a world of radical Muslim control. Do you want to have happen here, what occurred in Somalia, when Islamists closed radio stations?" "I believe in the survival of human civilization on planet earth and the protection of freedom and democracy. It is imperative that the major countries, like the U.S., Britain, Russia, Israel, India, Germany, and other victims of jihad formulate a concrete strategy to effectively end this serious threat to our very existence."
ISRAEL DAY CONCERT IN NEW YORK Sunday, the Israel Day parade overcame a forecast of rain, so that 20,000 people stayed on for a concert in Central Park. Sponsors thought it was the biggest ever. [It certainly was bigger than the ones I attended in the early years.] The theme of the speeches at the concert was the indivisibility of Jerusalem and halting concessions to the Palestinian Authority. One speaker was MK Danny Danon, described as one Israeli politician who does not talk right but turn left. Other speakers affirmed the Jewish people's right to settle throughout Judea-Samaria. The main speaker was Republican National Committee chair Michael Steel. He referred to American public opinion showing overwhelming American support for Israel in its struggle for survival. But he injected somewhat of a political note by criticizing President Obama for abusing PM Netanyahu and kid-gloving Iran. He said that the Palestinian Authority is not serious about peace and that Israel should keep Jerusalem united (Arutz-7, 5/24/10).
MISSTATING LEGALITY OF JEWISH TOWNS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA A prior article cited a source on the legality of Jewish towns in Judea-Samaria. In editorial remarks, I then explained further. Today, a source had another statement on that. This time, the towns were deemed legal, because neither the Geneva Conventions nor the Security Council Resolution 242 called them illegal united (I thought this was from Arutz-7, 5/24/10, but the e-mail disappeared, and I can't find the article on the web site) The statement fails the test of chronological order. First came Conventions and Resolution. Then came Jewish towns. One would not expect Conventions and Resolution to rule on the legality of towns before any were built. Based on international law and justice, I have reached the conclusion that the towns are legal. I reject poor arguments in behalf of their legality. I prefer accuracy and precise language.
P.A. AGAIN THREATENS WAR WHILE U.S. TRAINS ITS FORCES FOR WAR Abbas Zaki, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, reiterated Abbas' threat to resume armed struggle against Israel, if negotiations fail. The U.S. continues training Palestinian Authority (P.A.) military forces and continues ignoring military threats from P.A. ruling circles (IMRA, 5/23/10). The reality on the ground is that the U.S. is preparing the P.A. to make war on Israel. The antisemites in the clouds accuse the U.S. of "unstinting support for Israel" and only Israel. Do you think that with the vaunted "Jewish" control of the U.S. government, Israel could get that government to stop training the P.A. for a war is it far likelier to wage against Israel than against Hamas?
ISRAEL BREAKS UP TERRORIST RING SUBSIDIZING ARAB CONVICTS Working for Hamas, eight Jerusalem Arabs, an Israeli Arab, and a Gaza Arab were arrested for helping Hamas illegally subsidize terrorist prisoners in Israel. Apparently, attorney Shirin Isawai was the ringleader and go-between. Previously, Hamas used charitable fronts to continue paying imprisoned terrorist, until Israel and Jordan banned those fronts (Arutz-7, 5/24/10). An American attorney was convicted also for acting as go-between for an imprisoned terrorist and his followers outside.
ABBAS DEMANDS THAT NETANYAHU FULFILL OLMER'S OFFERT Palestinian Authority (P.A.) head Abbas demands that PM Netanyahu fulfill or start negotiating from the offers made by his predecessor, PM Olmert. Abbas wants U.S. support for this demand. Israelis rejected Olmert's offers as extravagant and foolish. They elected a rival politician, Netanyahu, to withdraw those offers. Abbas knows this. He also knows that a negotiating offer is not binding unless ratified by the Cabinet and signed by both sides. There was no signing and binding. Abbas' demands are childish. The U.S. should tell Abbas to negotiate responsibly (IMRA, 5/23/10). Those opinions came from my source. Some readers confuse my reporting sources' news with my own opinions appearing after I cite my sources. I do not think that Abbas is being childish but a cynical and relentlessly aggressive radical Muslim. I think that the U.S. government is cynical and unscrupulous. It does what it feels it can to favor the Arab side. Hence U.S. diplomats and opinion-makers have claimed that a successor Israeli Prime Minister must be held to the terms merely suggested in negotiating discussions by his failed predecessor. The idea here is not to be mature or to make peace, but to browbeat Israel. If Israel were intelligent about non-military aspects of total war,
it would show the impropriety of Abbas' demand and U.S. complicity or
silence about it. The U.S. keeps calling Israeli housing construction
a deterrent to successful negotiations, but the P.A. erects a series
of real deterrents without U.S. comment. That is neither constructive
nor fair.
NEW ISRAEL FUND AND EU FINANCE CAMPAIGN TO DISSOLVE ISRAEL The New Israel Fund (NIF) and EU finance the Israel Democracy Institute, which scheduled a conference on bi-nationalism for Israel, in other words, whether to end Jewish sovereignty. Almost all the speakers are far leftists, who approve of turning Israel into a bi-national state. Last year, most of those conferees were at a York University conclave, discussing alternatives to Israel's existence. The University of Haifa is having a panel of two Arabs and a leftist Jew discuss approvingly the Arab [non-]right of return, which would end Israel's existence as a Jewish state (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/23/10). If millions of Arabs come in, millions of Jews would have to get out, if they would have anywhere to go and could live long enough to reach the ports. Bringing the Arab-Israel conflict from mostly external jihad to internal jihad, and calling that a solution, defies logic. We have seen the recent breakup of, or genocide in, multi-national states, such as Rwanda, Sudan, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia. The answer is not to make another multi-national state.
EGYPTIAN WAR GAMES IN SINAI TARGET ISRAELI Egypt held large-scale military maneuvers in the Sinai, using planes, helicopters, paratroopers, armored units, and special forces. The scenario was crossing the Suez Canal and penetrating deep into enemy territory. Most of the weapons are U.S.-made. The country on the other side of the Canal is Israel. Israel object to the war game, because of the peace treaty between the two countries (IMRA, 5/23/10). Hizbullah objected to Israel's defensive — civil defense — drill. What would it think of Egypt's offensive war game? Egypt's weapons are paid for by the U.S.. Many readers have complained about spending U.S. taxes on military aid to Israel, but have said nothing about U.S. military aid to Egypt and others, who repeatedly made war on Israel.
ISLAMISTS LOSING INFLUENCE IN JORDANIAN PROFESSIONAL UNION For about a decade, Islamists controlled the Jordanian professional associations. They just lost control of the Jordan Pharmacists Association to leftists and nationalists. They recently lost control of the Jordan Bar and Medical Associations, too (IMRA, 5/23/10).
JEWISH-ARAB DEMOGRAPHICS MISSTATED [A high Palestinian Authority (P.A.) official said that Israel would be wise to settle with the P.A. or be overwhelmed by Arab demographics. Those demographics are a myth. Arab population figures and growth are exaggerated, as they always have been, not that they once were not considerable. Israel's central bureau of Statistics long has over-estimated Arab fertility and under-estimated Jewish fertility, under-estimated Arab emigration and under-estimated Jewish immigration. In the 1950s, they predicted a Jewish population of 2.3 million Jews by 2000, but there were 5.8 million. They mistakenly had rejected Ben-Gurion's prediction of a million Jewish immigrants and later of another millions Soviet Jews. The current trend favors Jewish demography. In recent years, the Arab birth rate has stabilized, whereas the Jewish birth rate rose 50%. The population of Arabs in Judea-Samaria was inflated by 66%. The P.A. counts 400,000 overseas residents and 250,000 Jerusalem residents already included in Israeli statistics. According to the World Bank, the P.A. birth rate was inflated by 32%. There usually is a net Arab emigration from Judea-Samaria, reaching 20,000 last year. Why the reduced Arab birth rate? Birth control program, great reduction in teenage pregnancy and later marriage, urbanization, education, careers for women, and high divorce (IMRA, 5/23/10). http://www.imra.org.il/
SUPPOSE A NUCLEAR ATTACK ON ISRAEL BY UNKNOWN PARTIES? The BESA center for strategic studies studied what Israel should do if it suffers a nuclear attack by unknown assailants? The attack may be by a state, such as Iran, whose dominant ideology is to bring on Armageddon — suffer now, play later. The attack may be by a terrorist organization. [They are known to be seeking weapons of mass-destruction of some sort. They also may be given such weapons.] Israel needs a policy likeliest to deter such an attack. BESA suggests a policy of shoot first, ask questions later. Waiting and investigating would tempt others to finish Israel off. The analyst, Chuck Freilich, suggests that Israel make this policy known unofficially, as through leaks. A direct statement of intent would arouse opposition beforehand. Whom should Israel retaliate against, when it doesn't know who perpetrated the attack? BESA suggests the whole of Iran, al-Qaeda, and Islam's holiest sites (IMRA, 5/23/10). The problem with attacking al-Qaeda from a distance is finding it. The problem with vaporizing Iran is that many good people live there, themselves victims of a fanatical dictatorship. The study probably assumes that all the countries and organizations that care about the holy sites and other intended targets would strive to keep anyone from attacking Israel. On the other hand, letting it be known that Mecca would be destroyed may make them unite against Israel. The nuclear proliferation, that the UN seems more to preside over than to prevent, and that major powers assisted by disseminating nuclear knowledge, makes attacks, both accidental and deliberate, more likely. This spread of destructive power, combined with the increasing use of Israel as mankind's scapegoat, makes more than Iran a potential source of nuclear attack. One almost can predict a nuclear free-for-all. Is this the end of mankind? How will readers react to this analysis? Some will share in its dismay, but probably not comment. Others will probably would criticize Israel, without a word against great powers that taught and sold the means of nuclear proliferation, against Iran's ideology of seeking the "end of days" and the return of the hidden Mahdi, and of the terrorists who murder and oppress and threaten the world. The real issues are not only what should Israel do, but what should the world do to halt this nightmare. Can the world emerge from its fanatical, corrupt, and scapegoat mode and solve this and other problems constructively? Or will the primitive ideologies' access to modern technology destroy civilization. One feels like a Roman hearing of the approach of Alaric.
ARAB REACTION TO DESTRUCTION OF UNRWA CHILDREN'S CAMP The Palestinian Center for Human Rights defended UNRWA's help for its people and denounced those who interfere. Some group supported the attack on the grounds that UNRWA camps teach girls to swim and dance. [Not the place of females to enjoy life?] The Center "Emphasizes the importance of the rule of law and completely rejects the notion that any party can claim to be the guardian of morals and values of this people, and carries out whatever attacks it deems appropriate, as such actions constitute the epitome of security chaos and misuse of weapons." (IMRA, 5/23/10). The Center refers to Gaza as "occupied," but Israel has nothing to do with these problems and the Center's complaint is against the Arab rulers there and freelance terrorists. The rule of law is indeed important, but the whole Palestinian Authority lacks it. One of yesterday's articles mentioned a UN assessment that one cannot get a fair trial in Gaza. Arafat used to have 2-minute trials, before an almost automatic finding of guilty. The Communists and Nazis used to have show trials, when they had trials.
ISRAEL CRITICIZES GAZA BLOCKADE-RUNNERS The Foreign Ministry of Israel criticized the blockade-running flotilla for engaging in politics behind the guise of humanitarianism. Since January 2009, Israel has let through about 15,000 tons a week of humanitarian goods. That amounts to a million tons. That is almost a ton per person. The people there suffer no shortage of food, medicine, and clothing. International aid organizations and private groups in Gaza see to that.
EU RECONSIDERING AID TO P.A. Some EU diplomats are reconsidering their subsidy of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). The aid was given, they say, in preparation for statehood, which they see as the outcome of negotiations. If the negotiations do not make much progress, then what use is the aid? They may end it (IMRA, 5/24/10), They ask what use is their aid. I often have reported to what use their aid is put. A major result is defamation of Israel, in accordance with an anti-Israel political agenda that seeks its destruction. Another use to which their aid is put is to free funds for war. The regime they aid represses its own people, too. And they criticize the U.S. for subsidizing dictatorships? Let's ask what the purpose of negotiations is. Statehood? What is the use of that, if peace is not made, even if it is proclaimed for photo-ops? The purpose should be peace. But peace isn't created by negotiations, it is ratified and concluded by negotiations. There is no peace there to negotiate. The P.A. keeps inciting to terrorist violence and urging war. How could the EU imagine there can be peace while the P.A. indoctrinates its people in hatred of Jews and in feeling justified in killing them and taking their land? Sovereignty would better enable those terrorists to make war.
PRESIDENT OBAMA MEEETS WITH LEBANON PM HARIRI President Obama met with Lebanon's PM Hariri. This is the press release. Obama commends Hariri for carrying on his father's legacy [for independence from Syria], and supports the Special Tribunal for Lebanon [investigating the murder of the father probably at Syrian orders]. They both want to enforce the UN resolutions instead of allowing arms smuggling violations. Obama stressed getting Iran into compliance on nuclear proliferation. The U.S. wants to strengthen Lebanese institutions such as the Lebanese Armed Forces (IMRA, 5/25/10). PM Hariri has abandoned his father's legacy. Hizbullah is too strong, Israel failed to smash it, the U.S. did not follow through, and Obama is appeasing radical Islam. As a result, Lebanon brought Hamas into the government and Syria has resumed treating it as a province of Syria. Lebanon did not enforce the UN resolution against arms smuggling to Hizbullah. In fact, the Lebanese Armed Forces impeded any enforcement by UNIFIL. Not that UNIFIL was conscientious. It closed its eyes to the arms smuggling, and reports that it hasn't seen any.
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION COMFORTS HIZBULLAH President Obama's counter-terrorism adviser, John Brennan said that Hizbullah is not a purely terrorist organization. Hizbullah official Mahmoud Qamati hailed the statement. Hizbullah also took comfort from something Obama told a visiting Lebanese official that he is tired of hearing about Hizbullah weapons smuggling. "Enough of this!" topic, said the U.S. President (IMRA, 5/25/10). Although beset by the third great totalitarian menace within a hundred years, the earlier ones being Nazism and Bolshevism, the U.S. is as slow to catch on to the new menace, radical Islam, as it was to the older ones that nearly engulfed it. In a futile way, the U.S. tried to use Nazis against the Soviets, and radical Muslims against the Soviets, and now, as does Britain, radical Muslims against radical Muslims. Britain and the U.S. consult radical Muslims on how to deal with radical Muslims. What kind of advice would you expect them to get? How does that line go about "giving aid and comfort to the enemy?" (For more on Obama adviser Brennan, goto:
ISRAEL ON CIVIL DEFENSE: UPDATE
Israel still is engaged in a massive civil defense exercise combining the efforts of government offices, local authorities, and civilian organizations.
Observers from 30 countries are attending, to learn what they can. Israel is glad to share its experience with them, and anticipates future cooperation. Among the countries represented are: Japan, China, Brazil, Ecuador, India, Colombia, Mexico, the USA, and European countries (IMRA, 5/25/10).
Will those countries echo complaints by Syria and Hizbullah that these civil defense efforts are a cover for war and a provocation? Hardly.
ISRAEL EXPLAINS GAZA PARTIAL BLOCKADE Already in this year, terrorists in Gaza have fired 140 rockets and mortars into Israel. Hamas keeps trying to build up its arsenal. It tries by smuggling tunnels or using fishing boats to bring in missiles, launchers, guns, explosives and materials for building them. Due to that war effort by Hamas, the IDF has to raid Gaza and restrict land and sea crossings into the Strip, for the protection of Israeli citizens. Nevertheless, Israel does allow frequent and routine transfer of goods and equipment and also "of people for medical, religious, welfare, business or diplomatic reasons." The news item provides the facts that refute "the claim of a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." Much tonnage and many kinds of food and other materials are described in great detail (IMRA, 5/25/10).
HAMAS USES FARM ANIMALS TO SNEAK IN TERRORISM Terrorists in Gaza concealed an explosive in a donkey-cart, moving toward the Israeli security fence. Since the bomb went off prematurely, no Israelis were hurt. No word on the donkey. Last year, some terrorists, themselves wearing explosive vests, fitted explosive devices to five horses, put the horses in trucks, and drove them toward the security fence near a crossing into Israel. No word on the outcome, also not successful (IMRA, 5/25/10). Do people stop to realize how fiendish Islamist terrorists are?
SYRIA DENIES SMUGGLING SCUDS TO HIZBULLAH Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem denied that his country had transferred Scud missiles to Israel: 1. "The Assad regime will not act as a policeman for Israel." Syria has armed Hizbullah so heavily, that it almost is immaterial whether its shipments include Scuds. Scuds, however, could change the strategic balance, especially if Syria inserts into them some of its chemical weapons. That might require Israeli action. The UN should have been acting against illegal Hizbullah rearming, but feigns ignorance of it. "Policeman for Israel?" Nobody asks Syria to do anything untoward. Syria is expected to obey the Security Council resolution against rearming Hizbullah, at least south of the Litani River. A binding UN resolution, you know, like the unnamed ones the Arabs always pretend they are indignant at Israel for allegedly violating. Whether Israel stops arming or not is irrelevant. Hizbullah the terrorist organization was the aggressor; Israel fought back; therefore the UN got a ceasefire by banning Hizbullah rearmament and positioning south of the Litani River. What violence does Israel instigate? Israeli military maneuvers on its own territory, short of mobilizing huge forces at the border, are immaterial. The question here is illegal armament of Hizbullah. The UN, if it earned its expensive keep, would impose sanctions on Syria for violating the Resolution. Yes, Scuds are big. Perhaps that is the basis for Israel's claim to have detected them. On the other hand, Syria was reported to be training Hizbullah just inside the Syrian border, how to operate Scuds. That technically does not violate the Resolution, but the intent is to bring the Scuds a short distance into Lebanon when war is renewed. HOW MUCH U.S. AID TO EGYPT? This report comes from the Abu Dhabi National via Egypt Daily News. The annual U.S. military subsidy of Egypt is $1.3 billion. Total U.S. subsidy to Egypt, so far, amounts to $50 billion. The U.S. Congress is debating whether to give Egypt $4 billion more in economic aid in the next decade. Proponents of the gift contend that Egypt needs recompense for its "historic alliance with the U.S.." Opponents contend that the Egyptian dictatorship would interpret a boost in its subsidy as an endorsement or tolerance of its repression. If so, it would be less likely to reform (IMRA, 5/24/10). "Historical alliance?" That's a good one. Ally needs recompense? That's another good one. $50 billion and the Sinai are not sufficient? What recompense did the U.S. get? For the $50 billion, Egypt has an army that does the U.S. and Egyptian people no good, and that may fall into terrorist hands. Do U.S. officials never evaluate foreign aid? Do no members of Congress contend that the U.S. is running on check overdraft, and cannot afford most foreign aid? Our legislators and executives neither figure out what may go wrong with their proposals nor what has gone wrong with their implementation. They have neither foresight nor hindsight. They just have scapegoats. The popular scapegoats now are hedge funds, short-sellers, banks, and President Bush. It's easier than determining the many causes of recession over many years, and their own responsibility. P.S.: readers mention all sorts of figures for U.S. subsidy of Israel. A recent claim was $8 billion. The actual figure is about $3 billion, somewhat less than the total of U.S. aid to several Arab governments. Israel pays a considerable sum to the U.S., because earlier aid was in the form of loans when interest was at its peak. Egypt also had loans. The U.S. canceled Egypt's debt but not Israel's. I refer readers who oppose U.S. aid to Israel to my various articles also opposing it as poor policy all around. But the rationale for it had a certain sense, in that the U.S. then sold arms (not just gave them) to Israel's enemies, who repeatedly committed aggression 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 and visit his website:
|
|
THE FRUITS OF WEAKNESS
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 24, 2010. |
|
This was written Charles Krauthammer and it appeared May 23, 2010 in The Washington Post. Last week's uranium deal maneuver between Iran, Brazil and Turkey demonstrates how traditional US allies have decided that there's no profit in lining up with a president given to apologies and appeasement. |
|
It is perfectly obvious that Iran's latest uranium maneuver, brokered by Brazil and Turkey, is a ruse. Iran retains more than enough enriched uranium to make a bomb. And it continues enriching at an accelerated pace and to a greater purity (20 percent). Which is why the French Foreign Ministry immediately declared that the trumpeted temporary shipping of some Iranian uranium to Turkey will do nothing to halt Iran's nuclear program. It will, however, make meaningful sanctions more difficult. America's proposed Security Council resolution is already laughably weak — no blacklisting of Iran's central bank, no sanctions against Iran's oil and gas industry, no nonconsensual inspections on the high seas. Yet Turkey and Brazil — both current members of the Security Council — are so opposed to sanctions that they will not even discuss the resolution. And China will now have a new excuse to weaken it further. But the deeper meaning of the uranium-export stunt is the brazenness with which Brazil and Turkey gave cover to the mullahs' nuclear ambitions and deliberately undermined US efforts to curb Iran's program. The real news is that already notorious photo: the president of Brazil, our largest ally in Latin America, and the prime minister of Turkey, for more than half a century the Muslim anchor of NATO, raising hands together with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the most virulently anti-American leader in the world.
THAT PICTURE — a defiant, triumphant take-that-Uncle-Sam — is a crushing verdict on President Barack Obama's foreign policy. It demonstrates how rising powers, traditional American allies, having watched this administration in action, have decided that there's no cost in lining up with America's enemies and no profit in lining up with a US president given to apologies and appeasement. They've watched Obama's humiliating attempts to appease Iran, as every rejected overture is met with abjectly renewed US negotiating offers. American acquiescence reached such a point that the president was late, hesitant and flaccid in expressing even rhetorical support for democracy demonstrators who were being brutally suppressed and whose call for regime change offered the potential for the most significant US strategic advance in the region in 30 years. They've watched America acquiesce to Russia's re-exerting sway over Eastern Europe, over Ukraine (pressured by Russia last month into extending for 25 years its lease of the Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol) and over Georgia (Russia's de facto annexation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is no longer an issue under the Obama "reset" policy). They've watched our appeasement of Syria, Iran's agent in the Arab Levant — sending our ambassador back to Syria even as it tightens its grip on Lebanon, supplies Hizbullah with Scuds and intensifies its role as the pivot of the Iran-Hizbullah-Hamas alliance. The price for this ostentatious flouting of the US and its interests? Ever more eager US "engagement." They've observed the administration's gratuitous slap at Britain over the Falklands, its contemptuous treatment of Israel, its undercutting of the Czech Republic and Poland and its indifference to Lebanon and Georgia. And in Latin America, they see not just US passivity as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez organizes his anti-American "Bolivarian" coalition while deepening military and commercial ties with Iran and Russia. They saw active US support in Honduras for a pro-Chavez would-be dictator seeking unconstitutional powers in defiance of the democratic institutions of that country. This is not just an America in decline. This is an America in retreat — accepting, ratifying and declaring its decline, and inviting rising powers to fill the vacuum. Nor is this retreat by inadvertence. This is retreat by design and, indeed, on principle. It's the perfect fulfillment of Obama's adopted Third World narrative of American misdeeds, disrespect and domination from which he has come to redeem us and the world. Hence his foundational declaration at the UN General Assembly last September that "no one nation can or should try to dominate another nation" (guess who's been the dominant nation for the last two decades?) and his dismissal of any "world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another." (NATO? The West?) Given Obama's policies and principles, Turkey and Brazil are acting rationally. Why not give cover to Ahmadinejad and his nuclear ambitions? As the US retreats in the face of Iran, China, Russia and Venezuela, why not hedge your bets? There's nothing to fear from Obama, and everything to gain by ingratiating yourself with America's rising adversaries. After all, they actually believe in helping one's friends and punishing one's enemies. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
A RACE UNIQUE
Posted by Betty Misheiker, May 24, 2010. | |
Contact Betty Misheiker by email at largo@netvision.net.il |
|
ARAB WOMAN REPORTS ON WIFE-BEATING IN GAZA; LEGALITY OF JEWISH TOWNS
IN JUDEA-SAMARIA; NYC PSYCH CENTER ON JIHAD AND SOCIAL COHESION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 24, 2010. |
|
AMERICAN-BORN MUSLIM URGES U.S. MUSLIMS TO MURDER FELLOW GIS Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemenite Muslim born in the U.S. urges U.S. Muslim troops to murder fellow soldiers. He says this is to protect Muslims abroad. Awlaki boasts that Major Hassan, who did just that, by firing on unarmed troops who were more or less taking therapy from him, was heroic (Arutz-7, 5/23/10). Antisemites have raised questions of dual loyalty, the very question that caused the formerly Jewish owners of the New York Times to turn anti-Zionist and eventually convert to Christianity. It was a false issue. There is no conflict between the interests of the U.S. and of Israel, though some U.S. officials are anti-Israel against U.S. interests. Some of my articles have explained that. Jews, like other minorities, have been loyal and are glad to demonstrate it. Every ethnic group has some bad characters, out of character of their group. Usually, each group tries to assimilate. Eventually, it gets accepted. It may be different, now. For one thing, there is less of a process of Americanization, as the Left turns anti-American. More important, radical Muslims enter Western countries prejudiced. More and more of them sabotage their own host countries. Compounding the problem is the ease with which ordinary Muslims become radicalized. Another problem is that we have let radical imams convert felons, already prone to anti-social violence. Ironically, the very ways of life and code that force many Muslims to flee from their native cultures, may be brought in with them, reproducing anti-American sentiment and even action. How shall we distinguish between decent Muslims and ex-Muslims, such Ayaan Hirsi Ali (whom I recently extolled for her contributions in this area) and radical ones before they murder people over religion and to the detriment of our national security? We have to reform and strengthen our own society, that the Left is undermining, and not just complain about Awlaki and Hassan. NY HINDU LEADER: PART 4. PAKISTAN AND THE U.S. Pakistan has gotten U.S. technology and about $15 billion in subsidy, to fight terrorism. It only pretended to oppose terrorism [at least until recently, when it started, though very slowly, to fight back when terrorists turned on it]. Pretense is a frequent tactic within the code of jihad. Pakistan is major font of terrorism and Jihad. The combination of Saudi Arabian funds and Pakistani might is as great a danger to the world as is Iran, Narain Kataria warns. Pakistani troops are stationed in Saudi Arabia to guard its oil. That gives Pakistan leverage over Saudi Arabia. Pakistan controls many Saudi businesses, Kataria charges. Saudi Arabia probably financed Pakistan's nuclear development. The Saudis certainly finance the radical madrassas and mosques there and in many other countries that radicalize Muslims into jihadists against civilization. Every year 500,000 Taliban graduate from 11,000 madrassas in Pakistan. At least 10,000 graduates a year go all over the world to kill innocent people in the name of Allah, says Kataria. (While the U.S. tries to apprehend dozens of terrorists by law and order tactics, Saudi-subsidized Pakistan indoctrinates thousands.) Pakistani intelligence has directed jihad against India, primarily via Kashmir. The same groups encouraged the Taliban in Afghanistan against Pakistan's supposed ally, the U.S.. The U.S. did not catch on particularly, just pressed Pakistan for years to crack down on terrorism and close its border. Nevertheless, Pakistan keeps the bulk of its armed forces facing India, which has not attacked it except to prevent genocide. The U.S. alliance with Pakistan does not work.
ARAB WOMAN REPORTS ON MUSLIM WIFE-BEATING IN GAZA: EXCLUSIVE 
Here is a reader's comment: Entry: Violence against Arab women in Gaza increases? myriam — I BEATEN TO THE BONE FROM MY PALESTINIAN HUSBAND..WE LIVE IN gAZA CITY..THIS IS A JOKE TO BLAME IT ON "ISRAELI OCCUPATION"I'M EMBARESSED HOW MY PEOPLE ACT-THATS WHY ALLAH DOESNT HELP US OUT.THEY HURT US-ME-THEIR OWN KIND!DURING THE WAR,I BEGGED ALLAH TO KILL ME..HOW DARE THEY USE ISRAELI OCCUPATION AS AN EXCUSE-ISRAEL-THESE ARE CIVILIZED PEOPLE..IN GAZA&OTHER MUSLIM PLACES THEY BEAT THEIR WIVES AND IT'S "OK"..WHY SHOULD ALLAH HELP US OUT ANYWAY?OUR MEN WANT TO DO NOTHING BUT FIGHT-INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THE FACT,THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE-AND TO MAKE SOMETHING OUT OF IT..ALLAH DOESN'T SEE US WORTHY.YET, I DONT BLAME HIM.THE MEN HERE HAVE FAILED ALLAHS TEST-OF BEHAVING "DECENT" AND "HUMANE"EVEN UNDER HORRIBLE CIRCUMSTANCES!INSTEAD OF FIGHTING&CAUSING PROBLEMS-THEY DO NOTHING TO DEAL WITH THE CARDS WE WERE GIVIN!I'M PAYING THE PRICE FOR MY HUSBAND BEING AN ANIMAL,NOT BECUZ "OCCUPATION"-BECUZ HE HAS NO "NATURAL" MANNERS,DECENCY-THIS IS WHAT ISLAM TEACHES HIM.IT'S SICK. Posted/Updated: 05/23/2010 04:59 PM My heart goes out to that Arab Muslim woman. Some time ago, I wrote about the Muslim cleric in France who wrote a book about how to beat one's wife and how to do it without non-Muslims authorities finding a mark. I also reported cases of Arabs beating servants not only in Saudi Arabia but also in the United States. This is a scandal little remarked upon. Why do you suppose that is? Innocent women should not suffer pain because of husbands' neurosis. Too bad those men do not realize the great joy of having wives in mutual, wholesome love and companionship! There may be another factor. Obesity and diabetes are raging, as I reported, in at least some Arab countries: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Jordan. An early stage of diabetes is hypoglycemia, or low blood sugar. One symptom of hypoglycemia is loss of temper. The abuse of Arab women and children produces sadism, hence torture of prisoners, too, riots, and probably wars. I challenge readers to rise to this occasion, and oppose Arab wife-beating, whether because of religion or bad temper, illness or immaturity. Arab women need your help, international investigation, and support. Wife-beating used to be more common in Western society. Maybe it will abate in Arab society, but that society remains traditional.
ON LEGALITY OF JEWISH TOWNS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA Many people have difficulty with chronological logic. They do not understand that: (1) First came Arab wars on Israel and formation of Fatah and the PLO to destroy Israel; (2) Then as a result of the third war, Israel acquired the Territories. Nevertheless, the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) claims it wars on Israel to get the Territories. Why the wars from 1947 to 1967, before Israel did not have the Territories? Now that chronological logic really wasn't difficult, was it? In behalf of its land claim, the P.A. emphasizes a legal claim that the Jewish communities in Judea-Samaria are illegal. The BBC and UN Secretary-General go along with that [perhaps because they would accept any argument against Israel]. They repeat the statement, that the "settlements" are illegal, without much explanation. Here is a statement of part of the case for legality. "In fact, however, the settlements are not illegal and do not violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, despite what the Arabs have charged of late. Adopted in 1949 in response to Nazi atrocities, the Convention governs the treatment of civilians during wartime, outlawing torture, collective punishment and the forced transfer of civilians to territory under its military control — but does not apply to territory gained as a result of a defensive war, as when Israel liberated Judea and Samaria in the Six-Day War of 1967. Neither do the Oslo Accords nor UN resolutions 242 and 338 outlaw the Israeli towns in Judea and Samaria." (Arutz-7, 5/23/10). Nor did Israel transfer civilians to the Territories forcibly. It was not punishment. If the Security Council thought that those towns were illegal, its resolution would have said Israel must withdraw totally. It did not. Recent sentiment to the contrary therefore is not based on law but on ideology. This ideology then distorts law in order to rationalize its position. People thus ignore what the law means and was meant to mean, and rationalize its literal wording, or take paragraphs out of context, to mean something in accord with their ideology. Not honest. Same is true of U.S. regimes. Previous Presidents called the Jewish communities legal. The incumbent does not. His radical ideology colors his policy. I've explained before, so will just restate a summary of it, that the Territories cannot be considered someone else's occupied land, because they did not belong to someone else. There was no sovereign power with title to the area. The area got its legal status from the Mandate. Who is the intended heir of the Mandate? The Jewish people. Read its emphasis on Jewish political rights and, in fact, Jewish settlement. Nothing has changed the legal status of the Territories from the Mandate's mandate for "close settlement of the Jews on the land." International law gives the Jewish people a second option for annexing the Territories. It authorizes countries that were the victims of aggression, as was Israel, to retain land it seized in self-defense, if needed for security from further attack. Since the Arabs attacked repeatedly, and since there ideology calls for further jihad, Israel is well within its rights to have annexed the Golan and land around Jerusalem. It would be entitled to annex more. Against that understanding, the same anti-Zionist ideology takes a misleading position. It states as a principle that countries should not profit from war by acquiring land from enemies. That is misleading and can be a foolish principle, if unqualified. The qualification is, a country should not profit by acquiring land by aggression. If it acquires land by self-defense, as did Israel, it punishes aggression and, more important, discourages both by that penalty becoming a deterrent to repeated aggression and by strengthening the borders of the victim of aggression. That is justice. Applying the misleading anti-Zionist interpretation would indemnify the aggressor against loss of territory and encourage further aggression, since there would be no territorial penalty and the victim's borders, if weak before, remain so. The U.S. peace process would leave Israel with weak borders, hence encourage aggression by enemies still bedeviled with a thirst for conquest and religious domination.
HIZBULLAH CALLS ISRAELI CIVIL DEFENSE DRILL A COVER FOR WAR Hizbullah accused Israel of holding its civil defense drill to camouflage war plans. It also called it an obstacle to peace negotiations. How can Israel be negotiating peace while holding military maneuvers? (Arutz-7, 5/22/10.) Civil defense is not military maneuvers. Should a country not have civil defense? What evidence has Hizbullah that Israel is planning war? Many times the Arabs have accused Israel of planning war, but there was no war. Israel absorbed rocket attacks for years, before massive retaliation. The accusations are false. Perhaps if the rest of the world wanted peace, it would tell the Arabs to cease their false accusations and give peace a chance. Hizbullah's logic has a double standard. The Arabs are arming and holding military maneuvers. Hizbullah does not question their dedication to peace.
JEWISH CANINE CORPS PROTECTING AGAINST ARABS SQUATTERS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA I had reported Yitzchak Hershkowitz' years of struggle, against deceitful Arab squatters, lax courts, and lazy police, to gain access to his property in Jerusalem. Finally, the squatters were removed. However, they threaten his access and life. In comes the Jewish Canine Legion. Members have guard dogs to
protect Jews' property. The Legion claims to have thwarted eight
intrusions in Elazar, ten minutes away. They may set up a training
base on Mr. Hershkowitz's property (Arutz-7, 5/22/10.)
I reported on this case some time ago. The government let the case drag on, with a series of contradictory Arab appeals, for so many appeals, the authorities and the squatters must have been counting on the owner to give up. The owner may have been wondering whether he would live long enough to get his property back. He did. Israel should penalize subversive officials and immediately reject frivolous suits.
IDF COUNTERS P.A. BOYCOTT OF JEWISH TOWNS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA The IDF gives demobilized soldiers job training for their return to civilian life. It had not included training in manual trades for years. Now it resumed training bricklaying, carpentry, tiling, plumbing, etc.. The resumption of manual training seems intended to fill the gap in the building trades that the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) is trying to leave by getting its men to boycott settlements, where they do much of the construction work (Arutz-7, 5/22/10.)
NEW YORK PSYCHOLOGICAL CENTER ON JIHAD AND SOCIAL COHESION The Philoctetes Center in New York runs programs of public import in the fields of psychology. On some Saturdays, they hold high-level panel discussions, free. Last Saturday's panel considered jihad and social cohesion over the centuries. Europeans in the Middle Ages enjoyed social cohesion. Their states compromised basically homogeneous people in practically hereditary classes in which each person's place was set. The modern market economy created wealth by productivity rather than by stealing other people's property. Until WWI, people, even in impoverished areas, felt optimistic that prosperity and peace were growing, and the future, promising. Modern economies, however, disrupted many older societies. So how is social cohesion maintained? Not by the UN. The UN has failed to hold countries together. Countries are groups, and group life is characterized by violence. Countries with conflicting ethnic or religious populations splinter. What determines whether the separation is violent, as with Yugoslavia, or peaceable, as with Czechoslovakia? For one thing, Yugoslavia was a confluence of three religious cultures. Countries need to put their own "houses" in order. The New Deal did that in the U.S., enabling it to take a leadership role when it entered WWII. At about that time, al-Bana founded Islamism, which is different from Islam. Islamism is a modern doctrine, more of a political movement, inspired by European totalitarianism. Although Sunni and Shia extremists have their differences and their rivalries, they were inspired by the same sources. A few decades after al-Bana, Said Kutb, founder of the Moslem Brotherhood, revised his theory. Kutb was writing radically before his trip to the U.S. The basis of his and similar ideologies is a meta-myth about "the people of God" facing annihilation by foreign forces and internal subversives. The subversives try to undermine their morality. For their defense, they need a sacred war. First they would suffer from the war, then they would triumph and inaugurate the rule of God for a thousand years. That was similar to: (1) The Gospel of John with Armageddon and ending evil; (2) Bolsheviks, with the proletariat versus internal bourgeoisie and external capitalists and imperialists, ending history; (3) Nazi Aryanism, beset by Jews internally and imperialists externally but to lead to the return of the Roman empire and a 1,000 year Reich ; (4) Muslim "community" under assault from within by Muslims and Jews and from without by imperialists. The Islamists plan to reconstitute the Muslim empire via jihad; (5) Some in the West thought themselves the chosen country. Which is cause and which is effect, ideology or conditions? The modern totalitarian or violent ideologies may have an origin in 19th century poetry. The poems were vague, but headed in the modern direction. Then the ideas turned political. After WWI deflated optimism in the steadiness of human progress, more evil ideologies emerged. How can we prevent forces of violence? Expose extremist doctrines as not reality but ideology based on old clichés. Then people can change their views. For example, Germans abandoned Nazism. Millions of Communists admitted having made a mistake. [Muslims are finding Islamism intolerable to them.] People's notions are psychological, cultural, or ideological. Cultural ones, running for thousands of years, are the most resistant to change. Many people are not educated about totalitarian movements and their meaning. For example, Israelis are anxious about Iran, but very few of their professors study Iran. [The West as a whole does not study totalitarian enemies.] The moderator asserted that religion is the basis of much xenophobia, nowadays. That seems inconsistent with his claim that there is a rising Islamophobia and a violent rise, at that. The jihadist drive to conquer the world produces a Western reaction, some war but more appeasement. I find the emphasis is on appeasement and on some self-defense but with society attempting to differentiate Islam from radical Islam. That is neither xenophobia nor any phobia.]
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE BIG LIE
Posted by Truth Provider, May 24, 2010. |
|
Dear friends, Here is an excellent article you should all read. It will prepare you to answer those of your friends who repeat the preposterous claim that Israel is to blame for America's problems in the Muslim world. Your Truth Provider,
This article
|
|
'It's those damned Jews." That's the muffled message I hear when, pretending to represent our national interest, voices call for the abandonment of Israel. We've heard it from agenda-driven scholars who write that our alliance with Israel is responsible for our problems in the Middle East. More worrisome still, I've begun to hear it from a minority of military officers, as well as from Washington types. This latest, and sadly lasting, bout of moral cancer can be dated back to 2006 and the publication of an article that had sought a home for years, The Israeli Lobby And US Foreign Policy, by professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. The book's assault on Israel was welcomed by figures including President Jimmy Carter's national-security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski — a hoary Israel detractor. With their Ivy League credentials, Mearsheimer and Walt made anti-Israeli diatribes (semi-)respectable. Their effect has been lasting. OK, let's get one thing straight: There is no evidence that if Israel disappeared tomorrow, the Middle East would suddenly blossom into a pro-American model of justice, hard work and progress. Nor is there any evidence that anti-American terrorism would slacken. In al Qaeda's list of complaints, Israel barely makes the top dozen. A US turn away from Israel would only encourage and empower terrorists, convincing them of our cowardice and folly. The grotesquely failed societies of the Middle East desperately need Israel and the US to blame for their self-wrought problems. Neither Washington nor Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are responsible for the Arab world's pervasive corruption, stagnation, oppression of women and lack of creativity or a work ethic. Neither the US nor Israel is to blame for the unprecedented squandering of wealth by Arab oil powers, for their failure to invest in human capital or productive infrastructure, for the absence of democracy and respect for human rights, or for the region's mockery of the rule of law. Given the vast homemade tragedy of the greater Middle East, it's inevitable that Israel's hated for its shining success amid the local squalor. Likewise, the US is hated for our might — and the seductiveness of our civilization. But if that explains why Arabs, Persians and others would relish, but not reward, our abandonment of Israel, it doesn't explain the American voices repeating Arab propaganda about devious Jews controlling our foreign policy. I divide the dump-Israel movement's leaders and fellow travelers into four groups: Old-fashioned anti-Semites: It's no longer socially acceptable to accuse Jews of sacrificing Christian infants. But it's quite fashionable to blame Israelis for the suffering of Palestinian children. One doesn't mention "Jews." But calumnies against "Israelis" are the new, politically correct blood libel. On one hand, extended first-hand experience of Arab culture has not filled our troops with respect for the same (any officer who had fairy-tale, Lawrence-of-Arabia notions about the region has had them extinguished, to put it mildly). Yet the daily drone of Arab complaints about Israel — blamed for every Arab misfortune back to the destruction of Baghdad by the Mongols — has had a cumulative effect. Criticism takes the form of "A plague on both their houses." I ask the gripers categorized above for any evidence that our betrayal of Israel would have the slightest positive effect. The Saudis wouldn't even drop the price of oil for 24 hours. Go back to the bordello side of all this: Wealthy Arabs have bought a great deal of influence in Washington, lavishing money on think tanks, contracts on US firms and expensive gifts on individuals. (A few years back, one American "authority" on the Middle East delightedly told me that he'd been given five Rolexes.) In contrast to these ingratiating, deep-pocketed Arabs, Israelis are brusque and dismissive, relying on American Jews to smooth things over. Well, sorry, Israel needs to rediscover public relations. With the global media rabidly pro-Palestinian, Israel had better get back in the information fight. The recent attacks on Israel that masquerade as sober analysis boil down to the age-old anti-Semitic query: "Wouldn't we better off without those Jews?" My answer, as an American, is "No." Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
US CONSULATE STAFF INVOLVED IN JERUSALEM BEATING
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 24, 2010. |
|
A gang of American 'diplomats' reportedly attack young Israeli man, are
freed from custody due to 'diplomatic immunity'
|
|
A young Israeli man who was brutally beaten in downtown Jerusalem earlier this month revealed to The Jerusalem Post that his assailants were apparently employees of the US Consulate in the Israeli capital. The young man, who identified himself only by his first name, Yishai, said the attack occurred as he and a friend stepped out of a downtown bar where they were celebrating another friend's birthday to buy some cigarettes. As they were returning to the party, the two Israelis were approached by a group of people speaking English. One of the larger of the English-speakers exchanged words with Yishai and then punched him in the face. The others proceeded to punch and kick Yishai, leaving him with multiple head and body injuries that required him being taken to a nearby hospital. Yishai's friend, who was also lightly injured, rushed back to the bar to let the rest of his friends know what happened to and to call the police. The group searched for the attackers and found them at another bar, to which they directed police. The assailants were arrested and taken to a downtown jail, but were shortly after released. When Yishai's friends demanded to know why those who had perpetrated an unprovoked and brutal attack were simply allowed to walk free, one officer revealed that the attackers were employees of the US Consulate, and so enjoy diplomatic immunity. Police officials later contacted by the Post refused to confirm or deny that the assailants were US diplomats. US Consulate staff insisted that they were cooperating fully with the Israeli police in the investigation. The US Consulate in Jerusalem has many Palestinian Arabs who possess US citizenship on its staff. They, together with other American employees of the mission, have on numerous occasions confronted both Israeli civilians and security personnel in a very hostile manner. One of the more recent incidents involved a consulate driver refusing to allow Israeli guards at a border crossing check his vehicle. He reportedly attempted to drive the car into one of the guards as the situation escalated. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
THE PRESIDENT AND "ONE OF THOSE MOMENTS"
Posted by Dave Alpern, May 24, 2010. |
|
"My name is Daniel Pearl. I am a Jewish American from Encino, California, U.S.A." In this moving essay, Mark Steyn captures the puerile insipidness of President Obama. Read and grieve for America. Mark Steyn This article is archived at
|
|
The president has become the latest Western liberal to try to hammer Daniel Pearl's box into a round hole. Barack Obama's remarkable powers of oratory are well known: In support of Chicago's Olympic bid, he flew into Copenhagen to give a heartwarming speech about himself, and they gave the games to Rio. He flew into Boston to support Martha Coakley's bid for the U.S. Senate, and Massachusetts voters gave Ted Kennedy's seat to a Republican. In the first year of his presidency, he gave a gazillion speeches on health care "reform" and drove support for his proposals to basement level, leaving Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to ram it down the throats of the American people through sheer parliamentary muscle. Like a lot of guys who've been told they're brilliant one time too often, President Obama gets a little lazy, and doesn't always choose his words with care. And so it was that he came to say a few words about Daniel Pearl, upon signing the "Daniel Pearl Press Freedom Act." Pearl was decapitated on video by jihadist Muslims in Karachi on Feb. 1, 2002. That's how I'd put it. This is what the president of the United States said: "Obviously, the loss of Daniel Pearl was one of those moments that captured the world's imagination because it reminded us of how valuable a free press is." Now Obama's off the prompter, when his silver-tongued rhetoric invariably turns to sludge. But he's talking about a dead man here, a guy murdered in public for all the world to see. Furthermore, the deceased's family is standing all around him. And, even for a busy president, it's the work of moments to come up with a sentence that would be respectful, moving and true. Indeed, for Obama, it's the work of seconds, because he has a taxpayer-funded staff sitting around all day with nothing to do but provide him with that sentence. Instead, he delivered the one above. Which, in its clumsiness and insipidness, is most revealing. First of all, note the passivity: "The loss of Daniel Pearl." He wasn't "lost." He was kidnapped and beheaded. He was murdered on a snuff video. He was specifically targeted, seized as a trophy, a high-value scalp. And the circumstances of his "loss" merit some vigor in the prose. Yet Obama can muster none. Even if Americans don't get the message, the rest of the world does. This week's pictures of the leaders of Brazil and Turkey clasping hands with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are also monuments to American passivity. But what did the "loss" of Daniel Pearl mean? Well, says the president, it was "one of those moments that captured the world's imagination." Really? Evidently it never captured Obama's imagination, because, if it had, he could never have uttered anything so fatuous. He seems literally unable to imagine Pearl's fate, and so, cruising on autopilot, he reaches for the all-purpose bromides of therapeutic sedation: "one of those moments" — you know, like Princess Di's wedding, Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, whatever — "that captured the world's imagination." Notice how reflexively Obama lapses into sentimental one-worldism: Despite our many zip codes, we are one people, with a single imagination. In fact, the murder of Daniel Pearl teaches just the opposite — that we are many worlds, and worlds within worlds. Some of them don't even need an "imagination." Across the planet, the video of an American getting his head sawed off did brisk business in the bazaars and madrassas and Internet downloads. Excited young men e-mailed it to friends, from cell phone to cell phone, from Karachi to Jakarta to Khartoum to London to Toronto to Falls Church, Va. In the old days, you needed an "imagination" to conjure the juicy bits of a distant victory over the Great Satan. But in an age of high-tech barbarism, the sight of Pearl's severed head is a mere click away. And the rest of "the world"? Most gave a shrug of indifference. And far too many found the reality of Pearl's death too uncomfortable and chose to take refuge in the same kind of delusional pap as Obama. The president is only the latest Western liberal to try to hammer Daniel Pearl's box into a round hole. Before him, it was Michael Winterbottom in his film A Mighty Heart: As Pearl's longtime colleague Asra Nomani wrote, "Danny himself had been cut from his own story." Or, as Paramount's promotional department put it, "Nominate the most inspiring ordinary hero. Win a trip to the Bahamas!" Where you're highly unlikely to be kidnapped and beheaded! (Although, in the event that you are, please check the liability-waiver box at the foot of the entry form.) The latest appropriation is that his "loss" "reminded us of how valuable a free press is." It was nothing to do with "freedom of the press." By the standards of the Muslim world, Pakistan has a free-ish and very lively press. The problem is that some 80 percent of its people wish to live under the most extreme form of Sharia, and many of its youth are exported around the world in advance of that aim. The man convicted of Pearl's murder was Omar Sheikh, a British subject, a London School of Economics student, and, like many jihadists from Osama to the Pantybomber, a monument to the peculiar burdens of a non-deprived childhood in the Muslim world. The man who actually did the deed was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who confessed in March 2007: "I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew Daniel Pearl, in the city of Karachi." But Obama's not the kind to take "guilty" for an answer, so he's arranging a hugely expensive trial for KSM amid the bright lights of Broadway. Listen to his killer's words: "The American Jew Daniel Pearl." We hit the jackpot! And then we cut his head off. Before the body was found, The Independent's Robert Fisk offered a familiar argument to Pearl's kidnappers: Killing him would be "a major blunder . . . the best way of ensuring that the suffering" — of Kashmiris, Afghans, Palestinians — "goes unrecorded." Other journalists peddled a similar line: If you release Danny, he'll be able to tell your story, get your message out, "bridge the misconceptions." But the story did get out; the severed head is the message; the only misconception is that that's a misconception. Daniel Pearl was the prototype for a new kind of terror. In his wake came other victims from Kenneth Bigley, whose last words were that "Tony Blair has not done enough for me," to Fabrizzio Quattrocchi, who yanked off his hood, yelled "I will show you how an Italian dies!" and ruined the movie for his jihadist videographers. By that time, both men understood what it meant to be in a windowless room with a camera and a man holding a scimitar. But Daniel Pearl was the first, and in his calm, coherent final words understood why he was there: "My name is Daniel Pearl. I am a Jewish American from Encino, California, U.S.A." He didn't have a prompter. But he spoke the truth. That's all President Obama owed him — to do the same. I mentioned last week the attorney general's peculiar insistence that "radical Islam" was nothing to do with the Times Square bomber, the Pantybomber, the Fort Hood killer. Just a lot of moments "capturing the world's imagination." For now, the jihadists seem to have ceased cutting our heads off. Listening to Obama and Eric Holder, perhaps they've figured out there's nothing much up there anyway. Contact Dave Alpern at daveyboy@bezeqint.net |
|
FOR ISRAEL TO SURVIVE
Posted by Ari Bussel, May 23, 2010. |
|
For Israel to survive she needs to change direction. First, she needs to admit that peace will not emerge from the current mistaken path of the last two decades. Further concessions only perpetuate the delusion on the Israeli side that peace is attainable and continue to weaken Israel's already inferior position vis-à-vis the Palestinians. Second, she needs to start responding to the blood libels against her, observe, deduct trends and act before the 12th hour. Refusing to act until it is almost too late to react only worsens Israel's position, and then we are asked with wonder: "How did Judge Goldstone reach his conclusions?" or soon "How did the Palestinians unilaterally declare a state and won overwhelming international support?!?" Third, Israel needs to face the fact that there is a new type of warfare against her. Decades ago it was ground offensive with tanks and artillery. Then it became a war of missiles against the civilian population, which necessitated the creation of a Home Front Command in the IDF. Sophistication ensued and missiles were augmented with various warheads and replaced with acts of terror such as homicide bombings. To these two fronts (the physical, outward boundaries and the physical, inside backbone of society) a third was added: the Public Relations front. Israel is yet to respond, thus she fails. To these three fronts, a new one will be added soon, using technology, such as computer accessibility or electric magnetic pulse to bring society to a standstill. Nations recognize the threat, yet are not advanced enough to provide a sufficient response. Fourth, Israel must strengthen herself, fight corruption at the highest levels, the violence against the elderly and overall crime that have escalated to heights previously unknown, eradicate hunger and focus on education (which has been deteriorating at the K-12 levels) and on instilling values (other than watching Big Brother or Israeli Idol) in future generations. Fifth, her people must unite and recognize their own rights: the right to their land, right to live in peace within secure borders, right to be an equal member among nation states with equal justice prevailing and applied to all. This very element cannot be achieved when some of Israel's harshest critics are Israelis and Jews, when there is no respect or loyalty even within one's own political party or religion, and when "unity" is easily expressed yet rarely practiced. Sixth, until a visionary emerges, to lead Israel toward acting once again rather than lagging behind and hardly reacting, Israel must react forcefully. When the Palestinians boycott Israeli goods and services and the Palestinian leadership burns Israeli products for the world to see, there must be a severe and immediate response. When self-declared humanitarians set sail to "end the blockade on Gaza," their efforts must be stopped at all costs. Likewise, when "anarchists" instigate trouble that threatens the lives and wellbeing of the security forces, they should be imprisoned or deported. When the enemy bombards the very electric plant that supplies electricity to Gaza, the flow of electricity must be stopped. If a rocket is launched against a civilian population, there must be a greater, not a proportionate, response. When a kidnapped Israeli soldier has not seen a soul other than his captors for the past four years, there must be a reaction. In the Middle East, the only discernible language is strength, great strength. Yet, Israel is embroiled in internal debate, led by the "Pro-Peace Pro-Israel" camp of J Street or the New Israel Fund and other Israel haters that undermine its national welfare. For Israel to survive, Israelis must change direction. No one can do it for them. Our own contributions should not be those to non-profit organizations, too numerous to count. Our sole contribution should be to alert Israel to what we witness with our eyes wide open, what she does not see, or prefers to subdue quietly. Israel is on a straight collision course and some see the existential impact coming. Yet our waves, shouts, rush to alert the driver and the occupants just seem to fall on deaf ears and blind eyes, deflected from the windows of a vehicle otherwise immune and oblivious to the outside world. We cannot want more for Israel than she wants for herself. Sadly, we are left to pray a leader will arise who will have the inner conviction of Israel's natural and historical rights, will not hesitate to sacrifice some of life's momentary conveniences for a better future and who will draw from Israel's Eternal Book, the binding bond, her core, for a modern day existence in peace and security. Contact Ari Bussel at busselari@gmail.com |
|
AVOID OSTRICH SYNDROME
Posted by Babu Suseelan, May 23, 2010. |
|
I saw a sign in front of McDonald: "One Billion Served.". There are more than one billion Jihadis are around the world still serving for the cause of invisible Allah. In their service to Allah, Jihadis have killed millions of people, caused enormous economic loses, and still serving Allah and creating problems for infidels. What we should do? Jihadi Imams and Jihadi terrorists have created enormous problems for us. There are many proven, effective ways to reduce or handle problems created by Muslims. DOING NOTHING IS NOT ONE OF THEM. Knowing the true nature of Islam is the first priority for all infidels. An informed infidel can challenge the criminal document called the Koran. Letting the hard issues pile up without even looking at them is not going to help us, the infidels. Islam is not a religion. It is a desert originated 6th century political dogma for invasion, plunder, looting, sexual exploitation of women and oppression. It is time to understand the criminal treatise called Koran and Haidth and past brutalities of Islam. It is time to face facts, whatever they are, and move forward. Muslims with Saudi Money is fast converting criminal population in America and Canada. Correctional inmates are in prison for their crimes. They are criminal thinkers and do heinous crimes without fear, shame, remorse or guilt. Islamic dogma encourages criminal activities and support criminals in their sex predatory behavior and provides opportunities for amplifying their deviant characteristics. Ninety five percent of criminal inmates will be released on parole. Once they are converted into Islam, they will act as hidden Jihadis in our communities. They will pose a potential danger to our community. Citizens need to work with nationalist groups and expose the hidden agenda of Imams. Ninety Nine percent of the Imams working in correctional institutions are from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Sudan, Yemen and Somalia. They have a vested interest in converting criminal population and make them Jihadis. Letting the Islamic conversion of criminals and other hard issues pile up without even looking at them is not going to help us. The fact is even the Ostriches do not really bury their heads in the sand. That would make them horribly vulnerable. Dr. Babu Suseelan is a professor of clinical psychology and the director of a drug and alcohol treatment program in Pennsylvania. A former Muslim, he writes on the subject of Islamic terrorism and its effect on Hindu society. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: COUNTERING DISTORTION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 23, 2010. |
|
My desire to set the record straight, when it's possible to do so, makes me a bit compulsive. Having worked on another project all day, I was not planning on posting today. And yet... this is important. The distortion I respond to today is not an Arab one, but from an Israeli official. Inadvertently or not, it covers up some harsh realities. ~~~~~~~~~~ Once again writing jointly, Khaled Abu Toameh and Herb Keinon reported in today's JPost that Fatah is warning of a return to "armed struggle" if the "proximity talks" fail. Abbas Zaki, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and the Fatah Central Committee, made threats during an interview with Al Ghad, a Jordanian newspaper. Besides keeping open the option of "armed struggle," Zaki said that the Palestinian Arabs might also demand the implementation of UN Resolution 181, of 1947, which called for the partition of Palestine, with Jerusalem (joined with Bethlehem) controlled internationally as a Corpus Separatum. The second threat can be dispensed with. For this resolution came from the General Assembly and is thus only a recommendation without force within international law; it cannot be "implemented." What is more, the Arabs rejected it in 1947. What concerns me is the first threat, of violence: "We shouldn't give Israel more time. We must start thinking of all forms of struggle and taking measures to make Israel pay a price for its aggressive practices." ~~~~~~~~~~ And here's where things get problematic: According to this report: "A senior Israeli official characterized Palestinian threats about a return to violence as a 'serious problem.' ~~~~~~~~~~ And I'm here to tell you that he's wrong. Sure the process was based on the illusion of a commitment by Arafat to renounce violence. Undoubtedly our leaders believed it at the start. Or so I assume. But it was never, ever Arafat's intention. And Israel continued to pretend it was, long after there was reason to know better. When should Israel have first begun to realize what was afoot? A mere ten days after the signing of the Gaza-Jericho First agreement that was a follow-up to the original accord. That is, until May 10, 1994. That's when Arafat went to Johannesburg, South Africa and gave a speech in a mosque, in English. He spoke off the record, but his talk was discreetly recorded by a South African journalist and then made public. Arafat said, famously: This agreement, I am not considering it more than the agreement which had been signed between our prophet Muhammad and Quraysh... That should have rung some bells, somewhere. Islamic academics would have understood, and everyone else should have rushed to find out what it meant. The short of it is that in 628, Muhammad, who was not yet powerful, made a 10-year peace pact with the Quraysh tribe that controlled Mecca. Two years later, when he had garnered sufficient strength, he abrogated the treaty, attacked the (unsuspecting) Quraysh with overwhelming force and took Mecca. ~~~~~~~~~~ That, my friends, was the model for how Arafat viewed the Oslo Accords. This should be noted well, because Arafat set the tone for what is proceeding to this day. Understand: He was Mahmoud Abbas's mentor. They pretend peaceful intentions (although they're not even doing that very well today), but remain prepared to hit us whenever it suits them. As Dennis Ross, who was a special envoy to the Middle East for President Clinton, later wrote, Arafat never relinquished the "terrorism card." ~~~~~~~~~~ The lesson we refused to learn back in the mid-90s was that it was time to call a halt to Oslo as soon as it was clear the Arabs weren't sincere. But we kept moving along as if... "As if..." is very dangerous. It is not a luxury, or a foolishness, we can afford right now. ~~~~~~~~~~ And then there is the statement, from this Israeli official, that if the Palestinian Arabs return to violence it is taking us back to before Oslo. Now, perhaps he had no clue about the Quraysh. But he knows about what was called the "second intifada," and therefore, surely, he must know that his statement is in error. Briefly: In 2000, then prime minister Ehud Barak offered Arafat a deal, which, thank heaven, he rejected, even though it would have given the Arabs almost all of Judea and Samaria, all of Gaza, eastern Jerusalem and sharing of the holy sites, etc. Details are not relevant here, except to say that they weren't to Arafat's liking. So he didn't request further negotiations. He fell back to plan B: He resorted to violence. That's the pattern. The pretense was that this was a "spontaneous" uprising in response to the "provocation" of a visit to the Temple Mount (OUR Temple Mount, which they insist is theirs) by Ariel Sharon. In point of fact, and I have documentation, it was premeditated. Arafat had put out the word and they were simply waiting for the hook to hang it on, to make it "our" fault. Arafat surely intended to teach us a lesson. But instead, by 2002, as things got very ugly, he got hit with Operation Defensive Shield, which quieted matters down and took the IDF back into areas from which we had pulled out. ~~~~~~~~~~ The painful reality is that more Jews died from terror attacks AFTER Oslo than before. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, have we learned nothing? Does our government not see that we're headed that way again? They'll pretend to negotiate, and break it off in discontent with protests about our unreasonableness, and they'll hit us again. We can squash them again, but be aware, good old General Dayton is in there, training PA "security forces." So they'll be better equipped this time. ~~~~~~~~~~ There was news last night and today about an ostensible agreement between Israel and the PA concerning the principle of a land trade (meaning we would keep some communities in Judea and Samaria and give them some land inside the Green Line). Abbas, who is the one who announced this, is not saying how much he would agree to swap, and Israel is saying that it's not good to talk publicly about what's being discussed. Which leaves us no where in terms of anything definitive. Maybe Abbas is making it up, maybe Netanyahu doesn't want it know what he's saying. I do not intend to belabor this here. ~~~~~~~~~~ Instead I will close with a good news item, as promised yesterday, and with thanks to Joel K., who shared this with me. You have here a link to footage from the Steven Spielberg film archives that shows incredible scenes from our pre-state history, our founding, and much more. Enjoy and share, as it is moving and stunning:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SOME UNPLEASANT OBSERVATIONS
Posted by Kaustav Chakrabarti, May 23, 2010. |
|
Everywhere the free world seems to be on the run. Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia in direct or indirect liason, an ambivalent US not willing to ruffle feathers in Islamic circles more for creating vote-banks than long term strategic interests, N.Korea brazenly firing torpedoes to sink a South Korean vessel, the Shiite groups gaining the upper hand in Iraq, the ongoing and seemingly endless war in the Af-Pak region and a steadily destabilizing Pakistan with the spectre of the Taliban and allied groups seizing control sooner or later and the Taliban taking on the US military at Bagram. Israel alone seems to be fighting and standing up to the devils. The international community (whatever it is) is bent on making another Masada of the Jewish state through its tacit support for the terrorist groups and their ideological/political cohorts. Moral bankruptcy and political correctness have reached ridiculous heights. Contact Kaustav Chakrabarti by email kaustav12000@yahoo.co.in |
|
ASSOCIATE PRESS: ABBAS: PALESTINIANS READY TO SWAP LAND WITH ISRAEL
Posted by Paut Rotenberg |
|
Assume this is true, Jaffo is on the table, what will happen when they get to discussing contiguity? Assume it is not true, why isn't Israel putting out statements as to what the PA is agreeing to, true or not, statements that promote the Israeli perspective. Like "The PA have agreed that all settlements will remain" or "The PA has agreed to accept the centrality of the Sanremo Accords as the basis for Israeli continued presence along the Jordan River" This is infuriating because it sets an expectation that is not being countered by the Israeli government. Have they no dignity, no spine, no self respect, no understanding of what they are doing and who they are dealing with. Paul This below is from the Mary 22, 2010 Associated Press and it is archived at
|
|
RAMALLAH — The Palestinians are ready to swap some land with Israel, although differences remain over the amount of territory to be traded, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Saturday after two rounds of U.S.-led indirect peace talks. The negotiations began earlier this month, with U.S. envoy George Mitchell shuttling between Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Abbas' comments marked the first time a participant has provided details about the talks. Abbas said the first round dealt with borders and security arrangements between Israel and the state the Palestinians hope to establish in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with east Jerusalem as its capital. Israel wants to annex major Jewish settlements in the war-won West Bank and east Jerusalem. In previous negotiations, the two sides agreed that Israel would swap some of its territory to compensate the Palestinians, but gaps remained on the amount of land to be traded. Abbas dismissed recent media reports that the Palestinians are willing to trade more land than in the past, saying: "We did not agree about the land area, but we agreed on the principle of swapping land (equal) in quality and value." In 2008, the Palestinians offered to cede 1.9 per cent of the West Bank to Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert. Olmert sought a 6.5 per cent swap. It is not clear whether Netanyahu accepts the idea of a land swap, and if so, how much of the West Bank he wants to keep. Israel has moved nearly half a million of its citizens into dozens of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem since capturing those territories in the 1967 Mideast War. Netanyahu spokesman Mark Regev declined to comment on Abbas' remarks and would not say whether Netanyahu agreed to the principle of land swaps. "I cannot go into the content of the talks. If these talks are to succeed, and we hope that they do, they have to be done with discretion," Regev said. A land swap would be crucial to any final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Talks resumed in early May after a 17-month breakdown.
Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com
|
|
A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO?!?
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 23, 2010. |
|
Why build a mosque at Ground Zero? Do Muslims want to convince America, the world, with such 'in your face' symbolism that Islam is not responsible for the horrific events of 09/11/2001? Might the sponsors of this proposal, presumably to support tolerance, unity, the antithesis of radical Islam, be willing to fly flags of all nations, including Israel, prominently, within the structure's courtyard? Better yet, would those sponsors be willing to more than symbolically denounce the dark side of Islam; the side that coerces women to wear head to toe garments thus not arouse the lust in men, the side that threatens to destroy the 'infidel'; from the pulpits of their mosque; as well as throughout the worldwide media? Specifically, would they be willing to confront Iran's president, Mahmoud AhMADinejad, harshly condemning his hateful Holocaust denial rhetoric, his threat to destroy Israel? Would they be willing to assert that when a suicide bomber blows him or herself up, or any Muslim plants/sets off an explosive, he also blows up the Koran? Would they be willing to conduct interfaith services within their mosque on occasion? Most essentially, would they be willing to erect a shrine honoring all those who perished when radical Islamic savages flew American planes into the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon; crashed over Pennsylvania? Unless sponsors of the project are willing to truly accept responsibility for the blasphemers of their faith; those who spit on civilization; proposing to build a mosque at Ground Zero reeks with arrogance. Remaining silent, distancing themselves, refusing to confront those who pervert peaceful tolerant Islam is unacceptable. Only aggressive acts of atonement for the heinous deeds of 9/11/2001 should allow them to be considered for the momentous honor of receiving permits to build on what is truly sacred ground; most desirably as part of a faith based mega-complex of structures representing Judaism, Christianity and other religions willing to participate! 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 |
|
THERE'S NO P.A. RIGHT OF RETURN; MOSQUES GOING UP AT WTC;
HAMAS AND FATAH RELEASE EACH OTHER'S TERRORISTS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 23, 2010. |
|
THERE IS NO PALESTINIAN ARAB RIGHT OF RETURN Ma'ariv columnist Ben Dror-Yemeni analyzed the Palestinian Arab false historical narrative, with these sub-topics: (1) A British research group spend years in Palestine, mapping the area population of about 100,000 residents in 1878, just before modern Zionism mass-immigration of Jews and Arabs; (2) There never was a country," Palestine" nor a Palestinian nationality; (3) 50 million refugees from the World Wars assimilated quickly, but the Palestinian Arabs and UNRWA are extending a now phony refugee status for generations; (4) The Jews suffered a greater catastrophe, but did not try to destroy their former countries; and (5) This article discusses "The fraud that is called the right of return." Many Arab journalists have adopted the Arab version of history. Mr. Dror-Yemeni asked them, "When have deportees who declared war, and lost that war, been granted the "right of return?" Is there one among the dozens of groups and the tens of millions who experienced expulsion in the past century that has been granted a "right of return" in a manner that caused the political annihilation of a nation state? He says they cannot answer. A Palestinian Authority document "...claims that there are precedents for a 'right of return.' The most serious example presented there is the Dayton Agreement of 1995 which allows the return, for example, of Serbs to Croatia. The circumstances, however, are different. First, the return was never implemented. Croatia allowed the return of Croatians but placed barriers on the return of Serbs. Second,...the return would not have undermined the existence of Croatia as the national state of the Croatian people." The document refers to a 1997 agreement on Azerbaijan. "...a report from 2002 shows that the Muslims who were exiled to Azerbaijan did not return to Armenia, and the Armenians who arrived as refugees did not return to Azerbaijan. In effect, the Armenian constitution grants the right of return only to Armenians (similar to the Israeli Law of Return, which exists [for other ethnic groups] in other countries around the world)." "The other examples...from Africa and South America, are also irrelevant to the many population exchanges around the world and certainly to the population exchanges between the Arab countries and Israel." "The most serious reference to the issue of the right of return is in the Cypress agreement initiated by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The agreement does not recognize the right of return, despite the fact that the European Court of Human Rights recognized the rights of petitioners on the Greek side of Turkey to return and to the restoration of property. In other words, not every legal precedent becomes a political truth. The agreement was welcomed by the international community in general and by the European Union in particular." However, "...the right of return there was limited so that the Turkish majority, on the Turkish side, would always be at least eighty percent." The Palestinian Authority also cites UN resolution 194. The Arabs had opposed it. It is based on Resolution 242, which "grants international legitimacy to recognition of the Jewish state." These resolutions also subject any return to genuine peace. But "... as Abu-Mazen stated in May 2009, he does not recognize the Jewish state because it is liable to prevent the return of the masses." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/20.) Prof. Plaut has cited the example of the American Revolution. The peace agreement called for the expulsion of the pro-British loyalists from the United States, and not return. The U.S. was supposed to pay compensation for property they had to leave behind, but reneged on that. The Palestinian Arabs are demanding compensation for themselves and not for the far greater number and far greater property of Jews expelled from Arab states.
MOSQUES GOING UP WHERE ISLAMISTS BROUGHT WORLD TRADE CENTER DOWN A $100 million project, called the Cordoba initiative, is building a mosque in a New York building adjacent to the Twin Towers and damaged in 9/11. The Majid Mosque project appeals for funds to build a second mosque nearby. "In fact, the website appealing for donations boldly states that it plans to "build the 'House of Allah' next to the World Trade Center. Help us raise the flag of 'LA ILLAH ILLA ALLAH' in downtown Manhattan." [http://goo.gl/qrq0]. Hebron has the Cordoba Girls' School, where children learn that murdering Jews earns their place in Paradise. Cordoba was the capital of Islamic Spain for 500 years, one of Europe's biggest cities. They named the mosque project Cordoba. Why? Probably so as not to forget and in anticipation of restoring Islamic control. The al-Qaeda affiliate that confessed to bombing Spanish trains in 1994 explained, "This is part of settling old accounts with Spain, the crusader..." [http://goo.gl/SOBg]. Islamic groups still blame Christian Spain for ending the Caliphate hundreds of years ago in Cordoba (Hebron Jewish Community, 5/21) (One of my readers thought that Islamists have forgotten the old desire to recapture lost conquests.) Since the U.S. offers freedom of religion, and does not treat Islam's Islamist offshoots as a subversive political movement, Muslims have a right to build mosques where they buy property. But people who keep telling America to be soft toward Muslims "sensitivity," should give some consideration to defending New Yorkers' sensitivity. There is an element here of "in your face" defiance. This kind of affront is not unique to New York. In Jerusalem, Muslims built a mosque alongside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, with bathrooms overhanging it, as if to show superiority. In Bethlehem, Muslims tried to usurp the public plaza needed to accommodate pilgrims to the Church of the Nativity, for another mosque. As it is, churchgoers sometimes have to run a gauntlet of hostile Muslims, there. A similar do-one-better aspect characterizes a mosque project in Rome. By contrast, In Saudi Arabia, churches are not allowed to bear outward identification. In Egypt, churches (and not mosques) are not allowed to be built or be renovated except with government permission, not readily granted. Some people ask why not ban mosques in the West, until churches are not banned in the East. The question really is whether the West is wise to let in a people with a political movement, masked as religion, whose political ideology is to conquer the West.
U.S. HELPS TURKEY BOMB KURDISH TERRORISTS IN IRAQ Aided by U.S. intelligence, Turkey sent about 20 warplanes to bomb Kurdish PKK terrorists moving from mountain hideouts in Iraq toward the Turkish border. Spring thaws the terrorists. Turkey claims to have struck 50 targets, and the Kurds claim to have suffered no casualties. About 2,000 terrorists were estimated to have been holed up in the autonomous Kurdish region of Iraq. The PKK rebellion has cost about 45,000 lives (IMRA, 5/21/10). Casualties in this conflict are 30 times as high as the combat in Gaza, and probably get 1/30th of media attention. During my U.S. military training, the sergeants related admiringly how stoic were Turkish allied troops captured and mistreated by North Korea. Nevertheless, formerly, the U.S. did not cooperate with Turkey against Kurdish terrorism in Iraq, which the U.S. occupied at the time. Would U.S.-Turkish relations be better now, if the U.S. had cooperated from the start? Would Israeli-Turkish relations be better now, if when Turkey faced Syria down, at a time when Turkey had an informal alliance with Israel, PM Netanyahu had mobilized the IDF on the Syrian border, to demonstrate solidarity with Turkey? Instead, he moved troops away from the border, to demonstrate neutrality. Neutrality contradicts alliance. An alliance is supposed to be mutual. When the U.S. or Israel bombs Islamic terrorists, not because the U.S. or Israel is prejudiced but because the terrorists are and commit aggression over it, Muslims complain that Muslims are getting killed. When Turkey bombs Kurdish terrorists, and Kurdish terrorists kill Turks, nobody complains then that Muslims are getting killed.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: 13. ISRAEL IS THE SOURCE OF ALL MIDEAST CONFLICT The misconception that attributes all Mideast strife to Israel views the conflict superficially. Tribal and violently feuding Muslim countries have warred on many countries inside and outside the region. Their society has gone from feudalism through militarism, Communism, nationalism, and Islamism. They are trying to modernize without reforming their value system that appears inconsistent with modern values. Some of those countries are engendering a radical ideology that even attacks their own governments as insufficiently pure ideologically. When defeated, they beg for refuge abroad, and then turn against their new hosts. Some Mideast countries are failing. Their rulers find it convenient to distract attention from those failures by rallying the people against imagined crimes by Israel. The Arab shame-honor syndrome makes it especially difficult to acknowledge error, so, again, they blame Israel for their own problems. For example, they attacked Israel, lost, and a few hundred thousand Arabs fled from Israel. They blame Israel for their loss, but their aggression resulted in that loss. They are their own worst enemies. If they took a moderate view of Islam, and did not feel they had to conquer states belonging to other faiths, they could leave Israel in peace. But they do not take a moderate view. They fabricate accusations against Israel. They dream up all sorts of unsubstantiated claims of attempted poisoning by Israel, and then get aroused over it. Their leaders, including ones that the West prefers to consider moderate, such as Abbas and the King of Jordan, make up accusations that Israel is undermining, attacking, or planning to attack al-Aqsa mosque. (Absurd, that after about 90 years of such claims, the mosque still stands and the IDF can't do what the Arabs claim it wants to do!) Hearing the accusations, masses of Arabs often riot against Israelis. It all is demagoguery. Suppose Israel did not exist. Would Sudan stop dispossessing, enslaving, and exterminating black citizens? Would northern and southern Yemen stop their civil war? Would Syria end its drive to absorb Lebanon and other areas? Would the Moslem Brotherhood stop trying to dominate Egypt and Algeria? Would Iran no longer think of the U.S. as the great Satan? Would the Polissario Front reconcile itself to Moroccan rule? Would the Radical Muslims leave Somalia be? Would all other border claims in the region disappear? Would Iran release democrats from prison? Would Pakistan develop public education? Would the Taliban stop trying to impose medieval ways upon Afghanistan? One could go on, but it has become clear that calling Israel the cause of Mideast struggles by states and organizations struggling all over and over all, is just to scapegoat. A better case could be made that Israel is a force for stability in the Mideast. It is a stabilizer to the extent that it acts in its own interest and not to appease its enemies and its critics as by withdrawal from Gaza and Lebanon. In a way, by being the scapegoat for the Arabs, it serves as a unifying force among them, or they might fracture more. Israel prevents Hamas from making war on the Judea-Samaria part of the Palestinian Authority. Years ago, it helped discourage a Syrian invasion of Jordan. It distracted Egypt's Nasser from his invasion of Yemen, perhaps on his way to Saudi Arabia. It dislodged the PLO from supremacy in Lebanon. It helped keep Soviet influence minimal in the Mideast. Israel eliminated nuclear bomb factories of both Iraq and Syria.
HAMAS AND FATAH EACH RELEASE PALESTINIAN ARAB TERRORISTS OF THE OTHER Hamas made political prisoners of Fatah men, and Fatah made prisoners of Hamas men. Holding these hostages was one impediment to Egyptian efforts to unify the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) government. That impediment is now removed (IMRA, 5/21/10). Some people think that peace cannot be made without unifying the two parts of the P.A.. Otherwise, who speaks for the entity and who can make peace. That kind of thinking is misconceived. It mistakenly assumes that some authorities there want peace. Uniting those two movements would give Hamas an opportunity to dominate the whole P.A.. Into its hands, for use in terrorist war, would fall the troops trained by the U.S. to fight terrorists. On the other hand, if Fatah were to win, not likely, it would gain forces useful in its jihad against Israel. Neither faction wants peace. Both want to conquer Israel.
ISRAELI FORCES KILL TO TERRORISTS TRYING TO SNEAK IN FROM GAZA 
A couple of terrorists attempted to infiltrate from Gaza into Israel. A firefight began, in which two of the intruders were killed. The IDF said they were armed with two assault rifles and two protective vests. Maan news said they were unarmed boys trying to sneak in to find work. But the Hamas regime claimed them as "resistance fighters." Mortar fire from both sides was continuing, at the time of the report, on Saturday (IMRA, 5/21/10).
NEW YORK HINDU LEADER: PART 3. STATUS OF JIHAD IN INDIA 
India has 1.2 billion people. More than 83% are Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, and Jain. They embrace Indian culture and traditions from ancient Indian scripture. "They consider themselves the sons of the soil." The remainder of the population is 13.49% Muslim and 2.349% Christian. "Their forefathers were Hindus. They had been converted to alien religions during Islamic and then Christian rule in India by force, fraud, and allurement. Hindus consider conversion of their people to other religions as aggression." There are mini-Pakistans in India. In the states of Bengal and Assam, Muslims constitute 30% and 33% of the population, respectively. With their concentrated, one-issue voting bloc, Muslims dominate the provincial governments. "Hindus have to appease Muslims." [This is an eye-opener to people who think that democracy means majority rule.] It can be dangerous for Hindus to enter areas of concentrated Muslim population. Muslims in India have been President and Cabinet ministers, including Education Minister, and judges. The head of the ruling Congress Party is a Christian, as are the Defense Minister and government advisers. Muslims also are the prominent ones in India's underworld, Kataria says. The number one gangster in India, who is persona non grata in the U.S., is Dawood Ibrahim, a Muslim. The Muslims organize communally. They ally themselves with the Left and others to gain disproportionate influence. The Hindus are not represented as such in India's parliament. India's media is predominantly secularist, Christian, Muslim, and leftist. The media represses news of value to Hindus. Indeed, although Hindus still are being driven out of the Kashmir Valley of India, the media ignores this and the government does nothing. Hindus, in a sense, are kept down, Kataria believes. What worries Kataria is a lack of realization in India of the danger of piecemeal Muslim takeover and a lack of strategy for opposing terrorism.
LOCKERBIE BOMBER RELEASED TO LIBYA: UPDATE Scotland released Lockerbie bomber Al-Megrahi to Libya, there to await his death from cancer in an estimated three months. That was in August, about nine months ago. He received a hero's welcome home and still is living there. He has outlived three other prisoners released on compassionate grounds. Their relatives are indignant that Al-Megrahi still lives. Scotland claims it released him out of compassion, but observers said he did not seem terminally ill and his release helped British business interests with Libya (IMRA, 5/21/10). Someone is always the last one standing. That is not a fair basis for indignation. Releasing that mass-murderer for business reasons is. What do you think of Libyans giving the mass-murderer a hero's welcome? Jihad is popular there, isn't it! That has implications about who the West's enemy is.
ISRAEL AND P.A. CONCURRING ON LAND SWAPS 
Isrsrael and the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) reportedly concur on land swaps. The question is why. UN Security Council Resolution 242 does not require land swaps, and does not Israel to withdraw to the 1967 lines. The premise for land swaps would be that the area belongs to the Arabs (IMRA, 5/21/10). That premise has no foundation, since it is not based on prior sovereignty nor any Security Council Resolution. One should bear in mind that the P.A. calls Israel, itself, occupied.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
JEWISH MAN OPENS FIRE ON ARABS WHO WOUNDED HIS WIFE
Posted by Levi, Yaacov, May 23, 2010. |
|
This was written Gil Ronen, who
writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.
All the locations given here are close to my home there, Har Bracha is five miles across the valley from Itamar. |
|
Arab rioters in Samaria hurled rocks at a car bearing Israeli license plates Saturday evening, wounding a Jewish woman who was inside it. The woman suffered light injuries and was later evacuated to a hospital. Her husband got out of the car and opened fire in the direction of an adjoining olive grove, where he believed the attackers were located. The bullets did not hurt anyone. The incident took place outside the village of Azzoun, near Shaarei Tikva. After firing in defense of himself and his wife, the Jewish man reportedly hurled rocks at an Arab vehicle outside Azzoun. No one was hurt but the car was damaged. Israel Police have launched an investigation. Israeli law enforcement authorities are considered extremely strict as regards the right of Jews to use their weapons in self defense. While the Israeli ethos in the early decades of the state openly favored the bearing of firearms by able-bodied men as a part of a general deterrent posture, a Department of Justice report by Attorney Yehudit Karp determined, in 1982, that Jews in Judea and Samaria are given too much freedom to use their guns against Arabs. An additional report by Karp in 1989 led to further limitations on the bearing and use of firearms by all Israeli men, citing a concern that they would use them to threaten or shoot their own wives. Recently, the IDF, too, was reported to have issued strict instructions to soldiers regarding the use of firearms against Arab marauders. Soldiers were reportedly told to refrain from shooting to kill even if attacked by a fire bomber. Soldiers are reportedly expected to shoot at a fire bomber's legs, and even then — only up to knee level. In other rioting on Saturday, about 20 Arabs threw rocks at the fence surrounding Karmei Tzur in Gush Etzion. Security forces used riot gear to disperse them. About 30 Arabs ran wild near the community of Har Bracha in Samaria. They hurled rocks at security forces who responded with riot gear. (IsraelNationalNews.com)
|
|
HERE WE GO AGAIN: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO ENGAGE "MODERATE" HIZBALLAH
Posted by Paul Lademain, May 23, 2010. |
|
It is probable that the Obama Administration has done more harm to Lebanon than to any other country in the world. Either Brennan should be fired or the Obama Administration should admit that he is accurately representing its policy, in which case the Obama Administration should be fired. |
|
Well, no. He's done more harm to the US than to Lebanon. We wish he would take another international bow-movement tour and this time stay put in Riyadh. Yep, we read enough of BHO's so-called "health care reform" legislation — a dirty joke on the American public, which causes us to refer to BHO as the "master illusionist" and we sure hope Israel isn't taken in by his fantasy about "reformatting" the arabs (whom you errantly refer to as "palestinians". We say the only real Palestinians were and are the Jews.) We adhere to the reasoning of Prof. Howard Grief in his magnificent new book: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law". Well reasoned, easy to read. Persuasive! The boundaries of Israel encompass the very regions some very ignorant or fantastical Jews want to trade for peace with the arabs. We also studied the koran and we therefore know that trading land for "peace" will spell the total extermination of you, not them. The US fought for over a hundred and fifty years to solidify the US as a nation — what makes you think you have to have "peace at any price"? You've only put in 62 years! We enjoy most of your group's opinions, but please do hold your fire and respect the fact that we hold bolder opinions than you when we say: "Restore Jewish Palestine (israel) from the ocean to the sea, the way Israel was agreed to be." We believe that the more Jews stall, the worse it will become for Israel. Take what is yours. FYI: we do know the law, and we do know who has violated it, both in the US and in Israel. The law is on Israel's side. And we pray that the day will come when the majority of Israelis demand the restoration of all of its lands as set forth under the San Remo Resolution. Viva Israel from the SC4Z — SC4Z
Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
MIAMI RALLY
Posted by HebreProductions, May 23, 2010. |
|
FAIR PLAY FOR ISRAEL RALLY!
We the good citizens of the great State of Florida, having found disfavor in the abandonment of the State of Israel, and the mistreatment of her prime minister at the hands of our federal administration, do hereby and hereunto declare the following: Whereas, Israel has proven itself to be the United States' most steadfast and consistent ally in the world, and thus worthy of our respect, loyalty and admiration; and Whereas Israel has partnered with the United States in making a myriad of advances in technology, science and medicine benefiting not only both countries, but the world at large; and Whereas Israel has joined the United States in providing life-saving emergency aid to grief-stricken peoples all over the world; and Whereas Israel has constantly been and continues to be beset by hostile Arab and Muslim enemies, some of whom deny the Holocaust, and all of whom prepare for another one; and Whereas Israel has always possessed the technical means to annihilate all its enemies but has never even thought to do so; and Whereas, Israel stands at the front-line of the radical Muslim onslaught dedicated to the elimination of Western Civilization, should ever it acquire the technical means to do so; and Whereas Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Israelite race and Jewish State, and Judaea and Samaria the historic bedrock of Jewish civilization; and Whereas Israel has repeatedly outstretched her hand to her Arab neighbors in peace only to be met with the fist of war: We the people demand and insist that the Obama administration CEASE AND DESIST from pressuring Israel to give up more land, rights and privileges to its enemies while its enemies, chiefly Iran, plan her destruction. For all these reasons, and it having been that this great nation of ours was founded on the principles of truth, justice, fairness and reciprocity, We the People STAND UP for the State of Israel and demand that the Obama administration do the same! Contact HebreProductions at hebrewproductions@aol.com |
|
THE ISRAEL DEMOCRACY INSTITUTE TO HOLD CONFERENCE ON THE PLUSSES AND MINUSES OF ANNIHILATING ISRAEL
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 23, 2010. |
|
1. Well, later this week the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI), a leftist think tank funded by the New Israel Fund and the Eurocrats, will be holding an academic conference on the advantages and disadvantages of annihilating Israel. To be fair, that is not the conference's official title. The official title is "An International Workshop on Bi-Nationalism." The conference will host a group of academics, almost all of them from the far-Left. Some will tell the audience how wonderful it would be to turn Israel into a Middle East Rwanda, a "bi-national state." A few will express opposition to the idea. You know, so's it will be balanced. The conference's announcement can be read here, much of it in
English:
It follows up a similar conference at York University last year, in which some of the same people appeared, where the official goal of that conference was to find alternatives to Israel's existence. Now clearly the IDI is trying to "break the taboo" about conducting serious consideration and debate over the idea of annihilating Israel. While some at the conference will speak against a Rwanda solution for Israel, the very fact that a Think Tank in Israel is holding a conference about the possibility of annihilating Israel is what is significant here. If the conference organizers were honest, they would hold a conference on the topic of the Advantages and Disadvantages of shipping off Israeli Jews to Death Camps operated by Islamists, and then allow a few of the speakers to speak against the idea. The University of Haifa, though, is even less disingenuous. Tomorrow it will be holding a small panel featuring two Arabs and a leftist Anti-Zionist lecturer in English (Ron Kuzar) who will all celebrate the idea of the Palestinian Right of Return and demand that Israel's existence as a Jewish state be ended and that it be turned into a nice Rwanda.
2. Don't you love poetic justice? Ben Gurion University has long been one of the centers of the anti-Israel academic Left inside Israel and the capital for calls from tenured traitors for a world boycott of Israel. Well, Cowabunga! Now it turns out that a South Africa "University" wants to boycott Ben Gurion University, in response no doubt to the bleatings of Comrade Neve Gordon and his BGU friends in mufti: Varsity row over Israel links
The University of Johannesburg (UJ) is considering cutting academic ties with Israel's Ben-Gurion University (BGU) in protest against Ben Gurion's alleged association with Palestinian human rights abuses. An "extraordinary" meeting of the university's senate debated the matter on Monday. The university's current partnership with Ben Gurion dates from August when the two signed an academic cooperation and staff exchange agreement, relating to water purification and micro-algal biotechnology research. This re-established a relationship forged between the former Rand Afrikaans University (RAU) and Ben Gurion in the apartheid 1980s. RAU merged with Technikon Witwatersrand in 2005 to form the University of Johannesburg. In October, 52 academic staff members signed a petition opposing the current partnership. It states in part: "The Palestinian people are currently victims of an Israeli occupation, which violates their human rights as well as international law. Their plight has been repeatedly compared with that of black South Africans under apartheid." Professor Steven Friedman presented the pro-boycott argument in the senate on behalf of the petitioners. "We are not asking UJ to join a boycott campaign against Israel," said Friedman, who is the director of the joint UJ-Rhodes University Centre for the Study of Democracy. "But we are asking them not to sign agreements with institutions which collaborate with governments that commit human rights violations," he told the Mail & Guardian. Friedman argued that: Israel has 53 apartheid-style laws that discriminate between Jews and non-Jews; The Israeli occupation of Gaza is a colonial exercise; and The Ben Gurion offers stipends and partial exemptions from its degree requirements to members of the Israeli military, and tenders for Israeli Defence Force research contracts. The partnership was defended in the senate meeting by Professor Ilan Troen, the Ben Gurion's founding dean of humanities and social sciences, and South African advocate David Unterhalter. Troen flew to South Africa from Israel for the meeting; Unterhalter appeared pro bono. Their participation was organised by the South African Associates of Ben Gurion University, the president of which, Bertram Lubner, is vice-chairperson of Ben Gurion's board of governors. Lubner is an honorary life member of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies. 'Surprised' Troen told the M&G he was "surprised" that a "water purification project that is of manifest benefit to South Africans and an academic cooperation of 20 years' standing between two institutions" should be questioned. He said the proposed boycott was reprehensible. "It is understandable that South Africans should interpret other societies in terms of their own experiences, but the apartheid metaphor is a fallacy." Petition signatory Salim Vally, a senior researcher in UJ's Centre for Education Rights and Transformation, said: "RAU played a particular role in cooperating with apartheid. It was on the wrong side of history then and we don't want UJ to be on the wrong side now." The university's SRC president, Emmanuel Mapheto, echoed this: "We cannot allow our institution to partner BGU. What Israel is doing in Palestine amounts to apartheid," he said. The senate unanimously resolved that a nine-member committee, led by UJ deputy vice-chancellor Adam Habib, should make recommendations on the matter to the senate within three months. Source: Mail & Guardian Online
Want to tell the brand new rector of BGU what you think of this? Contact: New rector at BGU is
and rector@bgu.ac.il
Prof. Yael Edan, Deputy-Rector
3. You know how the New Israel Fund and its fellow rhino horn wearers have been attacking the Im Tirtzu student group because it accepted a donation from a pro-Israel church group? Remember how they said this proved that Im Tirtzu students are fascists and harmful to Israeli democracy? Well, what happens when anti-Israel Jewish groups are offered money
by anti-Semitic church groups? Find out here:
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
INDIA'S EXPERIENCE WITH ISLAM — LIKE ISRAEL'S; P.A. LISTS ISRAELI "VIOLATIONS" AND U.S. FAILS TO OBJECT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 22, 2010. |
|
PALESTINIAN ARAB TV STILL URGING CHILDREN INTO TERRORISM In still another episode on Hamas TV, the animal character, in this case a teddy bear, urges children to commit terrorism and via "martyrdom" gain entry to Paradise. The program features children singing that childhood means nothing without Palestine. What is "Palestine?" Fatah TV features a map at which children point to Israeli cities, such as Haifa and Jaffa, and the host identifies them as cities in "our state, Palestine." (Arutz-7, 5/21/10 from MEMRI). You know, the state that does not exist and would require the conquest of Israel for it to exist. Where is the objection to this indoctrination in war from our
"unshakable bond with Israel" President and our peace-loving New York
Times and our guarantor of international security, the UN? Was it
Senator Clinton who called that "child abuse?"
ABBAS PLANS DIPLOMATIC OFFENSIVE, ISRAEL PLANS CONCESSIONS Abbas is campaigning internationally to isolate Israel diplomatically. Israel's PM Netanyahu plans some concessions, perhaps releasing more terrorists who tried to murder Israelis, perhaps leaving more Arab cities under control of Palestinian Authority (P.A.) police. The P.A. position is that negotiations should resume from Israel's last, best offer, but should not include the Arabs' last, best acknowledgment. Previously, it was understood that a new Arab entity should not be allowed to have a military, and that Israel should be able to station forces (Arutz-7, 5/21/10 from MEMRI). Israel's turning the other cheek, when the Arabs slap the first one, does not work with them. A significant number of released terrorists continue trying and sometimes succeeding in murdering more Israelis. Releasing such convicts is indeed a way for Israel to boost Arab confidence, but it is confidence in their ultimate success in destroying Israel. The more concessions Israel makes, the more contempt Arabs and others have for Israel. It does not build goodwill. Can't build goodwill among radical Muslim fanatics and foreign governments that appease them. Leaving Arab cities under control of P.A. police means extending the havens for terrorists. The P.A. police do not eradicate terrorism. Note the prior article, about P.A. indoctrination in terrorism. There appears to be an inconsistency in the P.A. negotiating position, in demanding that new Israeli administrations be bound by what the prior ones offered, and releasing the new P.A. administration from what the prior one apparently had accepted. It isn't so much inconsistency as bargaining, reneging on a matter of principle, and arrogance in assuming religious superiority. PM Netanyahu was too timid or deceptive, when he agreed to an independent P.A. entity but demilitarized, without specifying that in order to become and stay demilitarized, it could not be granted sovereignty. Once sovereign, it need not stay demilitarized. Meanwhile, the U.S. is militarizing the P.A. without the P.A. reversing its education for war. Why does Netanyahu want to station Israeli forces in the Jordan Valley? Any sizable Israeli concession of territory would deprive Israel of secure borders. At least some security would be retained, if Israel had troops along the border to warn of approaching enemy forces and to start repelling invaders. Territorial swapping has much to commend it. May I suggest that Israel offer the P.A. Baffin Island in exchange for Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. Oh, Israel doesn't have Baffin Island to give? Well, neither do the Palestinian Arabs have title to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. Never did. The New York dailies emphasize that the P.A. is offering a higher percentage of land in the Territories for land in the State of Israel. The dailies call that a concession. The additional percentage is tiny. But again, the P.A. is offering what it does not have title to.
EU DIPLOMAT QUITS ANTI-ISRAEL JUNKET Senior foreign relations official, and member of the EU parliament, Gabriele Albertini, quit a junket to Israel, after realizing it was set up to make anti-Israel propaganda. The delegation had some sentiment for issuing an anti-Israel statement before it set out to ascertain the facts. However, it did not do that. Israel rejected the delegation's request to be let into Gaza. The government does not want official missions to lend moral support to the terrorist regime there. Israel also could see that the delegation planned to ascertain and present just the Arab side of the conflict. Mr. Albertini thought the delegation should change its itinerary, in order to allay Israeli concern. The delegation, however, reacted by entering Gaza through Egypt and showing its own displeasure with Israel by canceling a meeting with the Mayor of Jerusalem (Arutz-7, 5/21/10) and hearing even less of the Israeli side. What does the delegation think it is, the UN, making up its mind before traveling to see, and presenting a case without having heard the other side? Considering that Arabs and other Muslims in Europe talk freely about taking over Europe and imposing its oppressive religious rule upon it, one would think Europeans would be more open to other intended victims of jihad, such as Israel. Unfortunately, self-preservation is an art few are practiced in.
GUNMEN AMBUSH ISRAELI FAMILY Senior foreign relations official, and member of the EU parliament, Gabriele Albertini, quit a junket to Israel, after realizing it was set up to make anti-Israel propaganda. The delegation had some sentiment for issuing an anti-Israel statement before it set out to ascertain the facts. However, it did not do that. Israel rejected the delegation's request to be let into Gaza. The government does not want official missions to lend moral support to the terrorist regime there. Israel also could see that the delegation planned to ascertain and present just the Arab side of the conflict. Mr. Albertini thought the delegation should change its itinerary, in order to allay Israeli concern. The delegation, however, reacted by entering Gaza through Egypt and showing its own displeasure with Israel by canceling a meeting with the Mayor of Jerusalem (Arutz-7, 5/21/10) and hearing even less of the Israeli side. What does the delegation think it is, the UN, making up its mind before traveling to see, and presenting a case without having heard the other side? Considering that Arabs and other Muslims in Europe talk freely about taking over Europe and imposing its oppressive religious rule upon it, one would think Europeans would be more open to other intended victims of jihad, such as Israel. Unfortunately, self-preservation is an art few are practiced in.
AIPAC FILM ON IDF HUMANE CODE AIPAC has released "Soldier's Story," a film showing how humane the IDF is. 
One story of the film is about an Israeli unit in Gaza. The commander saw Palestinian Arab troops loading a rocket launcher, from behind a couple of hundred school girls. The only weapons at that unit's disposal were machine guns. Machine guns are not accurate. The commander withheld the order to fire. The rocket was launched into Israel. It had the potential of killing innocent Israelis. An Israeli pilot has to inform headquarters a minute before he is ready to fire, half a minute before, and 10 seconds before. Perhaps a civilian has come into the line of fire. Many times headquarters ordered him to stand down. When a pilot is being fired at, he is not allowed to return fire until he verifies where the shots are from. Is the enemy is firing from within a kindergarten? It is a common practice of the Arab enemy to fight from behind children. By contrast, Hamas fires both from within civilian areas and at civilians areas (Arutz-7, 5/21/10). When the IDF kills enemy civilians, it is accidental and not terrorism. When the Palestinian Arabs, Hizbullah, and Arab states kill Israeli civilians, it is terrorism and not accidental. Pro-Arab propaganda does not respect the truth. It is a weapon like terrorism, used unfairly. The propaganda proceeds, even though firing from amid civilians and firing deliberately at civilians are war crimes. The propaganda proceeds, even though international law holds responsible for civilian casualties the side that fortifies civilian areas. Thus Israel, which tries to be considerate of civilians, gets denounced when some get killed. The Arabs, who are inconsiderate both of Israel's civilians and of their own, do not get denounced when civilians on both sides are killed because of illegal Arab tactics. Does the world's warped reaction to IDF decency give Israel a license to be indecent? No, but perhaps Israel has an exaggerated response that risks its own people's innocent lives to spare enemy lives. Terrorists count on Israel sparing them. Israel's exaggerated sense of decency spurs terrorists to use human shields. Then is IDF policy proper? Who relishes the position of having to make decisions like those of Israeli headquarters and the commander in Gaza? Yes, pilots should be careful, but perhaps troops on the ground should be sterner. The news brief did not explain enough. Nowadays, the IDF and the U.S. military have lawyers helping decide whether their troops may fire. Lawyers are cautious. Troops do not want to be punished under politically correct codes. Being too clean, may encourage the enemy to be too dirty. The U.S. military has changed greatly since the Vietnam War, when it would announce that it had to destroy some village in order to save it from the Vietcong. This week's Wall St. Journal reports that the U.S. is causing far fewer civilian casualties in Afghanistan, now, but is getting far more complaints about accidental civilian deaths from the President of Afghanistan. "Ya can't win!" Nobody has figured out the answer to the apparent new goal of fighting a war without casualties. Some of my readers cite casualty figures, which are higher for the Arabs than for Israel. They think that this means that Israel is in the wrong. That kind of logic must be too brilliant for me to understand. I thought casualty figures show which side is fighting harder.
INTRODUCING OBAMA'S ANTI-TERRORISM ADVISER Meet President Obasma's counter-terrorism adviser, John Brennan. 
In a recent speech, Mr. Brennan referred to his favorite city, "al-Quds, Jerusalem," the first term being the Arab name for that city [named by the Jews about 1,500 years before the Arabs conquered it]. Ayatollah Khomeini initiated "al-Quds Day," an annual signal for anti-Israel demonstrations all over. Using the Arabic name, in English, for Jerusalem, is pandering to anti-Israel sentiment. The speech went on to mention Brennan's Arab classmates at American University in Cairo, who desired "to practice our faith freely." "In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques at Mecca and Medina" ('Top Obama Officials Now Calling Jerusalem "Al-Quds,"' YouTube, may 199, 2010). Is Brennan attempting to deceive fellow Americans or himself, when he alleges some concern for religious freedom by Arabs, and then refers to Saudi Arabia, which bans churches, synagogues, and non-Wahabi mosques? Brennan wants to encourage "moderate elements" in the officially-declared terrorist organization, Hizbullah, to isolate the militant ones. He did not identify who in Hizbullah is moderate, but Hizbullah has not deviated from its stated goal of destroying Israel. So, while the US. strives to isolate Hizbullah, Brennan lends it legitimacy. Brennan joins a long line of Obama advisers partial to the Arabs against Israel. Obama, himself, has had viciously anti-Israel friends. He belonged to an anti-Israel and anti-American, black-supremacist church for 20 years. His "Administration has ignited major tensions in its relations with Israel while not holding accountable and [not] penalizing the Palestinian Authority for continuing terrorism and incitement to hatred and murder." (5/21 news release by Zionist Organization of America, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member.) Like Brennan, other U.S. officials have persuaded themselves, or at least tried to persuade others, that there are moderate elements with fanatical organizations, and that we can work with them. Iran-Contra is one example of the U.S. being made suckers of. Arafat was thought moderate, until it was too absurd to pretend he was. Now Abbas and Fayyad are called moderate, although they glorify terrorism. When the Arab side is totally extremist, officials and the media invent "moderates" among them, so seem to justify continued negotiations instead of just defeating them. Sure the Muslim Arabs want to practice their religion freely. In Israel, they get the opportunity, unless you consider that to them, its free exercise means the right to curb other religions. When they controlled Jerusalem and Hebron, they denied access to people of other faiths. During the election, Americans were shocked at the black-supremacist and other prejudiced statements that poured out of the mouth of Obama's pastor. Obama claimed that during those 20 years, he never noticed or was away at the time. Never noticed? Obama's excuse is as shocking in its implications as Rev. Wright's animus. Obama likens himself to FDR. I think he is more like Marc Antony at Julius Caesar's funeral. To paraphrase the ancient Roman, Obama might say, "I come not to praise Israel, but to bury it." If you prefer, substitute "America" for "Israel," but that would include domestic policy as well as foreign policy.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: 12. POVERTY CAUSES TERRORISM Terrorism is a major approach of jihad. The misconception that poverty causes jihad is demonstrably false. It may be an aggravating factor. Many societies of impoverished people do not take to terrorism. Why so much among Muslims? U.S. blacks had more legitimate grievances than the Muslims, whose jihad fabricates, rather than rectifies, grievances. Islamists spread false grievances for public relations. Their deliberately spread rumors get accepted by their people. Why are their people so credulous about rumors that keep getting disproved by political analysis? One such rumor is that "the Jews" plan to, and have attacked the al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount. That mosque never was attacked by Jews in the 90 years of such accusations of Jewish conspiracy. If other governments and media were honest, courageous, and less prejudiced against Jews, they would have exposed those alleged grievances as false, long ago. As time goes on, other societies take up terrorism, though not jihad. Jihadists seem to be forming a growing alliance with drug gangs, non-Muslim rogue states, and Communist-like groups in Latin America who, like them, despise Western civilization. Jihad, which means "struggle," is religious in basis. It has taken on the connotation of struggle by violence. Muslims of all classes are religious, not just the poor. Wealthy Saudis and Iranians sponsor jihad. Saudi Arabia subsidizes radical mosques and madrassas, Islamic schools that indoctrinate students in jihad. Education is no bulwark against extremism. Middle class engineers and doctors, embracing jihad, become terrorist technicians and leaders. Who else becomes terrorists? Sudden terrorist syndrome indicates that moderate or nominal young Muslims can be radicalized swiftly. They believe what they are told by the radicals. Those schooled in the West apparently lack a sufficient grasp of general history to resist. They believe they are defending Islam, whereas they actually are attempting to impose the faith in its radical form on others, both Muslims and non-Muslims. In the interest of jihad, Palestinian Arab women are at times accused of a relationship, even a minimal one, with unrelated men. As a result, they face dishonor and death. They therefore are encouraged to redeem their honor, in the jihadi spirit, by murdering Israelis. In some cases, Hamas has tricked the women into becoming compromised. A Palestinian Arab who turns terrorist ensures his family's financial future. This is so because the Palestinian Authority, including Hamas, subsidizes terrorist families even after the death of the terrorist. Having taken control of the autonomy left them by Israel, which had greatly improved their standard of living without improving their tendency to bigotry and violence, they brought down the standard of living. They spent money on war instead of on their people. Fatah leaders lavished funds on themselves. Arafat's commanders took a rake-off on their troops' pay. It is more true that certain terrorist movements generate poverty, than that poverty generates terrorism.
NEW YORK HINDU LEADER: PART 2. INDIA'S EXPERIENCE WITH ISLAM — LIKE ISRAEL'S What in India's history, and in Narain Kataria's personal story, brought him to form an intellectual defense organization? For one thing, he has a master's degree in history from an Indian university, so he knows the long-term problem. He narrated to me that Muslim invaders had been attacking India for a couple of hundred years. Muslim rule started in the 10th century. It took the invaders about 300 years to conquer Afghanistan, once part of India. The clever invaders discovered that Indian armies depended on their king. Muslim forces concentrated their archers against the Indian king. Once he fell, his army disintegrated. The Muslims then were able to corner and slay the Hindu soldiers individually. The widows committed suicide, rather than let the Muslims violate them. We have elaborate literary and epigraphic evidence from the works of renowned Islamic Historians and inscriptions on numerous mosques all over India which glorify the barbarism and savagery perpetrated on Hindus by Islamic rulers. In addition to thousands of temples vandalized, looted and desecrated by Muslims, Islamists also destroyed three magnificent Hindu temples built in the name of Lord Shiva at Benaras, Lord Rama at Ayodhya and Lord Krishna at Mathura, and erected lofty mosques over them to humiliate Hindus. (Lord Shiva, Lord Rama and Lord Krishna are considered as an incarnation of God in Hindu pantheon.) Example from the cited source: "The Amir marched out toward Lamghan [in Afghanistan but then part of India], which is a city celebrated for its great strength and abounding wealth. He conquered it and set fire to the places in its vicinity which were inhabited by infidels, and demolishing idol temples, he established Islam in them. He marched and captured other cities and killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters and gratifying the Musulmans." The sources elaborate upon the great wealth of India, before the Islamic conquest. Kataria says, "Hindus want their temples back. The media does not report their sense of having been wronged, but instead, as wronging the Muslims." [Muslims likewise took over St. Sophia Church, one of Christianity's primary cathedrals, in Constantinople. Muslim conquerors built a mosque over, and now also under, the Hebrew's Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Then they claim that no other religion's holy sites had been there.] In 1947, the Hindus did not seek partition. The Muslims insisted on it by a 99% majority within their faith. Nevertheless, many stayed in India and doubled their population there. By contrast, Pakistan has been ousting non-Muslims. Thus the Muslims keep Pakistan exclusively Muslim but keep India not exclusively Hindu. "It is like having one's cake and eating it, too." What India experienced, so has Israel. The first partition of Palestine led to an exclusively Arab state, Jordan, and another area, for a Jewish state but with a Muslim majority. The Muslims attempted to drive the Jews out of that other area, but in the effort, fled, leaving a Jewish majority. Now the State Dept. and Arabs propose another partition into an exclusively Arab state under jihadist rule and a Jewish state having many restive Muslims. Restive, as when Arabs chant, "The Galilee is Arab!" Kataria had lived in the one-third of India that the Muslims acquired during India's partition at the same time that the UN recommended partition of the remaining area of the Palestine Mandate after Jordan was emancipated from it. Kataria is from the Sind region. He was among the 10 million Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists that the Muslims of Pakistan, in collusion with the Pakistani army, drove into India. He feels fortunate not to be among the 10 million driven into the ground. The world took no notice. According to Kataria, Hindus comprised 20% of Pakistan's population in 1947. Now it's 2%. "The Hindus suffered the brunt of the violence during partition, because, Kataria says, "Hindus were not thinking in terms of enemies, whereas the Muslims were organized to kill." "Nearly two million Hindus are still held as slaves in southern Pakistan. In Bangladesh 20 million are missing."
U.S. TRAINS FOREIGN CADETS IN U.S. NAVAL AND AI R FORCE ACADEMIES U.S. military academies accept one cadet per foreign country. This year, however, the U.S. Air Force and Naval Academies have accepted three cadets from Lebanon, based on their academic record, physical training, and English proficiency. U.S. Ambassador Sison explains that the "military academies have a long tradition of excellence, helping train not only future American military leaders, but the future leaders of our friends and allies." (IMRA, 5/20/10). This is worse than ordinary sentimental naivete. "Friends and allies?" Lebanon has reverted to being a satellite of Syria, which the State Dept. had declared a terrorist state. Hizbullah has a veto over the government of Lebanon and is part of the ruling coalition. The Army of Lebanon is an ally of Hizbullah. It is bad enough that U.S. universities train students from countries that promote jihad against us. It is at least as foolish for our military academies to train officers from those countries. The U.S. government does not know friend from foe. It mistakenly thinks that educating foreigners inculcates American values. American schools hardly inculcate American values in American students. Texas is trying to revise the curriculum to do that. Instead of recognizing the problem that Texas is exploring, and working with Texas, critics focus only on where the proposals go beyond American values and into detailed political and religious opinions. The critics seem to demonstrate what Texas worries about, that many Americans are unacquainted with the value of American values.
P.A. LISTS ISRAELI "VIOLATIONS" AND U.S. FAILS TO OBJECT Palestinian Authority (P.A.) head Abbas gave U.S. envoy Mitchell a list of alleged Israeli violations. The list includes Israeli detention of suspected terrorists and defending Israeli territory from Gaza terrorists using human shields. As usual, Mitchell accepted the list without comment. Meanwhile, the Obama administration keeps reiterating its dedication to Israeli national security. It could demonstrate any truth to that dedication, and be constructive about it, by taking the P.A. to task for acting as if terrorism were legitimate and defense against it were not (IMRA, 5/20/10). Until the U.S. gets that concept straight, any talk of peace is as illusory as the Administration's alleged dedication to Israeli security. What the P.A. calls Israeli "violations" turn out to be legitimate Israeli responses to P.A. violations. This is another example of the Muslim Arabs' notion of their entitlement to supremacy and non-believers' non-entitlement to self-defense. It also is an example of the false accusations and claims of the jihadist side. Those who accept such accusations and claims of naivete, indoctrination, and ignorance that typified Communist fellow travelers, whom even Lenin called "useful idiots." U.S. silence about P.A. defamation of Israel, a defamation that proves attachment to terrorism and not peaceful coexistence becomes complicity with the defamation. It condones terrorism. It b brings into question whether the U.S. government wants peace or it still pursues the State Department's traditional anti-Zionism.
LEFT OUTRAGED THAT ISRAEL BARRED NOAM CHOMSKY Haaretz and the Israeli Left are outraged that Israel barred Noam Chomsky. Chomsky called that Stalinist. Odd of him to use that epithet. Chomsky supported the Soviet regimes during the cold War, and especially spoke up for the Khmer Rouge. Barring people is not a Soviet monopoly. For having politically incorrect opinions, the United Kingdom barred radio host Michael Savage, the anti-gay Rev. Fred Phelps, Dutch politician Geert Wilders, reggae star Jah Cure, TV star Martha Stewart, Islamist cleric Yusuf Qaradawi, and many Israelis, including right-wing activist Moshe Feiglin. The U.S. barred journalist Robert Fisk, Greek professor John Milios, the Belarus acting President Lukashenko, an LSD advocate, etc.. Canada, Australia, Germany, Austria, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and Slovakia have barred people. Venezuela banned Lech Walesa. Many Arab countries ban Israelis. Very few of those who denounce Israel for barring Chomsky denounce the other countries for barring people (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/20/10, e-mail with links to each banning.) Their double standard indicates that for them, the issue is not one of civil liberties. It is an opportunity to bash Israel. Israel has plenty of resident leftists and Arabs who support the enemy. However, a country at war does not have to let in people who come to rally the enemy. That is not a matter of free speech but national defense.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH FOR NON-MUSLIMS? Fox Business channel had the "Stossel Report" on Thursday, 8 p.m. on various aspects of freedom of speech and assembly. The first aspect was about freedom of speech for non-Muslims. The host was clear and sensible. First guest was Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a remarkable woman. Originally from Somalia, she emigrated to the Netherlands, was elected to Parliament, renounced Islam, and had to flee for her life to America. She appreciates the freedom here, and advocates for it, but unfortunately still needs bodyguards. She replied to the host with pinpoint, appropriate, and definitive answers. She was calm under challenge, lovely in personality, fair, and knowledgeable. Holland's loss was America's gain. She already had encountered death threats for opposing Muslim oppression of women, in Holland. She does not consider it a Muslim man's right to murder his daughter, as if upholding his honor, or a right to beat his wife. Neither does she consider it a Muslim man's right to murder her because she objects. She explained that Islamic law considers it a right and duty to execute apostates such as herself. [Is it a religion of murder?] Asked if exposing Islamic violence against women is a "provocation," Ms. Ali calls the fatwa against her life the provocation. She helped film maker Van Gogh, who, like Geert Wilders, used Islamic verses to show religious approval of beating women. Even citing Islamic religious authority in favor of what she disapproves, did not exempt her from Muslim persecution. A Muslim who brutally murdered Van Gogh said he would have preferred to get her. Her second and new book compares U.S. and Islamic values. It explains how to answer Muslim challenges to the American way. She is disappointed in American feminists for not fighting against "honor killings" and female mutilation carried on in the States. There is censorship and self-censorship in the land of the free. For example, the usually bold TV show, "South Park," had a show that mocked, in bad taste and fantasy, the founders of several religions. It received nasty and threatening comments for an innocuous depiction of the founder of Islam, and not for depicting Buddha as a drug addict. Next time "South Park" displayed its cartoon, it covered Muhammad with a sign, "censored." It had given in to the threats. Perhaps the station simply was showing respect? Then why not the first time and why not to the others? No, it censored itself out of fear of fanatics (5/20/10). U.S. feminists may have become so left-wing, as to give priority to political correctness — the Left being increasingly allied with Islamists who are anti-liberal — that it condones the anti-feminism of Islam. It isn't fair to American freedom and culture to let into our country people who want to deprive us of it.
TIMES SQUARE BOMBING RIPPLES AND ARRESTS IN PAKISTAN 
The Times Square bombing is having a ripple effect, as Pakistan detains a widening circle of people over it. The government of Pakistan has now arrested an army officer and a businessman for helping introduce the bomber to trainers and for doing some of the planning. Details are murky; denials are rife. The officer is called "disaffected." The network for associating trigger men with trainers is called "informal." The question is asked whether there are a few men in the Army who support terrorism (Jane Perlez, NY Times, 5/22, A1). "A few?" My series on a New York Hindu leader indicates that Pakistan is dedicated to terrorism, though now it is beginning to defend itself from terrorism. Like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan encourages terrorism but does not want terrorists to turn against it. Pakistan birth featured mass-murder and expulsion by the million. The Pakistani Army committed purges, and on a genocidal level, when trying to keep Bangladesh from independence. Muslim terrorism against Indians in Kashmir is so prevalent, it has to be sponsored by Pakistani intelligence. Pakistan has thousands of madrassas run by radicals who generate terrorists. When the U.S. intervened indirectly in Afghanistan against the Soviets, it channeled money and weapons for the resistance through Pakistan, without monitoring it. Turns out that Pakistan delivered that aid to radical militias. Hence the rise of the Taliban. What does that tell you about Pakistan and terrorism? Not all of the help for the Taliban, however, was to assist jihad. Pakistan wants to somewhat control bordering Afghanistan, and considers India its enemy. On the other hand, if Pakistan were not militantly Islamic, it would not need to consider India an enemy, regardless of who controls Kashmir. The question is not whether the Pakistani Army has some disaffected individuals, but whether the pro-terrorist intelligence outfit determined policy and still determines it. There was a credible report a few years ago, that when he was President, Musharraf told fellow Islamists that at times, he would have to act as if he opposed them, but he was one of them. This is like the secret meeting of Muslim government leaders with Arafat, that I reported some years ago, in which, as he was about to sign Olso's peace pledge, he reassured them that Oslo is part of his phased plan for the conquest of Israel. Like Janus, two-faced: one face to the West, another face to jihad. Deception is part of the Islamist code. The U.S. needs to recognize this and assess more realistically. Then the U.S. might finally develop foreign policy in its own interest.
CANADIAN HATE-LAW AND AMERICAN MONITORING OF POLITICAL ACTIVISM The "Stossel Report" described in my prior article, also featured publisher Ezra Levant, who ran afoul of Canada's law against hate speech. Should there be any law against "hate speech," and how reasonable is Canada's law? Canada's law violates the key legal principle of clarity. The law is vague. Aside from a list of specifics prohibited, the law also bans opinions that "could expose someone to hatred." What does that mean? One cannot tell in advance. It is up to what euphemistically is called the Canadian Human Rights Commission to decide. The result: chilled freedom of speech. The guest had published pictures of Muhammad that all the other publishers were afraid to. As a result, 15 government agents interrogated the publisher for a total of 900 days, he reports. He could have been fined and even jailed. Eventually, they decided to drop the charges. They explained it on the basis of some formula involving where in the publication the items appeared and similar conditions that make no sense. They told him he is free to go, until "next time." That last, intimidating remark cast a shadow over his innocence and their devotion to democracy. Note that he was not accused of defamation. The government was upholding a counterfeit right not to be offended, against the real right to express ones' views. This is censorship, 21st century. Mr. Stossel advises Americans that some other democracies are much less free than we are, but we have similar tendencies to guard against. One such tendency is to monitor or repress political activity and speech. In one state, that thinks the paramount right is for people to know who is behind political activity, community activists have to read a 100-page instruction booklet and fill out a 14-page form. They are dropping out of activism. Neighbors cannot organize without government monitoring. Where do universities stand on hate-law? Universities are supposed to be places of enlightenment, controversy, free exchange of views. One would suppose mistakenly, these days. The head of the University of Ottowa threatened Ann Coulter, in advance of her scheduled speech, there, with prosecution if it crossed this law's invisible or moving line. The speech was accompanied by mob violence against her. Stossel considers the censorship law a state extension of that mob agenda. Stossel and guests drew a distinction among: (1) Ordinary speech and writing, that the Constitution protects from Congressional interference; and (2) Calling people to commit an imminent crime or committing fraud [or abetting terrorism]. Fraud may be sued. Inciting to riot may be prosecuted. Child pornography exploits innocent children. Otherwise, there should be no censorship (5/20/10). A law against being offended is the dream of political correctness and a nightmare for everyone else. Different things offend different people. Groups may pretend to be offended, as a means of extorting concessions from others. Islamic organizations are driving to institute forms of Islamic law in democracies. They consider any statement of Islamic history and theology, however true, academic, and respectful, offensive if it disputes their version. Thus they find free speech offensive. It is a way to repress dissent. Yet at universities where Muslims riot and call Jews names, there is little or no prosecution. Then there is no principle involved. The universities are anti-democratic or cowardly. These laws are tools of totalitarians.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
SOUTH AFRICA & THE WORLD CUP
Posted by Israel BenAmi, May 22, 2010. |
|
This was written by Rian Malan, writer, journalist and documentary-maker, who argues for living on the edge in South Africa. This appeared May 16, 2010 in the Observer (UK). |
|
It's a sunny weekday afternoon in Jo'burg, and I am lunching with friends at an outdoor restaurant. The joint we're in was hit by armed robbers earlier this week. The newspapers on the table are full of hair-raising tribulations — our former police chief on trial for bribery, commuter buses shot up by murderous taxi bosses who won't tolerate competition, and elders of the African National Congress declining to sign the charge sheet against Julius Malema, the controversial youth leader who made global headlines the other day by endorsing Robert Mugabe, the cocky little psychopath who ruined neighbouring Zimbabwe. Malema is now facing disciplinary charges, but no one in the ruling party is willing to take the risk of being identified as his accuser. This is worrying. Are racist demagogues winning the battle for control of the ANC? Are decent black men scared to take a stand lest they find themselves alongside whites, trussed up in the missionary cooking pot while Malema lights a fire beneath us? In a normal society, such questions would induce nervous breakdown, but my mates and I are laughing. We're sitting in the African sun, sharing jokes, and wondering how to con foreigners into coming here for the World Cup. Once upon a time, South Africans imagined that this soccer extravaganza would make us all rich. Myself, I struggled to believe that half a million football tourists would cross the planet in the midst of a brutal recession to visit a country best known for its high crime rate. My neighbours scoffed, preferring to believe they would make a killing by renting out their homes. Alas. Bookings are running at about half the anticipated level. Would-be scalpers are stuck with tickets they can't even give away, and Fifa's gluttonous marketing arm has reportedly managed to lease only 1% of the luxury private boxes in our enormously expensive new stadia. I am rather enjoying the resulting cries of pain. Fifa has made a monkey out of South Africa, encouraging us to spend billions we don't have on football stadiums we don't need in the absurd belief that we could recoup our losses by gouging football tourists whose willingness to come here was always in doubt. Our own leaders collaborated enthusiastically, partly because they relished the glory of presiding over an event of World Cup stature, but also because they were eager to participate in murky backroom deals that saw politically connected individuals reaping obscene profits on taxpayer-funded construction contracts. Now we're all saddled by debts it will take generations to pay off. I'm so riled that part of me would be gratified if the World Cup were a complete failure. But South Africa is a complicated country, and there's always another side of the story. As I write, a certain Mrs Gladys Dladla is ironing clothes in my kitchen. Gladys is an old-school Zulu matriarch, struggling heroically to maintain a huge family on her meagre earnings as my once-a-week char. She lacks the wherewithal to bribe officials who control access to state housing, so she's lived in a tin shack for 16 years. In recent weeks, getting to work has become a frightening ordeal thanks to renewed tensions between police and the aforementioned taxi thugs. Gladys's life seems entirely miserable, but she always shows up on time, chattering cheerfully about church and her hope that God and the ancestral spirits will soon guide us to victory in the national lottery. Gladys and I have a little syndicate going. The World Cup is an event of huge symbolic importance to Mrs Dladla. In the next several weeks, oily ANC politicians will attempt to convince you that this tournament is a tribute to their heroic victory over apartheid and associated triumphs of the human spirit. Hm. For people like Gladys, the longing for success is actually rooted in despair. They're so tired of being losers and also-rans, trapped at the bottom of a society that constantly threatens to degenerate into just another African basket case. Their dream was that in June 2010 the world's eyes would descend on us, and at last find something to admire. Mrs Dladla looks on these things with enormous pride. She feels that their glory reflects on her directly, and besides, there's always the hope that football tourism might generate jobs for her unemployed offspring. She was a great supporter of short-lived plans to turn my rambling old home into a cheap doss house for football hooligans. In the end, I baulked at paying tribute to Fifa, whose lawyers crushed all attempts to market World Cup lodgings through any channels other than their own. Just as well, because our doss house would most likely have failed anyway. So now we stand before you with clean hands. We have nothing to gain from the World Cup but the pleasure of your company, so it would be nice if you changed your minds about coming. Please! We've almost bankrupted ourselves in our determination to stage a tournament that runs like clockwork. And if it doesn't — you can have a chuckle at our expense. Last week's newspapers reported a state of abject unreadiness among the pom-pom girls scheduled to perform at the opening ceremony. A day or two later, President Jacob Zuma informed America that we have the laziest and most useless civil service on the planet. Elsewhere such an admission would have precipitated the government's downfall. Here, the story was relegated to page five. I struggle to see how anyone can resist a country where such things happen. South Africa is amazing! At any given moment, all possible futures seem entirely plausible. We are winning, we are losing. We are progressing even as we hurtle backwards. Every day brings momentous exhilarations and dumbfounding setbacks, and the sun shines brightly even in winter. Throw in the heady proximity of Mandela and Beckham, and you're almost guaranteed a splendid time. As for crime, well, yes, crime is a threat, but our police have been given orders to smash anyone who so much as touches a hair on any football fan's head. If you book now, you'll arrive just in time to catch a last glimpse of our fading rainbow, and the first stirrings of our next upheaval. If that sounds alarming, I wouldn't worry. There is much to be said for living on the edge, in a place shot through with "heartspace and the danger of beauty", as the Boer poet Breytenbach once phrased it. Britain seems pallid in comparison. We are told that your election was an event of epochal significance, but from Jo'burg, it looked boring — three nice white men with almost identical opinions jostling for space on the same centrist pinhead. As for the prospect of a hung parliament... you call that a crisis? Good God. We have far worse, every day, before breakfast. And we're still laughing. Better get here before we stop. Contact Israel BenAmi at farmer@012.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL: BEYOND INFURIATING
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 22, 2010. |
|
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) Last Wednesday night, Nabil Shaath, a member of the Fatah Central Committee and a close associate of PA president Mahmoud Abbas, spoke at a conference in Ramallah, at which he said: "There is a need to create and endorse new struggling tools, such as the popular resistance, and to increase our efforts in the international arena to isolate and punish Israel, prevent it from deepening its relationship with the European Union and attempt to expel it from the United Nations." By Thursday, according to news reports, our government was "furious," and denouncing Shaath's words. So what do we learn from the Friday report on this in the JPost by Khaled Abu Toameh and Herb Keinon? That we will be raising this with Mitchell — just as, on Thursday, we had raised the issue of the PA attempting (unsuccessfully) to block our admittance into the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. ~~~~~~~~~~ Beyond exasperating. Beyond comprehensible. Why are we continuing with this ridiculous game-playing called "proximity talks" if our ostensible partner, which claims to seek establishment of a state at our side that will live in peace with us, is trying to destroy us? Where is our national dignity? Our instinct for national self-preservation? Why aren't we calling a halt, saying boldly and publicly that we have no one to negotiate with in good faith? You don't suppose Netanyahu's fear of displeasing Obama has anything to do with it, do you? Or Barak's concern that the international community might not like us? ~~~~~~~~~~ Perhaps there's one "redeeming" element here. If we "must" continue these talks, at least the PA behavior should stiffen backs of our government officials somewhat and make it easier to refuse more concessions. You would think so, would you not? When they're acting this way, we should do more? After all, Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe Ya'alon (Likud) on Thursday evening, speaking at a celebration to mark the completion of a small new neighborhood in Maon, in the South Hebron Hills, insisted that we would start building after the freeze ended in September: "We will renew building after the moratorium ends. We will not evacuate settlements. We will not move Jews. We will not sacrifice Jews from any place in Israel. "The settlements have never been a stumbling block to peace. The absence of that peace is for reasons that are not connected to us. Our neighbors do not recognize the right of Jews to their land. They do not recognize the right of Israel to exist as a national homeland for the Jewish people." ~~~~~~~~~~ But, alas, it turns out that this statement from Ya'alon was only Ya'alon speaking — I seriously doubt that he was speaking for the government. For, also on Thursday, after Prime Minister Netanyahu (who DOES speak for his government) had met with Mitchell, his office released a statement regarding what had been discussed. And, incredibly, one of the things it is said they talked about in the first part of the meeting was "gestures Israel might make to the Palestinians." Nah! That can't be. But apparently it is. Let's get the chronology straight here: This discussion took place after Shaath had made his speech and our government was reportedly "fuming." After this, in a talk with Mitchell, Netanyahu was willing to discuss possible gestures we might make to the bums who want to destroy us. If he won't quit the talks, could he not at least say, "Nothing. Zero. Effes. I will not even consider a single gesture, unless and until they clean up their act"? Apparently not. I am ashamed, on behalf of Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is a great deal of analysis in the media regarding a turn-around on the part of Obama, who is doing a mea culpa and admitting he handled Israel badly at the start of his efforts to promote peace. He's learned now, he and his flunkies are telling Congresspersons, Jewish leaders and even some rabbis. Things are different. Well, I don't buy it for a second. And I don't trust Obama a bit more now than I ever did. That would make me very foolish indeed, although I imagine many will. I believe that Obama is playing it the way he thinks will work. It is being said that the new, kinder Obama is what convinced Israel to enter those talks. But if he suddenly decides again that "throwing Israel under the bus" (Melanie Phillips' words) is the way to go, he'll revert back to where he was. Because his heart is not with us and his intentions towards us haven't changed. Just wait until it is September, and he wants us to continue that freeze in building. One sure way to gauge Obama's intent is to note that while he is now "nicer" to Israel, he has not come down tougher on the PA in any visible way. It's obvious that PA leaders are still counting on him, and that he hasn't sent Mitchell to tell them, enough of this garbage already, get real. Mitchell met with PA officials in Ramallah on Wednesday and Wednesday night Shaath gave his talk. It's extremely likely that this "nicer" Obama has something to do with why Netanyahu won't quit the talks now, when he should. And is even willing to discuss "possible gestures." Those of a certain age and American cultural background will remember these words: "What a revolting development this is." ~~~~~~~~~~ Just to show you how revolting it all really is: After Mitchell met with Abbas this past week, Khaled Abu Toameh reported that Abbas complained about Israeli "provocations." Abu Toameh cited one "senior Israeli official," who said Jerusalem hoped the Palestinians were not looking for an excuse to scuttle the talks. "We want this process to succeed." How's that again? They full well KNOW it won't succeed. ~~~~~~~~~~ Rahm Emanuel, a key Obama aide, and most definitely no friend to Israel, has arrived here on a private visit, during the course of which his son will celebrate his bar mitzvah. Ain't that great? ~~~~~~~~~~ We end Shabbat with the traditional greeting, Shavua tov, good week. And so will I end it here. Perhaps in my next post there will be something encouraging to report. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
TRANSFER JEWISH LAND TO ARABS. THIS IS ZIONISM; FREEZE TOUGH ON JEWS DISPOSSESSED FROM GAZA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 21, 2010. |
|
SALAFIST LEADER IN GAZA ON HAMAS, ISRAEL,AND CHRISTIANS Jaish Al-Islam (Army of Islam) leader Omer Al-Ansari gave Ma'an News an exclusive interview. He said that his Salafist ideology is close to that of al-Qaeda and Hamas, and makes alliances with some other jihadist organizations, but his organization has its own methods and other differences. His main criticism of Hamas is that it is too modern, having found reasons to restrain its brigades from immediate, all out war with Israel. Operating clandestinely and as a rival to Hamas, Al-Ansari acknowledged, from his hideout, that most of his organization's founders, leaders, and scholars are dead or imprisoned. Nevertheless, the organization soldiers on. Although Al-Ansari did not admit that his organization is responsible for some explosions in Gaza, he said it serves to create security chaos. It causes Hamas not to seem fully in charge. Nevertheless, he complained that Hamas exploits the security chaos to declare martial law and crack down on his organization. Would the Salafists make a truce with Israel? Yes, but only if Israel conceded their immediate demands on prisoners and control over the Territories and the jointly-claimed holy sites. He distinguished between Christians who drink and whore, and Christians who do not. He said that the Salafists would expel the former and retain the latter. [His contemptible disrespect also applies to many Muslims, who do not follow his extreme view.] Why do many Muslims hate Christians? Al-Ansari explained that churches give them some subsidy that Muslims do not get. [Is that a reason to hate?] When asked if Salafism believes in change by force, Al-Ansari replied that there is no such thing as an extremist wing in Islam, all versions are part of the whole. His view is like the Christian view of the Trinity, each of three components independent and all three united (IMRA, 5/19/10).
ISRAEL PREPARING TO BAR FLOTILLA FROM GAZA Israel has decided to bar the flotilla, carrying hundreds of "peace activists" and humanitarian goods, attempting to break the partial blockade of Gaza. Israel's Foreign Ministry advised the governments of the countries from which the various ships disembarked. The Defense Minister has alerted the Israeli Navy to intercept the flotilla in the open sea off Gaza. Last June, another blockade-running ship was towed into an Israeli port. As far as humanitarian goods are concerned, Israel had let into the Gaza Strip 14,000 tons of it, last week. The flow has gone on and on. Meanwhile, with foreign help, Gaza port is being deepened and improved, to receive more ships (IMRA, 5/20/10). "Peace activists" has become a euphemism for abettors of war. They do not urge Hamas to abandon terrorism, which it carries out in an aggressive manner. They do not demand an end to Hamas holy war. They fail to criticize Hamas and Fatah for their ideology of conquering all of Israel. They do not suggest that next time there is war there, Israel be encouraged to eradicate Hamas, to end the terrorism and future wars. They have no solution for ending the war. All the efforts of those who call themselves "peace activists" are to weaken Israeli defense. When non-Muslims are less able to defend themselves from Islamic holy war, radical Muslims are more likely to launch the war. What would you expect? Breaking the partial blockade would enable Hamas to bring in heavier weapons and make harsher war. Some of the "peace activists" probably are wolves in sheep's clothing, who want that. Some are anti-Zionists and antisemites. The rest are naïve, assisting the most hate-filled, oppressive people at complete odds with those naive activists' liberal ideals. Perversion gives liberalism a bad name. A deeper port would enable the arrival of bigger freighters laden with tanks and artillery. Think Hamas wouldn't do it? What wouldn't Hamas do, that organization that risks its own civilians and murders enemy civilians, under its concept of a god that craves human sacrifice and in their view really is far from merciful? When Israel permitted Arafat a helicopter and PLO VIPs to drive across borders without being inspected, they abused the privilege to smuggle in weapons. That kind of smuggling having limited potential, Arafat then tried to build a port and airport, for heavier duty smuggling. The "peace activists" are supporting his successors' efforts. Remember when they claimed there was a humanitarian crisis, but no evidence of it? 
Photographs of Arabs in Gaza show full bellies, compared with photographs of Sudanese refugees with swollen bellies.
FATAH LEADER: EXPEL ISRAEL FROM UN Senior Fatah official Nabil Shaath wants the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) working to loosen Israel's ties with Europe and expel it from the UN. He says that the Holocaust helped "the Jews" strengthen ties with important European states. He has little hope expectation that negotiations between the P.A. and Israel will resolve the conflict. He suggests monitoring Israel's violations and informing the U.S. of them (IMRA, 5/20/10). I thought there was no Holocaust. Who can keep track of anti-Jewish inanities? The Holocaust killed almost half the Jews in the world, removing their potential new cultural and scientific enhancements to whole European countries. Then came a period when some Europeans felt contrite but others refused to relinquish their Holocaust spoils. Now many Europeans have resumed their bigotry against Jews while defending bigoted jihadists in the name of the humanism that those jihadists are destroying. They call that liberalism. Here is a terrorist organization, Fatah, based on murder and deceit, finding the UN enough of a cesspool of corruption, bigotry, and heartlessness, so it feels encouraged to influence it to expel a scapegoated member. All decent countries should resign membership. First they must rescind the Security Council power to issue binding orders on countries. The Security Council is too unreliable to be entrusted such power. Many binding orders, however, are ignored by malefactors. Supposedly binding Security Council resolutions and signed IAEA treaty provisions did not hold Saddam, N. Korea, Iran, and Syria-Hizbullah. Let Mr. Shaath suggest expelling N. Korea, Iran, and Syria and Lebanon from the UN. He won't. What jihadists say to us should not be taken as serious ethical principle. When their ideology endorses deception and violence, they say and do anything for their side. Do not expect to hear consistency from their mouths. By incitement to hate-filled violence, the P.A. has been violating all its agreements with Israel and the U.S.. The U.S. has ignored those violations, reflecting its own bias and fear of admitting policy failure. P.A. encouragement of violence and its diplomacy against Israel are strange ways of making peace, wouldn't you say? What violations does Shaath think Israel is committing? Doesn't say. Usually, the Arabs call Israeli self-defense aggression, and Arab aggression self-defense. The Arabs also call a violation Israel doing something not mentioned in what Israel agreed to, but a condition that the Arabs would like it to agree to. The Arab side uses a topsy-turvy logic foreign to the Western mind, though in the decline of Western civilization, inconsistency and hysteria are catching on.
JEWISH DEMOCRATS OF CONGRESS MEET WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA Three dozen Jewish Democratic Members of Congress met for 1 and a half hours with President Obama, to urge more public support for Israel. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) heard Obama express "his absolute determination that Iran would not achieve a nuclear bomb," and added that the President was "genuinely interested in our advice." "Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ) noted Republican Party efforts 'to distort President Obama's positions on Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.' He called Obama the "best president on U.S.-Israel military and intelligence cooperation in American history." As evidence of support for Israel's military, Obama cited his offer of an additional $205 million to subsidize Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile defense. The legislators appreciated that (IMRA, 5/20/10). Americans have on strange way of: contempt for politicians, electing one as President, disliking his policies, and then being awed by his presence and accepting his rationalizations. However, this group came as partisans and made a partisan political statement. That reduces their credibility. Reading both the Wall St. Journal and the New York Times, I find Republic analysis of Obama's foreign policy logical and Obama's defense of it a distortion of reality. In fact, Rep. Rothman distorts the Muslim-Israel conflict that most Muslim governments have with Israel into a narrow "Israeli-Palestinian conflict." The broader term shows the conflict's religious basis, like global jihad in general. The narrower term makes it seem territorial, and shows either political bias or lack of understanding. Yes, the Obama administration keeps expressing determination that Iran not develop a nuclear bomb, but it wasted time waiting for engagement that Iran spurned, wasted time trying to put the onus on Israel for being unable to deal with Iran, wasted still more time calling for pinprick sanctions, ruled out U.S. military action, took steps to thwart Israeli military action, and put out feelers about living with a nuclear-armed Iran. Is Obama determined to let Iran develop a nuclear bomb? Those certainly are not examples of U.S. cooperation with Israel on military and intelligence matters. As for the Iron Dome, its wastes money and defends little. Thanks but no thanks.
ISRAEL TRANSFERS JEWISH TOWNS' LAND TO ARAB CITY; HOW THIS RELATES TO ZIONISM Israel's Defense Minister Barack transferred land long zoned for Jewish towns in Judea-Samaria to the Arab city of Rawabi, for a highway to it. The city would start with room for 25,000 people and would have an option to accommodate another 15,000. Many Arabs build luxurious houses for themselves. At Rawabi, construction is going on every day, all day. Thus while Barak freezes Jewish construction, he heats up Arab construction. [Anti-Zionists accuse Israel of discriminating against Arabs.] The construction of Rawabi poses environmental problems for the surrounding area. Residents of a nearby Jewish town, Ateret residents, asked about Rawabi's trash, sewage, transportation, and security. "Arab sewage is already flowing uncontrolled in nearby Haramiye," one Ateret man said, "so I want to know how an entire city will be dealt with." (Arutz-7, 5/20/10). Earlier articles reported that this Rawabi is the product of a foreign plan to establish Arab facts on the ground, in anticipation of negotiations, while those same foreigners demand that Israel not build housing, lest that influence negotiations. The government of Israel reflects the ideology of its chief leaders, not Judaism, whose system of law is unused in its courts. Judaism is like a three-legged stool, resting on Torah, People, and Land. Secular Zionism, which perhaps PM Netanyahu subscribes to, at best, lacks the first pillar. Therefore, its stool wobbles on the leg of Land. Appeasement, which Defense Min. Barak subscribes to, has no pillars, and wobbles on Torah, People, and Land. Without ideological security, there is little national allegiance and even less national security. Ultimately, you can see, secular Zionism is inferior to religious Zionism in what it can maintain. As for Israeli courts, which reflect Barak's ideology, they are citadels of injustice, divorced as they are from Jewish values in a state besieged by barbaric values seeking to destroy Judaism and the Jewish people, and to seize the Land of Israel. Zionism focuses on the Land of Israel. It has no designs on other countries. It would not commit aggression to incorporate Jordan, which is part of the Land of Israel. Judaism desires to practice its own faith and especially in it own homeland, and, unlike its enemies, not to destroy or dominate others. (Here is a link to this article
FREEZE TOUGH ON JEWS DISPOSSESSED FROM GAZA When Israel expelled the Jews from Gaza, PM Sharon promised them compensation and new housing. Jews formerly from Netzarim have been waiting in tiny caravans for five years for permanent housing. Just when they finally received government approval to build permanent houses in Ariel, PM Netanyahu imposed an official freeze on Jewish, and only Jewish, construction in Judea-Samaria. Barak's "land snatch" may be part of rumored plans to change the category of some Judea-Samaria land from Area C, under total Israeli control, to Area B, under Palestinian Authority (P.A.) civilian control or to Area A, under P.A. military control. Members of Knesset appealed to Netanyahu and Defense Min. Barak to make an exception for the few dozen Netzarim Jews. Months pass, without response (Arutz-7, 5/20/10). One supposes that is what people mean by "Israel's 'vibrant'
democracy." Seems more like heartless leftwing and appeasement
ideology.
NEW YORK HINDU LEADER: PART 1. FROM REFUGEE TO U.S. PATRIOT — A TRUE FREEDOM Cultured and refined, Narain Kataria devotes his life to protecting freedom from the anti-culture and largely unrefined jihadists. Eleven years ago, Mr. Kataria founded the non-profit, Indian American Intellectuals Forum, over which he presides for the last 7 years, in New York. The Forum exists to strengthen friendship between the country of his birth and this country of treasured freedom. Mr. Kataria also is a director of Hindu Human Rights Watch, a watchdog for Hindu security globally. He is a founding member of the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam [introduced in these pages a year ago and whose three rallies were reported here]. The Coalition invites in all faiths, races, and nationalities to defend liberty and civilization. Thus the Hindu principle of live-and-let-live counters the Radical Muslim principle of live Muslim or die. Hindus do not forcibly convert, do not organize themselves under a religious hierarchy, and Kataria avers, can see others' pain. "Hindus consider the world as a family," Kataria explains. "Hindus never sent expeditions out to loot, murder, and dominate." By contrast, alien religions did invade India for such purposes and by such means, "unleashing a reign of terror and forcibly subjugating the people for 600-700 years." It was the British who emphasized a distinction between Hindus and Buddhists. Hindus feel a basic unity with Buddhists — Buddha was Indian. I have seen Kataria introduce a Sikh priest as "our elder brother." Kataria expressed gratitude to the Sikhs, whose martial skills and interests defended Hindus from aggressive Islam. As examples of Indian tolerance and understanding of others' problems, he cites the welcome given to hundreds of thousands of Tibetans driven out by China and to Parsis driven out of Iran by Islamists. India welcomes refugees without conditions. Kataria attests that India never persecuted Jews. The Indian American Intellectuals' Forum holds conferences to help people understand who and what guide international terrorism. The Intellectuals' Forum had sent their representatives to present a Hindu perspective at anti-terrorism conferences organized by Intelligence Summit in Florida and by America's Truth Forum in Washington, D.C. and Las Vegas. Every year Intellectuals' Forum organizes Hindu Unity Day in New York and invites important Indian leaders to speak on that occasion. The Intellectuals' Forum supports like minded groups, such as the New York chapter of Act For America. Twice its members visited the State Dept. The delegation informed the State Dept. that Pakistan misused U.S. aid to build an aggressive force against India. They urged the U.S. to declare Pakistan a terrorist state, disarm its nuclear weapons, and divide Pakistan into its four major ethnic areas. Splitting up Pakistan is not as Quixotic as it seems. The Baluchis and other major groups in Pakistan do not want to be dominated as they are by the Punjabis. When Bangladesh in eastern Pakistan seceded, the Pakistani army began a massive slaughter of Bangladeshis, including 2.5 million Hindus and .5 million Muslims. India's army arrested and jailed 90,000 Pakistani soldiers and forced the Pakistani army out. Who knows how many more millions India thereby saved! That was before Pakistan developed nuclear weapons. State Dept. officials heard the delegation out, but told them that nothing they would say could sway the U.S. from its alliance with Pakistan. The U.S. paid for that stubbornness, as another article will show.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE GREAT HEZBOLLAH SNIPE HUNT
Posted by Daily Alert, May 21, 2010. |
|
This was written by Michael J. Totten and it is archived at
|
|
John Brennan, deputy national security adviser for homeland security, has come up with a new way to waste the foreign-policy establishment's time — locate the so-called "moderate elements" within Hezbollah and somehow promote them. "There is [sic] certainly the elements of Hezbollah that are truly a concern to us what [sic] they're doing," he said. "And what we need to do is to [sic] find ways to diminish their influence within the organization and to try to build up the more moderate elements." There are no moderates within Hezbollah, at least not any who stand a chance of changing Hezbollah's behavior. Sure, the terrorist militia has sent a handful of its members to parliament, as Brennan says, and once in a while they sound more reasonable than its secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah, but these people are employees. They don't make policy. If you want to catch a glimpse of Hezbollah's org chart, just rent a car in Beirut and drive south. You'll see billboards and posters all over the place in the areas Hezbollah controls. Some show the portraits of "martyrs" killed in battle with Israel. Others show the mug shots of Hezbollah's leadership, most prominently Nasrallah and his deceased military commander, truck bomber, and airplane hijacker Imad Mugniyeh. Alongside the pictures of Hezbollah's leaders, you'll also see Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the two "supreme guides" of the Islamic Republic regime in Iran. It's obvious, if you know who and what you're looking at, that Hezbollah is still subservient to Khamenei. His face is almost as ubiquitous as that of Nasrallah and the deceased faqih Khomeini himself. Hezbollah's state-within-a-state doesn't even look like it's in Lebanon. It looks like, and effectively is, an Iranian satellite. Iran's heads of state appear everywhere down there, while Lebanon's heads of state are personae non grata. I've met those you might call moderate supporters of Hezbollah, Lebanese citizens who believe Hezbollah is there to defend Lebanon from Israel rather than to attack — which is not at all what anyone at the top thinks. Even if second-tier leaders were less belligerent, it wouldn't matter. The organization takes its order from Tehran. Hezbollah won't change until its masters change in Iran, and the U.S. is no more able to "build up" any imagined moderates within its ranks than it is able to replace Khamenei's hated dictatorship with the Green Revolution. 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 |
|
CALIPH ABU BAMA IN THE CITY OF AL-KOOKOO
Posted by David Wilder, May 21, 2010. |
|
A few days ago I discovered the American way. True, I grew up in the states, (a long time ago), and knew and heard about the great American dream. But the authentic 'American Way' crossed my path only earlier this week. A friend of mine gave me a short article published in a New York newspaper, headlined, "Mosque Going Up in NYC Building Damaged on 9/11." It didn't take too long to discover that this building adjacent to the Twin Towers, was making news, big time. The thirteen story mosque, a $100 million dollar project, is being called the Cordoba initiative. Before continuing, it should be made very clear the exact significance of this name. Do you remember Cordoba? Here in Hebron we also have a Cordoba, — the Cordoba Girls School, across from Beit Hadassah (teaching sweet little innocents how to win a place in the next world by killing Jews). What is the connection between the Cordoba initiative in New York and the Cordoba girl's school in Hebron, you ask!? Very simple. Cordoba was, for about 500 years, the capital of Islamic Spain. According to Wikipedia, "in the Middle Ages it was a capital of an Islamic caliphate and one of the largest cities in the world." What is the best way to keep such memories alive? Of course, to name important places after them. Why keep the memory alive. Because Islam believes that this city, Cordoba, still belongs to them. Following the attack on Spanish trains in 1994 in Madrid, an Al-Qaeda associate, Brigade of Abu Hafs al-Masri, who took 'credit' for the bombings, wrote, ""This is part of settling old accounts with Spain, the crusader..." [1] In other words, there are still Islamic groups who blame Spain for the fall of Cordoba and the Caliphate hundreds of years ago. As a result, mosques and schools are named, not only in memory of Cordoba, but as a means to maintain that memory in expectation of future conquest. And now New York will have the great honor, adjacent to the site of the most horrific crime in the United States, to conserve the name of those who perpetrated it. This has, of course, stirred great debate in the land of the free. But now, let's jump one step further, to mosque number two. That's right. A second mosque is being planned in the same vicinity. "FOX News has learned that an effort to place a second mosque close to the hallowed site in New York City is in its advanced stages. The Masjid Mosque has raised $8.5 million and is seeking an additional $2.5 million to begin construction. While it apparently has not settled on a final location, it has told donors it plans to build very close to where 3,000 people were killed in the September 11 terror attacks. In fact, the website appealing for donations boldly states that it plans to "build the 'House of Allah' next to the World Trade Center. Help us raise the flag of 'LA ILLAH ILLA ALLAH' in downtown Manhattan." [2]. All in the name of freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom to kill anyone and everyone who doesn't think like you. But New Yorkers shouldn't feel bad. Jerusalem too, the holiest city in the world, is also being maligned. Not only by extremist Islam, but from the highest echelons of America the Beautiful. Following 9/11, President George W Bush initiated the Homeland Security act and added Homeland Security to his cabinet. This organization's job is to protect the United States from terror such as struck nine years ago, and has almost struck again, numerous times. Of course, there are many ways to an end, to prevent such atrocities. Bush had his ways. America, 2010 has changed. Today's Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security is a wonderful fellow named John O. Brennan. Johnny grew up in my old haunting grounds, in New Jersey. He seems overly suitable for his position, having dealt with counterterrorism for many years. However, be it his own initiative, or that of his boss, Brennan seems to have developed a unique approach to fighting Islam. That is, if you can't beat them, join them. In a youtube video [3], Johnny-Boy says, and I quote, (at 1:00) "and in all my travels, the city I have come to love most is al-kuds, Jerusalem." 
Yes I have to admit, he does mention Jerusalem, after al-kuds. What is al-kuds? That's what Arabs call Jerusalem — 'the holy.' In the words and thoughts of a senior presidential advisor, one of the top anti-terror officials in 'Oh Say can you See,' Jerusalem is, first and foremost, al-kuds. Our Arab, Islamic neighbors have names for all Jewish places. It makes no difference that Jerusalem was Jerusalem thousands of years prior to the advent of Islam. It is, according to JohnO al-kuds. A modern example: Tel Aviv, a hundred and fifty years ago still sand dunes, is called, on a map of palestine, Tell ar rabbee. And again, back in time, Hebron, al khalil. Just as Eretz Yisrael — Israel — is palestine. I guess I shouldn't feel bad. After all, Washington DC Imam Abdul Alim Musa wants to establish an "Islamic State of North America no later than 2050".[4] With good guys like Brennan, and precedents such as NY city mosques next to the late twin towers, and presidents like Hussein Abu Bama, who knows? I know. Abu Bama will be the caliph, and Washington DC the capital. But the city's name will be changed. It will no longer be called Washington DC, rather Al-KooKoo. Footnotes [1] "Al Qaeda Claims Credit for Madrid Blasts"
[2] "Muslims in NYC Planning to Build Second, Smaller
Mosque Near Ground Zero"
[3] "Top Obama Officials Now Calling Jerusalem 'Al-Quds'"
[4] "DC Imam wants to establish an 'Islamic State of North
America no later than 2050'"
David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron.
You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of
Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il
or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760
Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone:
718 677 6886.
|
|
6 MILLION VOICES MUST BE HEARD!
Posted by Never Again is Now, May 20, 2010. | |
|
Contact Never Again Is Now at neveragainisnow@live.com |
|
SHMUEL TO BIBI: FIGHT BACK!
Posted by David Isaac, May 20, 2010. |
|
Welcome to ShmuelKatz.com! Our site is dedicated to continuing the work of Shmuel Katz (December 9, 1914 - May 9, 2008), the most clear-sighted political thinker Israel has ever produced. Shmuel Katz was a historic figure who participated in many of the events that led to the creation of the State of Israel. He served as member of Knesset (1949-1951), became advisor to Prime Minister Menachem Begin, and played an instrumental role in the establishment of Americans for A Safe Israel, an American offshoot of the Land of Israel Movement. He was also a noted biographer and historian The Web site will contain a wealth of information. The archive already houses nearly two hundred articles, as well as rare pamphlets, all of which are searchable by keyword. These articles are a treasure trove of political insight and a historic record. If you take the time to read them, you will be richly rewarded, gaining a knowledge superior to 99% of those who claim the title 'expert' in Israel's affairs. The site's "Lessons for Today" section will show how Katz's advice is applicable to the current crisis. You can view our latest entry below. It is also viewable at http://shmuelkatz.com/wordpress_cp/ I hope you enjoy and benefit from ShmuelKatz.com. If you have questions or comments, please reach me at David_Isaac@shmuelkatz.com. Sincerely,
|
|
What would Shmuel say to the Obama administration's plan to convene an international conference on achieving Mideast peace should direct talks between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs fail to reach a breakthrough by the fall? In "The Looming Danger of Annapolis," (November 22, 2007) written a year-and-a-half before his death, Katz wrote, "The Jewish state is in greater danger than anytime since the 1948 War of Independence." The danger wasn't Arab violence, but the Annapolis conference, "conceived and promoted with almost frenetic enthusiasm by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice." Katz described the lopsidedness of the approaching conference, where on one side stood delegates from the Arab states, the Palestinian Authority, and the Mideast Quartet — the U.S., UN, European Union and Russia — all "committed to the diminution of Israel and some, frankly, to her consequent extinction" — and on the other side, an Israeli delegation led by the irresponsible and incompetent Ehud Olmert. Fortunately, the Annapolis conference did not live up to its hype and ended more as news brief than banner headline. But if at first you don't succeed, try, try again and the Obama administration has revived the idea of an international summit, and it is likely to do a better job applying pressure against Israel than did the Bush administration, if for no other reason than that this president believes more in the cause. According to Haaretz, "The officials said the conference would be run by the Quartet of Middle East peacemakers — the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia — in a bid to forge a united global front for creating a Palestinian state." And so the trap is set. If Netanyahu permits it, Israel will find itself engaged in direct talks with the PA's Mahmoud Abbas for a "two-state solution." These talks will fail. Israel will not agree to forfeit all of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and East Jerusalem while allowing an influx of millions of Arab "refugees". Abbas will agree to nothing less. What incentive has he to do so? Were he agree to less, he would be subject to violent attacks from Hamas. By simply waiting, he'll gain what he wants anyway, with the "world" handing it to him a few months later — and offering him additional cover against attacks from his rivals (If the proposals fall short, he can easily distance himelf from them by saying they're the summit's proposals and not his own). As for Israel? Should it go along with these negotiations and wind up at that international conference, it will find the entire world arrayed against it — and unlike Iran which has China and Russia to run interference — there will be no one to take her side. Internationally isolated, divided from within, Israel will sit in a trap from which it will not easily break out. What would Shmuel say? "Bring the phony negotiations to an end. Prevent the conference from happening." Though the situation appears bleak, there is hope. First, Israel must change its behavior. It has been given many opportunities to exit the talks, none of which it seized upon. Only last week, Israel complained of PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad lobbying the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) against admitting Israel into the organization, accusing it of war crimes during Operation Cast Lead. This is incitement, an activity the PA was explicitly censored from doing by President Obama. Here, Israel could have said the PA is clearly not serious. It can't fulfill even the miminal demands placed upon it and so we are putting a stop to talks. Israel would explain why the entire peace process is, and always has been, a fraud. Netanyahu has the eloquence, even the underlying conviction. Let him use it on Israel's behalf. But turning the tide of world opinion is not a job for one man. Shmuel was a tremendous advocate for a program of information to present Israel's case to the world. (In our video section you can see an interview of Shmuel discussing his idea for a Ministry of Information.) Imagine how much better off Israel would be were it not sunk continuously in a defensive posture, but, instead, capable of boldly answering the continual lies of its enemies. As Shmuel wrote in "Countering Propaganda" (Sept. 26, 1984): "Israel is confronted in the West not just by hostile criticism but by a many-faceted propaganda-war machine with long-range objectives, operating at every level of society. The answer is for Israel to have a propaganda machine of her own. In "A Crying Need" (Aug. 6, 1982), he wrote: "HAD ISRAEL such a ministry, the first drastic change would be the presence at the cabinet table of the minister absolutely dedicated to the task of information. His battles would never end as long as newspapers and T.V. and radio stations chatter on around the world. The minister, absorbed in the conduct of that war in all his waking hours, must examine every subject put on the cabinet table with an eye to the hasbara challenges and tasks that may be involved. He will see to it his ministry should take action accordingly." Friends of Israel have noticed the glaring failure of Israel's public relations. Columnist Ralph Peters (New York Post, May 17) remarks, "Israel needs to rediscover public relations. With the global media rabidly pro-Palestinian, Israel had better get back in the information fight." Even were such a ministry started today, it would be many months before it became effective. Netanyahu can start the process now by speaking the truth about the fraudulent peace process and the true aims of the Arabs. Such a step would go a long way to energizing Israel's allies, from the powerful evangelical base frustrated at Israel's passive response to constant attack to Jewish Democrats grown uncomfortable with Obama's high-handed tactics against Israel. Obama's position is not as strong as it would seem. Already there are cracks in the wall. Last month, Jewish senators led by Chuck Schumer sent a letter to the president, criticizing his treatment of Israel. Jewish Democratic donors have also expressed their dissastisfaction. And there are reports of rifts developing in the administration, as well. "There is the first sign of a schism in administration policy over the Middle East," Steven Rosen, a director at the Middle East Forum, said in a recent news report. Israel must exploit the situation without delay. As Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick recently wrote: "By using support for Israel as a wedge issue in the upcoming elections, Republicans will do more than simply constrain Obama's ability to harm the Jewish state. They will be setting a course for a Democratic return to strategic sanity in the years to come. And nothing will guarantee the return of bipartisan support for Israel more effectively and securely than that." Preventing the international summit — that must be the paramount goal of Netanyahu, however uncomfortable it makes Israel-U.S. relations in the short term. Social security is considered the third rail of domestic politics. With any luck, the political fallout will be such that solving the Arab-Israel conflict will become the third rail of foreign politics, a subject so politically volatile that Obama will not want to touch it again. David Isaac is e-Editor of www.shmuelkatz.com, a website devoted to the writing of Shmuel Katz. Contact him at David_Isaac@shmuelkatz.com |
|
FRANCE, ENTRE GUERRES
Posted by Frank Adams, May 20, 2010. |
|
This is a comment on "The 'Phoney War' And The Next War" by Dmeetry Raizman that appeared in the March-April 2010 issue of Think-Israel. |
|
One aspct about inter war France and the 1940 defeat is not spelled out clearly enough. Given the disintegration of Austria Hungary, Ottoman Turkey and the ostracism of Communist USSR between 1919 and 1939 Germany was the biggest unit of population and economy in Europe and as much was clear to everybody. To have held up a balance of power coalition against her would have been difficult and so a war and victory to clip German wings effectively looked hollow, and for France given her population problems and profile, downright Pyrrhic whence her strategic caution. This is basically the old playground problem of how to deal with the bully of the class: avoid trouble or better, be friends which in the 20's and 30's was asking too much; or hug him close as friend to all which the post 1945 situation forcced on those defeated in 40-45. It is this basic German physical advantage in Europe that led Germany to chance its arm on reversing the 1918 defeat — which it did successfuly till it over-reached itself by invading the USSR. It is also the basis of the slow build of European unity in the €U possible because the USA and USSR had taken the hegemony after 1944 so pulling the rug under local competition for it. The latest irony being the German reluctance to exercise that local superiority by propping up Greek and other "PIGS" economies: Portugal, Italy, Greece & Spain. Essentially German Unity in 1870 dethroned France from the premiership of Europe and having retrieved Alsace Lorraine in 1918 at what turned out to be an exorbitant cost, her civil constituency was not in a mood to fight if it could be avoided because it was a hiding to nothing — especially after the 1929 crash and depression which at the time fitted the not only Communist explantion that economic trouble came from the bankers' ramp of unregulated capitalism. Remember in the 30's most of the labour force of Europe and USA — as well as the USSR were first genration ex-peasants up from the country onminimal primary education and even in secondary education economics was still a rare educational experience in the 30's. The demoralisation and caution came from a reality that you do not provoke the biggest boy in class, and as regards the military doctrinal technicalities the Germans too were cautious and the move to panzers and blitzkrieg was pushed politically from Hitler for tanks and aircraft and from within the military the 1940 victory was largely a fact of Manstein (né Lewinski) being a better general than Georges the commmander of the French Northern front. Yours,
Contact Frank Adams at frrankadam@aol.com |
|
HOW LIBERAL JEWS ARE ENABLING THE SECOND HOLOCAUST
Posted by Sandra Levy, May 20, 2010. |
|
This was written by Philip Klein and it appeared in the
American Spectator
|
|
In the past, I've remarked to friends that the difference between a Jewish liberal and a Jewish conservative is that when a Jewish liberal walks out of the Holocaust Museum, he feels, "This shows why we need to have more tolerance and multiculturalism." The Jewish conservative feels, "We should have killed a lot more Nazis, and sooner." I thought of this as I read Peter Beinart's new essay, "The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment," which argues that "liberal Zionism" is in danger unless groups such as AIPAC start to take a more critical view of Israel's actions. Beinart, using a Frank Luntz survey of young American Jews as a jumping off point, writes: Particularly in the younger generations, fewer and fewer American Jewish liberals are Zionists; fewer and fewer American Jewish Zionists are liberal. One reason is that the leading institutions of American Jewry have refused to foster — indeed, have actively opposed — a Zionism that challenges Israel's behavior in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and toward its own Arab citizens. For several decades, the Jewish establishment has asked American Jews to check their liberalism at Zionism's door, and now, to their horror, they are finding that many young Jews have checked their Zionism instead. The problem, however, isn't with leading Jewish organizations that defend Israel, but with liberalism. As sickening as it sounds, Jewish liberals see their fellow Jews as noble when they are victims being led helplessly into the gas chambers, but recoil at the thought of Jews who refuse to be victims, and actually take actions to defend themselves. It isn't too different from American liberal attitudes toward criminal justice or terrorism, where morality is turned upside down and the lines between criminals and victims become blurred, and in certain cases, even reversed. In the case of Israel, what changed over time was that Israel went from a state that exemplified Jewish victimhood (a role that Jewish liberals are comfortable with) to one in which Jews were actually in a position of power, which liberals are not comfortable with. Meanwhile, Palestinians, aided by the media, effectively exploited Jewish liberals by portraying themselves as the real victims, and Israel as the oppressors. I experienced this first hand once when I went on a Birthright Israel trip (which is a paid trip for American Jews to travel to Israel). At one point, we went to the cemetery at Mount Herzl, which is sort of Israel's equivalent of Arlington National Cemetery, and is located by Yad Vashem, Israel's main Holocaust Museum. While stopping at the cemetery, we were asked to offer our feelings standing in a cemetery honoring fallen Israeli soldiers, and the first American Jew who commented was this liberal girl who reflected, "All I can think about is how many Palestinian graves there are." Israel, right now, is surrounded by terorrist groups dedicated to the nation's destruction. Palestinian society teaches its children to aspire to slaughter Jews much in the same fashion as the Nazis indoctrinated their young. Suicide bombers who die in the act of killing Jewish civilians are celebrated as heroes. It's a culture that glorifies death and uses women and children as human shields to gain sympathy from the international community — and especially liberal Jews. And the terrorists are receiving aid from Iran, a radical nation that vows to wipe Israel off the map within the context of seeking a nuclear weapon. Yet against this backdrop, all liberal Jews want to do is to pin the blame on Israel's efforts to defend itself, and engage in the magical thinking that more Jewish concessions will create peace and security. By doing so, they are helping the enemies of the Jews who are intent on finishing the job that Hitler started. While Israel has no shortage of critics, when Jewish liberals attack Israel, it's that much more damaging, because Israel's enemies can say, "See, even Jews admit that Israel is the oppressor." While I would never suggest that Jews who happen to be politically liberal would want a second Holocaust to happen, I do think that by participating in a campaign to defang Israel and prevent it from taking the actions necessary to defend itself, that Jewish liberals are making things significantly easier for those who do want to carry out a second Holocaust. Luckily, though, there are a lot of Jews in Israel who are determined not to let that happen. Contact Sandra Levy by email at shula2933@gmail.com |
|
HEZBOLLAH HOLDS 'JIHAD TOURS' FOR STUDENTS
Posted by Boris Celser, May 20, 2010. |
|
Militants teach students to fire rockets after tour of south
Lebanon. 'It's like Disneyland,' says one
This is from Ynet
|
|
Just days before the tenth anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon, Hezbollah hosted hundreds of students at what it called 'The Land of Islamic Resistance'. For many of the Muslim and Christian young people it was the first visit to southern Lebanon. "We want our students, whether they are Hezbollah members, supporters or rivals, to see the land that Israel occupied for 22 years," said group member Mohammad Taleb. 
"We want young people to know of the achievements made by the resistance and show them how wrong Israeli occupation is. This land was liberated by thousands of resistance fighters who fought every day in order to return the land to their people." Many of the students were wide-eyed at a meeting with Hezbollah's militants. "It was like being in a movie," said Grace, a Christian Lebanese student. "I respect these young men, who liberated my land. I don't see them as terrorists, as the West describes them." The militants, on their side, showed their guests how to fire rockets and anti-aircraft missiles. "These young people give us strength," said one gunman after the demonstration. The students also toured the area of the Beaufort, and planted a Hezbollah flag near the village of Maroun al-Ras, the site of one of the bloodiest battles of the Second Lebanon War. "It's surreal," said a French student who took part in the tour. "It's like Disneyland. I never expected to see such things." Responding to claims that Syria had provided the group with Scud missiles, Taleb was unapologetic and said Hezbollah would never lay down its arms. "We will keep our weapons because they will help us deal with Israel if it attacks Lebanon again," he said.
Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net
|
|
IRAN UPGRADED MAIN BATTLE TANK; ISRAELI ARMY TRAINING AGAINST PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY MIILITARY ASSAULT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 20, 2010. |
|
CIVIL DEFENSE DRILL Next week, Israel will conduct a civil defense drill against a combination of bombardment by hundreds of rockets and a cyber attack that theoretically brings down the computer networks. The government declined to state from which countries the simulated attacks theoretically originated, but it notified neighboring countries that these are war games (IMRA, 5/18/10). Why hundreds of rockets? Why not thousands and tens of thousands? How would Israeli anti-missile defenses stop so many? Israel notifies enemy states that these just are war games, so they do not imagine Israel is about to attack them. The Arabs and the Soviets used to allege that Israel was preparing to attack or that it started prior wars. The Soviets made such allegations to panic the Arabs into war. The Arabs made such allegations for propaganda, paranoia, or pretext for their own aggression. When about to attack, a country could declare it is just staging war games. Does the enemy believe Israeli assurances? The anti-Zionist side assumes that Israel is as deceitful as the anti-Zionists. One reader told me that Israel started the second Lebanon War and that the media and Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International verified it. He must have forgotten that, besides having fired rockets at Israeli civilians — a war crime — and built up a stockpile for more such instances of aggression, Hizbullah raided Israel and killed and kidnapped some Israeli soldiers. There is a class of anti-Zionists who abuse the comments box to be disruptive. Although they read many of my articles, they studiously miss the point, reject points giving substantive explanation, and deny there were such points. This class of reader seeks to attach to every sub-topic an irrelevant rehashing of the origin of the Arab-Israel conflict, on the basis of historical fabrication. Some anti-Zionists generate false claims, and others accept them without checking, because it suits them. No scholarship there. Although they read my articles, they act unaware of the rules of decorum for comments, which I have restated periodically. They seem unaware that no respectable newspaper accepts readers' letters that attempt to insult their journalists, call for mass-murder, and opine about topics not in the article. Some of them keep pestering, though I delete their comments. They assume a non-existent authority over other people's time. One said he could take up all my time. This is shameful behavior. Once a person has shown himself to be just seeking to annoy, his offerings no longer are welcome. These people accuse one of fearing debate. But they do not debate with any academic integrity. They ignore one's points and call names. Not fear, do I have, but the same feeling in deleting their posts as in sweeping ants off the picnic table. Specific, relevant, polite debate is welcome. Nasty harassment is not.
IRAN UPGRADED MAIN BATTLE TANK Iran is about to unveil a major upgrade to its main battle tank, the Zolfagar. The tank has been greatly improved and tested. It will be available for export. New laser systems were installed, the fire navigation system was updated (IMRA, 5/18/10). The U.S. exported its technology. It allowed into science and technology classes many thousands of Iranians and Arabs. The U.S. sold technology to foreign countries. Now Iran and Jordan have begun exporting arms in growing competition with the U.S., and some of the students must be helping build weapons of mass-destruction abroad. Sec. of Defense Weinberger, who was an executive in a military corporation, helped Saddam build a chemical warfare factory, helped bring about the Iran-Contra deal that shipped arms to Iran, and against regulations set up a tank factory in Egypt. Weinberger was the same person who subverted the U.S. program of sharing with Israel intelligence, thereby tempting Pollard to share it illegally. Weinberger interfered with Jonathan Pollard's judge to secretly advocate the excessive penalty Pollard got, but years later Weingerger admitted that the alarm over Pollard was greatly exaggerated. Nobody held Weinberger accountable for his obstruction of justice, subversion, law-breaking, contribution to Saddam's war crimes, and fiasco in dealing with Iran.
CANADIAN JEWISH CONGRESS: HATECRIMES/ SPEECH LAW ABSURD The Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) advocates strong anti-hate laws, but, carried too far, the law in Toronto has turned around to bite it. "The Criminal Code allows for sentences to be increased if there is 'evidence that the offense was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, color, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor.'" Recently added to the hate-speech lexicon was an ungrammatically redundant construction, "non-Jewish Shiksa." CJC finds that addition absurd (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/18). Both my parents could speak Yiddish. "Shiksa" means non-Jewish female. The word, itself, does not indicate anything else, and does not connote hatred. It can be used to express disapproval or be neutral. Hate-speech is an extension of hate crimes and a way of identifying hate crimes. I have been the victim of both, but disapprove of the category of hate crimes and hate speech. It allows for too much discretion and therefore abuse. It extends into censorship and absurdity, as the Toronto incident illustrates. Let assault and vandalism be punished in their own right, and let society attempt to educate for tolerance!
ISRAELI ARMY TRAINING AGAINST PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY MIILLITARY ASSAULT The Israeli Army is training against possible attack by Palestinian Authority (P.A.) forces. The U.S. is turning P.A. troops into a formidable infantry. They are much more effective than formerly. Israel has to take them seriously. IDF Major-General Avi Mizrahi says that an increase in settler violence, perhaps further burning of mosques [for which no culprits have been identified yet], could arouse the P.A. troops to attack. IMRA pointd out that U.S. Gen. Dayton, who heads P.A. military training, warned that if the P.A. does not get what it wants from negotiations, it might use against Israel the troops he is training. Gen. Mizrahi's rationale for P.A. attack is "politically correct." (IMRA, 5/18/10). P.A. head Abbas made the same threat. On the other hand, finding themselves picked on both by the Arabs and by the government of Israel, some young Jews in Judea-Samaria may be becoming violent. Even if they are not, people will claim, as people claimed when they definitely were not, that they are violent. It just takes rumors to rouse the Arabs. On the third hand, the government has used agents provocateurs to commit violence against Arabs in the name of religious and nationalist Jews and to frame Jews for non-existent crimes or for self-defense. Could be that the government will get settlers blamed for what provocateurs do, in order to get a pretext for removing Jews. In any case, the U.S. is training a military force under jihadist control that is more likely to be used to commit aggression, than not, whether taken over by Hamas or not.
RUSSIA AND CHINA AGREE TO MORE UN SANCTIONS ON IRAN A day after Iran announced a nuclear swap proposal with Turkey and Brazil, the U.S. announced agreement with Russia, China, and the other permanent members of the Security Council to impose a fourth round of sanctions on Iran. The swap proposed to safeguard only half of Iran's fissionable material, and that half without international supervision. The sanctions ended up with less of a bite than the U.S. had suggested to Russia and China. China praised the swap. The new sanctions include a mandate to inspect Iranian ships suspected of entering or leaving foreign ports with nuclear-related technology or weapons. The efficacy of such sanctions is not clear. Another provision restricts Iranian financial institutions (David E. Sanger, Mark Landler, NY Times, 5/18/10, A1). Iran's swap deal was thought to impede the U.S. drive for sanctions. But the U.S. ignored it — apparently, the world eventually gets tired of deliberate delay, The parties involved are play acting, with a partial swap and partial sanctions, and China pretending that the swap is more than a ploy to procrastinate. First, Iran would take a week to flesh out the swap proposal. Then it would negotiate it. Then it might submit further proposals. Anything to keep Iran's nuclear time-bomb ticking down. Some defenders of Iran keep writing in to deny there is any evidence of Iranian intent to develop nuclear weapons and that it was fully inspected. What do they think the fraudulent Iranian offer is evidence of? What about the IAEA complaints that Iran had secret facilities not inspected and that Iran, like Iraq before it, did not answer many IAEA questions? The answer is that they studiously ignore evidence. Neither do they think about the situation. Why do they imagine China and Russia go along, even if dragging their feet, with UN sanctions? They do not imagine. Instead of taking their quarrel up with the UN, they take it up with me for reporting and explaining the UN. That is the jihadist way of dealing with controversy, blame the messenger. Americans should reject that issue-avoidance and truth aversion.
SOUTH KOREA TO ASK FOR UN SANCTIONS ON NORTH KOREA 
South Korea has completed its investigation of the sinking of its ship. It found the damage to have been done by a torpedo from North Korea. It intends to request UN sanctions on North Korea. Since N. Korea hardly makes or trades anything, sanctions would have little effect. South Korea would be able to withhold subsidies of its northern nemesis. China could be asked to reduce its subsidy of N. Korea (Choe Sang-Hun, NY Times, 5/18/10, A4). China uses the subsidy to keep its border with North Korea stable. It fears a rush of refugees.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: RAISING OUR VOICES AGAIN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 20, 2010. |
|
We need your help here, from those inside of Israel especially, but those outside as well. I have been focusing on political events that in the main involve Israel in interactions with the international community, such as the "proximity talks" (which I address below.) But now I raise an issue of a different kind, which cannot pass unnoticed. Arutz Sheva described the situation: "The IDF's Civilian Administration issued a demolition order [May 9] against the spacious building that houses Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva at Yitzhar, in Samaria. MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union), in an unprecedented statement, warned that bloodshed would ensue. "Local residents believe that authorities are purposely punishing the yeshiva because of a confrontation with the IDF that took place on Independence Day, and also because security forces hold the yeshiva's students responsible for various attacks against Arabs in recent months and years." ~~~~~~~~~~ Note of clarification: Yeshiva head Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira was held by authorities this winter with regard to the arson attack on the Kafr Yassuf mosque. Reports the JPost: "A Jerusalem District Court judge forced the police to release Shapira for lack of evidence." As to Independence Day, Yitzhar residents say that IDF troops began harassing visitors who wanted to tour the area and prevented them from entering the springs near the settlement. When the soldiers tried to hold back one of the residents, other settlers became agitated. The residents say that one of the soldiers stationed in the area fired a warning shot into the air. When he refused to give his name, the residents demanded that he remain in the area until he agreed to do so. The IDF says that residents attacked soldiers with stones, lightly hurting three. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to the Arutz Sheva report: "'...the authorities are making special efforts to hurt the yeshiva in an unfair and vindictive way,' a yeshiva spokesman said... 'It should be noted that the building is an ornate permanent structure, with an area of 1,300 square meters, which was built with the aid of the Ministry of Housing and was approved by the various authorities to serve as an educational institution.' ~~~~~~~~~~ Further clarifications from the JPost : The IDF administration in Judea and Samaria claimed that the construction was done outside the zoning area for this type of building. The Yitzhar treasurer, Itamar Posner, however, maintains "that the building was within an appropriately zoned area of the settlement... "...he noted that the ministries of Construction and Housing as well as Transportation had invested heavily in the project. They would not have done so if it was illegal, he reasoned. "Posner added no one at the yeshiva has any record of a demolition order from 1999. Nor had they heard anything about it in past years. "...The yeshiva...posted a response [on its website] that said, in part, that the legal status of the yeshiva was stronger than many other structures in Judea and Samaria." ~~~~~~~~~~ I've been writing about Barak's positions vis-a-vis the "proximity talks," and his failure to protect Jewish interests, with, instead, an eagerness to run to make concessions. Well, here he is, our muscle-flexing minister, showing one and all that he's really tough with the people on the right, and thereby courting approval from the left and, need I add, the international community. Obama and Abbas would be so pleased with him. This cannot be permitted to proceed. ~~~~~~~~~~ I am asking you to write to Prime Minister Netanyahu (not Barak himself). The demand is that Netanyahu stop Barak. We need a huge outpouring of protest. As always, numbers count. Make your message short, and to the point, please. If you are writing from outside of Israel, please note that the world is watching and if Barak succeeds he will do Israel considerable harm among the very people who are Israel's biggest supporters. This has impact. If you are inside of Israel, please get as many other Israeli citizens as possible to write. ~~~~~~~~~~
If you do e-mail, for the first address, above, put: "Attention: Cabinet Secretary, Zvi Hauser." For the second address, above, put "No Demolition at Yitzhar," "Don't destroy the Yeshiva," "Stop Barak now," or something similar. Short and to the point. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, to the farce known as the "proximity talks." Mitchell is here. He held talks with Abbas in Ramallah yesterday, and is scheduled to meet with Netanyahu today. Right before Shavuot, I read yet another statement by PA negotiator Saeb Erekat, and I thought, ah, the "threat du jour." Said Erekat: "Israel is now facing two options: Peace or settlements. Israel cannot combine the two together." Spoken, once again, with the arrogant self-assurance of someone who assumes that the American president will deliver for the PA. Personally, I think our prime minister should put out a parallel statement: The PA must understand that peace is only possible if it recognizes Israel's right to exist AS A JEWISH STATE. The PA should not delude itself that it can have peace without this. ~~~~~~~~~~ There were additional statements that Erekat made that I wish to examine here: "He added that according to agreements reached between the PA and the Obama administration, core issues, such as Jerusalem, refugees, water, borders and prisoners, would be resolved on the basis of international law and United Nations resolutions. "'This will eventually lead to ending the Israeli occupation of our land and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state,' he said." I've been writing vigorously about the need to tell our narrative, or, put more boldly, tell the truth, to combat the Arab lies. And here is an instance in which that truth is very badly needed. For the truth is stretched so badly by Erekat that it is not even recognizable as such. "...resolved on the basis of international law and United Nations resolutions." UN Security Council Resolution 242, passed after the Six Day War, does not require Israel to return to the '67 lines and does not even mention a Palestinian people or a Palestinian state. Erekat refers to "our" land (which is commonly understood to be everything past the '67 line), but it is not their land. It never was their land. We need to talk about the Sanremo Conference and the Mandate for Palestine, which exist within international law to this day, and give all of the land between the river and the sea to the Jews. Now, as never before, our case must be made. ~~~~~~~~~~ Even Security Council Resolution 1397, which was passed during the intifada in 2002 and recognizes the "vision" of two states living side by side, calls for "secure and recognized borders." It says nothing about Israel returning to the '67 line and does not in any way acknowledge that all land on the other side of that line is automatically "Palestinian." What is more, it "demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction." And so, if Erekat is going to refer to UN resolutions, he should be prepared to put his own house in order. ~~~~~~~~~~ I would further point out here that there is a difference between Security Council resolutions, which have standing in international law, and General Assembly resolutions, which are no more than recommendations and do not. Too often, that difference is conveniently ignored. It is important to note that both resolution 181 of 1947, which called for the partition of Palestine, and resolution 194, passed in 1948, which the Arabs use as the basis for a "right of return," are General Assembly resolutions. They carry no weight in international law. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday, PA president Mahmoud Abbas warned about Israeli "provocations" that are threatening the talks. He presented Mitchell with a letter detailing Israeli "crimes." You can see just how far this is going to go. Allow me, please, to note a couple of things the PA, our "peace partner" is doing: According to a Palestinian Media Watch report, the PA TV children's show "Chicks," this past week featured children who had visited places in Israel such as the Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee), Haifa and Jaffa, and they were all identified as being in "Palestine." "The Arabic word chosen to define 'Palestine' was 'dawla' which means 'state'". "The Palestinian Authority alternates its messages between denying Israel's right to exist and denying Israel's very existence. This is one example of denying Israel's very existence, having it replaced by 'the State of Palestine.'"
~~~~~~~~~~ The PA has declared "all out war" against the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. It has now launched a large scale campaign to persuade Palestinian Arabs that they should boycott everything coming from these communities. This is contrary to what is stipulated in the Oslo Accords. What is more, it is particularly galling considering that Netanyahu, since he became prime minister, has worked to strengthen the PA economy. ~~~~~~~~~~ Above I refer to the "threat du jour." Here I have the US idiocy of the week: Reuters reports that according to John Brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, Washington is concerned about "some elements" in Hezbollah. There is a need, he said, "to try to build up the more moderate elements." When you stop laughing, you can finish reading... Brennan, who made his comments at a Washington conference, referred to Hezbollah as a "very interesting organization" that has moved from being a "purely a terrorist organization," to a militia, to a partner in the Lebanese government. How pathetic these people (not Hezbollah, the decision makers in Washington) are! I have news for Brennan: Hezbollah, which is bringing in weapons galore, is still a terrorist organization. My concern is that this sort of thinking may color the US reaction to us when, sooner or later, we take on Hezbollah again. Remember when Obama proposed reaching out to the moderate elements in the Taliban, and members of the Taliban said they didn't know what he was talking about, as they were all the same? ~~~~~~~~~~ I spoke about the farce that is the "proximity talks." I haven't the stomach here to also address the farce that is the dealings with Iran. But it's painful. ~~~~~~~~~~ Allow me to end with teachings from a shiur, a religious lesson, I attended on Shavuot night. It was intended to provide us with a vision of hope during these terribly dark times. It did so for me, and I share this with you can you can be buoyed as well. Our teacher used as her model the situation of the parents of Moshe (Moses). Struggling against the decree of Pharaoh to toss all newborn Israelite babies in the Nile, they hid their son for three months, and then recognizing that it would not be possible any longer, they placed him in a teva (Hebrew for "ark") and set it in the bulrushes at the edge of the river. There, of course, he was discovered by Pharaoh's daughter. After studying the Torah text itself, we looked at two commentaries on this situation. One was exceedingly grim. Oh, the pain those parents must have felt, the grief... The other was imbued with faith (emunah) and hope. Consider: Why does the Torah refer to the water-proofed basket in which Moshe was placed a teva? This word is the same one used for the ark of Noah at the time of the flood. What is a teva, as compared to a ship? our teacher asked? A ship has a steering column. A teva does not: It is steered by G-d. Moshe's mother, Yocheved, was placing her baby son in G-d's care. There is a midrash that tells us that the day on which he was placed in that teva, is the same day (Shavuot) that years later he ascended Har Sinai to receive the Torah from the Almighty. We must never, ever, despair. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
IT´S NOT THE MESSAGING, IT´S THE MESSAGE
Posted by Susana K-M, May 19, 2010. |
|
This was written by Daniel Greenfield. He blogs at the
Sultan Knish website, where this article is archived at
|
|
Two weeks ago I was asked what role Rahm Emanuel is meant to play in the Obama Administration's campaign against Israel. That question has now been answered. Emanuel has been selected for the unlikely role of the "Good Cop" in an administration full of "Bad Cops". After seemingly steering clear of Israeli policy, Rahm Emanuel surfaced in a meeting with several moderate liberal "Rabbis" to explain that the Obama Administration was actually extremely pro-Israel, only their "messaging" was screwed up. 
The "messaging" tactic is one that the Obama Administration has repeatedly used to reassert its position while arguing that critics simply didn't understand what was being said to them. Think of Cool Hand Luke. "What we've got here is a failure to communicate." What that really means is a failure to obey. Run that through PRese and mix it up with a handful of buzzwords, and it's another attempt at pushing the "Reset button" while really saying, "We're not wrong, you're stupid." Hoping that the people they're talking to are too stupid to realize what's really being said and done to them. The idea that Rahm Emanuel is the Obama Administration's top Jewish asset is already surreal. Despite his background, in his actual job Emanuel has shown about as much interest in Jews and Israel, as Biden has shown in the Irish and Ireland. But Emanuel's own political ambitions doubtlessly played a major part in allowing him to select this role for himself. The real Rahm Emanuel has no loyalties except to himself, which is why he isn't about to let himself be used as a "Bad Cop" and then thrown under the bus. It's safer to be the "Good Cop" and then walk away claiming you were misled by people you trusted, once the wheel turns. But Rahm's soiree shows a dose of worry by the Obama Administration when it comes to their Jewish support. The full list of Rabbis he met with hasn't been released, but those who have are younger, moderate liberal and pro-Israel. This marks a retreat from the unofficially official position of the Obama Administration that its hostility to Israel is actually representative of a "new generation" of Jews who hate Israel. And anyone who disagrees is just a "Likudnik". Of course they don't say "hate". They have nicer terms than that, which is helpful when what you're really talking about is collaborating in genocide. All along J Street and left wing anti-Israel groups have been promoting a youthful self-image, which is a tough sell considering that its president, Jeremy Ben Ami is pushing 50, and its moneyman, creaky Nazi collaborator George Soros, is pushing 80. But the left's progressivism requires casting their struggle as that of the caring and passionate youth against the uncaring old men. Even if the old men are the ones who are actually running the show from behind the scenes. Especially then. And so after picking over the rhetorical bones of Peace Now, they emerged with "Dor Shalem Doresh Shalom" or "A Whole Generation Demands Peace". If you believe the Obama Administration, the Beinarts and the J Streets, they already control the youth, and only the aging organization leaders stand in their way, only because they haven't caught up with reality yet. This is classic leftist cant, that confuses their own propaganda with reality. And Obama's falling poll numbers have forced him to backtrack from the lie that his position on Israel is that of a majority of Jews in America. And after a year of extremely slimy tactics that ranged from accusing Jewish pro-Israel leaders of being out of touch with their own communities to using media proxies to hurl accusations of Dual Loyalty at anyone critical of the Obama Administration's mangling of Israel — Rahm appears to throw a few crumbs to the people who need it most. Liberal Pro-Israel Jews who are genuinely worried about the crisis in relations between the two countries. 
The meeting marks no retreat, only a bone thrown to a starving dog. Many liberal Jews who do care about Israel and nevertheless voted for Obama need a reason not to turn on their master. And if a pat on the head was all it took to make Elie Wiesel lick the administration's hand, the idea is all it will take is a few sit downs with Rabbis from Florida to keep the Jewish vote from spinning too far out of control. A few doses of the old campaign spin. A little less James L Jones cracking jokes about greedy Jews, and a little more Dennis Ross, Baker's ole Jewboy, on set to calm frayed nerves and assure everyone that Obama is doing everything it can to protect Israel. When of course Israel would much rather that Obama go "protect" someone else out of existence. If you listen to Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and Dennis Ross then there's nothing wrong here. Just another "failure to communicate." The reality however is that it's not the messaging, it's the message. Politicians and PR spinners love to blame the messaging, because it lets them go on thinking that they can sell any lie, so long as it's gift wrapped in a pretty enough package. But it's not the messaging, it's the message. And the message is that Israel is the problem and that Palestine is the solution. That Israel's refusal to surrender 100 percent to terrorists is what is killing American troops. That Jews have no right to live in Jerusalem. That Israeli concessions are a prerequisite for any form of negotiations with terrorists. That the Obama Administration will wink at terrorism against Jews, but shriek furiously at a Jewish house in Jerusalem. All this is not messaging. It is the message. And the message is the same one delivered by Obama in Cairo. A copy of which he gave Netanyahu as a "gift". A newly Muslim friendly America that will use its leverage to finally bring Israel to its knees and destroy it, and by doing so build a new relationship with the Muslim world. This intersection of Liberal realpolitik and Muslim diplomacy is where the Obama Administration meets its real foreign policy goals. As it uses the threat of Iran and its nuclear arsenal as leverage against Israel and on behalf of Fatah and Hamas terrorists. But the collection of brain damaged brats were too gleeful at taking the White House to control their real sentiments. And their open expression of hostility to Israel has been filed under the folder of, "Too much, too soon". That doesn't mean it's going anywhere, just that its grand entrance needs more work. The Obama Administration had spent too much time believing that its J Street affiliates represented American Jews. They belatedly discovered what Emanuel had probably already told them, that this wasn't the case. But Emanuel's outreach to a handful of liberal Rabbis shows the political limitations of his own echo chamber. If Peter Beinart is at least willing to menace liberals with the specter of a conservative Orthodox monopoly on Zionism, the Obama Administration doesn't even speak that language. Its understanding of the Jewish community is as narrow as its knowledge of American Christianity, with encyclopedic familiarity of its liberal allies, and ignorance and contempt of the conservatives in the shadows. In line with the left, the Obama Administration has adopted a Muslim-centric view of the Middle East conflict. But much of the Jewish community may have made concessions to that view, but has never adopted it. Yet this Nakba defined concept of Israel is uppermost not only for the Beinarts and the J Streets, but is the beating heart of Obama's Cairo speech. And when the Obama Administration tries to speak to pro-Israel audiences, it cannot even do so nearly as well as Clinton or Kerry, because it does not share a common language with them anymore. Where they celebrate Israel's independence, it mourns a tragic Muslim defeat. Where they appreciate a great country, it believes that Israel was a mistake. The gap in these two versions of history is as unbridgeable and profound as a Unionist talking to an IRA member. Obama shares no common history with Americans, and his Jewish associates do not share one with the Jewish people. And thus they think the problem is the messaging, when in reality it's their message. And their message has been received.
Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com
|
|
OBAMA AND HIS SEDER
Posted by Dmeetry Raizman, May 19, 2010. |
|
President Obama and his advisors got confused:
|
|
To Barack Obama: Shalom from Jerusalem! Newspapers informed the Jewish people of wonderful news: You celebrated the Feast of Unleavened Bread in the White House and even congratulated America's Jews. Thank you, Mr. President! It is always nice to receive a blessing for the holiday. The Book of Esther tells us: Jews had rest from their enemies, and the month which was turned unto them from sorrow to gladness, and from mourning into a good day; that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor. Why is it so? After all, we are talking about Passover and not Purim? Maybe, from such happiness, Mr. President, you are blessing the Jews, and I'm confused? No Mr. President! I'm not confused — but you are. I look at the pictures in the paper and streaming tears melt my sight. How wonderful and utopian. Twenty Jews sit around the President's table with "Passover Haggadahs" in their hands! Most importantly — gefilte fish, kugel, and kneidlach decorate the holiday table! As my grandmother used to say — "a Zissen (Sweet) Pesach!" Why does this still hurt my soul, Mr. President? I am looking at another picture in my memory. The problem with the Jews, Mr. President, is that they always find something disturbing! We are an ancient nation and our historical memory is four thousand years old, so if we search in our memories — everything is there ... I remember another presidential table — exactly 40 years ago. The date: March 4, 1970. The place: the Soviet Union's state channel's television studios. Just like around your table, Mr. President, Jews in policy-making roles, generals, deputy ministers, famous authors, superstars and many others sat. Why did 39 highly placed Jews gather around that table? To "masquerade." The USSR, a dictatorial superpower, decided to stage a show. The purpose of it was — as usual — to show the entire world that the government is not anti-Semitic — to show everyone: "How we love our Jews." I will neither mention here the names of the 39 individuals present there — nor those of the 20 sitting around Obama's table today. As then, today they sit there and play their part as they fear losing their livelihood. We will take pity them and not mention their names... Forty years ago screenwriters and directors were sophisticated and far stricter than those of today's shows. We, the Jews, Mr. President — a scholar of collective memory and experience — know how to identify anti-Semite at first sight. When speaking, he always starts with his many Jewish friends and never forget to mention that his favorite foods are gefilte fish, kneidlach, and kugel ... You, Mr. President, and your advisors are confused: the Jews dress
up on Purim — not on Passover. On Purim, we tend to direct the
"masquerade" — Purim Shpil. If your advisors would have done
the show during Purim, maybe the trick would have worked ... After
all, on Purim we are commanded to get so drunk that we cannot
differentiate between damned Haman and blessed Mordechai. We put on
masks during Purim, not Passover. On Passover we discover the truth —
about ourselves, the pharaohs, ...
IF WE LOOK FOR THE TRUTH, MR. PRESIDENT, we find that not only was your show meant to confuse, but your blessing had the same intention. I am again looking at the words you wrote: "we must fight for the victory of freedom ... we remind ourselves of our responsibility to constantly fight ... we can change the world." No, Mr. President. On the eve of Passover, you must have read the wrong book — not the "Passover Haggadah." Exodus, sir, is not the revolt of Spartacus, the French Revolution or the Bolshevik Revolution. You are confused! For thousands of years, we continually retell the Exodus and each of us — even small children — know well who brought us out of Egypt with a strong hand and an outstretched arm. Every child knows, Mr. President, that He Who brought us out of slavery, did so to transfer us to our rightful land. It is hard to imagine, Mr. President, that you and your advisors are confused. Therefore, your performance of the "Passover Seder," as well as your blessing was, most likely, just a bluff. Just like a year ago, Mr. President, when you began your term with a lie — you continue with a lie. It is unlikely a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School is foolish and ignorant. In your speech a year ago at Cairo, you praised the "immense contribution of Arab culture to humanity." An intelligent person like you must know that this contribution is not great, to say the least. It cannot be, as you said in Cairo, that the Jewish suffering during the Holocaust in World War II is comparable with the "suffering the Palestinian people." Did you really think that the two are comparable! It is impossible to assume that you did not realize that your statement is a form of bold anti-Semitism — the comparison falls in line with the thinking of those who want to destroy the state of Israel. No Mr. President, you're not confused. You brazenly lied — to your people, to our people, to the whole world. On Passover Eve, you also lied with your show — the Presidential Seder.
I WRITE THESE LINES ON THE WAY FROM HEBRON TO JERUSALEM. Before the bus (bulletproof, Mr. President!) drove off, I was on the "Seventh Step" of the Cave of the Patriarchs — beyond which Jews have not been allowed to go during centuries of Muslim rule. Even today, when Jews want to pray in the "Yitzhak Avinu" Cave of the Patriarchs, the Arabs prohibit it. Perhaps you, Mr. President, are more knowledgeable of Islam? Maybe you can explain why Muslims mark the Isaac's grave? The most Zionist of the three fathers? Isaac, who most symbolizes the connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel? Yitzchak Avinu, the only father who had never left the Israel? We are prohibited from praying in the Isaac Cave of the Patriarchs — where Arabs worship ... Even when you spoke about freedom of worship, Mr. President, it is impossible to believe that you did not know of the prohibition. It is impossible that you do not know that the Arab leaders incited their followers to prevent the Jews from praying on the Temple Mount, the heart of Jerusalem. No, establishing a prayer on the Temple Mount for Jews is not allowed. Even an arrangement to let the Jewish Prayer Book to the Temple Mount is not allowed. It is not likely that you did not hear that when Jews pray to the Western Wall, the Arabs, from time to time — when they please, assault the Jewish congregation with stones. You talked about freedom of worship, Mr. President? You lied. When talking about the freedom of religion remember you actually mean the "Seventh Step" for us! For thousands of years in exile, generations of our people have finished their prayers with the words: "Next year in Jerusalem." When we returned to our country in 1948, rabbis in Israel changed the text at the end of the prayer to "Next year in rebuilt Jerusalem." These days, from your piles of lies, Mr. President, we finally heard the truth — your truth: "Not to rebuild Jerusalem." Therefore, we must return to the Diaspora version which we had for two thousand years, and therefore, from our prayer, President Barak Hussein Obama, we must return to the prayer of the Diaspora ... Pharaoh said — "Who is the G-d that I'll hear his will ... " Since then, over three thousand five hundred years, the pharaohs are changing. They return again and again to the same situation of the Egyptian Pharaohs, but in the end — they disappear from history as if they never existed. I do not really think that President Barack Obama will read what I wrote. I do not really think it will change his path. That is that path of the world's rulers: "I know the G-d but I will not release the Jews ... " President Barack Obama — a passing fad, will not change his way and once he falls from history's stage, his reign will be remembered as a horrible failure. But his rule has lessons for us: we must change our ways. We must stop relying on American "friends," we must awaken from the dream that they (or someone else) will solve the Iranian nuclear issue for us, and we must stop fooling the public.
Contact Dmeetry Raizman by email at dr@symula.com
|
|
WHAT WERE THE 1967 BORDERS?
Posted by Sheridan Neimark, May 19, 2010. |
|
............ drawing the precise line was complicated and the harm caused to settlements on its periphery was great. The majority of the line corresponds to the military front of the 1948 War, and while the considerations dictating its placement were primarily military, it soon became clear that in many places it divided towns and villages and separated farmers from their fields. Consequently, the Green Line underwent various slight adjustments, and special arrangements were made for limited movement in certain areas.[8] Most impacted were (and for the most part, remain) Jerusalem, which the Line divided in half, into East and West Jerusalem; the city of Qalqilyah, which virtually became a Jordanian enclave within Israel, with only a narrow passage connecting it with the West Bank; and the village of Barta'a, which, partially due to errors on the map, was left with one third of its area on the Israeli side and two thirds outside of it. Kibbutz Ramat Rachel was left almost entirely outside the Israeli portion of the Green Line.[8] Jewish population During the war, a number of male Jews who resided east of the Line, including the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, were taken prisoner by the Jordanians, while women and children were allowed safe passage. All but a few of the Gush Etzion defenders were massacred. The prisoners were returned to Israel after the war.[4]
Thus, the entire old city of Jerusalem, including of course the Kotel, would be outside of Israel, if the "1967 borders" defined a new Palestine. This below was written by Dore Gold and is called "The Myth of the 1967 Borders." It is archived on www.dore-gold.com. |
|
In rejecting, the proposal for a Palestinian state with temporary borders, that Haaretz reported last Friday, Abu Mazen insisted that the only basis for any future political arrangements with Israel is "the 1967 borders". He is not the only one today talking about the 1967 lines. President Carter's, national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, just wrote an article in the Washington Post on April 11, along with former congressman Steve Solarz calling for a territorial solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict "based on the 1967 borders." Brzezinski had recently been invited to discuss the Middle East with the President Barack Obama's National Security Adviser Jim Jones............... In short, the 1967 lines are coming back as a common reference point when many officials and commentators talk about a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is increasingly assumed that there was a recognized international border between the West Bank and Israel in 1967 and what is necessary now is to restore it. Yet this entire discussion is based on a completely distorted understanding of the 1967 line, given the fact that in the West Bank it was not an international border at all. Formally, the 1967 line in the West Bank should properly be called the 1949 Armistice Line. Looking back to that period, on the Egyptian and Syrian fronts there had been a history of international boundaries between British Mandate and its neighbors. But along the Jordanian front what created the armistice line was solely where Israeli and Arab forces stopped at the end of the War of Independence, with some added adjustments in certain sectors. As a result, the 1949 line, that came to be known also as the 1967 border, was really only a military line. In fact, Article II of the Armistice with the Jordanians explicitly specified that the agreement did not compromise any future territorial claims of the parties, since it had been "dictated by exclusively by military considerations." In other words, the old Armistice Line was not a recognized international border. It had no finality. As a result, the Jordanians reserved the right after 1949 to demand territories inside Israel, for the Arab side. It was noteworthy that on May 31, 1967, the Jordanian ambassador to the UN made this very point to the UN Security Council just days before the Six-Day War, by stressing that the old armistice agreement "did not fix boundaries". After the Six-Day War, the architects of UN Security Council Resolution 242 insisted that the old armistice line had to be replaced with a new border. Thus Lord Caradon, the British ambassador to the UN admitted at the time: "I know the 1967 border very well. It is not a satisfactory border, it is where the troops had to stop." He concluded: "it is not a permanent border." His U.S. counterpart, Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, added that "historically, there have never been secure or recognized boundaries in the area"; he then added that the armistice lines did not answer that description. .................. Over the last decade, Israel has made repeated mistakes in allowing the restoration of the 1967 lines and the downgrading of Resolution 242. It should have fought harder over the language of the Road Map back in 2003. Israel's right to defensible borders, that must replace the 1967 lines, has a strong foundation in international law and in the past policies of the UN Security Council. It would be a cardinal error to allow these rights to be eroded now, especially if new peace begin and the Palestinians seek to win international support for a Palestinian state next year that will undoubtedly be based on their demand to see Israel pull back to the 1967 lines. The full article is at
|
|
AMONG THE RIGHTEOUS: LOST STORIES FROM THE HOLOCAUST IN ARAB LANDS
Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, May 19, 2010. |
|
"Among the Rightous"
|
|
Among the Righteous, which required eight years to complete, is indeed valuable and compulsively interesting. But as Phyllis Chesler writes (in pajamas media), this is something of a false notion — in these eight years, Prof. Robert Satloff unearthed and chronicles three Arabs who saved Jews. At the same time, as difficult as it was for him to unearth these unusual (even atypical) souls, it is just as clear that, largely, the descendants of these men are only grudgingly accepting of their forebears' efforts to save those most of their contemporaries now despise. The filmmaker (Satloff is executive director of The Washington Institute) has to convince the progeny of these saviors to accept the honor of their parents' actions. They would, in a word, rather leave old ghosts buried, even if the ghosts are now being feted for bravery and decency. Prof. Satloff says he could not find documented Arab/Muslim women who saved Jews, but acknowledged that many Arab women, without special documentation he could find other than hearsay, took in Jewish children, and certainly helped with feeding Jews, because Arabs/Muslims in North Africa got more generous food rations than Europeans, and both got more than did Jews, the lowest of the low, especially in Vichy-ruled Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria and so on. I was conflicted while moved because in my month in North Africa, this February, I heard none of the information needed that I sought on these matters. Instead, my local informant/guide gave me the pretty history of the Romans and the various dead peoples who left picturesque ruins and mortuary stelae. The brutal treatment — by and large — of the N. African and escapee European Jews, thousands upon thousands of whom were interned in horrific concentration camps in the three countries bordering the Med, despite an occasional imamic fatwa (Algeria, note-worthily) forbidding Muslims to co-opt the effects or properties of the Jews in camps and in incarcerations. And elsewhere, where the king refused to go along with the Vichy nazis to force 'his' Jews to wear the ugly yellow identifier, JUDE. These were exceptions. The rule was grotesque, even compliant cooperation. Where I was constantly unsettled was the accuracy of Satloff's claim: Indeed, where the European aspect of the murder of more than 6 million Jews was copiously recorded in film, photography, records (the meticulous Germanic obsession) and personal histories captured in book and tape and Spielberg's Shoah recordings, few today have ever heard of this North African contingent of Holocaust that murdered so many, with so little remnant left. Professor Satloff is owed a huge debt, an enormous debt, for his massive digging in stubbornly opaque libraries and hamlets now crumbling. Elsewhere, yellow stars. They were systematically denied rights given to African Muslims. They were beaten, underfed, and worked to death in the swelter of the desert. Yes: They had it slightly better than European Jews, who were frozen and worked to death or incinerated. But relative terribleness is no comfort to those imprisoned, dragooned into slavery, dhimmitized, guillotined or shot for nothing but for being Jewish. Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in China on the university level. She can be contacted at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com |
|
ESSENTIAL FACTS ABOUT DEIR YASSIN
AS TOLD BY THE ORIGINATOR OF THE MASSACRE
STORY TO THE BBC
Posted by Maurice Ostroff, May 19, 2010. |
|
Response to an article in the Independent
on Deir Yassin.
|
|
As a responsible newspaper, the Independent will no doubt be anxious to publish some little-known, but historically important factual material to correct wrong impressions created by a previous article, albeit unintentionally. I refer to the accusing headline "A massacre of Arabs masked by a state of national amnesia" in the May 10, 2010 issue of the Independent. The sub-heading "Sixty years on, the true story of the slaughter of Palestinians at Deir Yassin may finally come out" assumes that in fact a slaughter took place, but in the interests of journalistic integrity readers of the Independent are entitled to be told that Hazem Nusseibeh, an editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service's Arabic news in 1948, admitted in an interview with the BBC, that he fabricated claims of atrocities at Deir Yassin on the instructions of Hussein Khalidi, a prominent Palestinian Arab leader. In a video interview with the BBC in 1998, Nusseibeh, a member of one of Jerusalem's most prominent Arab families, said "I asked Dr. Khalidi how we should cover the story,.. He said, 'We must make the most of this'. So we wrote a press release stating that at Deir Yassin children were murdered, pregnant women were raped, all sorts of atrocities" Although no longer available on the BBC web site, the interview may
be viewed at
This false press statement was released to New York Times correspondent, Dana Schmidt leading to an article in the New York Times on April 12, 1948, claiming that a massacre took place at Deir Yassin. True to Winston Churchill's quip "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on", Schmidt's story was reprinted worldwide and cited, even in Israel, as proof of Israeli atrocities. And all stories about atrocities at Deir Yassin that circulate to this day, are based on Nusseibeh's admitted fabrication. In the video clip Abu Mahmud, who was a Deir Yassin resident in 1948, told the BBC that the villagers protested against the atrocity claims: We said, "There was no rape. But Khalidi said, We have to say this, so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews." The fact that stories of a massacre and rapes were fabricated, does not in any way negate the historical fact that a heavy battle did indeed take place at Deir Yassin. In April, 1948 there was sniping from Dir Yassin into nearby Jewish villages. Foreign fighters in Deir Yassin, included Iraqis and irregular forces. Even an Arab research study conducted at Bir Zeit University relates that the men of Dir Yassin took an active part in violent acts against Jewish targets and that many of the men of the village fought in the battle for Kastel. On April 6, Operation Nachshon was launched by the Haganah in cooperation with Lehi and Irgun with the aim of opening up the road to Jerusalem. A loudspeaker mounted on an armored car warned the residents to evacuate their women and children. Hundreds left, but hundreds stayed and a pitched battle ensued. The use of the loudspeaker to warn the civilians to evacuate is a key point, certainly not the action of soldiers planning to murder the population. The loudspeaker is not in dispute. A publication of the Arab League titled Israeli Aggression states: "On the night of April 9, 1948, the peaceful Arab village of Deir Yassin was surprised by a loudspeaker, which called on the population to evacuate it immediately". Israel continues to suffer from the mea culpa syndrome, hastily admitting guilt before examining the facts, as for example in the notorious Al Dura affair in which the young boy and his father were caught in crossfire between Palestinians and Israelis. Israel immediately admitted that it was possible that Al Dura had been hit by an Israeli bullet, although no bullet was ever retrieved as no post mortem was held. Years later, the French courts ruled in favor of Philippe Karsenty who accused France2 and Charles Enderlin of staging the entire episode. Myths accusing Israel of misdeeds are perpetuated despite contradictory facts. Al Dura has become an international icon of Israel's supposed cruelty and an organization called "Deir Yassin Remembered", continues to keep alive admitted fabrications by the 1948 Palestine Broadcasting Service's Arabic news service. A note about Meir Pa'il's reports Since the Independent article refers to "a damning report written by Meir Pa'il", described as a Jewish officer who condemned his compatriots for bloodthirsty and shameful conduct on that day, it is highly relevant to point out that although he is credited with providing the most detailed eye witness account of the alleged massacre, several authoritative views cast doubt on his credibility. Pa'il is reported to have been a spy for the mainstream Haganah, monitoring the activities of the right-wing Lehi and Irgun "dissident" groups, with whom Haganah was frequently in conflict. It is therefore widely believed that he was only too keen to blacken the dissidents with accusations of atrocities. More egregiously, historians claim that Pa'il's eye witness accounts are spurious as they say he was not at Deir Yassin on the day of the battle. For example in an article on Deir Yassin, the Zionist Organization of America notes that when the well-known historian, Dr. Uri Milstein, interviewed veterans of Deir Yassin, all said that Pa'il was not there at the time of the battle and that it was inconceivable he could have been there without their knowledge. These veterans include Yehoshua Zettler, Mordechai Ra'anan (commander of Jerusalem front), Moshe Barzili, Yehuda Lapidot, Patchia Zalvensky, and Moshe Idelstein. http://www.torahtimes.org/DeirYassin.html Nor is there any evidence from Haganah sources indicating that Pa'il was present; the statements given by David Shaltiel, Zalman Meret, Zion Eldad, and Yeshurun Schiff do not mention Pa'il by name or by either of his code names, "Avraham" and "Ram." The Haganah's Moshe Eren and Mordechai Gihon, who were at Deir Yassin and who knew Pa'il personally at the time, said they did not see him there. Yehoshua Arieli, who supervised the burials, stated that he did not see Pa'il there. Shlomo Havilov, the Haganah's commander for western Jerusalem, who spent the night of April 9 in neighboring Givat Shaul, stated: "I did not see Meir Pa'il there. I knew him well. If he had been there I would remember him." Contact Maurice Ostroff by email at maurice@trendline.co.il |
|
U.C. IRVINE PRETENDS TO CONDEMN JIHADIST SPEECHES;
IRAN AND NUCLEAR
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 19, 2010. |
|
Last week, A U.C.Irvine Muslim Students Union speaker, Amir Abdel Malik Ali, upheld the officially designated terrorist organizations, Hamas, Hizbullah, and Islamic Jihad. He said he supports jihad on campus, "as long as it's in the form of bringing truth to power." Truth? He equated the Jews with the Nazis. Unlike the Jews, the Nazis committed millions of murders, among other crimes against humanity, "and it was thus our right and moral duty to fight them, kill them, and destroy them." MSU implication: destroy the Jews and their state. Chancellor Michael Drake responded merely "that at the speech, there were 'offensive remarks supporting terrorism.' He also stated that several other speeches, lectures and discussions that week were 'very difficult and offensive to listen to.'" This statement was too "vague and tepid," the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) wrote to Chancellor Drake. To have any effect, it should have condemned the offending speaker and organization by name, Amir Abdel Malik Ali and the Muslim Students Union, for inciting to bigotry and violence. ZOA wants the Chancellor to denounce some specific, offending statements, such as the comparison of Jews to Nazis, antisemitism. Such a denunciation by the Chancellor would be his proper exercise of freedom of speech. Why should MSU even be allowed on campus, after having raised funds for Viva Palestina, which forwarded resources to Hamas? That fundraising violates federal law. "ZOA also urges the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) to condemn the bigotry and incitement to hatred and violence that the Muslim Student Union continues to promote on the UC Irvine campus. These groups say that they are committed to fighting anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias, bigotry and violence...It's time for CAIR, the ADC, and MPAC to finally forcefully and publicly condemn the ongoing anti-Semitic bigotry and incitement to violence against Jews and Israel supporters at UC Irvine, and also to denounce the group that continues to promote hatred of Jews and Israel, the Muslim Student Union." (Press release by ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member.) Chancellor Drake is borrowing a technique of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). The head of the P.A. sometimes denounces an act of terrorism, but in a general way and without naming culprits. Nobody takes such denunciation seriously, since no one is held responsible. In the case of the P.A., the lack of specificity in the denunciation is because of sympathy for terrorism against Israelis. In the case of the Chancellor, the tepid denunciation is paying lip service to decency without himself having the decency to enforce the law and to act against incitement to violence. His timidity encourages radicals to continue transgression. As for "speaking truth to power," it would seem that MSU is the power on campus, and the duly constituted authority is not.
NGO MONITO RDEFENSE AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN ISRAEL, EU, AND U.S. Israel's powerful academic Left strongly criticizes NGO Monitor head, Prof. Gerald Steinberg. Prof. Steinberg believes there should be no Left or Right ideology in academia, through which thought is filtered. A university should educate and question, not indoctrinate. NGO Monitor has exposed the dependency of leftist, anti-Zionist Israeli and Palestinian Arab NGOs upon foreign financing. [As a result, the NGOs appear less than legitimate Israeli organizations, and more as subversives. Their local support, presumed high in the basis of their efforts, became seen as hollow. Laws were proposed to require the source of funding to be revealed.] Some suggestions that foreign funding be restricted apparently were dropped. The Left still cites the abandoned proposals while omitting the unpopular facts that some of these NGOs support the Goldstone report and the campaign to boycott, divest and sanction Israel. [That is not so much thought as an attempt to destroy the country.] The Left reacted, as usual, by trying to repress the whistle blowers, who would require transparency in donations. Transparency would inform the public who is behind what group. That is civic truth in labeling, not repression. Many leftist academics share in the funds secretly donated from abroad. For examples of such denunciation, "Prof. David Newman has lashed out repeatedly in The Jerusalem Post ('Bashing the academic left,' April 14, 2009; 'Who's monitoring the monitor?' November 30, 2009; 'The politics of delegitimization' February 9; and again in a May 11 op-ed, coauthored with Sharon Pardo). After Newman was elected by like-minded colleagues as dean at Ben-Gurion University, he used an interview in the Post ('How to make the next Buber,' May 11, 2010) to repeat the attacks." Newman warns that "the recent attacks on the EU and its funding of civil society and human rights organizations and NGOs" will result in Israel's expulsion from "the family of nations for whom democracy and free speech constitute the most basic of common values." Steinberg counters, "...this European money goes exclusively to leftist causes, and not to the wider Israeli civil society in whose name they claim to speak. Similarly, the use of the label 'human rights organizations' often hides the abuses of these principles, as highlighted in the tendentious accusations of 'war crimes.'" An example of a foreign donor is New Israel Fund (NIF). Its head, Prof. Naomi Chazan, ranks herself as one of the victims. However, when Prof. Steinberg explained how NIF and its partners seek to silence their critics, Prof. Chazan had no rebuttal. Who then, champions freedom of thought, NIF or NGO Monitor? Steinberg observes, "For this group, the right to free speech only applies to the Left. Their protests over the government's misguided attempt to keep radical Prof. Noam Chomsky from visiting Bir Zeit University would be more credible if they had not sought to silence Alan Dershowitz. The Harvard professor criticized the use of classrooms for political indoctrination at Tel Aviv University recently." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/18/10.) Someone challenged, who monitors NGO Monitor? NGO Monitor's reports are open to discussion. If in error, critics could offer correction. They don't. They just try to intimidate, while claiming that factual reports they cannot rebut try to intimidate them. IRAN AND NUCLEAR: PART 1. HOW IRAN SEES THE FUEL SWAP Iran rejected the Western proposal for enabling it to get enriched nuclear fuel supposedly that could not be diverted to military use, only to come up with its own, somewhat weaker proposal. It prepared this proposal with two sympathetic, even allied members of the UN Security Council, Brazil and Turkey. The latter two are rising powers with their own interests in nuclear energy, so far, of a non-military nature. Brazil had abandoned a military nuclear development program. Brazil's participation makes the Iranian initiative trans-regional. In other words, Iran operates independently of the West, issue demands on the West, and set itself up as leader of a new world order. Iran is offering itself as a political, cultural, and moral alternative to Western civilization. Of course, Iran hopes its plan will take the wind out of the sails of the sanctions movement (A. Savyon, (IMRA from MEMRI, 5/17/10). IRAN AND NUCLEAR: PART 2. NEW YORK TIMES IDEAS ON CONTROVERSY The U.S. had supported the original Western fuel-swap proposal, originating in Vienna, because it would tie up enough fuel so that for a year, Iran could not devise a nuclear bomb. Iran's proposal suggest swapping the same amount of fuel, but by now it has much more fuel and is capable of enriching it to weapons grade faster than before. Hence the new proposal is weaker than the original one. Iran stated that it would continue to enrich additional fuel to the 20% level, the jumping off point for rapid conversion to weapons-grade. This "'is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolutions,' Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said in a statement." Turkey's ambassador to the U.S., Namik Tan, called Iran's proposal a "confidence-building measure." Iran's foreign Ministry said, "This shows that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons, but rather peaceful nuclear technology." Emad Gad of the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo said, "Iran has a history of forging a deal and then going back on it. It lets the situation get really tense and then reaches an agreement." (David E. Sanger, Michael Slackman, NY Times, 5/18/10, A1.) The agreement really is a con-man's measure. It builds his confidence. Far from showing peaceful intent, by holding out half of Iran's nuclear fuel stock, and by vowing to amass more unsupervised stock, and by doing this in continued violation of the Security Council resolutions, Iran is signaling what else but bellicose intent? Perhaps the Security Council has proved itself a failure, but so long as critics of Israel claim vaguely that Israel is a violator of UN resolutions, one may ask where is their consistency in upholding UN resolutions, when Iran blatantly violates actual resolutions?
IRAN AND NUCLEAR: PART 3. WALL ST. JOURNAL IDEAS ON SWAP Turkey's role in Iran's proposal reflects its general foreign policy of resolving all issues between itself and neighboring states. Turkey has opened up trade and improved relations with Iran, Syria, Iraq, Russia, and Greece. Turkey has used pipeline contracts to foster trade and goodwill and to position itself as a global energy hub. At the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, senior associate Henri J. Barkey said that Turkey highly values commerce, it has just done Iran a big favor, and surely expects a big favor in return. Prof. Husseyin Bagci of international relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara said that the diplomacy helps Turkey's PM Erdogan "to establish him image as an international statesman and it helps Iran to gain time." Turkish officials believe that sanctions do more harm than good. Turkey lost much trade with Iran, when sanctions were imposed against Saddam (Max Champion, Wall St. J., 10/18/10, A14). The proposal is a debacle for Obama diplomacy. Instead of backing Iran into a corner, Iran has backed the U.S. into a corner. Obama had made an offer by the prior proposal, but refused to accept Iran's rejection of it and switch to another alternative. Now the U.S. seems to have no way of stopping Iran's march to nuclear weapons. Western intelligence finds that Iran keeps acquiring triggers for nuclear weapons. Iran also is almost self-sufficient in producing nuclear missiles. It was the U.S. that encouraged Brazilian diplomacy, as if Brazil did not have its own agenda. Brazil turned diplomacy against the U.S.. Having identified itself with the prior plan, the U.S. will find it difficult to explain why this plan, having similar features, is unacceptable. Iran now is less isolated diplomatically. Obama's diplomacy "has succeeded mainly in persuading the world's rogues that he lacks the determination to stop their destructive ambitions." (Ed., 10/18/10.) Turkey started reconciliation with Armenia, too, but that process is suspended. Russia also seeks to be an energy hub, and has used its power to shut the spigot in order to demand price and other concessions. The Turkish professor's remark that the proposal "helps Iran to gain time" warrants analysis. Time for what? Apparently time to keep devising nuclear weapons. Iran proposes continued violation of UN resolutions, keeping much of its nuclear fuel out of international control, building nuclear missiles or at least getting nuclear triggers — nevertheless, apologists for Iran keep asserting that Iran's program is peaceable, when the evidence strongly indicates otherwise. Politicians do not like to admit mistakes. This must be truer nowadays, when the media shows no mercy for the fallen. But some day it must dawn on Americans that their leaders keep getting outfoxed by foreign leaders. They often understand us better than we understand them. It behooves us to study them and to analyze how they outsmart our leaders.
IRAN AND NUCLEAR: PART 4. HOW FAR AWAY FROM BOMB IS IRAN? Iran has increased its capacity for enriching uranium in its pile. It has accumulated more than was estimated. "So much for all those technical problems Iran was said to be encountering, supposedly delaying the day of nuclear reckoning for at least three years." Iran could have a bomb this year (Bret Stephens, Wall St. J., 5/18/10, A15). My comments always scoffed at estimates assuring us we had much time. As the years passed, Iran overcame hurdles unexpectedly fast. The Marxists were right — new economies industrialize faster than the older ones, because they start with where the older ones ended. Also, when the stake is survival, one must allow for unexpected breakthroughs. In this particular field, rogue states help boost other states' proliferation, U.S. intelligence agencies have been politicized, export laws are lax, and exporters don't want to know that what they ship can have a dual use. It is easier for corporations and governments to turn a blind eye, keep making money, hard decisions.
IRAN AND NUCLEAR: PART 5. DEFENSE AND OFFENSE IN PERSIAN GULF While the U.S. was working on strengthening sanctions, and Iranian diplomats were working on avoiding them, Iran held war games that prepared to punish them. During the week of war games, Iran intercepted foreign ships under various pretexts and drove off a drone observer, as if it controlled the international waterway. This aspect of the games was not publicized as much as the introduction of newly developed or improved modern weapons, declared to have hit their targets. Most significant may have been the new speedboat, that Iran claims can destroy large enemy ships. The war games orchestrated Iran's claim that it can block the Gulf oil exports and halt Western industry (Arutz-7, 5/18/10). The speedboat firing platform shows that offense and defense remain in a balance-changing duel. Miniature weapons render obsolete giant weapons that give advanced industrial powers their advantage. What is the U.S. doing to make its set of armaments relevant to this new type of challenge? At the same time, China is increasing its forces at a rate that soon would make it capable of dominating the U.S., first from extending its power, and second, from defending itself (This last point was explained by Mark Helprin, Wall St. J., 5/17/10, A21). Is either the U.S. or Israel, both of which state with bravado that the military option against Iran "remains on the table," prepared, in such an event, to neutralize in time Iran's extensive forces capable of shutting off the flow of oil? Will Iran's demonstrated power over the Strait of Hormuz, where most oil is shipped out, finally prompt the U.S. into energy independence policies? Will the U.S. continue tying itself to unproved and dishonestly defended notions of human-caused global warming refuse to switch to coal and its own natural gas? Are there any pipeline alternatives? Suppose Iran decides, at great sacrifice in behalf of its version of Islam, to preemptively destroy the West and the rest by blocking the Gulf without being attacked or having sanctions strengthened? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
IRAN'S GROWING THREAT TO ISRAEL: SKETCHES FOR A STRATEGIC DIALECTIC
Posted by Louis Rene Beres, May 19, 2010. |
|
This was written November 1, 2000 and is archived at
|
|
Let us consider, systematically, Iran's growing military threat to Israel. To do this properly, we should begin with a look at the sort of models used by strategic analysts in general. Thereafter, we may move from the general to the particular, from abstract theorizing to concrete considerations of Iran and Israel. In examining threats to national security, strategists traditionally distinguish between capabilities and intentions. These components of threat are never entirely separate. Indeed, they are often not only interpenetrating and interdependent, but also interactive. This means: (1) capabilities affect intentions and vice-versa; and (2) the combined effects of capabilities and intentions may be synergistic, producing policy outcomes that are greatly accelerated and/or are more than the simple sum of these effects. Understood in terms of Iran's growing threat to Israel, these relationships between capabiltiies and intentions now warrant particularly close consideration. For the moment, those who would still downplay the Iranian threat argue that Teheran's unconventional capabilities remain problematic and/or that its willingness to attack Israel is assuredly very low. Yet, over the next several years, that country's ongoing development of chemical/biological/nuclear weapons will be substantial, creating conditions wherein a first-strike against Israel might be regarded as altogether rational. Even if it could be assumed that Iran's leaders will always be rational, a questionable assumption, to be sure, this would say nothing about the accuracy of information used in making rational calculations. Rationality refers only to the intention of maximizing specified values. It says nothing about whether the information used is correct or incorrect. Hence, perfectly rational Iranian leaders could make errors in calculation that lead their state to war with Israel. Whether correct or incorrect in its calculations, an Iranian leadership that believes it can strike Israel with impunity or near-impunity could be strongly motivated to undertake such a strike. Such motivation, of course, would be heightened to the extent that Iran remained uncertain about Jerusalem's own preemption plans. Here, Iranian capabilities would affect, possibly even determine, Iranian intentions. For its part, Jerusalem will fashion its preemption plans upon a number of critical factors, including, but not limited to: (a) expected probability of Iranian first-strikes; (b) expected harms of Iranian first-strikes (itself dependent upon the nature of Iranian weaponry, projected Iranian targeting doctrine, and multiplication/dispersion/hardening of Israeli nuclear forces); (c) expected schedule of Iranian unconventional weapons deployment; (d) expected efficiency of Iranian active defenses over time (anti-tactical ballistic missile system developments); (e) expected efficiency of Israeli active defenses over time; (f) expected efficiency of Israeli hard-target counterforce operations over time; (g) expected reactions of other regional enemies (e.g., Syria; Iraq); and (h) expected world community reactions to Israeli preemptions. The Iranian threat to Israel might, on the other hand, originate from another direction. In this scenario, Iran's intentions toward the Jewish State, hostile and perhaps even authentically genocidal, could animate Teheran's development of unconventional military capabilities. Here, representing genuiunely far-reaching international hatreds rather than mere bluster, Iranian diatribes against Israel would ensure the production/deployment of extraordinarily destructive forces, weapons and postures. What I have now described, therefore, are circumstances where Iranian intentions could affect, possibly even determine, Iranian capabilities. But what if Iran's intentions toward Israel were not hostile or genocidal? What if its public bombast were not an expression of genuinely belligerent motivations, but a position designed entirely for political consumption? The short and obvious answer to these questions is that such shallow and contrived intentions would not impact Iranian capabilities vis-a-vis Israel. Yet, upon reflection, it is altogether likely that even inauthentic expressions of intent could, over time, become authentic, that repeated again and again over many years, such expressions could become self-fulfilling. The most complex relationships between Iranian capabilities and intentions, and potentially the most consequential to Israeli security and survival, concern synergy. Here the issue is not whether, or to what extent, one threat component affects the other, but instead how certain of their various combinations might (a) produce an ongoing series of interactions that moves relentlessly, through its own dialectical momentum, toward war; or (b) produce a wholly new effect, an effect of which either capability or intention is individually incapable. An example of (a) would be an Iranian "bolt-from-the-blue" attack against Israel that is launched only because of the particular way in which capabilities and intentions feed upon each other. An example of (b) would be any Iranian attack against Israel — bolt-from-the-blue or product of escalation, conventional or unconventional — that would not otherwise have taken place. This example is plausible to the extent that one believes Iran would never strike first against Israel, irrespective of Iran's singular intentions and capabilities, unless these two threat components were judged mutually reinforcing. Now, let us move to even more concrete and immediate concerns. How might the Israel-PLO agreements affect Iranian posture toward the Jewish State? Conventional wisdom has been quick to suggest that the Oslo agreements, by codifying and demonstrating Israel's commitment to peaceful settlement of disputes, diminish the Iranian threat. After all, wouldn't world public opinion uniformly condemn Iran for any act of aggression directed against Israel? And wouldn't, therefore, Iranian aggressive intentions be reduced or even removed, a change that could slow down Teheran's pertinent militarization and consequently the overall danger to Israel from that country? Perhaps. But the conventional wisdom may be wrong, or merely partial. It is also plausible that because of Oslo, Israel's inclination to preempt Iranian agression, an inclination that would express the principle of anticipatory self-defense under international law, has been diminished. Wouldn't the entire global community frown upon such preemption in the midst of an ongoing, albeit stalled, "peace process" in the region? Moreover, if Iran should recognize these effective inhibitions on Israeli action that stem from the Israel-PLO agreements, that country could calculate as follows: As our (Iranian) militarization will be less threatened by Israeli preemptive attack after Oslo, we (Iran) should increase our capabilities — especially our unconventional weapons capabilities — as quickly as practicable. Such a calculation, as we now know, could enlarge Iranian intentions to attack Israel and might even make cost-effective hostile actions by Iran that would not otherwise have been considered or even have been possible. What about the effect of Israel-PLO agreements in bringing about a Palestinian state? Here, it is altogether probable that Israel's substantial loss of strategic depth would be recognized by Iran as a significant military liability for Jerusalem. Such recognition, in turn, could heat up Iranian intentions against Israel, occasioning an accelerated search for capabilities and consequently a heightened risk of war initiated from Teheran. Israel, of course, might forsee such Iranian calculations and seek to compensate for the loss of territories in a number of different ways. Jerusalem, for example, could decide to take its bomb out of the "basement" (as a deterrence-enhancing measure) and/or it could accept a heightened willingness to launch preemptive strikes against enemy (including Iran) hard targets. Made aware of such Israeli intentions, Iran could respond in a more or less parallel fashion, preparing more openly for nuclearization and/or first-strike attacks against the Jewish State. It is conceivable, on the other hand, that Iran would react to Israel's greater vulnerability — a vulnerability stemming from the creation of Palestine — by winding down its militarization, including its specifically nuclear militarization. But such a reaction would be entirely contingent upon the view from Teheran that Israeli intentions had become benign and/or that a Jewish State in the Middle East was no longer a malignancy. At the moment, deciphering Iranian descriptions of an Israeli "menace" and continuing calls for jihad, this view seems implausible. Taken by itself, a Palestinian State would affect the capabilities and intentions of both Israel and Iran. But if such a state were created at the same time that Israel reduced or abandoned its nuclear capabilities, the impact could be even more substantial and consequential. This scenario should not be dismissed out of hand. Depending upon Israel's decisions in the future, it could become altogether real. In spite of its extraordinary failure in the case of Iraq, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty continues to be widely favored as a promising means to reduce the growing risk of nuclear war in the Middle East. From the standpoint of Israeli security, this legalistic preference harbors considerable danger. Left to the protections of diplomatic agreements, rather than to more pragmatic forms of self-reliance, the Jewish State might effectively surrender its opportunities to endure. Such surrender would be all the more likely to the extent that it would involve any limitations on Israel's nuclear deterrent and on essential control of vital territories. What would happen if Jerusalem were to relinquish or limit its nuclear option and were forced to accept a new State of Palestine? Significantly, Israel under such circumstances would not only be vastly more vulnerable to Iranian first-strikes, it would also have been deprived of its essential preemption option. This is the case because Israeli counterretaliatory deterrence would be immobilized by reduction or removal of its nuclear weapons potential and because Israeli preemptions could not possibly be 100% effective against Iranian unconventional forces. Of course, a less than 100% level of effectiveness could be tolerable if Jerusalem had a truly viable anti-tactical ballistic missile capability, but such a capability is still enormously uncertain. The prospect of an Israeli preemption against Iran would be affected, inter alia, by that Islamic state's willingness and capacity to create an infrastructure to safely manage its unconventiuonal weapons. Inadequate Iranian investment in nuclear weapons survivability, for example, could generate substantial Iranian incentives to preempt against Israel. After all, fearing that it might not possess a second-strike capability — a capability to retaliate against Israel after absorbing an Israeli attack — Iran could calculate a military advantage to striking first. Recognizing this probable calculation, Israel would confront an overwhelming incentive to strike first itself. Even in the best case scenario, wherein Israel would receive credible assurances from Teheran concerning Iranian rejection of first-strike options, Jerusalem would understand that such assurances could become meaningless in the wake of Iranian political upheaval. Faced with an enemy state characterized by weak and authoritarian political institutions, fragile civil-military relations and/or competing factions representing several ethnic and religious groupings, Jerusalem could find itself compelled to seize upon the preemption imperative. How would Iran respond to Israel's weakened capabilities and correspondingly diminished preemptive intentions? Under such conditions, an informed observer might expect Iran to move even more purposefully and ambitiously toward full-fledged nuclear status, a move that would likely encourage first-strike intentions against the Jewish State. Before concluding, we must raise the prospect of an Israeli nuclear preemption. It is, of course, exceedingly unlikely that Israel would ever decide to launch a preemptive nuclear strike. Although circumstances could arise wherein such a strike would be perfectly rational, it is implausible that Israel would allow itself to reach these circumstances. Moreover, unless the nuclear weapons involved were used in a fashion consistent with the authoritative expectations of the laws of war, this form of preemption would represent a serious violation of international law. Even if such consistency were possible, the psychological/political impact on the world community would be negative and far-reaching. It follows that an Israeli nuclear preemption could be expected only: (a) where Israel's enemies in Iran had acquired nuclear and/or other unconventional weapons judged capable of destroying the Third Temple Commonwealth; (b) where these enemies had made clear that their intentions paralleled their capabilities; (c) where these enemies were believed ready to begin a "countdown to launch;" and (d) where Jerusalem believed that Israeli non-nuclear preemptions could not achieve the needed minimum levels of damage-limitation, i.e., levels consistent with preservation of the Jewish State. Assessments of the Iranian threat to Israel must take careful account of both country's capabilities and intentions, the components of these threat dimensions, their sources, their amenability to change and — most important of all — their very complex relationships and forseeable interactions. Rather than be understood as separate and disconnected components of threat, these capabilities and intentions must be approached as continually affecting each other, both intranationally and internationally. With such an approach, scholars who would seek to improve Israeli security from Iranian attack, especially from an attack involving chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, could begin to move in more promising directions, accepting a strategic dialectic that is now necessary. Louis Rene Beres is a long-time expert in international law. The author of fourteen books dealing with international law, he has co-authored scholarly articles in Israel and the United States with former Ambassador Zalman Shoval and Col. (IDF/RES.) Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto. Other international law articles by Dr. Beres have been published in Israel in Nativ; Btzedek; Haaretz; The Jerusalem Post; The Jerusalem Letter; Bulletin Of The Jerusalem Institute For Western Defence; and the Policy Paper Series of the Ariel Center. Professor Beres is Strategic and Military Affairs Analyst for The Jewish Press in New York City. |
|
SHAVUOT IS A CELEBRATION FOR RECEIVING THE TORAH ON MT SINAI
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 19, 2010. |
|
The Battle for Jerusalem is a Battle for Truth. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu attended the annual Jerusalem Day celebration at the Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva in Kiryat Moshe, Jerusalem. In his speech, Netanyahu stressed the importance of Jerusalem and the unbroken connection of the Jewish people to the city, quoting the verse from Isaiah 62: "For Zion's sake I will not be silent and for the sake of Jerusalem I will not be still, until her righteousness emerges as a shining light and her salvation burns like a torch"... The PM continued: "There can be no justice without truth and if there is a perversion of justice vis a vis our city and nation, it means the truth has been perverted, because the truth is that Jerusalem is our city and we never compromised on that," he said, "not after the destruction of the First Holy Temple, nor after the destruction of the Second. We were a majority in the city until the 9th century and we returned 2000 years later and witnessed the city's destruction once again. There is no other nation that feels this deeply about a city. Yet there is no other nation that has allowed such complete freedom of worship to other religions in this city. We will continue to build Jerusalem, a city that is full of life." The Speaker of the Knesset, MK Ruby Rivlin spoke at the start of the event, saying "Over the last year, Jerusalem has lost many supporters... Today, some Zionist political parties who spoke of united Jerusalem until a short while ago, are now seeing the city as a problem and obstacle to our continued existence here. The same politicians who voted laws protecting Jerusalem into effect are now looking for loopholes in those same laws that will allow them to raise their hand against Jerusalem... Zionism without Zion, without Jerusalem is an empty shell. Our ability to withstand attacks on Jerusalem depends a great deal on our resolve and patience, on our ability to bide our time until the sword that is drawn over the city is removed." Jerusalem and Torah — Even in Name They are Linked. The Midrash tells us that when Hashem came to designate a name for His favorite city, He was, as it were, faced with a dilemma. Malkitzedek, otherwise knows as Shem son of Noach, first referred to the ancient city as "Shalem." Years earlier, Avraham, following his offer of his son Yitzchak as a sacrifice on what was to eventually become the Temple Mount, called it "Yireh." To call it only "Shalem" would be an affront to the righteous Avraham; to call it only "Yireh" would be an insult to the righteous Malkitzedek. The Divine solution was to combine the two and call the city "Yireh-shalem" which English translation has formed into Jerusalem. (It does not support the claim of so-called Palestinians, does it?) Stop Desecration of Ground ZERO. Stand up and oppose the building of a mosque at ground ZERO. We have sensibilities too. Muslims must not be allowed to offend the sensibilities of the innocent dead and those who survived murder by terrorists shouting, in the name Islam and of the Koran, "Allahu Akba" as they killed 'infidels' at the World Trade Center Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak While so-called Palestinians strongly oppose the presence of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, it is estimated that between 20,000 and 30,000 Arabs are working on building them. Regardless of their Jew-hating feelings, all anti-Semites love Jewish money! Rear Admission by European. On a visit to Ben Gurion University, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos said that Islamic fundamentalism was the common enemy of Europeans, Israelis, and Arabs as well. (They all know about it but in fear of offending their oil suppliers afraid to talk about it!) PA Just Slaps Israel in Face. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in an interview with Ha'aretz that Israel had done much to advance peace with the Palestinian Authority, but that the PA had responded by "slapping Israel in the face." Lieberman said "I think we made countless gestures, and what did we get in return? The glorification of terror." The day before the invitation to join the OECD was issued to Israel, PA Prime Minister "Salam Fayyad approached dozens of countries with a request to sabotage that acceptance. They keep going on with their stories about war crimes during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. After all, PA President Mahmoud Abbas himself called and asked us, pressured us to continue the military campaign and overthrow Hamas," Lieberman said. Livni Brainwashes Children by calling Treason "Patriotism". In a meeting with eleventh grade students in Jerusalem Opposition leader MK Tzipi Livni, said that, "Israeli patriotism today means promoting the idea of two states. This is in the Jewish Zionist interest." (There is a Jewish saying: "Any evil can be justified by quoting Torah out of context") Obama not a Friend of Israel. The Obama administration is preparing to join an international UN-backed advisory group the Alliance of Civilizations. The Bush administration boycotted the group when it was founded in 2005 because it feared the group would become a forum for bashing Israel and the United States. Those concerns were magnified a year later when the alliance released a report that officials in Washington said unfairly blamed Israel and the United States for many of the world's problems. Quote of the Week: "How odd of G-D to choose the Jew. But not as odd as those who choose the Jewish G-D, and hate the Jew!" — Francis A. Schaeffer Lack of Corage and Vision. High officers leading this week's big war game in northern Israel confronted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and chief of staff Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi with harsh criticism over the lack of a clear government strategy for dealing with the rising Hizballah threat of aggression and the uninterrupted flow of advanced weaponry from Syria to Hizballah. Foe in the Knesset. In an interview with the Kol El-Arab newspaper, Arab MK Masoud Ranaim, a member of Re'em-Ta'al party and of the southern branch of the Islamic Movement, called to establish an Islamic caliphate that would include Israel. He also said that all means are warranted to "protect" Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa mosque. Actual Issue of the Right to Vote is Ignored. The Ministerial Committee on Legislation is scheduled to discuss a bill preventing the assassin of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Yigal Amir, from voting in general elections. (Why is the committee not interested in discussing the rights of Israeli Arabs, who do not have loyalty to the country they live in, to vote and live?) Government of Lebanon is Hezbollah Partner! Lebanese President Michel Suleiman announced Saturday that Lebanon "cannot and must not" tell Hezbollah to disarm before reaching a deal on a defense strategy. A United Nations deal to end the Second Lebanon War in 2006 required Hezbollah to disarm. (No one is furious when Muslim states ignore UN resolutions.) Tear Down Illegal Arab Buildings Now. Illegally built homes in east Jerusalem will be demolished in the coming days, Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch announced on Wednesday. The minister said there had been delays in carrying out the orders due to diplomatic concerns, but that the concerns no longer applied and that the demolitions would go ahead. "Police have no instructions to refrain from carrying out the demolitions. They will be carried in the coming days," Aharonovitch said. "There were times when the political echelon thought the timing for implementing the orders was inappropriate, because of diplomatic processes. The orders were not canceled, but were delayed. If there were such delays, they are no longer in effect." Hypocrisy in Action: "US Officials Monitoring Jerusalem Construction" — Maybe it is time for Israel to start monitoring US construction on Native American land and other territories occupied by the United States! In contrast, it is Jewish land that is occupied by the enemies of Israel! Neo-Nazis Murder Yeshiva Student. Ukraine police have found the mutilated body of Chabad-Lubavitch yeshiva student Aryeh Leib Misinzov, who disappeared in Kiev on April 20, the anniversary of Adolf Hitler's birthday, when Neo-Nazis often carry out attacks on Jews. Netanyahu is the Weak Leader and a Liar. Member of Knesset Michael Ben-Ari, the National Union, said that "The Likud government of (Prime Minister Binyamin) Netanyahu is leading Israel to destruction." He was responding to the announcement made in Washington that Netanyahu had committed to freeze construction in the northern Jerusalem neighbourhood of Ramat Shlomo: "His yielding to the dictates of (United States President Barack) Obama will bring about the division of Jerusalem." Not long ago, before Likud party members voted to postpone elections for all the party's institutions, based on promises that Netanyahu would not freeze building in Jerusalem and would never divide the city. UN Elects Iran to Women's Rights Watchdog.
(Another example of the UN's consistent hypocrisy!) Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged "immodest." Buried 2,000 words deep in a UN's press release distributed last Wednesday on the filling of "vacancies in subsidiary bodies," was the stark announcement: Iran, along with representatives from 10 other nations, was "elected by acclamation," meaning that no open vote was requested or required by any member states... Iran' s election comes just a week after one of its senior clerics declared that women who wear revealing clothing are to blame for earthquakes, a statement that created an international uproar — but little affected their bid to become an international arbiter of women's rights. "Many women who do not dress modestly... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes," said the respected cleric, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi. The Commission on the Status of Women is supposed to conduct review of nations that violate women's rights, issue reports detailing their failings, and monitor their success in improving women's equality. 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 |
|
HOT TIPS ON UN WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE: U.S. MISSION POSTS SCORES OF UN INTERNAL REPORTS
Posted by Susana K-M, May 18, 2010. |
|
This is the Rosett Report for May 17, and it was written by Claudia Rosett and it appeared in Pajama Media. The original article has live links to additional material. |
|
Hot tip for any reporters interested in newly disclosed documents on waste, fraud and abuse at the United Nations: Just days after I queried the U.S. Mission to the UN about its commitment to UN transparency (Paging Ambassador Susan Rice), the Mission finally posted on its web site more than 130 previously secret UN internal audit reports. The UN, for all its endless promises about transparency and its ample enjoyment of other people's money, does not release these reports to the public. It is only thanks to the U.S. that they are now seeing daylight at all — though it takes some trolling through the Mission's web site to find them. For anyone who cares about even minimal integrity in UN management and handling of taxpayer money, there's a trove of bombshell material here. Together, the reports total hundreds of pages, but the typical report runs about 10-20 pages. They date from October, 2008 through August, 2009. Here's a link to the U.S. Mission's web page on UN Oversight and Transparency with the main links, and here are direct links to the newly posted and until-now confidential internal audit reports from 2008 and 2009. Pick your subject and dive in, whether it's a summary of the "higher risks" due to "the lack of an appropriate structure" for the UN's own Ethics Office, or a report on the dire derelictions of reporting and accountability dogging the plump trust funds of the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Specifically set up to better coordinate aid, OCHA features in a Nov. 2008 audit report as handling trust funds with a throughput of hundreds of millions of dollars, but not bothering to produce any consolidated statement of cash flow. OCHA also had "little discernible linkage" between strategic planning and "the measurement and reporting of actual performance." For those interested in the UN's climate bureaucracy, check out the July, 2009 report on the slop of the UNFCCC Secretariat's conference management, with its multi-year delays in accounting for funds. Or delve into the Dec., 2008 report on the UNFCCC's Clean Development Mechanism, where the governance was found "not adequate to mitigate reputational and other risks," and the executive board "due to lack of time" had neglected to adopt any code of conduct whatsoever to address such corrosive problems as conflicts of interest. Or, in the realms of UN peacekeeping, with its more than $8 billion annual budget, for which U.S. taxpayers alone fork out roughly $2 billion per year, check out the UN's nearly $1 billion annual program for peacekeeping air operations. In an August, 2009 report, the UN's own internal auditors noted that participation by senior management was "inadequate," current staffing levels were "insufficient," time of effective bidding on air charter services was "insufficient," provisions in air charter agreements were "unclear" and some vendor registration was "improper." It takes a certain amount of determination to slog through the UN jargon, in which an executive summary of "not adequate" is often code for outright abuse or screaming failure, if you slog on to the details of the report. But in these reports, which cover only a sampling of the UN's sprawling global system, the problems roll on and on. In corners that rarely receive attention from the media, they range from poorly documented lump-sum handling of noncompetitively-sourced travel arrangements for the UN mission in East Timor (UNMIT), to the UN's disregard of its own rules in choosing a director for the UN Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD), headquartered in Japan. It ought to be reassuring that at least the UN's internal auditors are tracking some of this mess. But at the UN, it is one thing to have internal auditors flag a problem, and quite another to see the UN genuinely fix it. For instance, at the UN Mission to Cyprus (UNFICYP), where a growing web of UN scandals a few years ago led to fervent UN promises of reform, one of the audits just disclosed by the U.S. Mission, dated August, 2009, suggests that oddities lingered in such areas as "no competitive bidding" on commercial travel for contingents of Argentine peacekeepers, and "inefficient accounting of food rations." (Here's a look back at questions in 2005, then surrounding UNFICYP food rations). For Washington to get any traction on pulling the UN out of its own administrative muck takes a lot of backbone and focused effort. But if the U.S. is to rely on the UN in any way, as President Barack Obama wishes to do, then the only course for minimizing chances of being tainted with the next colossal UN management scandal is for the U.S. to push hard, visibly and constantly for the UN to clean up its own house. Credit Ambassador Susan Rice that the U.S. Mission to the UN has finally released these UN internal audit reports, even if for some reason it took well over a year to get around to it. (I can't claim credit for prompting these postings with my story last week, though it would be nice to believe the U.S. Mission is that responsive to criticism. Let us assume it was merely glad coincidence that I queried the Mission on the whereabouts of these reports just 72 hours or so before they were suddenly released in bulk on the Mission web site). A quick bit of history here: When the Oil-for-Food scandal broke big time in 2004, the UN refused to release its internal audits of the program even to governments of member states, including its chief donor, the U.S. After a showdown with congressional investigators, the internal audits were finally tipped out in early 2005, via the UN inquiry led by Paul Volcker. They provided damning insights into UN administrative abuses and derelictions that helped feed the gusher of Oil-for-Food corruption. Those reports might have been useful in heading off the damage of that UN blowout, had they been released to the public as they were produced, instead of being exposed later as an embarrassing piece of the UN's self-serving coverup. In the aftermath of those disclosures, the U.S. Mission under the previous administration began obtaining UN internal audit reports and posting them on its UN reform section of its web site. That's the third link on the Mission's current main page for Oversight and Transparency, OIOS Reports Archive, which runs up to Sept., 2008, and until the end of last week was the most recent information available. For any current attempt to patrol the UN administrative habits, the next questions are: Where are the audits so far from 2010? When will the U.S. Mission post those? And when will the White House fill the important post at the U.S. Mission of Ambassador for Management and Reform? Since Obama took office, that slot has been left to an acting envoy, Obama's nominee last year having flamed out over questions involving his own issues of management. The Obama administration's welcome decision to release the massive backlog of 2009 and late 2008 UN internal audits will only help if people actually read them and distill the information within, and U.S. authorities act by strongly pressuring the UN to clean up its endlessly proliferating mess — which in recent times has had virtually no oversight. The jury's out. Meanwhile, here's that link again, to scores of windows on UN management — or too often, mismanagement. It's a start.
Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
AS TIME GOES BY
Posted by Arlene Peck, May 18, 2010. |
|
wrote this over a decade ago.. my mood was hetter then. It's dated February 30, 1998. |
|
It's not easy being a sex Goddess. In fact, as time goes by, I'm finding it even more difficult. The years pass and all of a sudden you wake up and say, "I'm not a teen-ager anymore. That, is a fact, which I find increasingly difficult to believe? So, I suppose that since I'm at the age where I can considered a woman of 'experience' I can give you some of my insight into some of the profound events in life that I've noticed. For instance, when Monica was accused of doing lurid and illicit acts, one in particular, with our President, probably a good portion of you men out there were thinking, "It couldn't be true! Jewish girls just don't do those things." Well, there is something to be said for the vast Jewish achievements that we've done. For being less than three percent of the population, we're probably eighty percent of the Nobel Prize winners. But, there are many areas where we are sadly lacking. For instance, how many women out there think that their children call them as often as their parent's think that they should? Can you ever remember your mother let the cleaning lady leave without feeding her lunch? I have a feeling that more than a few of you were raised by Jewish mothers such as me who would tell me, "Fifty people should be able to come into your house, unexpectedly and you shouldn't have to leave the house to buy anything to feed them. There are also certain jobs that we, as a group don't seem to qualify. For instance, have you ever seen a Jewish lion tamer, rodeo clown, or bullfighter? We also don't stand by the road with signs that say "Hungry, will work for food' Maybe for union wages, but, we're definitely not a people who sell veggies by the wayside. Jewish tans are not acquired from farming or riding horses while doing stunt work. When we swim, we don't dive for pearls. We may buy pearls but rarely wear just one strand. Incidentally, Jewish mothers, a good one that is, taught her children to automatically know that when you stop off to visit a friend, it's a given that they being a gift. Listen, what I'm telling you now is something you should clip and stick on the refrigerator if you have any aspirations of surviving in a Jewish family. There are just basic things that you should know. For instance, how many of you know that there are no Jews living in El Paso or trailer parks. I have long said in this column that there has been an on-going controversy these days concerning when life begins. In Jewish tradition the fetus is not considered a viable human being until they finish medical school. Our names have become highly creative. Jewish children now have 'mainstream' names. However, we still don't think to name our children, Chris, Shawn, Paddy or Buffy. Jewish women may shop at Victoria Secrets but not too many of them worship at the shrine of Laura Ashley and buy underwear with duck of the week on them Jewish weddings rarely serve cookies and punch at them. For the most part, you could serve Bosnia with the surplus found there. What you don't find either are floral arrangements left at the tables? Nothing is wasted.... Ever! Incidentally, the cleaning lady in a Jewish household is expected to not only do windows and make latkes but also, attend all family bar mitzvahs and weddings. Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com She is author of "Some Of My Best Friends: Only The Names Have Been Changed To Protect The Guilty." Her upcoming book is entitled "Prison Cheerleader: How A Nice Jewish Girl Went Wrong Doing Right." |
|
ON THE EVE OF SHAVUOT
Posted by Shula Bahat and Gloria Golan, May 18, 2010. | |
|
Julius von Carolsfeld painting of Ruth the Moabite and Boaz Shula Bahat is CEO, Beit Hatfutsot of America and Gloria Golan is Director, American Friends of Beit Hatfutsot. |
|
GEORGE WASHINGTON, JONATHAN POLLARD AND THE JEWS
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, May 18, 2010. |
|
To mark Jonathan Pollard's 25th year in American captivity — which is also his 25th year of abandonment and betrayal by the government of Israel — J4JP will be reviewing some of the best-written, most informative, and most interesting articles, essays and information written about the case over the last two and a half decades. This is article number 21 of the series. It was written in March 2005 by Esther Pollard and published as an exclusive commentary by Worldnetdaily, following Jonathan Pollard's final Appellate Court Hearing in 2005. This hearing was yet another attempt to bring Jonathan's case back to court so that the merits of his case might be heard. To this day, the merits of Jonathan's case have never been heard in a court of law. It is fitting to repeat the previous statement so that the reader can fully grasp the fact that a man has been held, and continues to be held, in an American prison for twenty-five years even though the merits of his case have never been heard in a court of law! All of Jonathan Pollard's legal avenues in the United States have been exhausted. The final avenue of appeal, the US Supreme Court has also ducked the Pollard case repeatedly, refusing to hear it. For those who are wondering, the US Supreme Court does not have to explain why it refuses to hear a case. The continued incarceration of Jonathan Pollard, now in his 25th year of a life sentence with no end in sight is America's badge of shame and Israel's dishonor. The article below contains a wealth of information which must shock and alarm fair-minded readers. It needs no further introduction. |
|
THE HEARING "The problem with Mr. Pollard is that he thinks he is unique." These words were spoken about my husband, Jonathan Pollard, by a judge in the US Appeals Court for the District of Columbia. Jonathan is in his 20th year of an unprecedented life sentence for his activities on behalf of Israel. On March 15, 2005, Jonathan's pro bono attorneys, Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman, appeared before a panel of three judges in the US Appeals Court. Despite outward appearances, Jonathan's case was never heard. One of the judges, Judge Karen Henderson, asked no questions and made no comments of any kind. Another judge, Judge Judith Rogers, briefly engaged counsel for both sides. The third judge, Judge David Sentelle dominated the hearing. He was openly hostile, mocking and scornful. Unchallenged by the other two judges, Judge Sentelle hijacked the hearing. He side-tracked the oral argument, verbally harassing and nitpicking on irrelevant matters until the attorneys' time was up. Consequently, the only one heard that day was Judge Sentelle; and much of what he said was either irrelevant or deeply offensive. For example, Judge Sentelle went so far as to insist that in this case the court does not have the authority to allow Jonathan's security-cleared attorneys access to their client's own sentencing file. How much more obvious could Sentelle's contempt be, than to suggest that the court has no authority over court documents! Worse, Judge Sentelle's hostile declaration, "The problem with Mr. Pollard is that he thinks he is unique" was deeply offensive to Jews and reverberated painfully in Israeli media reports. "You are not unique" is code talk that has been used over and over again throughout the ages by those hostile to Israel and Jews, to deny concerns that Jews are being singled out for 'special treatment.' It is the most routine of anti-Semitic devices, and it seems that it is always used precisely when Jews are indeed being singled out. What makes Judge Sentelle's remark even more stunning, is that it so blatantly flies in the face of the facts. THE CASE IS UNIQUE Here are some of the unique features of the Pollard case which Judge Sentelle wishes to dismiss:
CRUEL AND UNUSAL PUNISHMENT Another unique feature of this case is the repeated attempts by the FBI to make Jonathan "buy" his way out of nightmarish prison conditions by incriminating other prominent American Jews. He was repeatedly asked to point out "co-conspirators" on list of Jewish names he was shown. Jonathan adamantly refused. More troubling still, are the numerous episodes of cruel and unusual punishment which Jonathan has been subjected to — not only at the start of this case, but even as recently as the fall of 2003 when he was held in Washington for two weeks pending a September 2nd court date Some examples of cruel and unusual punishment Jonathan has endured include:
POLITICS NOT JUSTICE Perhaps the feature of this case which is the most disturbing is the way in which it has been exploited over the last 2 decades by Government agencies. Jonathan's continued incarceration has been a very useful tool for the Government in the following ways:
HIDING BEHIND A VEIL OF SECRECY The Justice, Intelligence and Defense Departments willingly collude to keep the truth about the Pollard case buried. This ensures that the Government can continue to exploit the case for other purposes, such as the above. It also explains why the Government is so determined to keep Jonathan's own court docket hidden under a veil of secrecy. The best legal minds in the country support Jonathan's right to access the material in his own sentencing docket. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), The American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (AAJLJ) and prominent individuals have filed a "Friend of the Court Brief" in support of access to the documents. Their Amicus brief expresses some compelling concerns about this case. Others who have expressed their concerns about this case are: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who said that she is troubled by 'sentencing issues' in the Pollard case; http://www.jonathanpollard.org/ciralsky.htm, the number 3 man at the justice department when the Pollard case broke, has repeatedly said that there is nothing in the Pollard file to justify the sentence he received; Senator Charles Schumer, Congressman Anthony Weiner and other American legislators have voiced similar concerns. All those who have seen the classified file, including Schumer and Weiner, say that it does not contain any justification for the life sentence Jonathan received. And then there's Dennis Ross, Special Envoy to the Middle East during the Clinton Administration. In his new book, The Missing Peace, Ross openly acknowledges that Jonathan's sentence is disproportionate and that he should be freed without condition. Nevertheless, says Ross, Jonathan is too valuable as a bargaining chip with Israel to be freed as a matter of simple justice. Instead, Ross explains, Pollard should go free only in return for major concessions from Israel during "final status talks" with the Palestinians. No other American ally is treated with such disdain. Clearly it is politics, not justice which drives the Pollard case. THE PROBLEM IS NOT WITH MR. POLLARD No, Judge Sentelle. The problem is not with Jonathan Pollard. It is with those American officials who, through 5 successive administrations, have used this case as a device to call into question the loyalty of American Jews and Israel's reliability as an ally. The problem is with those officials in the Justice, Intelligence and Defense Departments who allow the case to fester because it is such a fine weapon with which to bludgeon Israel and the Jews. And of course, the problem lies with Israel and the American Jewish leadership whose silence and complicity have exacerbated the situation and prolonged Jonathan's agony. By continuously turning their backs on Government excesses and judicial inequities in the Pollard case, they have tried to convince themselves that this really has nothing to do with them. Then along comes Judge Sentelle and reminds them that it does. Israel and the American Jewish leaders have sat back for nearly 2 decades, patiently waiting for the American justice system to prove that it works as well for Jews as it does for every other religious minority. Yet, every time Jonathan Pollard — the Jew who spied for the Jewish state — encounters the American justice system, the entire Jewish world is slapped in the face all over again. GEORGE WASHINGTON AND JONATHAN POLLARD Two hundred years ago, President George Washington visited the Truro Synagogue of the Jewish community of Rhode Island. He later penned a letter to the community declaring that Jews are welcome as full citizens of the United States of America and equal in every respect: "It is now no more that toleration is spoken of," Washington wrote, "as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights." He also declared that the government gave "to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance." Denied justice for 20 years, Jonathan's case has become a noxious poison draining the vitality of the American Jewish community and undermining America's relationship with Israel. If the promise that George Washington made to American Jews two hundred years ago is to be honored; if the Jewish community in America is to have a future in this country, then justice for Jonathan Pollard, long delayed, must finally be done. The Pollard case is not only about Jonathan Pollard. It is about America's real attitude towards Jews and its relationship with Israel. It is also about whether or not the nation which is so devoted to bringing freedom to other parts of the world is capable of freeing itself. Government lies and judicial collusion are keeping Jonathan Pollard in prison. It is time for them to stop. As long as Jonathan Pollard remains in prison, truth and justice in America are in prison too. # See Also: Hebrew Text: George Washington Jonathan Pollard and The Jews http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/032405.pdf -- Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at their website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org |
|
ARTISTES. A PHONY NATION. WE'RE WAKING UP
Posted by Paul Rotenberg |
|
This was written by Marc Prowisor. Contact him
by email at marc@friendsofyesha.com
and visit his website
|
|
Part 1: Artistes Yet another "Artist" cancels his performance in Israel, due to "political pressure" he says. Elvis Costello does not want his name associated with Israel and the "Palestinian conflict". Guess what...Elvis... we don't want you or any other spineless, hypocritical, student of deceit, so called "Artist" associated with it also. We are here for the real people, you know the truth seekers, those who have self respect and values. Amazing, this "pressure" we keep on hearing about. It has put a noose on "Hollywood", Washington and New York, it is strangling free speech and thought, it is crippling University campuses and it is blinding justice throughout the world, it is causing our people outside of Israel to hide...to name a few. It has many names; I will stick with one of them, pure, unadulterated hatred. Hatred, not necessarily of Jews or all Jews (depending who you ask), but of anything that has to do with real Jewish identity, strength, and lets not forget, any splinter of a Jewish land. It's the popular and "in" thing to be nowadays. Anti Israel is cool, it doesn't matter whether it is right or wrong, it's "cool". You know, like when it was "cool" to hate Jews in Germany back a few years. How many of you just thought... "Hey, that's a bit extreme"? Is it?
Part 2: A Phony Nation Today many nations of the world are supporting one of the greatest illusions of the 20th century... the "Palestinian nation", totally ignoring history and the connection of Jews to this land. These same nations and people champion and work towards an ethnic cleansing of Jews in parts of Israel (for now). Boycotts against Israel, (who has given more to the world, compared with most other nations today), World-wide anti Israel activities are popular amongst the supposed "intellectuals", among many other despicable actions, all this while countless Muslims around the world are being slaughtered daily by other Muslims, (mostly Arabs). Mosques are being blown up, a Muslim communities are being ravaged in many Arab countries, again while the Arab and Muslim world (and UN) keep quiet, just to name a few. You know why the Arabs keep quiet, because they think it is alright for Muslims to kill each other, it is alright to kill Jews and Africans, they have been doing it for millennia anyway, here's the bad news, the world thinks it's OK also. Gee, sounds kind of one-sided, sort of racist, you know what I mean? The latest joke cropping up this side of the Jordan is now the Arab Palestinian Authority is calling for a boycott of goods made in the communities and Industrial Zones of Judea and Samaria. Their spokesman just said minutes ago that they do not care about Arabs loosing their jobs. This is so typical... the Arab leaders have never cared about their own people, only about themselves. Sound biased? Ask any Arab living in an Arab country, not the runaway expats in the US. They better start praying that their own people don't lynch them soon. Mel Brooks, where are you when we need you?
Part 3: We're Waking Up And now to switch topics, as dangerous and moronic as the world is behaving and will continue to behave (don't worry, it will get worse), it has become boring and primitive, and so I will move on. The other day, a contingent from the far off world of Tel Aviv came to visit Shilo. The discussion was based on the image of the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria the world sees, and the image that the rest of Israel sees. Obviously the pride of our region often goes unnoticed or unrecognized, be they world class University Professors, Doctors, Heroes of Disaster ridden Haiti, Artists or just the good people who surround us daily, the world sees what the media shows them, most often the negative side (which is the minority). One major topic came up that should bring pride to anyone living in Judea and Samaria, that being the family, community, Zionist and Jewish values that exist in the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria are noticeably being missed in the rest of the country. Our children are being looked upon as what should be, and what many parents wish for their own. Nothing to do with a specific religious outlook, as our communities are not defined by religious adherence or affiliation, indeed we are quite mixed. Many in Israel are reminiscing about the "good old days", and they are seeing them again in the Jewish population of Judea and Samaria. Israel is waking up, despite our politician's unrealistic views and ideas. Unfortunately many of our fellow Jews outside of Israel do not see this, simply because they are afraid or "pressured" into not coming and visiting these communities, so much for "Birthright" or the various "Leadership" Missions. I do not plan on "bashing" others, their loss far out-weighs their gains. Wake up NOW! Shavuot is upon us, thank Gd, one again we celebrate the giving and the receiving of the Torah, we also celebrate the harvest, again giving and receiving, in short...Heaven and Earth coming together. Eternal connections that were made long ago that last forever, that should always be together. Like the Jewish people and the Land of Israel. Chag Sameach Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com |
|
ISRAEL STEERS ARAB SHEPHERDS TO LAND OF JEWISH NATIONAL FUND; OPERATION BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 18, 2010. |
|
PRIVATE ISRAELI SHIPS TO CONFRONT TURKISH ONES OFF GAZA A private flotilla, encouraged by Turkey's government, has started disembarking from Turkey on its way to Gaza. The purpose is to break Israel's partial blockade of Gaza. The Israeli government's likely response is not clear. Using social networks, Israeli individuals have devised a plan to sail their own ships into international waters in front of Gaza, to confront the flotilla. The purpose is to get Israel's point of view heard. The Israelis would lay on Hamas the responsibility for restrictions on Imports, because it kidnapped an Israeli soldier. The Israelis would explain that Turkey is doing this to gain popularity from the Arabs at Israel's expense (Arutz-7, 5/17/10). Neither Turkey nor the Arabs would mind the latter argument. Nor is it the main Turkish reason. Turkey's government has become Islamist. That is the real reason. Neither is the Israel's explanation for the partial blockade the main one. The main one is that Hamas is at war with Israel. A partial blockade is meant to crimp it and especially to block materials that otherwise Hamas uses for war. It is true that responsibility for the blockade is Hamas'. Make peace, end blockade. The flotillas usually carry humanitarian goods. That is cover for pro-terrorist effort. Actually, Israel lets in humanitarian goods. But the flotillas also bear assorted anti-Zionist propagandists. This enterprising move and counter-move could end tragically.
HAMAS DEMOLISHES PALESTINIAN ARABS' ILLEGAL HOUSES 
Hamas police expelled Palestinian Arabs from perhaps three dozen houses along the border of Sinai, and demolished them. Hamas said those houses were illegal, being erected on government property in Rafiah. Masked Hamas policewomen beat fellow Arab women and children with clubs, until they evacuated the houses. The sight of Arabs driving bulldozers into their houses angered the former residents, who compared this with what Israel does. Now they find Hamas, which seized power in Gaza in July, 2007, doing likewise. Rafiah's mayor promised alternative housing, but Gaza's housing minister heard of no alternatives in planning (Arutz-7, 5/17/10). Along with reports of Israeli expulsion of Arabs from illegal houses, I saw no reports of Israeli police beating Arab women and children. Israel's reasons have been that terrorists used the houses as havens, the houses were built without permits, or the houses were built on public land. No reader who objected to such expulsions by Israel, and who alleged that Israel grabbed land from Arabs, ever addressed the abuse of Arab theft of government land. Neither did they go further than allege Israeli land grabs. Want to take bets on whether they complain about Hamas demolition of Arabs' houses? Usually, the Arab-Israel conflict is a pretext for Israel-bashing, with real sympathy for suffering Arabs ignored. Note that Hamas seized power. A reader recently commented that Hamas was elected. Didn't hear of the Hamas coup? Even if Hamas had elected the President, an election restricted to two terrorist organizations is not free; a terrorist government is not legitimate. Even if the election were free and the regime legitimate, democracy is much more. Democracy allows personal freedom of thought, association, and religion and protects minorities. Hamas violates all those major principles of democracy. Do not be deceived by the trappings of elections. Most dictatorships hold elections. Those elections do not make them democratic.
ISRAEL STEERS ARAB SHEPHERDS TO LAND OF JEWISH NATIONAL FUND The Israeli watchdog group Ometz finds that the government is steering Arab shepherds to land owned by the Jewish National Fund [and managed by the State Land Authority]. Ometz is asking State Comptroller Lindenstrauss to investigate. The scandal arose when a Jewish shepherd, Motti Peretz, found that the government was advertising the land only in the Arabic language and in Arab towns near Tur'an in the Galilee. The government distributed the land to nearby Arab villagers. Mr. Peretz reports that Arab shepherds have been trying to drive him off his own land, rustling his herds and causing about $100,000 of damage to his facilities. He warned, "...we are likely to wake up one day and discover that while we hold tight to our borders, we've lost the land inside the country." (Arutz-7, 5/17/10). The Jewish National Fund pooled the collective donations of Jews throughout the world to buy land for the Jewish people. The money was not donated for Arabs. Considering that Arab farmers are rustling, vandalizing, and attacking Jewish-owned farms extensively, while squatting on land not theirs, and having boasted that the "Galilee is Arab" and marched to the chant of "Death to the Jews," the criticism of the government is rather mild. U.S. PROF. CHOMSKY DENIED ENTRY TO ISRAEL AND TERRITORIES M.I.T. Professor Noam Chomsky was denied entry from Jordan to Israel. No reason given. He had hoped to speak at Bir Zeit University. Prof. Chomsky describes himself as an anarchist. He justified Iranian nuclear arms development and the Hizbullah militia as warranted defense from Israeli threats and aggression. He said that if Iran initiated a nuclear weapon launching, it would be vaporized, and it does not want self-destruction. The threat is that Israel has, he believes, nuclear armed submarines. The likely aggression, he asserted, is by Israel against Lebanon. A month after that assertion about Israeli aggression against Lebanon, Hizbullah attacked Israel, starting the second Lebanon war (Arutz-7, 5/17/10).
The Security Council established an armistice on the basis of Hizbullah not rearming south of the Litani River. Hizbullah has rearmed. What does Chomsky think of that violation, now that Hizbullah has proved itself an aggressor? A reputedly moderate Iranian leader, former President Rafsanjani, said that in a nuclear exchange, Israel would be destroyed and only part of Iran would be destroyed, so Islam would win. Israel's submarines, if nuclear armed, would be for retaliation only, therefore hopefully not needed, therefore a deterrent. Iran, however, threatens to destroy Israel. Sometimes Iran qualifies that threat as only in self-defense. However, jihadists call the mere existence of Israel "aggression" against Islam. Iran commits aggression by proxy. Therefore, the qualification must be meant to offer a pretext that Iran is not threatening aggression against Israel. Chomsky seems equally at home with neo-Nazi Holocaust deniers, Communists, dictators, and jihadists. His philosophy must not be anarchy but nihilism and antisemitism. Is Chomsky's admission a matter of free speech? Israel is not obliged to let through an obvious enemy who would encourage opposition to Israel that, in the Palestinian Authority, takes a violent form and that elsewhere, is part of a drive to de-legitimize Israel.
OPERATION BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL Last year, 31,000 young Jews were brought to Israel for a special heritage and acculturation tour. Registration for this year is surpassing last year's. Young IDF soldiers serve as mentors for these tourists, helping acclimate themselves. Many of the troops were themselves introduced to Israel by this program (Arutz-7, 5/18/10).
ISRAEL SOLVING WATER SHORTAGE Israel is solving its water shortage. It just dedicated the third of five planned desalination plants. The new one is the largest in the world, producing 33 million gallons a year, 10% of Israel's needs. It is being located in Hadera, on the Mediterranean coast between Haifa and Tel Aviv. The plant is divided into two independently operating halves on an 18-acre site. From sea water to thirst quencher, 35 minutes. The $400 million new plant separates water from salt by reverse osmosis. Reverse osmosis avoids burning fuel to evaporate pure water out of the brine. This is much more environmentally benign. The output is expected to replenish the Lake Kinneret reservoir. Together with the two future plants, the plant would revive the dying Jordan River and Dead Sea (Arutz-7, 5/18/10). Growing international water shortages once were thought liable to kindle new wars. This kind of solution may prevent such wars. Years ago, Haifa U. economics Professor Steven Plaut, a source on the Arab-Israel conflict and especially jihad and lack of academic freedom in Israeli academia, wrote a paper on water. He explained how the government allotment formula distorted the natural market in favor of users of large volumes of water for small economic gain. That caused much of the shortage, that Israeli scientists tried to ameliorate by more efficient distribution technology. Barry Chamish pointed out the Jordan peace treaty's cumulative lowering of Lake Kinneret water levels, by annual donation of 50 million cubic meters a year to Jordan. Jordanian hostility to Israel has grown since the treaty was signed. Earlier reports expressed concern about the effect of injecting this different composition of water into the Dead Sea. Would the new mixture permit the same mineral extraction as currently done? No word on what is done with the plant's filtered out chemicals.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE JIHAD OF ISRAEL'S ACADEMIC LEFT AGAINST FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 18, 2010. |
|
1. http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/
Article.aspx?id=175810
Seizing on fringe amendments long dropped from the discussion, the campaign against a law to ensure the public's 'right to know' is distorted as a defense of free speech. Claiming to be under unprecedented threat, the powerful Israel academic Left has launched fierce counter-attacks on enemies, real and imagined, among which I and NGO Monitor are included prominently. Prof. David Newman has lashed out repeatedly in The Jerusalem Post (" Bashing the academic left," April 14, 2009; "Who's monitoring the monitor?" November 30, 2009; " The politics of delegitimization" February 9; and again in a May 11 op-ed, coauthored with Sharon Pardo). After Newman was elected by like-minded colleagues as dean at Ben-Gurion University, he used an interview in the Post ("How to make the next Buber, May 11, 2010) to repeat the attacks. Others involved in this ideological trench warfare include Prof. Daniel Bar-Tal. In a conference at Tel Aviv University, allegedly focused on academic free speech in the context of conflict, Bar-Tal condemned imagined "right-wing" McCarthyite threats to Israeli democracy and freedom of speech. The list of speakers also included, Prof. Galia Golan (Peace Now), Newman and Prof. Naomi Chazan, head of the controversial New Israel Fund. Chazan passionately wrapped herself in the bandages of victimization, while saying nothing when I presented the examples of how the NIF and partner organizations seek to silence their critics. For this group, the right to free speech only applies to the Left. Their protests over the government's misguided attempt to keep radical Prof. Noam Chomsky from visiting Bir Zeit University would be more credible if they had not sought to silence Alan Dershowitz. The Harvard professor criticized the use of classrooms for political indoctrination at Tel Aviv University recently. Other allegations in this campaign attack a fictitious version of a draft Knesset law on transparency for foreign government funding provided to Israeli nongovernmental organizations. A number of these NGOs support the Goldstone process, as well as the boycotts, divestment and sanctions campaign. But such core dimensions are all erased from the complaints. Instead, seizing on fringe amendments long dropped from the discussion, the campaign against a law to ensure the public's "right to know" is distorted as a defense of free speech.
NOT COINCIDENTALLY, many Leftist academics benefit directly from these highly secretive processes. For example, next week, Newman is a prominent speaker at a conference on "The External Relations of the European Union." Looking at the program, observers might conclude that the participants were chosen from a narrow spectrum, perhaps to avoid serious academic debate. And coinciding with this conference, Newman's latest op-ed ("Doomed to succeed," May 11, with Sharon Pardo) lashes out yet again. This version warns darkly that "the recent attacks on the EU and its funding of civil society and human rights organizations and NGOs" will result in Israel's expulsion from "the family of nations for whom democracy and free speech constitute the most basic of common values." In this demagoguery, the authors also hid the fact that this European money goes exclusively to leftist causes, and not to the wider Israeli civil society in whose name they claim to speak. Similarly, the use of the label "human rights organizations" often hides the abuses of these principles, as highlighted in the tendentious accusations of "war crimes." More broadly, the very concept of an "academic Left" that Newman and others claim to defend is wrongheaded. Universities exist to teach students to think for themselves and to pursue knowledge, debunk myths and encourage debate, in contrast to the doctrinal nature of religion and ideology. An academic Left is as absurd as an academic Right — both ideological straitjackets are antithetical to the pursuit of knowledge and vigorous debate. Such frameworks, which dominate European campuses and are spreading to the US, are inconsistent with complexity, open thought and substantive debate. This alternative universe has no room for intelligent people, including open-minded rationalists who seek a wide range of evidence, and analyze it openly and not through ideological filters. All of this is entirely inconsistent with the values and professional ethics that provide the foundations for academic endeavors, and the privileged status of university professors. Instead of attacking the Right or Left for their views, real and imagined, we are supposed to welcome important debates to clarify complex issues needed to distinguish between scientifically supported theories and bunk. Unfortunately, in many areas, the ideological cant has overwhelms substantive debate. The writer is on the political science faculty at Bar-Ilan University and president of NGO Monitor.
2. http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=2176#printpreview
In the politically correct world of infantile leftism, words like sedition and disloyalty have effectively been erased from the political lexicon. Indeed, those daring to employ such terms are automatically smeared as "McCarthyite" or fascist. But despite Israel being surrounded by Moslem nations whose primary objective is to eliminate Jewish sovereignty from the region, a growing minority of Israeli academics, funded by Israeli taxpayers and Diaspora Zionist philanthropists, exploit their universities as launching pads to undermine and delegitimize their own country. Some even promote global boycott, divestment and sanctions of the very institutions which provide their salaries. They teach their students that the state in which they live was born in sin, that Israelis behave like Nazis and morally justify the campaigns by our enemies to demonize and delegitimize us. What magnifies this obscenity is that university administrators feel obliged to maintain the continued tenure of such immoral and anti-social degenerates on the grounds of academic freedom. Can one conceivably visualize any other institution providing salaries to employees actively working towards its destruction? The issue came to a head at the recent meeting of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University when Marc Tanenbaum, a long-standing American donor and supporter, submitted a resolution calling on the University Senate to review conditions governing the status of academics indulging in "inappropriate behavior" such as promoting academic boycotts of Israeli universities, and recommending that academics be prohibited from listing their affiliation or academic titles whilst engaged in domestic or international forums of a political nature. The president, Professor Joseph Klaffter, intervened. Grasping the microphone from Tannenbaum, he railed against the resolution and proclaimed that under his watch such a resolution would never be carried and demanded that it be withdrawn. When the initiators called for a vote, he refused to submit the resolution and adjourned the meeting — ironically, on the spurious grounds of academic freedom. Tannenbaum resigned and pledged to mount a campaign to highlight the undemocratic manner in which the university authorities were protecting those who were actively undermining the university and the State. Regrettably, the TAU scenario represents a microcosm of how the loony left have imposed a regime of madness in this country. It is noteworthy that Anat Kam, who exulted in stealing classified IDF military information in the name of freedom of expression and attempted to present herself as a heroic figure, was educated at TAU, in a philosophy department in which professors called for a global boycott against Israel. Examples of unacceptable behavior abound: the Chair of the Philosophy Department, Professor Anat Biletzki, is a close supporter of Asmi Bishari, the Arab MK calling for the dismantling of Israel; Biletzki also gathered signatures for a high school student petition justifying the right to refuse to serve in the army; Anat Matar, another lecturer at the philosophy department, initiated an (unsuccessful) campaign to deny the right of Col. Pnina Sharvit-Baruch, who headed the international IDF law division during the Gaza war, to lecture at its law school on the grounds that she would "justify the killing of civilians, including hundreds of children"; the Law School convened a conference on the subject of the alleged mistreatment of "political prisoners" at which one of the principal speakers was a former terrorist who had been sentenced to 27 years for throwing a bomb at Jews on a bus; Professor Adi Ophir campaigned to lobby embassies in Tel Aviv to impose sanctions against Israel to prevent atrocities in Gaza; TAU academics were prominent signatories in a petition backing the US Berkeley boycott against Israel; two professors, Anat Matar (who earlier participated in a London conference promoting a general and academic boycott of Israel) and Rachel Giora recently signed a petition denouncing The Boston Museum of Art for sponsoring an exhibit of Israeli medical and high tech achievements; etc etc. Freedom of expression is a treasured feature of democracy but the dividing line must be drawn between academic freedom and breaching the law or indulging in subversive activity. Some liberals like Alan Dershowitz believe that students have "the right not to be propagandized by the classroom by teachers who seek to impose their ideology" and oppose the exploitation of universities by academics as anti-Israeli launching pads, but still insist that lecturers should never be limited even if they promote false narratives which poison the minds of the students and encourage them to hate their own country. Dershowitz believes that the danger of limiting such activity exceeds the damage that can be inflicted and is confident that ultimately truth will prevail. But that does not justify those who delegitimize and demonize their country being provided tenure of employment. Setting aside the fact that in most societies under siege such behavior would be defined as subversive, I question whether for example such an approach would apply to an academic telling his students that Arabs are racially inferior or that Hitler's genocidal policies were justified. Or for that matter would academics insisting that the world is flat still be assured tenure in the name of academic freedom? I vouch that such people would soon be out of their jobs and justifiably so. But in this crazy environment it is only the mad left which claims to be victimized when their unconscionable behavior is exposed. For example, in a petition signed by over 80 TAU faculty members, Alan Dershowitz was denounced for indulging in "incitement" for having described as "hypocritical Stalinists", academics like Rachel Giora and Anat Matar who support boycotts of Israel. Professor Hannah Wirth-Nesher went so far as to accuse Dershowitz of seeking to impose Teheran standards on Tel Aviv. Hebrew University Professor Shlomo Avineri observed that "the attempt to 'protect' those who belong to the left whilst employing McCarthy like methods against those associated with the right is nothing but hypocrisy, which has no place in academia". Regrettably the State has failed to act in this area because it has become intimidated by the term academic freedom. Likewise out of fear of being labeled McCarthyites or fascists, the Knesset has also been loath to do anything. I have no doubt that opinion polls would confirm that the overwhelming majority of Israelis would vehemently agree that there are red lines beyond which academic freedom should not be permitted to justify antisocial or subversive behavior such as calling for the boycott of the state. Universities are the incubators in which future leaders of society are nurtured. It is surely elementary common sense to ensure that such institutions lead the way for constructive participation in civil life. Academics should not be above the law or permitted to engage in anti-social activities on the grounds of academic freedom. It is a disgrace that we have reached such a deplorable state of affairs under successive governments. Such activities would never have been tolerated under the social democratic Mapai hegemony and I have no doubt that our founding Prime Minister David Ben Gurion, a genuine Labor Zionist, would have turned the country upside down to bring an end to such outrageous behavior. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
"PALESTINIANS" AKA "ARABSTINIANS"
Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 17, 2010. |
|
It irks me a great deal to see how the Arabs, calling themselves "Palestinians," have managed to create a ring of lies and deception, they and the anti-Israel camp constantly use to justify their demands of Israel to 'de-occupy' the Palestinian land of the "West Bank." This kind of pressure the world has been putting on the State of Israel right to its sovereignty equals the pressure of a tourniquet around a bleeding wound. So who are these "Palestinians? What territory is referred to as the "West bank"? Late in 1967 the "Palestinian" people was created out of whole new cloth. The name "Palestinians" is not mentioned in UN General Assembly Resolution 242, adopted unanimously by the UN Security Council on November 22, 1967 in the aftermath of the Six-Day War. It is also not mentioned in Resolution 338, adopted on October 22, 1973 which called for a ceasefire in the Yom Kippur War. Reason being, until the Jordanian occupation of Judea, Samaria and part of Jerusalem ended in 1967, such a people never existed. Jordan, that illegally occupied and ruled over Judea and Samaria for merely 19 years out of the historical four thousand years of Jewish history in the region, (Jewish history is 4,000 years old. The history of Judea and Samaria is older), applied the term "West Bank." The fact that the "Palestinians," aka Arabs, insist on using the term "West Bank" means that they in fact accept Jordanian rule as legitimate and not an illegal occupation. In turn, that implies that they are the same people as that other oh-so-ancient people on the East Bank of the Jordan River, the "Jordanians." And that is a fact. These Arabs are literally brothers and cousins of the Jordanians. The "Palestinians" hold to historical revisionism according to which they claim they are the descendants of the Philistines, after whom the Roman Emperor Hadrian named the land. History attests otherwise. The [real] name is Philistines; they were the people who occupied the southern coast of Canaan and from time to time, they even occupied a greater piece of land. Nebuchadnezzar of the Chaldean Dynasty, the ruler of Babylon at that time, dispersed the Philistines. They resettled and totally assimilated and vanished. Moreover, the Israelites who entered the Promised Land called them "Philistine," in Hebrew, "Plishteem.". The name " Plishteem" in Hebrew means "invaders." Till today, the Arabs, calling themselves "Palestinians," do not know the history of those ancient people after whom they named themselves. "Palaestina" is a Latin word that comes from the Greek term "Palistia," which means a wrestler. This odd term was used by the Greek invaders to refer to the Jews who were, in that period called Yisrael, a term that comes to Jews from their Torah, the "Old Testament." The name Yisrael relates to the biblical story of Jacob who wrestled with the angel and was then renamed by G-d Yisrael. The Greek term "Palistia" is the translation from the Hebrew word Yisrael, which means, one who wrestles with G-d, referring to Jacob, who G-d renamed Yisrael. It is fascinating to know how history, referring to the Jews, is recorded with the name "Palistia." The Greeks came to be long after the Israelite kingdom was divided and also after the exile of the Kingdom of Israel, leaving in the areas only the Kingdom of Judea. It is also possible that centuries before, to distinguish themselves from the Northern Tribes, who, collectively, named themselves "Yisrael [Israel]," the members of later to be the Kingdom of Judah, had already identified themselves as "Yehudim." The fact is that the very name "Palestine" has no meaning, except with reference to the Jews. The Roman Emperor Hadrian gave the order to destroy the Jewish land the way the Romans destroyed Carthage. He invented and renamed the land "Syria Palaestina" "so that the name of Judea the Rebellious be remembered no more." This seems to mean that Hadrian named the land after the Philistines — Plishteem, the most hated of all the historical oppressors of the Jews, and did not use a nickname that referred to the Jews themselves. The "Palestinians" claim they have a long history in the land of Israel. This is fallacy. Such claim has no historical documentation. Today, the "Palestinians" are calling themselves by a Latin name, which is the language of the Crusaders. One should raise the question: what did these ancient people, the "Palestinians," call themselves before the Roman Emperor Hadrian coined the name "Palaestina," under which the Romans buried the name Israel with the hope it would be forgotten and disappears forever? Regardless of what Hadrian's reasons were, by the time the Romans came to be, the Philistines had long ago (approximately 700 years) disappeared from the historical record of the region. Doubtfully Hadrian even knew of them. What he did know was the Greek legacy of the region, in particular the language of the Greeks that, at the time of the Romans, was commonly spoken in Judea. He also must have known that the Greeks referred to the Jews in a derogatory manner as the "Palistia." Historically, using the name "Syria Palaestina" for the region makes more sense than naming it after the long dead people, the Philistines, who, in all likelihood, Hadrian had no understanding of their historic role. Reference to the Greek origin of the term Palistina comes from the
article "The Meaning Of Palestine" by Norman Cohen (Aug. 2007)
In either case, the name was not given because of a distinct people by that name inhabiting the country. From these historical facts we see that the term "Palestinian" NEVER referred to anyone except the people called Yisrael who, today are called Jews. The term Jews lumps all surviving members of the ten tribes of Yisrael into the tribe of Judah who inhabited the land granted by G-d to Judah. After the Persian Empire overthrew Babylonia, in 538 BCE, the Persian Cyrus the Great gave the Jews permission to return to their Yehud Province. As noted in the Biblical accounts of Jehoiakim, Ezra and Nehemiah, more than 40,000 Jews said to have returned Home and they re-built their Temple in Jerusalem. In the generations that followed they were called Yehudi from which the term Jew derives. The State of Israel real boundaries In reality, the historic Eretz Yisrael-the Jewish State's boundaries encompassed much greater land than the present State of Israel. If one reads the Torah, the First Five Books of the Old Testament, and other Canonical books dating from the "Biblical" Period, one clearly understands that the land of the Jews extended along the Mediterranean shores, well into Lebanon to the north and to the south-west from below what is known as Gaza Strip. The ancient Land of Israel included much of what is today Lebanon to the north, it incorporated all of the Golan Heights, extending in the direction of Damascus to the north-east, extended well into Jordan to the east and all the way down through the Gulf of Aqaba to the east-south. The argument that Sinai belongs to Egypt is historically utter nonsense. Though it is not clearly known to where, in the Sinai Peninsula, the boundaries or the Jewish Land precisely reached, those borders clearly were more expansive than the current dividing line is marked. As for the whole of the State of Israel, along its prejudice against Jews, the world has conveniently forgotten that the original League of Nations Mandate for "Palestine", known as the promised Homeland for the Jews, incorporated all the land out of which Trans-Jordan was later carved and the Golan Height detached from, all without even asking its proprietor, the Jews, approval. Then, after extracting a country called Trans-Jordan out of the legal Land of Israel, the British went on to divide and divide again the promised Jewish Homeland. Ultimately, the land of the Jews became a thin sliver of land west of the Jordan River. After Israel's 1948 Declaration of Independence, while Arabs remained living among Jews in the new State of Israel, Jews were expelled from all the land Jordan occupied. The world wants to whitewash and forget the fact that since before the Roman times Jews lived in all of that land and over their long history there they never relinquished the land to any of the many invaders. It was the Jews, not the Arab invaders, who were forcibly expelled from their land. As for the land these Arab "Squatters'" claim as their own, that too is a thief of history. For the most part the present Muslims living in the land of Eretz Yisrael-the Land of Israel have their family origin in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt and other Arab lands. Most of them arrived to the land when the early Zionists began settling, the largely un-occupied land, acquired from Ottoman-Turks' absentee owners. The Arabs came as laborers seeking work in the early stages of development of farming and industry the Jews were building. These Arab people are no more "Native" to the land than the Eskimos. The "Palestinians" are a population of immigrants, no less than the Jews, and from the same period. The British, Perfidious Albion mandate, severely restricted Jewish immigration while it permitted unrestricted Arab immigration into the Mandate of Palestine. The "Palestinians" also include Bosnian Muslims brought in by the Turks in order to prevent the immigrant Jews from becoming a majority in the Land. Factually, the "Palestinian" people have no history, no culture, no language and no religion of its own. They do not even have a genuine credible name. They call themselves by a name from the language of the Crusaders, whom they hate and revile daily. Sadly, the world has bought into the Arab Narrative that presents the Arabs as the victims of oppression by Jews. This false image is daily reinforced by the contemptible, blatant actions of the UN and the media that has taken upon itself to re-write Jewish history in order to conform to the Arab Narrative. Occasionally, this narrative is pierced by facts. One such case is that in areas the Arab control their policy is to systematically destroy archaeological evidence of Jewish existence in the biblical period. Regrettably, such facts get reported in the global media as an odd and insignificant item. The notion that such behavior is part of the Arabs' wider systematic effort to erase Jewish existence evidences in their ongoing efforts to strengthen their deceptive claim to the land, is never published and seen in the biased media. It's a tragedy that Jews don't know the real " Palaestina" story, the real story of the Land of the Jewish Nation. Even Israelis, including their leadership, don't know it. There are indeed grim consequences for forgetting Jewish history. One of them is that others, standing in the wings, will claim the history of the Jewish Nation as their own. It is long past the time for Jews to assert the truth, in particular first to other Jews and then the world at large. The failure of the Jews to do so until now has given the Arab invader the opportunity to claim Jewish history as their own, and today most of the world and its media buy into that false reinvented history. From here on, when Israel negotiates with the "Palestinians" it must insist on negotiations that are based on facts, not hallucination. The real nineteen year "occupation" of Judea and Samaria, aka "West Bank," ended with the Six-Day War in June, 1967. That was when the illegal occupier, Jordan, lost the war and withdrew its presence from the "West Bank" and the names Judea and Samaria came into use again. Save for Britain and Pakistan, for nineteen years the entire world regarded Jordan an occupier and its presence west of the Jordan River illegal. The United Nations Resolution 181, the Partition Plan for Future Government of Palestine, adopted by the General Assembly and approved on 29 November 1947, does not contain the term "West Bank." It consistently and exclusively refers to "Judea" and "Samaria." Judea means the land of the Jews. The term "West Bank" did not exist in 1947. It was an invention of the illegal occupier, the Arabs. The Arab effective propaganda of lies and deception has served their goal well and today the world insists on referring to the Judea and Samaria area as the "West Bank." It is no longer about land for peace, land for food, or land for fuel. It is about the Jewish State of Israel, about Israelis and the facts, based on truth only.
This was posted at |
|
THE MORAL DILEMMA: PROTECT ASHKELON OR ELIMINATE THE SOURCE OF THE ROCKETS
Posted by Noam Bedein, May 17, 2010. |
|
Recent protests by Ashkelon residents and the local PTA in demanding full rocket protection for school buildings across the city put us at the Sderot Media Center, in a moral dilemma. Should we join in their struggle? On one hand, we fully understand and identify with Ashkelon's population of 120,000 residents who battle for school protection which could save lives from expected Gaza missile attacks. On the other hand, we cannot help but ask, should this struggle be for protection of the city or for the cessation of the threat of aerial attacks from Gaza? Only last week, a rocket exploded in south Ashkelon, bringing to 349 the number of rockets and missiles fired into Israel since the cease fire stopped Israel's three week incursion into Gaza in January 2009. Will protecting the city stop the rockets? It is clear to everyone that it will not. Building shelters in Sderot At the Sderot Media Center, our agency has consistently reported on the struggle to get to the Israeli government to provide appropriate shelter for Israeli communities along the Gaza border. Back in April 2007, the SMC staff, in collaboration with researchers at Sapir College, conducted an investigation into the shelter protection in Sderot and the western Negev. The investigation was accompanied by the local PTA of Sderot, who demanded that decision makers and the Israel High Court fortify the 24 schools in Sderot and the surrounding area. The findings of our research, published on the Israeli news website NEWS1.co.il, headed by investigative journalist Yoav Yitzchak, highlighted significant failures pertaining to shelter policies in Sderot. The report showed that out of the 57 shelters in Sderot, 25 did not have running water or electricity. Sufficient protection for schools was also lacking, with protection provided only for school children under the age of nine. Schoolchildren in Sderot and the Gaza-border communities were expected to race from unprotected classrooms in which they were learning, to a shelter within 15 seconds of the siren sounding. To us, this was inconceivable at the time. Indeed, until two years ago, a nine-year-old boy was expected to study in an unprotected classroom even during the worst of rocket escalations, when 10-12 rockets would strike Sderot throughout the day. When the 'Color Red' siren sounded, this nine-year old student and 80 other schoolchildren would run through the school hallways, hoping to reach a protected space within 15 seconds or less. Like the shelters in Sderot, the Color Red warning system is not foolproof. There were situations when both shelters and the siren system did not suffice — the last person killed by a Qassam in Sderot, was killed in a direct hit, when no Color Red siren activated. Dependence on an electronic system to sound off warnings and bomb shelter protection to keep out rocket shrapnel is not a long term solution to the problem, even if these devices do save lives. Even the reliability of the shelters is now questionable. The shelters built for schools in Sderot can withstand up to three kilograms of explosives. Today the Qassam and grad missiles produced in Gaza carry anywhere from 12-20 kilograms of explosives, sometimes even more, which no school shelter in Sderot can withstand. At the end of the day, these shelters can do nothing to prevent the heavy psychological trauma and PTSD symptoms among Sderot's younger generations as children and adults, which are a direct result of rocket fire. Results from the Sderot bombshelter investigation Thanks to the bombshelter investigation initiated by The Sderot Media Center, pressure was applied on Knesset decision makers to introduce some changes. These investigative reports were translated into English and disseminated internationally as well. What resulted was that several overseas Jewish organizations in England turned to the Israeli embassy in London and demanded accountability. The Knesset took notice and a dialogue ensued with the spokesman for the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, who invited our staff to a meeting at the Knesset, where we discussed the budget for school protection in Sderot and the western Negev. Eighteen months ago, the government approved a law determining that every community, kibbutz or city that is located 4.7 km away from Gaza, will receive government funding for shelters including educational institutes within that range This happened following the recommendation of the defense establishment and after a direct query from the PM office. Today it's Ashkelon, tommorow it will be...? So what range from Gaza is fighting for shelter fortification? The city of Ashkelon is located 15-20 kilometers from Gaza. Massive missile attacks on the city began in March 2008. Countless Iranian Grad missiles which can damage a radius of up to 300 meters, repeatedly struck strategic areas across the city including Ashkelon's industrial zone, which provides more than 70% of Gaza's electricity. One of the worst rocket attacks took place on an outdoor shopping mall, where Dr. Mirela Siderer, a gynecologist who was invited to testify along with me, before the UN's Goldstone Commission, was severely injured, as well as a baby and young mother and 90 other people. During Operation Cast Lead, an Ashkelon school was also directly hit in a rocket strike. So what do we do now? If Ashkelon is fortified, then every city, kibbutz and community located within the 20 km radius of Gaza will have to be protected as well. And if Ashdod and Be'er Sheva will be in range in the next missile escalation, then these major cities will need fortification? The total cost for government fortification of only Sderot and Gaza, is about half a billion dollars. Ashkelon is both a strategic and goal of Hamas. Ashkelon is far larger and more populated than any other area Hamas has struck before so frequently. Hitting Ashkelon is also popular in Gaza since Ashkelon is built on the ruins of the Arab village of Majdal, whose descendants now live in UNRWA camps.70% of the Gaza population live in UNRWA refugee camps, who are kept there under the premise and promise of the right of return to the places like Majdal. Today, security officials estimate that rockets fired from Gaza can reach as far as Tel Aviv. As the rocket threat spreads across Israel, including the southern, northern and western parts of the country, a solution must be sought that puts an end to the rocket and missile threat that plagues Israel. The solution does not lie in "fortifying Israel". The challenge for Israel is to solve the problem in Gaza — not in Ashkelon.
Noam Bedein is a photojournalist, lecturer and founder/director of Sderot Media Center. He has conducted briefings and tours for government officials, diplomats, foreign press, and students from around the world
|
|
ARAB MEDIA CHEER OBAMA FOR DE-LINKING MUSLIMS FROM TERROR
Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, May 17, 2010. |
|
A leading international Arab newspaper has hailed U.S. President Barack Obama for officially removing the description "Muslim terrorist" as part of his campaign "to reach out to the Muslim world." The op-ed did not note the radical Muslim bacgkround of the terrorists and reasoned they are equal to other terrorists whose religion is not connected with their acts. Osman Mirghani, the deputy editor-in-chief of 'Al-Sharq Al-Awsat,' which is owned by a Saudi Arabian company and published in London, wrote an op-ed last week under the headline "Why Didn't Obama Mention Islam?." The Obama administration has broken from the Bush government's policy of using the term "Islamic terrorism" in official documents and "no longer [is] responding to extremist voices" that call for targeting home countries of terrorists, he explained. He said the president is carrying out his pledge in his "reaching out to Muslims speech" at Cairo University in June 2008. Regarding Obama's statements on the botched Times Square bombing, the editor praised President Obama for not once referring to prime suspect Faisal Shahzad's being Muslim and for not "mentioning Islam in discussing the terrorist operation." The same approach was taken after the failed Christmas Day bombing by Nigerian Muslim Umar Farouk Abdulmuttalib. "Obama spoke about the detained terrorist as a member of the Al-Qaeda organization but he did not speak about him being a Muslim,' Mirghani wrote. "Even when he spoke about Al-Qaeda, Obama noted that it was not the first time that the network had targeted America, ignoring the links that were made in the past between the organization and Islam or when it was put in the context of 'Islamic extremism.'" Similarly, after the Fort Hood, Texas attack by a Muslim terrorist who murdered 13 people last November, "President Obama 'cautioned against jumping to conclusions'" and did not refer to the terrorist's Arab origin or religion. The article did not mention that most, if not all, Arab terrorists are indoctrinated by Muslim extremism. Instead, the editor argued that describing terrorists as Muslims actually provokes more terror. "There is recognition today of the fact that terrorists are benefiting from the creation of an anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim atmosphere after any terrorist operation, and that issuing statements or taking steps that target Muslims employed by extremist groups further spreads hostility against the U.S., the West, and even moderate Islamic states," he reasoned. Th writer argued that "the identity of the terrorist does not necessarily implicate the country he belongs to, in the same way that other adherents of the religion the terrorist follows should not be condemned." He accused former President George W. Bush of being "captive to the Big Stick policy and slogans of 'you're either with us or against us,' which caused the popularity of the U.S. to wane, not only in the Islamic world but in numerous countries around the world." In contrast, he continued, "The new president has extended his hand to the Islamic world,... and the tendency to link every terrorist operation to the religion of the perpetrator has disappeared." Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a writer for Arutz-7, where this story appeared today. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: AS SHAVUOT APPROACHES
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 17, 2010. |
|
Tomorrow night at sundown we begin Shavuot, the festival that marks our coming to Sinai and receiving of the Torah. It is traditionally a time for all-night study, and a time for marking who we are as a people and what our purpose on this earth truly is. ~~~~~~~~~~ I didn't want to go into the holiday without having written. And yet I am finding it difficult to write, because it seems I deliver so much news that is heavy, and gets increasingly so. ~~~~~~~~~~ Before I move to some of that news, I want to share the link to the Arutz Sheva "Tamar Yonah Show" from Sunday. I was interviewed with regard to what the PLO and the PA are truly like. Don't know how long this will be up.
~~~~~~~~~~ Saeb Erekat, chief PA negotiator, delivered a talk to the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv on Sunday. If we examine his words — which are cloaked in conciliation and "longing" for peace — we can see very readily what the PA position is. He actually said: "We, as Palestinians, decided to give Mitchell, Clinton and Obama a chance...I talk with Mitchell about the core issues. Translation: We don't need negotiations because that implies give and take, and compromise, and we're not into compromising. We will hold out for what we demand, and we're counting on President Obama to shove what we have demanded down Israel's throat. That's why we support "proximity talks." We get to deal with the US and not Israel. Either Israel takes what we demand, or we'll see what comes next. Words of genuine peace, no? ~~~~~~~~~~ Of course, he flatly refused to consider issues that have been Netanyahu demands: "We will not agree to a military presence in the Jordan Valley, we will not agree to (Israeli) control of water, we will not agree to settlements there or Israeli industry there." ~~~~~~~~~~ Then, please, see this by Khaled Abu Toameh, on the Hudson NY site, with regard to how the "proximity talks" actually benefit Hamas and Iran. "The Obama Administration is making a mistake forcing Israel and the Palestinian Authority to discuss 'core' issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, borders and settlements when the two sides are crying out that the gap between them on these explosive topics remains as wide as ever. http://www.hudsonny.org/2010/05/middle-east- proximity-talks-benefit-hamas-and-iran.php ~~~~~~~~~~ The news from Barry Rubin — in his recent piece "Russian traps — and moves" — is grim as well. "If America's Middle East position collapses in the forest will anyone hear it? The answer is either 'no,' or 'just barely.' As I've predicted, Russia is coming back into the region and it is going to play a very bad role. Moscow is linking up with the emerging Islamist alliance of Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah. ~~~~~~~~~~ Have you picked up on the common denominator of these two "bad news" pieces? In both cases the situation is being fueled by an obtuse or damaging Obama policy. ~~~~~~~~~~ Defense Minister Barak, who seems to be working as Obama's buddy these days, has delivered a statement to his Labor party faction that literally makes me sick to my stomach: "The Americans are trying to organize sanctions against Iran, are busy stopping North Korea, and other countries like Somalia and Yemen. "Therefore, they expect Israel, too, as a friend, to mobilize in the areas in which it can help the overall effort — in other words, in a peace agreement with the Palestinians. "A fundamental change is required in our relations with the US. We cannot do this without a far-reaching political initiative on our part." He warned against Israel being depicted as refusing peace, and explained, "Our real challenge is to look over the small things and march toward the challenge and opportunity encased in Israeli political initiative towards negotiation and agreement." So, in order to be Obama's friend, and to be sure we are not "depicted" as "refusing peace," we should overlook "small things." What small things? Like a united Jerusalem and full expression of our rights to the land? This is the man who offered Arafat an incredible deal in 2000 (from our side, incredibly bad) and was turned down. But it seems he learned nothing. How can he see "opportunity" given what Erekat is saying (above)? How can he even pretend to see opportunity? ~~~~~~~~~~ And so, as Shavuot approaches, I pray that the Almighty will protect not only from our enemies, but from "leaders" such as this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Good news: There is a campaign begun, headed by Eli Avidar, to downgrade perks for Arabs in our prisons to conform with international law. (Yes, we do much more than is required by the Third Geneva Convention.) This is long overdue, and I hope the campaign succeeds. It is hoped that this will help to secure the release of Gilad Shalit: "If we do not cause a situation in which they [Arab families of those in our prisons] pressure their leaders...the chances to free Gilad will continue to diminish." ~~~~~~~~~~ Israel Military Industries has developed a rocket — named the Enchanted Spear — that can hit targets up to 40 kilometers (25 miles) away with a precision of 10 meters (32 feet). It can carry various heads and is constructed to destroy ground targets. More significantly, an Israeli start-up, Eltics Ltd, has developed the Black Fox Active Adaptive IR Stealth System. Night vision equipment is commonly used these days and is certainly in the possession of our enemies, such as Hamas. This technology renders helicopters, armored personnel carriers and ships invisible to thermal night vision systems and guided missiles. As was explained by Israel National News, "The equipment analyzes the thermal signature of the environment, and then screens the exact same signature on to plates fitted on to the machine." Pretty neat, and it would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of our having the advantage as we approach prospects of war down the road. The Black Fox is in the advanced prototype stage and developers are seeking additional funds. ~~~~~~~~~~ Let me end here with a YouTube video about Israel. I picked up this link on a site call "My Israel — Israel Sheli." It's in Hebrew, but you can readily get the sense of it without much language. Stunning and moving footage of our history — from Ben Gurion's declaration of a state, through early years of our founding, and our wars, to the present.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
IMAM IN GERMANY CAMPAIGNS AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM;
HAMAS ACCUSES ISRAEL OF DESECRATION AND WHATEVER ELSE IT CAN THINK OF
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 17, 2010. |
|
RIOTERS HURT FELLOW ISRAELI RIOTER Rioters threw stones, near An Nabi Salih. One of the stones struck an Israeli woman. An ambulance took her away. Police took away another of the rioters (IMRA, 5/15/10). Oops. Don't throw stones in glass houses. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. The brief omitted who else was rioting, what they alleged to be their grievance, how they justified violence, and why only one was arrested.
HAMAS ACCUSES ISRAEL OF DESECRATION AND WHATEVER ELSE IT CAN THINK OF 
Qassam news reports that Gaza is the most densely populated place on earth. Its density is estimated as 4,140 persons per square kilometer. IMRA notes that tThat compares with Tel Aviv's 7,134 persons per square kilometer. Gaza gained most of its population when Israeli forces expelled Arabs from their ancestral lands. [Actually, the Arabs fled from their failed attempt to expel the Jews from their ancestral lands. If the Arabs prefer to view the modern Zionist return from exile as relatively recent immigration, then one can reply that about three-fourths of the Arabs in the Palestine Mandate were relatively recent immigrants. The other fourth got there as a result of taking the country away from the Christians and Jews during the start of Arab imperialism.] Hamas vows to continue resisting the enemy so long as it continues arresting Palestinian Arab children and desecrating their holy places. [Hamas uses its people's children as human shields and weapons carriers. It does not care what happens to those children, and when they get killed, it makes anti-Zionist propaganda out of it, as if the deaths were not Hamas' fault for using human shields. Israel arrests youths who commit violence. No violence, no arrests. It makes more sense to blame the criminals for what they do than the police for arresting them.] [Desecration? No examples given. Palestinian Arabs destroyed Joseph's Tomb, attacked Rachel's Tomb, destroyed synagogues in Jerusalem and desecrated the Mt. of Olives cemetery in 1948, destroyed ancient Jewish artifacts in the Temple Mount, denied Jews access to other religious sites, and desecrate and vandalize the Hebron Jewish cemetery. Recently, when Israel announced plans to refurbish a couple of joint religious sites, Arabs rioted. Most accusations against Israel are slanderous, paranoid, and rabble rousing plots to destroy al-Aqsa mosque. The Muslim Arabs exploit their people's faith to rouse them under false pretenses. Somebody damaged a mosque in Judea-Samaria, recently, but the police have not determined who did it.] Hamas demands an "honorable" prisoner swap: an innocent Israeli soldier Shalit, whom the Arabs kidnapped for this ransom, in exchange for about a thousand convicted Arab terrorists (IMRA, 5/16/10). Honorable swap? Not according to common decency and not for Israel.
IRAN OFFERS UN NEW URANIUM EXCHANGE DEAL WITH TURKEY AND BRAZIL 
The heads of Iran, Turkey, and Brazil revived and revised proposals that the UN previously accepted for a foreign enrichment deal. This time, Iran would ship fuel to Turkey, for enrichment into rods useful in Iran's medical nuclear reactor. Another difference between this and prior proposals appears to be that although Iran now has more radioactive material than before, the quantity to be swapped would not be increased from the prior deal to include all the additional material. Details not devised. The new proposal would make the U.S. fear to look unreasonable if it rejected it outright (Alexei Barrionuevo, Sevnem Arsu, NY Times, 5/17/10, A10). That is the purpose. Here is play acting all around. Iran, like North Korea and Saddam's Iraq, has practiced deception and phony negotiation for years. It has not earned trust. When sanctions seem about to be imposed, the regime switches from refusing to negotiate to negotiating to refuse. First, the details are withheld. Then they are negotiated. Then they are released but reneged on. Then they are agreed to, but other regime officials deny it. Then they are withdrawn. The obvious purpose is to stall for time, time during which development can proceed or be covered up. Iran draws nearer the finish line. Repeated instances of these tactics demonstrate their insincerity. Many in the West keep falling for the ruse. Will the West never mature beyond naivete? Governments that side with the scofflaw seize upon the pretext of a suggested new desire to accommodate the UN, to stop the drive for sanctions. The U.S. pretends to be driving for sanctions, but it is not driving hard or fast. One key requirement for preventing Iran's radioactive material from being turned into weapons grade fuel is effective international supervision. Turkey is Islamist, an ally of Iran. Brazil's President is anti-Western. One cannot trust partners of Iran to hold Iran harmless.
IMAM IN GERMANY CAMPAIGNS AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM Imam Hesham Shahaa of Munich urges his congregation to shun radical recruiters. He travels all over the world to bring young Muslims back from the brink of terrorism. Having experience with radical movements and knowing Islamic scripture, he shows young Muslims that the radical message is warped. They cannot meet his challenge to show him otherwise. Those who are too thoroughly indoctrinated to retain an open mind respond with death threats. So far, the controversial imam has had much success. German police encourage the Imam, but some German natives stereotype him as Osama (Squad Mekhennet, NY Times, 5/17/10, A11.) This development bears watching. It could take Muslims out of their state of violent war with the West. Would there still be a religious and political struggle? Radical Muslims spread their message by Internet. How about moderate Muslims countering that message, on a religious doctrine and document bases, also by Internet? How about classes on that message, to reach youths as a form of inoculation against being radicalized?
PAKISTANIS AND POLICE COORDINATE IN CONNECTICUT A Pakistani-born, Muslim cardiologist of Stratford, Connecticut, Dr. Atique A. Mirza, has teamed up with Stratford police chief Mark Rinaldo, to detect incipient signs of terrorism before they mount to murder. Their fruitful collaboration developed along with the need for it and with trust between them. Chief Rinaldo wants to prevent crime, not persecute Muslims in general. Dr. Mirza does not want a general prejudice against Pakistani-Americans to grow among other Americans. Dr. Mirza founded the Pakistani American Association of Connecticut, now acting as liaison with police in 13 towns and increasing. He urges fellow Pakistanis to follow a message like what we New Yorkers hear in our subways, "If you see something, say something." Don't let a plot culminate in murder and recrimination. His wife, Faryal, an endocrinologist, now teaches about Pakistani culture, to detoxify impressions of it (Anne Barnard, NY Times, 5/17/10, A20). This seems to be a significant development. It appears to be the stage of taking civic responsibility in Americanization, following the stage of settling in. It is a long way from the original, mutual distrust.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
STAND4REASON: SIGN PETITION COUNTERING JCALL INSANITY
Posted by Fiamma Nirenstein, May 17, 2010. |
|
This was written by Fiamma Nirenstein and appeared in
Arutz-7 and is archived at
|
|
The attack against Israel by the Jcall document is inspired by a short-sighted view of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, the signatories of this appeal do not have the clear perception of the global physical and moral threat to which Israel is currently exposed. It is indeed incredible that intelligent and cultivated people like Alain Finkelkraut and Bernard-Henri Levy — instead of dealing with Iran that will soon keep the whole world under the threat of the range of its atomic bomb — play with the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu is the true hindrance to peace, that the essential obstacle to a resolution of the conflict is a reproachable attitude of Israel. The intellectuals who have signed the French manifesto ignore history and don't care about the help that it will give and is already giving to the unprecedented delegitimization threatening the life of Israel. Pushing Israel to concessions without rewards, simply means to surrender the enemy without any guarantee: the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza has produced disastrous consequences, the land Gush Katif inhabitants has been kicked out from, is since then a launching pad for missiles and terrorists; Ehud Barak's concessions in Camp David, designed to give Arafat practically everything he was asking for, led to the horror of the second Intifada, with its two-thousand people killed by suicide terrorists, shootings and rocket attacks; the evacuation of Southern Lebanon in 2000 strengthened the Hezbollah, supplied them with more than 40,000 missiles and led to the 2006 war. Finkelkraut, Henri Levy and their fellow signatories claim that they are concerned about the future and the security of Israel. But they actually ignore the basic element that has prevented success of any peace process, namely the Arab and Palestinian refusal to recognize the very existence of the State of Israel as a permanent nation-state in the Middle East. This all-encompassing rejection of Israel's right to exist is reflected day by day in the Palestinian and pan-Arab media. The attack against Netanyahu aims at breaking up his right wing coalition. But it actually never mattered whether an Israeli government was right or left wing: anyhow the Palestinians refused any proposal of peace. Israeli land concessions like the ones the French intellectuals advocate, will never bring peace. Only a cultural revolution in the Arab world can achieve it, but nobody asks for that, not even Obama, who devotes US great strength to pressure only Israel. This is the current fashion. Peace will not come because Israel becomes smaller Peace will not come because Israel becomes smaller. What will bring us closer to peace is if Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas stops naming public squares after mass-murderers like Hamas bombmaker Yehiya Ayash; if the Palestinians stop passing out candies when Jewish families are murdered by suicide bombers in restaurants; and when the Arab world accepts Netanyahu's modest request to recognize the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish people. This reality is ignored as well by the Israeli intellectuals who have signed a document attacking the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel, who wrote a very noble letter to support Jerusalem as the spiritual core and historical homeland of the Jewish people. This sadly politically correct epidemic is probably designed to give some oxygen to the defeated pacifist movement that is actually able only to crash against the rock of the Islamist hatred culture and to defame Israel. But in this approach there is no contribution to any better future for the Middle East: the world must find the courage to face the new Islamist frenzy that springs from Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas and points to the destruction of Israel. Iran and its allies are of course arming themselves with lethal weapons, not with vain words, like those who signed "The Call for Reason". But even words can kill and destroy. The signatories of the J-Call manifesto show a blatant ignorance of the extended hand policy adopted by Netanyahu since his Bar Ilan speech in June 2009, the ten-months settlements freeze, the lifting of many check points and the adoption of important measures to ease the Palestinian economy. And you can clearly see that the "Finkelkraut document" has an Obama flavour, a prissy and respectable trendy attitude intellectuals are often unable to say no. This makes possible nowadays to the increasing number of Israel's enemies to delegitimize the Jewish State by claiming that "even the Jews are with us". If this was the signatories's goal, they have indeed achieved it. Sincerely,
With blessings from Hebron,
Visit Hebron
You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone: 718 677 6886. |
|
DO YOU THINK YOU ARE DIFFERENT? THINK AGAIN, YOU ARE WRONG!
Posted by Susana K-M, May 17, 2010. |
|
When Jews attempt to separate themselves from their brethren in order to curry favor with the outside world, we're in trouble. This was written by Emuna Braverman. |
|
There was a chilling book review in the Wall Street Journal. It described the early life of the now famous author, Irene Nemirovsky, who perished at the hands of the Nazis. In her earlier days, Nemirovsky has been a less-than-ardent supporter of her people. In fact she participated in a "rightist, ultra-nationalist and often anti-Semitic intellectual culture." At some point she converted to Roman Catholicism and married a man who had done the same. As the Nazi net began to close in around them, her husband penned a desperate letter to the Nazi ambassador in France, pointing out that "even though my wife is of Jewish descent, she does not speak of the Jews with any affection..." We are not like them (the other Jews), he was asserting. We are different. We are the good ones. We all know the end of the story. Hitler and his Nazi machine of extermination didn't care. He wasn't interested in your philosophy or your personal religious views. He didn't want to hear about your intermarriage or whether you raised your children as Jews or not. If you had even one-fourth Jewish blood, you were doomed in his eyes. It was, and is, a sobering thought. In a time of such targeted attacks on our people, it is excruciatingly painful to read about those Jews who tried to set themselves apart, who turned their backs on their people and to see the ultimate foolishness of their delusion. You might think we would have learned our lesson and recognize the need to stick together. It would be a logical conclusion but, unfortunately, an erroneous one. After Elie Wiesel took out his courageous full page newspaper ads in support of Israel (LINK to piece), another organization felt compelled to rebut his allegations, to suggest his support was unjustified, to openly avow and assert another side — a side critical of Mr. Wiesel, Israel, and by association, the Jewish people. This same group (under the ironic guise of being "pro-Israel") is constantly attacking Israel in the press and trying hard to differentiate themselves from those Jews who support the land. We are different, they are saying. We are not like them. We are the good ones. We need to be united against our external enemies and band together in order to reach our true spiritual potential. There very well may be legitimate criticisms of some of the actions of the Jewish state. There is plenty to debate. But if we have criticisms, let's make them internally. My concern is when dissent is made in public where the goal is not the betterment of the Jewish people but rather to demonstrate to the non-Jewish world at large one's lack of loyalty to the Jewish people and Israel. We are different. We are not like them. When we are governed by our concern for how the world will view us and an anxiety to make sure they don't link us with our brethren with whom we disagree, then we have lost our way. We are in danger of writing letters like Mrs. Nemirovsky's husband: I'm not one of those who believes in a united Jerusalem. I have no affection for the 'settlers.' That assertion of separation in order to curry favor with the external society is how the seeds of destruction are sewn. Our biggest strength is our unity. We are our own biggest enemies when we participate in our people's fragmentation. We leave ourselves open and vulnerable. This has been true throughout Jewish history. It's so painful to watch this unfold before my eyes, to see this played out alongside the saga of the life (and death) of Irene Nemirovsky. The desire of some to separate themselves from their people is painful. The disunity of our nation wounds. And to see my brothers and sisters (for they are our brothers and sisters) fall for such an illusion is an additional source of hurt. It took a Hitler to remind us that we are one. Sometimes only when we are attacked from outside armies do we band together. But wouldn't it better if we recognized our family through demonstrations of love and caring, through open discussion and sincere desire to find common ground? It doesn't matter how loudly or frequently we tell the world that we are different than our brethren, when anti-Semitism comes, we all share the same boat. We are now approaching the holiday of Shavuot. When the Jewish people encamped at the foot of Mount Sinai in preparation to receive the Torah, they exhibited an unprecedented unity. They were like "one person with one heart." This is the true secret to our success; only when we acted as one did we merit the Almighty's revelation and the gift of His Torah. We need to make our way back. We need to refocus our energies. We need to be united against our external enemies and band together in order to reach our true spiritual potential. Reading The Life of Irene Nemirovsky and observing the Jewish world today frightens me. It seems on the surface as if some things never change and some people never learn. And yet Shavuot is coming. And that unique experience of unity has been embedded in the spiritual fabric of the holiday. That palpable sense of a people with one clear purpose is available to us every year at this time. That is our hope. That is our opportunity. If only we can all reach out and grab it. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
THE SHOWDOWN AT THE TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY CORRAL
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 17, 2010. |
|
1. http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/17/
dershowitz-takes-on-tenured-extremists/
There is no one who is so effective in upsetting the academic radical Left as Professor Alan Dershowitz from Harvard University. Dershowitz, "Dersh," h as long been the nemesis of the far Left, especially academic radicals. They like to blame him (falsely) for the firing of Norman Finkelstein from DePaul University. [Actually DePaul fired Finkelstein [1] because he had never published a single academic publication.] And Dersh's defense of America and of Israel drives them to conniptions. But it is not only the American academic Far Left that finds Dershowitz enraging. Suddenly, academic freedom of speech is the leading topic of discussion in Israel. Suddenly, the local newspapers and TV shows are filled with debates about "censorship" in academic institutions. Suddenly, everyone in Israel can see the anti-democratic nature of Israel's academic fifth column. And Israel owes Prof. Alan Dershowitz a debt of gratitude for exposing the damages of Israel's anti-Israel academic far Left, the academic copperheads who support the enemies of their country in time of war! Receiving an honorary doctoral degree at Tel Aviv University a few days ago, Dershowitz gave a dramatic and eloquent speech [2] denouncing anti-Israel radical academics. The entire speech can be read here [2]. Tel Aviv University is arguably the worst den of tenured extremists and academic communists in Israel. In the speech, Dershowitz defended the rights of extremist academics to exercise freedom of speech, or — in his words — the right to be wrong. But he also defended the rights of others to denounce and criticize far-leftist academics, something the Israeli semi-fascist Far Left has been attempting to suppress [3] and prohibit. Dersh explained that it is misleading when such people whine about being denounced. Sure, they claim they are only engaging in "criticism" of Israel. But to the contrary, Dershowitz described how these people are engaging in treason, delegitimizing Israel itself, calling for world boycotts of Israel, calling for Israel's annihilation, organizing campaigns of boycott against their own country and their own universities by foreign anti-Semites. Dersh named several Tel Aviv University anti-Israel extremists, including some in Boston that day attempting to organize a boycott of Israel's engineering university, the Technion, for being a "war machine." Dershowitz then denounced the Tel Aviv University Stalinist professor Shlomo Sand, who is really an expert on the French cinema, for composing a propaganda book. It claims not only that Israel has no right to exist but also that no Jewish people exists. Dershowitz denounced far-leftist McCarthyists for insisting that freedom of speech belongs only to people who agree with the Left. He denounced far-leftist professors at Israeli universities who harass and persecute students who dare to disagree with the leftist propaganda being force-fed them, comparing their behavior to those who sexually harass students. He denounced the in-classroom indoctrination conducted by leftist Israeli academics. He insisted that students too are entitled to academic freedom, and that includes the right to disagree with the leftist indoctrination by radical professors. The Tel Aviv University audience listening to Dershowitz repeatedly interrupted him with loud applause. But the members of the tenured Left squirmed in their seats. It did not take them long to open fire in retaliation. Within days, a group of Tel Aviv University professors denounced Dershowitz and challenged his right to exercise freedom of speech and to criticize them. A petition of anti-Israel radicals [4] and a few fellow travelers who teach at Tel Aviv University was collected (a handful of the signatories are not identified with the ultra-Left), and it was published on a pro-terror, radically anti-Israel, far-leftist website. Since then the web has been crawling with anti-Dershowitz smears on countless blogs. Those 46 Tel Aviv University faculty members signed the petition denouncing Dershowitz for mentioning by name two of TAU's most radical anti-Israel academics and their seditious boycott-Israel activities: Rachel Giora and Anat Matar [5]. How dare Dershowitz mention TAU academics by name, the petition shrieks and moans! By name, you say? The very same Anat Matar composed and distributed photo and personal information [6] about an Israeli army officer, with the banner headline "War Criminal" and "Murderer," in a poorly disguised call for the officer to be harmed. The Israeli Attorney General is now investigating Matar for this (she has been arrested before for her violent behavior in anti-Israel protests.) And let us take a better look at just who these 46 great "defenders of academic freedom and freedom of speech" are, these people who denounce Dershowitz because he dares to exercise his own freedom of speech. Among the signers of the petition, claiming that Dershowitz's words "remind them of the darkest regimes in human history" when he criticizes anti-Israel extremists, are: Prof. Chaim Gans of TAU law school, a far-leftist anti-democratic extremist who organized a petition demanding that an IDF woman colonel be prevented from teaching a course in the school because he did not like her opinions. See this [7]. Prof. Gadi Algazi, a Marxist historian at TAU who recently led a march of Arabs supporting Hezb'Allah terror — see this [8]. Prof. Uri Hadar, a psychology professor, who recently organized a conference at TAU to support the Hamas and Hezb'Allah. See this [9]. Prof. Daniel Bar-Tal, an educational psychologist and an anti-Zionist Marxist extremist, who produces anti-Jewish propaganda for the UN and thinks Zionism is the obstacle to peace. See this [10]. Dr. Gerardo Leibner, who teaches history, a communist and anti-Zionist agitator. See this [11]. Dr. Orly Lubin, literature lecturer and anti-Israel propagandist. See this [12]. Prof. Adi Ophir, an extremist philosophy professor, who recently led the "Israel Apartheid Week" pogrom in the UK. See this [13]. Prof. Anat Biletzki, philosophy professor, a leader in the Boycott Israel movement. See this [14]. Prof. Moshe Zuckerman, history professor, anti-Israel extremist. See this [15]. Judd Ne'eman, a rabidly anti-Israel film professor. See this [16]. In addition, the two professors who organized the violent protests at TAU a few years back against the opening of a synagogue on the campus (but have no problem with a mosque) are on the list. The stories about censorship filling the Israeli newspapers also concern the censorship of the governors of Tel Aviv University by the new president of the University, Prof. Joseph Klafter. He refused to "allow" the [17] Governors of his own university to take a vote in their own plenary session. In part inspired by Dershowitz' speech, those Governors sought to condemn Tel Aviv University's anti-Israel academic extremists and tenured traitors. In response to the censorship by Klafter, one leading Governor and donor to the university has resigned [17] from the Board and he is likely to be followed by others. Under the "constitution" of Tel Aviv University, the Board of Governors is supposed to be the supreme power in control of the university, with the president subordinate to it. But that is obviously not how the institution is run. Meanwhile a Tel Aviv University psychology professor, far leftist Carlo Strenger, seems to be acting as the button man for TAU President Joseph Klafter. Strenger has a long track record of promoting the far leftist [18] agenda, and is on record opposing freedom [18] of speech for non-leftists because its exercise by non-leftists constitutes McCarthyism and "incitement." (For years, Israeli leftists have used the term "incitement" to refer to any opinion with which they disagree) Strenger attacked Tel Aviv University Governors in the Israeli media for their attempt [19] at criticizing the school's tenured extremists. He also accused the Governors of lying, something that no doubt will now cost the university in terms of its ability to raise donations. While writing a toady defense of the worst radicals at Tel Aviv University, including the notorious anti-Semite Sand [20], Strenger badmouthed Dershowitz and the Governors. He denied that Sand's "book" [21] is anti-Israel or anti-Semitic at all, insisting it is nothing more than a call for peace. Actually Sand's Invention of the Jewish People book carries crackpot themes generally to be found [22] on Neo-Nazi web sites about how today's Jews are imposters and converted "Khazars [23]." Naturally, Strenger also denied that any TAU professors ever indoctrinate students or harass non-leftist students. He found that "only" 140 [19] students at Tel Aviv University have filed complaints about being harassed when they disagree with leftist faculty members. And that is just a tiny proportion of the entire student body, insists Strenger. Strenger claims that the media misunderstood what Dershowitz said in his speech, and that Dersh's comments about bullying professors from the Left were actually referring to professors in the US and not to any at TAU. That should give Dershowitz a great belly laugh. Whether Klafter is behind Strenger's trashing of the TAU governors and toady piece is unclear. Klafter and Strenger have also been joined by Prof. Galia Golan, an extremist professor of "Government, Diplomacy and Strategy." She was among the founders of the leftist protest group "Peace Now," which seeks Israeli capitulation to Arab demands. Writing on the YNET news site, Golan denounced those who dare to criticize [24] the academic far Left. She repeated the familiar McCarthyist charges — that the exercise of freedom of speech by critics of the Left produces violence and so must be suppressed. A bit amusingly, she accused those who criticize the Left of being "rich." (If only that were so.) She singled out an Israeli Zionist student organization, Im Tirtzu, for condemnation because it dares to criticize far-leftist NGOs and professors. Golan writes: "It is not clear just what is behind the present attack on Israeli civil society and academia. Is it simply a misguided campaign by a small, inconsequential (but rich) minority on the extreme right? Is it the lashing out of a weak government responding to outside pressure and criticism? Or, is it, more likely, the expression of an ideology now in power — that of the right-wing, the Likud and its supporters? ...The Knesset (parliament) committee called upon the Council for Higher Education to take the report of Im Tirzu and investigate what Committee Chair Zvulun Orlev called "subversive and anti-Zionist." These (and more) are not isolated items. They add up to a policy, a campaign designed to cripple civil society, stifle criticism and eliminate opposition. They endanger the very essence of liberal democracy and of a free society, namely pluralism — of thought, deed, and expression." Israel's tenured Left is displaying growing hysteria. It is being targeted, monitored and exposed by watchdog groups, similar to the Campus Watch [25] group that operates in the US. Campus Watch is also commonly denounced in hysterical terms as "McCarthyist" by the McCarthyist Left.. The main group in Israel exposing the extremists is Isracampus [26]. A second watchdog is NGO-Monitor [27], which exposes the political bias and extremist agendas in anti-Israel Non-Government Organizations. Israeli leftist professors, led by TAU's Daniel Bar-Tal and Ben Gurion University's David Newman, have repeatedly issued calls for the suppression of these groups, supposedly in the name of freedom of speech and democracy. The hysterical reactions by people like Golan and the tenured signers of the anti-Dershowitz petition show how effective these watchdog groups are in exposing the seditious activities of Israel's academic fifth column. Those who expose and monitor the seditious Left are the real guardians of Israeli democracy. Footnotes [1] DePaul fired Finkelstein:
[2] Dershowitz gave a dramatic and eloquent speech:
[3] attempting to suppress:
[4] petition of anti-Israel radicals:
[5] Rachel Giora and Anat Matar:
[6] distributed photo and personal information:
[7] this: http://thejewishpress.blogspot.com/ 2009/01/assault-on-academic-freedom-by-tel-aviv.html [8] this:
[9] this:
[10] this:
[11] this:
[12] this:
[13] this:
[14] this:
[15] this:
[16] this:
[17] refused to "allow" the:
[18] Strenger has a long track record of promoting the far
leftist:
[19] Strenger attacked Tel Aviv University Governors in the
Israeli media for their attempt:
[20] anti-Semite Sand:
[21] Sand's "book":
[22] carries crackpot themes generally to be found:
[23] and converted "Khazars:
[24] denounced those who dare to criticize:
[25] Campus Watch: http://www.campus-watch.org/ [26] Isracampus: http://www.isracampus.org.il/ [27] NGO-Monitor: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/
2. Israel accidentally and mistakenly did the correct
thing yesterday. It decided to prevent anti-Semite Stalinist professor
Noam Chomsky from entering the country. At first it looked like
Chomsky was being Finkelsteined. Norman Finkelstein (and Richard Falk)
had earlier been blocked from entering Israel due to their intimate
relations with terrorists, and Chomsky himself has held pow-wows with
Nasrallah, the head of the Hezb'Allah. Chomsky is being cheered on by
Neo-Nazi Norman Finkelstein. See
Well, now the Israeli authorities are saying it was all a misunderstanding and in any case they would let Chomsky enter if he just landed at Ben Gurion Airport. Now if anyone is looking for a great reason why Israel should legitimately prevent Chomsky from setting a paw on the Holy Land, how is this?: In defending Holocaust Denier Faurisson, MIT professor Noam Chomsky wrote: "I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers or even denial of the Holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the Holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence. I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson's work." (cited on Wikipedia) Personally — I would let him in and then immediately arrest him for Holocaust Denial. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
LEFT VS RIGHT, FREEDOM OF THOUGHT VS SUBVERSION; RUSSIA TO SELL SYRIA ARMS; NEW ISRAEL FUND MISREPRESENTS ITS POLICIES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 16, 2010. |
|
ISRAELI LEFT VERSUS RIGHT, FREEDOM OF THOUGHT VERSUS SUBVERSION Prof. Galia Golan, founder of the far Left Peace Now, discussed the intensifying right-wing criticism of the far Left, starting by professing not to know why this is occurring and proving it. And so she asks, "Is it simply a misguided campaign by a small, inconsequential (but rich) minority on the extreme right? Is it the lashing out of a weak government responding to outside pressure and criticism? Or, is it, more likely, the expression of an ideology now in power — that of the right-wing, the Likud and its supporters?" Prof. Steven Plaut of Haifa University, my source for her article, remarks, if only he and his cohorts were rich. He organized a campus watch organization that publicizes professors who abuse their power to indoctrinate students and repress dissent, and that suggests that universities prohibit such abuse. Prof. Golan might have asked Prof. Plaut the reason for the intensifying criticism. Democratic discussion and debate is in order. The first sign Golan saw of the backlash was when Likud first attained power, and she heard of epithets against the "peace camp" as "fifth column" and of anti-intellectual and anti-Ashkenazi sentiment. [When Sephardic Jewry immigrated, the Labor Party, largely Ashkenazi, repressed their religious freedom and used government power over the purse to extort their votes. The Ashkenazi were more modern, but considered that a mark of superiority. That problem occurred two generations ago, and largely has been resolved.] A full-throated campaign is on now, with proposed bills to restrict NGO funding, immigration (called infiltration), Arab mourning of Israeli independence (the Nakba law), Knesset Education Committee discussion of anti-Zionist academia, and "private" initiatives as by Im Tirtzu blaming human rights groups and underwriters for Israel's international isolation. "They add up to a policy, a campaign designed to cripple civil society, stifle criticism and eliminate opposition. They endanger the very essence of liberal democracy and of a free society, namely pluralism — of thought, deed, and expression." This is the same approach, according to Golan, that Israel takes in denying democracy to the millions of Palestinian Arabs under Israeli "occupation." (Plaut, 5/14.) The Palestinian Arabs tried to murder and drive out the Jews, and retain the same ideology. One has to balance self-preservation against them with humane treatment. The Left tips the balance against self-preservation. Hence the backlash. Israel offered the Arabs in the Territories free municipal elections. The Arabs elected mayors who encouraged uprising. Later, Israel offered them autonomy, though it let Arafat accumulate dictatorial power. The Palestinian Authority fomented more uprising. Israel fights terrorism, but otherwise lets the P.A. run its own internal affairs, and is not even stationed in Gaza. Hence Gaza is a terrorist base. The Arabs picked their own leaders, who deny them democracy. Does the Left complain about Arab oppression of Arabs? I don't hear of any complaint. Apparently the Left does not care about the Arabs, but professes concern for them only as a pretext for damning the Jewish state. The Left's dishonesty starts with describing itself as a peace camp. All Israelis want peace. If the Left just believed that negotiations could bring peace, it could be thought naïve. After all, the Arab ideology is one of jihad, which does not make peace but seeks to conquer and oppress. But the Left or far Left, believes that the way to negotiate is to give away Israel's secure borders, strategic depth, half its water supply, and holiest sites, to a most undeserving portion of the Arab nation. Israel tried withdrawals, and got back war and Arab and international contempt. How long should Israelis put up with the Left's relentless pursuit of failed policies? The Left also monopolizes the major media, appoints unqualified leftists to the social studies departments of universities and bars qualified rightists, indoctrinates in the classroom, and calls any criticism of its abuses as against freedom of thought. It calls that "McCarthyist." Thus the Left tries to repress criticism of itself. As abuses accumulate, public awareness grows and people's gorges rise. Eventually, a backlash. When a Prime Minister was assassinated, the Left blamed all right-wing and religious Israelis and sought to intimidate them and still does. Why doesn't Prof. Golan mention that? The Supreme Court and Attorney-Generals have been stacked in favor of the Far Left goals, denying Jewish rights. I remember when Israeli police hit peaceful, legal, elderly Jewish demonstrators on the head. Arabs often attack Jews with impunity; Jews defend themselves at the risk of arrest. How long should Jews put up with that? It turns out that the plethora of leftist NGOs are financed by foreign, anti-Zionist powers and leftist foundations, taking up the most extreme Arab demands and condoning the NGOs false accusations against Israel and support for terrorism. Just as the U.S. considers it undemocratic to allow foreign powers to buy into our elections, so, finally, Israelis start objecting to foreign powers seeking to subvert them. Israelis want, and are democratically entitled, to determine their own destiny. Can Golan honestly disagree? She would call it oppression of Israeli opinion. But it is not that. It is the imposition of foreign opinion and in behalf of existential enemies. There is infiltration. There is a wave of illegal immigration as well. Israel is fighting for its life against enemies from without, increasingly aided by enemies from within. Laws against infiltration make sense. When a proposed bill itself contains abuses, criticize the abuses. But do not try to block reform for national security! What does Golan think Israelis make of the frequent sympathy for terrorism shown by Haaretz and some leftist suggestions that Israel be disbanded? What is wrong with calling it, in wartime, "treason?" As Israeli Arabs increasingly assist terrorists, organize in behalf of Israel's enemies thirsting to invade, and retain an antisemitic ideology, are they not a fifth column? When Israeli leftists lead Arabs in Judea-Samaria to attack troops guarding the security fence and to attack Jews and their crops, are they not a fifth column? The scandal of foreign financing of the leftist NGOs demonstrated the lack of domestic support for the Left. As the casualties from leftist policies of appeasement mount, Israeli support for the leftist policies dissolves. Turns out, the Left is a fringe. Although I do not believe that popularity vindicates policy, the Left does, the Left calls the Right a fringe, so I set the record straight. Why Israel's international isolation, that Golan mentions? The Jewish people were isolated internationally during the Holocaust. That was not because of anything the Jewish people did. It was because of powerful bigots' psychosis. Same, today. The Muslims have so many states, and so much oil, that they have very much power, inside and outside the UN. Jihad is a major force today. Israel is one of its objectives. Again, it does not matter what the Jews do, jihadists make up excuses for attacking them. European Christians are losing their faith, but many have not lost their antisemitic prejudice. They either fail to see jihad infiltrating their countries or think to deflect it against Israel. But after Israel, what buffer for them? The Arabs have an expression, "After Saturday's people (the Jews), Sunday's people. It does not matter what the Christians do, jihad will pursue them. Defeat it or die. The difficulty that the Left has in understanding why Israel is not popular, is because it takes bigots' pretexts seriously. Leftist secularism, carried to an extreme, becomes antisemitic or allies itself with Muslim antisemitism. A professor referred to the dhimmi, the relegations of minorities in Muslim countries to second class citizenship. He did not discuss the humiliations and penalties Muslim Arabs imposed on Jews. He contended that the subservience was overstated, by emphasizing religious identity, and ignoring economic, gender, regional, and class identities. The differences between Moroccan Jews and Muslims, he alleged, was exacerbated by Zionism. Someone contested the depiction, but was ignored. In truth, a major function of Zionism was to rescue Jews from intolerable oppression. Another professor decried Jewish scholars who want to know the enemy, as having a political agenda. He said that a record of Iranian fatwas against Jews gives a bleak picture, but the source of this verifies the bleakness. Participants said the picture is distorted if one puts it into the context of the current Muslim-Israel conflict. This is a conflict that participants distorted. "Joel Beinin, Stanford University history professor and well-known anti-Zionist, claimed that Iraqi Jews fled to Israel in 1950-51 due to 'collusion between the Israeli state and the Iraqi government of the time. He offered no explanation or historical record of this alleged 'collusion.'" [What about the pro-Nazi coup beforehand, the beatings, discrimination, and confiscation, and similar Arab state conduct elsewhere?] Another professor called the conflict nationalistic rather than religious. He did not explain the Muslim religious justification for the jihad by its torch-bearers, even though the whole audience was familiar with the Islamic concept of house of war versus house of Islam, meaning, roughly, outside of Islamic countries, Muslims make war to conquer non-believers. If the conferees establish the notion that the conflict is not religious, "future students in the Program for the Study of Muslim-Jewish Relations will be able to ask questions pertaining to apostasy, infidels, honor killings, Jews as 'apes and pigs,' or global jihad? (Rima Greene, Campus Watch, 5/14/10)
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: PART 12. ISRAEL OPPRESSES PALESTINIAN ARABS The misconception that Israel oppresses the Arabs in the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) is based on unsubstantiated accusation, deliberate defamation, and an underlying misunderstanding of the status and misbehavior of the P.A.. People should be more skeptical of the misconception, because Israel has no ideology of oppression, the Arabs do. Israel needs peace, not Intifada. During Israel's brief control over the Territories, it raised the Arabs' standard of living greatly, as Zionism had done in Israel, itself. Not the mark of an oppressor. The current P.A. status is autonomy. Except for IDF raids to capture terrorists whom the P.A. is supposed to capture, the P.A. mostly rules itself. P.A. self rule largely is a failed experiment, devoted too much to graft and war. Their culture makes Arabs excessively sensitive to being held accountable for their own faults, and their religious imperialism makes them eager to blame their enemy. They blame Israel. They call Israel their oppressor. Backing them up is the Left, which champions any group that it views as an oppressed minority, regardless of that group's murderous intentions. The P.A. has both a Fatah and a Hamas dictatorship. The Fatah regime extorts from its people. Both regimes divert their resources and foreign aid to war, and refuse to cooperate economically with Israel. Non-cooperation has extended to sewage and water treatment. The P.A. declined foreign aid to build a plant with Israel, but complains that Israel spoils or steals its water. (See prior articles on water.) Israel had let the Arabs of the Territories enjoy municipal self-rule, at one time. Their mayors endorsed terrorism. When, under the Oslo Accords, Israel granted them autonomy, there was supposed to be peace. The Arabs violated their agreements and committed war. That required security measures. Those security measures form the major Arab complaints, aside from unsubstantiated complaints such as accusations that Israel poisons them. Arabs and their foreign sympathizers complain about checkpoints, roadblocks, and searches, necessitated by the fact that many Arabs carry explosives and knives. The Arabs complain about the security fence, built to keep out Arab terrorists, whom the P.A. honors. They rustle or destroy Israeli crops, but accuse "settlers" of marauding against them. (There was a little retaliation, mostly recently.) When Jews defend themselves, the government of Israel, ever the supporter of appeasement, arrests the Jews. In those instances, the government is oppressive, of Jews. Arabs steal public or private land, and build on it without permits, but complain about the small percentage of so-called illegal houses demolished by Israel and accuse Jews of stealing land. Arabs squat in houses owned by Jews, and get the whole world to condemn Israel for evicting the usurpers. The world does not complain about the frequent Arab riots or throwing of stones at Jews, unprovoked. The whole world is ready to condemn Israel for expelling the usurpers. (As the old Yiddish proverb states, "The world may, but the Jews may not.") There is more along these lines, but that is enough. If there is any oppression, it is by the Arabs of the Jews and by the government of Israel against Jews. That oppression does not interest the world. Therefore, the world's indignation against Israel is hypocritical as well as unsubstantiated or disproved.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: PART 9. ABBAS IS A MODERATE Ordinary citizens who believe that Abbas, head of Fatah, PLO, and Palestinian Authority, is moderate, are taking the word of the media and the government. But how did the media and the government determine that he is a moderate? Lacking much knowledge of history, the media operates under a perceived underdog syndrome, never mind what the underdog did. The media looks for "moderates," whom they can pity and support as underdogs. The media focuses its critical faculties against Israelis, who set up checkpoints for security. The media then campaigns to end checkpoints. This is illogical. It defies reality. Reality is that the Palestinian Arabs commit terrorism, and their victims have a right to take security measures in self-defense. The media has a tendency to make much of minor distinctions among political parties sharing a similar ideology, as Fatah does with Hamas and other Muslim Terrorist organizations. It certainly makes their product more interesting when they report the Arab-Israel conflict like a horse race. One can root for the "moderate." "Moderate," after all, is a term of approbation, and "extremist" is a term of reprobation. Government agencies or political parties that promote their agenda, and media agencies that believe in advocacy journalism, are tempted to confer those terms in order to steer the debate. If someone is thought moderate, one favors him. If thought extremist, one shuns him. Favoring Abbas and trying to denigrate Jewish residents of Judea-Samaria, society calls Abbas "moderate" and settlers (as a stereotype) "extremist." These labels are affixed either without explanation or with reasons that themselves are suspect. Thus people explain that Abbas opposes terrorism, wants peace, and recognizes Israel. No, those notions either are false or hedged. As right-hand man of Arafat, once the world's foremost terrorist, Abbas was behind the murders of Israeli athletes in Munich. Abbas refuses to eliminate his PLO and Fatah Covenant references to liquidate Israel. Abbas honors terrorists and coddles their infrastructure, but warns that now, during his diplomatic offensive, it is not opportune for unleashing terrorism that would rouse Israeli resistance to his diplomacy, which seeks gains without having to fire a shot. Given a far-reaching final peace offer, the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) declined. The goal of Fatah and the PLO, as well as of Hamas, is the conquest of Israel. Their Covenants vow it and their internal propaganda indoctrinates their people in this. Arafat learned from the N. Vietnamese Communists to combine diplomacy with violence, each to reinforce the other. The concessions that the Arabs demand would better position them for the next war. We Westerners, who no longer have goals of taking over other countries for ourselves, believe in diplomacy in order to solve problems and avoid war. We make the ethno-centric mistake of imagining that the Arabs operate the same way. We get taken in by them. Abbas, like the Arab side in general, crafts his wording so as to give us a favorable impression without hindering his belief that the Muslims must conquer non-Muslim Israel. Even if he were to recognize Israel as a state, he still would want to overthrow it. That is why PM Netanyahu demanded that the P. A. recognize the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state. If Abbas did, he would be signifying, if sincere, that he no longer wants to overthrow Israel because it is a Zionist state. Abbas refused. In common with Hamas, P.A. media, mosques, summer camps, and schools indoctrinate violent hatred of Jews and assert that Israel rightfully belongs to the Arabs, who are entitled to fight for it. Hardly moderate! There is a difference between Fatah and Hamas rule. Both make Islam the established religion in their jurisdictions, but Hamas enforces a more severely restrictive version. Both embrace imperialistic dictatorships. As far as we are concerned, that makes both of them extremist. Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel in a direct fashion, whereas Fatah pretends it is accommodating. Mistaking Abbas for a moderate encourages risky Israeli concessions for an illusory peace. This is one of the more dangerous misconceptions. At U.C. Santa Barbara, after delivering a speech, David Horowitz put it this way. "I am a Jew. The head of Hezbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn't have to hunt us down globally. For it or against it?" A member of the Muslim Students Association answered, "For it." A couple of dozen members in the audience refused to condemn Hizbullah and Hamas, both terrorist organizations. Swedish cartoonist, Lars Vilk, whom Muslims plotted to assassinate after he depicted Muhammad as a dog, was lecturing on free speech at Upsala University. First, he exhibited Christian symbols in a way that Christians probably would find offensive. Then he exhibited a film showing Muhammed entering a gay bar. With that, someone ran up to him, punched him in the face, and broke his glasses. Other Muslims became rowdy, and police had to pepper-spray them. Islamists try to hide their tendencies to violence, censorship, and intolerance. Video cameras are exposing them (David J. Rusin, Mideast Forum News, 5/14). So far, however, the American public has not caught on. Liberals still think that the big or only danger in the U.S. is from the right. They don't know that the Left, in combination with Muslims, has deprived students and many authors of their freedom of expression and perverted their education with indoctrination. It is not decent of people to immigrate, and of the U.S. to welcome them, only to have them stifle our freedoms. It also is not decent of people to mock others' religion — I am not referring to serious, factual presentation — just for the sake of shocking people. It is a form of emotional assault.
RUSSIA TO SELL SYRIA ARMS 
Russia is arranging to sell Syria warplanes, anti-tank weapons, and surface-to-air missiles. Russia also may help Syria build a nuclear power plant (IMRA, 5/14/10), you know, they way it helped Iran to. Russia sold Syria and Egypt their wherewithal to mount the 1967 and 1973 wars. This time, the U.S. has prepared Egypt for the next war. NEW ISRAEL FUND MISREPRESENTS ITS POLICIES The New Israel Fund (NIF) claims to support Israel, but here are five examples of it supporting those who want to bring Israel down: 1. NIF Executive Director Rachel Liel said in April 2010, that if an NGO wants to deny Israelis self-determination, NIF would not subsidize it. However, in 2008, NIF subsidized Mada al-Carmel by $200,000, though that NGO wants to end Israel's status as a Jewish state and let millions of refugee descendants pour in. That would end Jewish self-determination [if not also the Jews' lives]. 2. NIF CEO Daniel Sokatch strongly objected, in March 2010, to calling Israel apartheid. However, in 2008, NIF gave $357,000 to B'Tselem, whose official, Jessica Montell, finds calling Israel apartheid useful in mobilizing people and finds the West Bank more apartheid than was South Africa. 3. Rachel Liel also said in April 2010 that no NIF beneficiary appeared before the Goldstone commission. However, grantee PCATI did testify against Israel at the commission. Eight NGOs to which NIF had donated $2.2 million in 2008 submitted a joint statement to Goldstone, alleging "human rights violations for which Israel must be held accountable." 4. Mr. Sokatch said in March 2010 that the movement to impose boycott, divestment, and sanctions on Israel is "unproductive, inflammatory and ineffective." However, six NGOs to which NIF contributed $478,000 in 2008 asked the Norwegian Pension Fund to divest from Israel, and it did. 5. According to its website, NIF strongly opposes foreign prosecution of Israel. However, Adalah, to which NIF had granted $510,000 in 2008, submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in Spain, supporting lawfare against Israel. NIF has crossed the line between legitimate criticism of Israel and supporting groups that try to delegitimate Israel (NGO Monitor, 5/14) or even to destroy Israel. NGO Monitor has proved its case. NIF has no excuse. NGO Monitor and others have warned NIF that this was happening in many cases. NGO Monitor pointed out that the NGOs use the language of human rights to conceal their jihadist drive to bring Israel down. Since the pattern is striking, the NIF motive, and its appeals for donations to it, hardly can be thought consistent with those appeals. Should a tax-exempt charity such as NIF, not to mention its grantees, be allowed to solicit funds under false pretenses?
RELIGIOUS VOTERS: OBAMA ACTS CONTRADICT WORDS Barack Obama won significantly more votes in the Bible Belt than did Senator Kerry, who ran previously. Now, significant numbers of religious Christian and Jews voters are switching to the Republicans, partly over his hostility toward Israel. They find that what he does contradicts what he says. Oratory can go only so far. One of the biggest contributor to the Democrats, Chaim Saban, is greatly distressed over finding Obama and entourage far Left. Obama has been meeting with Jewish opinion makers, to win them back. Orthodox Rabbi Ephrem Goldberg of Florida said, "It's easy to repeat the phrases 'unbreakable bond' and 'shared values.' We want to hear in no uncertain terms that Iran will not be allowed to go nuclear [and] that inevitably there will be an impasse" between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. "When that happens, will they only apply pressure to Israel, or have they learned something?" (Arutz-7, 5/16/10). As Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all of the Jews some of the time, and you can fool some of the Jews all of the time, but you can't fool all of the Jews all of the time."
JOHN BOLTON: OBAMA HARMS U.S. BY BACKING P.A. 
By letting the Arabs rely upon U.S. diplomacy, Obama is digging the U.S. into a whole. The negotiations are likely to fail. The U.S. will lose strength (Arutz-7, 5/16/10). This is another case in which the private ideology of a President propels him against the national interest. Mr. Bolton might have added that it also harms the U.S. to aid the Palestinian Authority because it is aligned with the international jihad that also targets the U.S.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
RISING TENSION BETWEEN IRAN AND THE GULF STATES
Posted by Zvi Mazel, May 16, 2010. |
The entire article is Jerusalem Issue Brief Vol. 9, No. 25, 14 May 2010. This was published by Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Institute for Contemporary Affairs.
|
|
UNWARRANTED JEWISH HOME DEMOLITIONS SYMBOLIZE OUR FAILURE AS A DEMOCRACY
Posted by Moshe Dann, May 16, 2010. |
|
Six months ago, 11 ministers approved a decision by Prime Minister Netanyahu to halt construction starts in Judea and Samaria for 10 months. The "freeze" applied only to buildings that had not begun. "...this suspension will not affect the construction already underway. It will not include schools, kindergartens, synagogues and public buildings necessary for the continuation of normal life over the period of the suspension," the Prime Minister's Office said. Defense Minister Barak apparently interpreted this administrative decision differently, directing the Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria to destroy buildings which have permits and were begun before the freeze was announced — a clear conflict with fundamental civil and humanitarian law, as well as the freeze order itself. Where Jews can and cannot build in Judea and Samaria is not easily defined, since national as well as local authorities are involved, although final decision-making is the hands of the Israeli military administration. This complicated puzzle played out last week in Ganei Modiin, home to 250 families. Although access to Ganei Modiin is through Hashmonaim, with 540 families, the two communities, under the authority of the Binyamin Council, are distinct. Hashmonaim (also known unofficially as Ramat Modiim), half of whose residents are English-speaking, is only a few kilometers beyond the Armistice Lines of 1949. Ganei Modiin is part of Modiin Illit (Kyriat Sefer), with over 30,000 residents, among a thriving, bustling group of Jewish communities in the Modiin Valley area, in which 150,000 Jews live — not an isolated, insignificant enclave. Driving through Hashmonaim, at the end of the road, three giant "buggers" (heavy-duty wreckers) were destroying a large, nearly completed home. Onlookers perched in other half-built homes nearby. The police had already finished destroying one home earlier that morning. The owner of that home, who lives in Ashkelon, heard of the destruction, and raced to the site with papers showing that he had permission to build, but the police and wrecking crew refused to stop. Small groups of teenage boys from schools in the community were scattered around the site, talking with scores of border policemen and riot police. It was 11 am and the wrecking crews had taken a break. A few kids tried to get into the half-crushed building, and were dragged out. Earlier, the family that owned the building had tried this, but was quickly removed. Deep social wounds Channels 2 and 10 and a few reporters roamed around; a policeman and several local residents had video cameras. Several boys were arrested after scuffling with policemen as the wrecking crews resumed their work. The attorney for the owner of the house arrived, and, against the backdrop of walls caving in, dust swirling in the dry heat, the homeowner, his voice reeking with pain, explained to camera crews that he had permission to build, and had begun building before the "freeze" was announced. That would seem to be according to law, but Defense Minister Ehud Barak and the Civil/Military Administration apparently apply the "freeze" to ongoing work as well. The "freeze" and the destruction in places like Ganei Modiin is a disturbing symbol of Israel's failure as a democracy and as a Zionist movement. Across the hills of Judea and Samaria, a struggle is taking place, not only between Israelis and Arabs, who claim this as their land, but between Israelis representing two different cultures — one secular, the other, religious, a confrontation that sometimes gets raw, leaving deep social wounds. Moreover, there are a number of disturbing questions: Since the "freeze" only applies to Jews, is the government acting arbitrarily and discriminatory? Is the "rule-of-law" applied selectively? Why are Jewish homes destroyed, while illegal Arab-owned homes remain untouched? How can the property of Israeli citizens be destroyed without a civilian court order, and without an opportunity to appeal to a civilian court? In November, PM Netanyahu said: "We will not put any restrictions on building in our sovereign capital," yet, he recently declared a two-year halt to building in Ramat Shlomo. A Supreme Court panel composed of settlement foes Dorit Beinish and Ayala Procaccia, and newly appointed Neil Hendel, confirmed the government's right to carry out its decisions. Were the judges politically motivated? Moreover, their decision did not consider if the enforcement violated the conditions and restrictions set forth by the government, nor the violation of basic civil and humanitarian law, norms and standards in democratic countries. For example, there is no requirement that buildings be destroyed; owners can be fined, as often happens throughout Israel. And, as citizens, they are certainly entitled to the full protection of their basic rights. Such actions by the government beg a more fundamental question: Why are such areas, with extensive Jewish populations, still under military, rather than civilian authority? It's been 43 years! "If not now, when?"
Moshe Dann is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem
This article appeared in Ynet News and is archived at
|
|
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN
Posted by Susana K-M, May 15, 2010. |
|
This was written by Elyakim Haetzni is an Israeli lawyer, an activist, and a Member of the Knesset. He lives in Kiryat Arba. |
|
The op-ed written by Dr. Hassan Abu Libdeh ("Boycotting Goods from the Settlements-Not Against Israel") is something of a déjà vu for me: This is how my late father's business was boycotted in the city where I was born, Kiel, Germany. I hold the "call for a boycott" that was published in a Nazi newspaper shortly after Hitler's rise to power: "German! These are your enemies in Kiel... Bombech, furniture store, Muehlstrasse 72," and 55 other business establishments. The Nazis incited against the Jews as the writer of the op-ed, the "national economics minister," incites against the settlers: Exploiters, disrupters of peace. There was no point in debating with the father of the Palestinian national movement, Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, and there is also no chance of convincing Abu Libdeh of the legitimacy of Jewish residence in the heart of the Land of Israel. But several questions arise: If the boycott should succeed, the Palestinian workers manufacturing the settlers' goods will be thrown into the street. Is the "Palestinian national economy" capable of building alternative factories for them? If so, why has it not done so until now, with the aid of the billions of dollars that have been poured into it since Oslo, with which it funded terror and filled its leaders' pockets? If Mr. Abu Libdeh should roam through the "land of the settlements," he would find that many villages earn their livelihood from their settler neighbors: In construction, handicrafts, gardening, garage work. Supermarkets, malls and gas stations in the settlements are filled with Arab buyers. Since Oslo, garages, hardware stores, household goods stores and the like have "settled" opposite the gates of my city, Kiryat Arba. Is the national economics minister demanding that they close their businesses? And the Palestinian drivers in "occupied" Jerusalem-will they stop serving the 200,000 Jerusalemite "settlers"? And where will the Palestinian patients turn, those who need Hadassah and Shaare Zedek Hospital, which are filled with "settlers": Doctors, nurses, staff? Conversely, what will the Arab doctors and nurses do, not take the settlers' temperature? Even Ariel University has Palestinian students. Should they leave immediately? Abu Libdeh is trying to drive a wedge between the settlers and the rest of their people. But if even only half the Jewish people adopt a counter-boycott, how many Palestinians will lose their places in hotels, restaurants, factories and sewing shops on both sides of the Green Line? Is this how peace will look? The Israeli government will also not be able to ignore for long a boycott imposed on its citizens by the "partner for peace," and it too will adopt counter-measures. Has Abu Libdeh forgotten that even the lives of his "president" and "prime minister" are protected by the IDF? Moreover, according to his own view, the "1948 Arabs" are Palestinians for all intents and purposes. If so, is he not inviting the Jews to treat them too as Ramallah treats the "1967 Jews," the settlers? As a settler and an attorney, I have provided professional services to Palestinians. One such client was suspected of theft and found to be innocent, but his Jewish employer, a dignified public figure, withheld his property and caused him financial damage. I advised him to file a lawsuit with the rabbinic court headed by Rabbi Dov Lior. He won the case and was compensated handsomely. If I reveal his name, will the Ramallah authorities place him in prison? Another Palestinian's lands were damaged by a road paved by the Jewish National Fund. His attorney, a settler, obtained full compensation for him-should he return the money? We will conclude with the unlawful subsidy that the Jewish economy as a whole provides, to its detriment, to the "Palestinian national economy": 50 thousand stolen cars per year, thousands of heads of sheep, cattle and horses, beehives, irrigation equipment, tractors, forged and smuggled brand-name goods, tapes, and schoolbooks, unsupervised meat, goods without customs and VAT-thievery day and night. If it is forbidden to buy from Jews, it is permissible to be a parasite on their economy? Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT KNOWS THAT IRAN HELPS AL-QAIDA BUT DOES NOTHING ABOUT IT
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 15, 2010. |
|
Here's a story that should mark the pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy. It should be on the lips of every White House and State Department official. It should fundamentally transform the nature of Obama Administration foreign policy. It's that important. But it isn't that new. The basic information here was supplied almost two months ago and covered by me HERE. Yet in all that time, since General Petraeus publicly revealed this fact, there has not been one word or action that indicates the Obama Administration is responding. Indeed, a new article reveals that President Obama has known about this increased cooperation since shortly after he took office. So what is this big development? Hard data showing that Iran has been helping al-Qaida. You remember al-Qaida, the group that staged the September 11 and many other attacks against Americans which have killed more than 3,000 of them. It is the only group in the world with which the current U.S. government sees itself at war. Now in a detailed report, drawing on interviews with U.S. officials, Associated Press documents this relationship. Tehran is responding, in part, to U.S. pressure over the nuclear weapons' program. The message from Iran is: If you annoy us we can hurt you bad. Al-Qaida fundraisers and the planners of terrorist attacks have been using Iran as a safe haven. Of course, Iranian officials monitor them closely and know precisely what they are doing. What do you think they are working on? Obviously, planning attacks to kill Americans. According to AP: "The roster of al-Qaida figures in Iran is something of a who's who for the terror group. One is Abu Hafs the Mauritanian, an Usama bin Ladin adviser who helped form the modern al-Qaida by merging bin Ladin's operation with Ayman al-Zawahiri's Islamic Jihad. Al-Qaida's longtime chief financial officer, Abu Saeed al-Masri, has been held there. So have bin Ladin's spokesman, Suleiman Abu Ghaith, and Mustafa Hamid, an al-Qaida trainer with a terrorism pedigree that spans decades." Some of these people may nominally be under house arrest at times but they are allowed to function. Iran isn't exactly offering to turn them over to the United States for punishment. Incidentally, the AP story reveals so much about U.S. intelligence efforts to monitor them that it is hard to believe that this effort isn't compromised as a result. Now a proper government would be building up this story, along with Iranian covert operations to kill Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, to mobilize support among the American people and internationally for a tough policy toward Tehran. There would be recognition of the fact that Iran views itself as being at war with America. This doesn't require going to war with Iran but engaging it in this struggle on every level. This is not, however, the path chosen by the Obama Administration which, at worst, still hopes to talk Iran into moderation and, at best, favors weak sanctions now and tough declarations later to tell Iran to behave properly. But what happens when al-Qaida planners, with Iran's knowledge and help (at least, beneficial non-interference) stage major successful or failed terrorist operations against U.S. territory and citizens? Remember, such an outcome would be a completely forseeable policy failure, not an unavoidable surprise. 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
|
|
OBAMA OFFERS ISRAEL USELESS MIILITARY AID; ISRAEL EXPOSES SAUDI EXTREMISM; PA ECONOMIC WARFARE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 15, 2010. |
|
OBAMA OFFERS ISRAE; USELESS MIILITARY AID After giving Israeli PM Netanyahu the cold-shouldered treatment, U.S. President Obama gave Netanyahu''s coalition partner but political rival, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, the red carpet treatment. Netanyahu had to fend for himself, Barak got a White House meal. Netanyahu was received without public notice, Barak got a photo op-ed. When Barak returned, he repeatedly proposed that Israel enlarge the coalition to include more leftists like himself, and who, like himself, openly appease the Arabs, as does Obama. Now Obama suggests that the U.S. give Israel, short of funds, $250 million to complete its Iron Dome rocket defense. This would be seen in Israel as an achievement of personal diplomacy by Barak, whereas it may an attempt by Obama to help him neutralize Netanyahu's signs of independence (Arutz-7, 5/14/10). We've reported on the Iron Dome before as being too limited in range, too slow, and too expensive. It was approved apparently in a lobbying play of power, which its lobby enjoys, rather than on the merits, which it lacks. Awarding undeserved contracts and favorable regulatory decisions is the modern world's major corruption that Americans, who don't have to bribe lower level government employees for every little task, are mostly unaware of. Does Obama know of its inadequacy?
ISRAEL EXPOSES SAUDI EXTREMISM 
New British Foreign Minister, William Hague (AP/Evan Vucci) Relieved that the anti-Israel head of the Liberal-Democratic Party did not become Britain's Foreign Minister, but William Hague, a self-proclaimed "natural friend" of Israel has, Israel's Foreign Minister Lieberman invited Min. Hague to visit. Min. Lieberman has opened a campaign to reverse the undeserved reputation Saudi Arabia enjoys with the U.S. government and media as moderate. Israel will concentrate on Saudi Arabia's caste system against females and other human rights violations and on its financing of an international effort to de-legitimize Israel. For example, a Saudi woman received 40 lashes for being driven by a man not her husband. Apparently the man was not whipped
The bigger problem is the conservative Islamic caste system for females, with its primitive restrictions, not the unequal enforcement of laws on it. Foreign Min. Lieberman is unusual in that he fights back against the Muslim Arab case and goes on the offense. Israel needs such officials, who can stop allowing Israel to be a diplomatic punching bag. Sometimes, however, he can be offensive, which is different. To expose how extremist Saudi Arabia is, Lieberman should publicize its financing of radical imams and madrassas all over the world, preaching jihad against the U.S. and others. Saudi Arabia is the font of terrorism, Pakistan the main enabler, and Iran, the builder of terrorist proxies.
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY ACCUSES ISRAEL OF SPREADING RELIGIOUIS HATRED AGAINST IT When celebrating Jerusalem Day, the reunification of the city after liberating the eastern part from Jordanian military occupation, Israel's PM Netanyahu reiterated the Jewish people's historic tie to the city. When an Israeli Arab MK challenged Netanyahu on that, Netanyahu cited the Bible's 850 references to the city, contrasted with no mention of Jerusalem in the Koran. A 12th century interpretation of the Koran [disputed among Muslims and by historians] does say one passage referred indirectly to Jerusalem. Netanyahu explained, "It is not my intention to detract from the bond other peoples have with Jerusalem... I am challenging the attempts to distract from, distort or erase our unique bond with Jerusalem." In reaction, senior Palestinian Authority (P.A.) negotiator Saeb Erekat accused Netanyahu of using "religion to incite hatred and fear." By contrast, Muslim leaders often accuse Israel of attempting to destroy al-Aksa mosque, of attempting to "Judaize" Jerusalem [whatever that means]. They claim the annexed neighborhoods rightfully belong to them (Arutz-7, 5/14/10). Mr. Erekat did not how any appeal to hatred and fear in Netanyahu's remarks. P.A. accusations of attacking the mosque cause riots. The accusations often are preceded with mosque sermons quoting Islamic religious documents describing Jews as evil, fit only to be slain, the sons of apes and pigs. Clearly, the jihadists use religion to incite hatred and fear. Clearly, PM Netanyahu, Judaism, and the Jewish people do not. The jihadists demonstrate that their view of their own religion is one of hatred, and PM Netanyahu demonstrates that Judaism is one of tolerance. Muslim control meant denial of access to the holy sites of Christians and Jews, whereas Israeli control means access to the holy sites of Christians and Jews. Earlier articles documented statements by the Mayor of Hebron and other Muslim officials that Jews should have no right to the Temple Mount and the Cave of the Patriarchs, and documented P.A.-condoned Arab attacks on Joseph's and Rachel's tombs, and destruction of ancient Jewish artifacts in the Temple Mount When will the U.S. government denounce the crude religious incitement to hatred and violence by Palestinian Authority political and religious leaders? Do you think the U.S. really is leading a peace process by subsidizing such warmongers?
ARAB MEMBER OF KNESSET SUGGESTS ISRAEL JOIN A CALIPHATE The Muslim Brotherhood's Southern Islamist Movement in Israel has a Member of the Knesset, Masoud Ganaim, who proposes that Israel fold itself into a Muslim caliphate. Then the Jews would be allowed to remain in the region, he said. He called "Israel racist," without explaining how it might be. He also echoed unsupported claims that Israel attacks the mosque on the Temple Mount and that Israel plans to replace it with another Jewish Temple. He said that Muslims must be prepared physically to fight over it. MK Ganaim's model political parties are Hizbullah and Hamas. Hamas won "democratic elections," and Israel should "respect the will of the Palestinian people," he explained (Arutz-7, 5/14/10). \ The Nazi and Communist movements also were both political and terrorist, like Hizbullah and Hamas. Hardly makes them models. The Gaza election was like a choice between Nazis and Communists, hardly something to call democratic or to respect. What democracy has Gaza now, with its purges and shackled media? Radical Islam does not understand, respect, or like democracy, but it knows the West does, so it pretends to support it. Why should Israel respect the will of people who want it destroyed and who are indoctrinated in the belief that Jews are evil? Can you imagine a more primitive, intolerant, and irrational bigotry? What "Palestinian people" is there, not knowing they were of the "Palestinian nationality" until the mid-1960s, but thereafter alleging a false and long separate national identity. We need a truth squad against radical Islamic claims. Israel has no plans to replace Al-Aqsa mosque. I met a tiny and isolated group, there called Temple Mount Faithful. They researched and prepared artifacts that a new Temple would need. Their standing with the government is so poor, however, that they hardly are allowed onto the Mount and are not allowed to pray on it. How unfortunate that Israeli Arabs combine paranoia with demagoguery! Israel racist? Why, because it gives preference to its own people abroad to return from exile? Many countries do. Arab countries forced their Jews out, so it ill behooves Muslim Arabs to call Israel discriminatory. What does Ganaim think of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) law imposing the death penalty on sellers of real estate to Jews, and P.A. imams who preach that Jews are apes and pigs? Is that his model of tolerance that should induce Israel to subordinate itself to the Muslims?
INTRODUCING PALESTINIAN MEDIA WATCH AND ISRAEL'S HOPE FOR PEACE Itamar Marcus founded Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) 14 years ago. He wanted to see whether what the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) said about peace in Arabic to its own people matched the fine things it told the West, in English. It did not. Mr. Marcus directs PMW to expose what the P.A. tells its own people. Let's first explain Marcus' hope for peace, for for other people, that hope has dimmed. He points out that the Palestinian Arabs did not always hate Israel and Israelis. Arafat and the P.A. taught them to hate. Before Arafat was allowed back from Tunisia, the Arabs in the Territories had had 28 years of exposure to Israel without an organized P.A. to color it for them. There was no suicide bombing. Polls from 1996-1999 found that 78% of the Palestinian Arabs consistently rated Israel as the best in human rights and in democracy. The U.S. had 65%, France had 55%, and the P.A. had only 50%. In the next three years, Israel still had high ratings, but lower — 77%, 75%, and 65%. Therefore, if the P.A. could find a true leader with courage and decency [and a bullet-proof vest against those who would call him a traitor to Islam], he could end P.A. hate-mongering and war-mongering and educate for peace. Otherwise, Arab children grow up so indoctrinated, that there is no chance for peace. Educating for peace would take years, if it ever starts. Borders could be designated in an instant, but peace takes long to cement. Education must precede diplomacy. [The U.S. drive for diplomacy implies the reverse, but the Arabs would have no incentive when by virtue of terrorism, it would have gained a state with greater powers to bar Israeli retaliation.] Doesn't the Israeli media also attack the Arabs? No, never for what they are. That prejudicial approach is called "incitement," and is banned. But the Israeli media does criticize Arabs for what they do. For example, in 2008, an Arab terrorist murdered eight Israeli students in a library. 84% of Palestinian Arabs supported this. The P.A. has named summer camps and sports events after terrorists. That kind of action angers Israelis. They and most of their media condemn it, rightfully so. Is PMW considered by non-Israelis as a Zionist propaganda organ to be ignored? No, says Marcus. PMW does not make propaganda. It brings to people Palestinian Arab videos, radio and TV broadcasts, newspaper articles, and textbooks. The Arabs speak for themselves. PMW audiences welcome that opportunity for the facts, enabling them to reach their own conclusions Testifying before the U.S. Senate, PMW did not have to compose its own message. It brought a P.A. TV music video exhorting Arab children to become suicide martyrs. Kids were told they would go to child martyr heaven, and fly kites and play on Ferris wheels. The Senate was horrified. Senator Clinton called it "child abuse." [How she seems to have forgotten!] Palestinian Arabs and other Muslims following Marcus' presentations have condemned the P.A. for its propaganda. Not only didn't PMW indulge in propaganda, its expose prompted the P.A. to discontinue those videos [for a while]. Arab children benefited. Hamas TV presented a skit on 4/3/09, about a fictional Jewish father instructing his son. Here are key portions: "We Jews hate the Muslims, we want to kill the Muslims, we Jews want to drink blood of Muslims and Arabs." He explained that he hates Muslims to please God. "We have to wash our hands with the blood of Muslims." Totally false. No better is P.A. TV, January 29 of this year. "The Jews, the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger, enemies of humanity in general, and of Palestinians in particular... The Jews are the Jews. Even if donkeys would cease to bray, ... the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred to wards Muslims... "The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them.'" Senior P.A. officials accuse Israel of trying to infect them with AIDS [Israel is a pioneer in global disease eradication], injecting acid into the foundations of al-Aqsa Mosque in order to topple it, and of experimenting on 5,000 Arab prisoners a year. Such defamation becomes the justification, in Muslim Arabs' minds, for terrorism. Obviously, such indoctrination precludes peace. Any reasonable person must detest it (IMRA, 5/13/10). Obviously, the P.A. leadership is too bigoted to make genuine peace. Personally, I haven't heard such hate-filled bilge since the Nazi era.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: PART 10. THE 'SETTLERS' ARE EXTREMIST (Part 9 is in the May 16th group.) This misconception is particularly unsuitable to such a heterogeneous grouping as the Jews who reside in the Territories. Among them are secular commuters, Orthodox Jews, and ultra-Orthodox. Some hail from Ethiopia or Western states, others are native-born. Some are left wing, some, right wing. Israeli schools disseminate a doctrine of ethnic and religious tolerance and an aversion to rioting and war by aggression. As for Jews in the disputed Territories, they either want to be left alone or to get along with Arab neighbors. Unfortunately, the Palestinian Authority ethos disseminates ethnic and religious intolerance, an affinity to rioting, and war by aggression. Thus, on their own, or stimulated by agitators, or led by leftist anti-Zionists, Arab often approach Jewish communities to taunt, attack, or vandalize. Rustling is a big burden upon Jews there and in the State of Israel. Resident Jews had hoped that they could rely upon the police and their own security guards to deal with those Arab attacks. Unfortunately for them, a separate set of rules was imposed upon the justice system so as to divert police from protecting Jews from Arab attacks, to harassing Jews for any minor thing. As a result, the police believe dubious claims by Arabs and ignore reasonable ones by Jews. When Jewish security guards or local residents defend their families and crops, Arab find that they can complain to police and instead of the marauders being arrested, the defenders are. These Jews sometimes are beaten or framed by police. They are accused of damaging Arabs' crops. Some Arabs pruned their olive trees, and then claimed that settlers attempted to destroy them and demanded compensation from the State. Since the Left is anti-settler, and has been denigrating settlers for years, it sympathizes with such charges. Anti-Zionists pick up such accusations without verification. After years of this abuse, some local Jews have come to retaliate against the Arab villages from which assailants came. Otherwise, there were few incidents of Jewish violence, whereas there were innumerable Arab riots and terrorist assaults, as in Hebron. Some Jews who hiked alone or in pairs in Judea-Samaria were found tortured and murdered. This does not happen to Arabs. Cries of "violent settlers" may be aired, even while hundreds of Arabs are rioting in Jerusalem over false rumors of Jewish plots to destroy al-Aqsa mosque, and while Arabs and anarchists damage the security fence and attack the troops guarding it. The relationship between accusation and truth is distant. The real issue is prejudice in informal reporting and in propaganda. Anti-Zionists fit the facts to their ideological narrative that Jews attack and expel Jews. The fact that Arabs squat on Jews' property is ignored, The record of Arab ethnic cleansing of Jews is not known or acknowledged by anti-Zionists. Whatever contradicts their preconceived narrative is ignored.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: PART 11. TTHE ARABS ARE PAYING FOR THE HOLOCAUST The misconception that "The Arabs are made to pay for the Holocaust" has these premises: (1) Israel was developed after and because of the Holocaust; (2) The Arabs are innocent of the Holocaust; and (3) Arabs deserve the Land of Israel and Jews do not. Those premises are specious. The outside world learned of the Holocaust about 1942. Modern Zionism, or return to the homeland, had started in the late 1800s. The Balfour Declaration was issued in 1917. WWI peace treaties set up the Palestine Mandate in 1920. Most people at the time understood that the Mandated territory was being prepared for Jewish statehood well before the Holocaust was known about and even begun. The Mandate provisions disprove the first premise. What about the UN Partition Resolution of 1947? The Holocaust did engender some sympathy. I think that the Resolution is over-emphasized. After all, the Zionists drove the British out by themselves. I think they would have done so, even without the Resolution. It might have taken them longer, but their path was set. The Resolution was a step backward from the Mandate, by suggesting a second partition after Britain already had arbitrarily given the Trans-Jordanian provinces of Palestine to the Arabs. It had a mischievous effect in foolishly suggesting that Jerusalem be separate from both a Jewish and an Arab state. The borders it suggested were disconnected and non-viable. Typical international mish-mash. During the Holocaust, the Arab world strongly favored the Nazis not just because Nazis were anti-British, but because they were anti-Jewish. The Arabs grafted on to their existing antisemitism Nazi racial antisemitism. Iraqis revolted in order to install a pro-Nazi regime. There was some persecution of Jews by Arabs, but more important, plots by the western Palestinian Arab leader to bring the Holocaust to them. He went to Germany, to assist in the Holocaust. From Bosnian Muslims, he formed two SS divisions that exterminated Jews. He pressed Hitler into a policy of extermination, urging the Reich not to let Jewish children escape the Holocaust. Children! He was popular in the Arab world until his death. Jews were made to pay via the Holocaust for Arab hatred. After the war, Nazis escaped to Egypt and Syria. They received good jobs, including helping Arab armies prepare to attack Israel. Hitler's autobiography Mein Kampf, was a best seller among Arabs then. It remains popular. Egypt's dictator, Nasser, made it required reading by his officers. Arab society disseminates and indoctrinates its people in racist, Nazi, Jew-hate. The Arab world exerted pressure against the precarious British Empire not to let Jews into Palestine, although as administrators of the Mandate, it was their duty to do so. Jews were kept in Europe. Hitler could not get them out of Europe, because Britain barred their exit. Whereas originally he was satisfied with expelling Jews, he turned to exterminating them when he could not expel them en masse. For that, the Arabs bear guilt as accomplices of the Holocaust. So do other countries that could have absorbed Jewish refugees but refused to do so. Britain blocked Jews from their internationally declared national home. (He who fences in the deer for slaughter is as guilty as the slaughterer.) To rebut the third premise, we consider the preamble to the Mandate. It recognized the Land of Israel, a.k.a. Palestine, as the Jewish homeland, and its restoration to the Jewish people as a correction of the historical injustice done in forcing most Jews out of it and into countries that did not treat them with equality. Among those who committed that injustice was the Arab empire. Arab armies took over Palestine and other areas outside the Arabian Peninsula. They lost control to Turks, within a couple of hundred years. Both they and the Turks made conditions too onerous for the indigenous population. As the Muslim rulers let the area sink into ruin, the population dwindled into insignificance. Now turn to the WWI peace treaties that disposed of the belligerent Turkish Empire. These treaties allotted 99 ½% of that former Turkish Empire to the Arabs, and about ½% to the Jews. Would you call that unfair to the Arabs? There was no "Palestinian" nationality as such. Such a notion was fabricated decades later for propaganda purposes. Recall, however, that Britain made part of Palestine, i.e. Transjordan, later Jordan, into an Arab area, emirate, and finally, state. That constituted a Palestinian Arab state, for imperialist reasons, not national ones, since there was no separate Palestinian, Jordanian, or Hashemite nationality. Later, in order to give color to their claim for a state in territory that Israel controls, they called themselves "Palestinians." Their PLO Covenant, however, admits they are of the Arab nation. You might think that the UN Partition Resolution recommending a state for the Arabs entitles them to a state. Not after they rejected the Resolution, which was just a suggestion anyway, since the General Assembly cannot make laws. They rejected it in order to attempt to expel the Jews. Arab invaders boasted that they would massacre the Jews, the way Genghis Kahn wiped out whole cities. They have been waging war on Israel ever since. They fight by criminal means, attacking civilians. They continue to indoctrinate in hatred of Jews and in destroying Israel. In their first war of aggression against Israel, outside Arab armies seized the Territories, including the so-called West Bank. In a later war, they lost these Territories to Israel. During the years in between, Arafat started his terrorism against Israel, and not against Egypt and Jordan, which ran the Territories oppressively. This means that he and his followers wished to conquer Israel. Their motive was not, as claimed now, to capture the Territories in order to have their own state. During Egyptian and Jordanian rule of the Territories, the Arab authorities saw no need for a separate, western Palestinian Arab state. Neither did the local Arabs. Jordan granted its new subjects citizenship, and they accepted it without protest. They only "discovered" that they were a separate nationality from Jordan when the Jewish state took over those territories. Only after Israel acquired the territories, did Arafat's followers claim them. Where is any sincerity behind this? What is the legal status of the Territories today? They are the unallocated territories of the Mandate. As chief heir to the Mandate, whose purpose was to provide a transition to Jewish political rule there, Israel is entitled to those Territories. There is where Jewish civilization started. There contain the mountains that can provide Israel with secure borders that discourage invasion.
NEW ISRAELI LOGISTICAL DEFENSE Israel has devised a new logistical defense. Formerly, it stockpiled arms and equipment at a few, major, fortified warehouses. Considering all the missiles targeting Israel, that strategy puts too many eggs into too few baskets. The new logistical defense is to scatter the materiel among more sites (IMRA, 5/13/10).
TWO DIFFERENT WAYS OF DEPICTING MUHAMMAD Westerners have heard much about rather innocuous cartoons of Muhammad eliciting death attempts and threats. Few have heard about pointed descriptions of disgusting behavior often attributed to him on an evangelical Arabic TV station, al-Haya (Life TV), especially on two weekly programs: Hiwar al-Haq (Truth Talk), hosted by Coptic priest Fr. Zakaria Botros, and Su'al Jari' (Daring Question), hosted by ex-Muslim Rashid. Both shows ask uncomfortable questions about Islam and its founder. They want Muslims to reconsider their faith's legitimacy (see here and here for English summaries). Several Muslim countries ban the broadcasts, but millions of Arabic-speakers watch it. When the series started, Muslims called in death threats. In response, the show revealed more revolting behavior by Muhammad [whom Islam considers the perfect man]. Just one set of examples is, "More graphically, Fr. Zakaria recently examined canonical hadiths (authenticated Muslim accounts) that record Islam's first believers eating Muhammad's feces, marinating food in his sweat, drinking the water he gargled and spat out, and smearing his phlegm all over their faces — all to his approval." Observant Muslims still hate the broadcasters, but have become apathetic about it. Now most of the callers are Muslim converts to Christianity, who thank the hosts for opening people's eyes. How come Muslims express less outrage over those broadcasts, which cast serious aspersions, than over mild cartoons? The Western reaction to death threats is appeasement. The West censors itself, facilitating Islamic subversion there. This encourages Muslims to monitor Western media more intently and complain more often, because that approach works in the West. Life TV refuses to censor itself. Finding that threats do not work, Muslims relax their efforts. Act subordinate to Islam, and be treated as subordinate. Act independent, and be treated as independent. Cartoons, such as one of Muhammad in a bear costume he never wore, are not based on reality or persuasive sources. Life TV quotes from the most authentic Islamic sources, so Muslims find them incontrovertible (Middle East Forum, 5/12 from Raymond Ibrahim, associate director of the Middle East Forum, author of The Al Qaeda Reader, and guest lecturer at the National Defense Intelligence College.)
TIMES SQ. BOMBING CASE EXPANDS
FBI agents raided several houses and arrested three men from Pakistan who gave money to the Times Square bomber. The question is whether they realized the money was for terrorism (William K. Rashbaum, Scott Shane, New York Times, 5/14/10, A17).
ISRAEL SLAMS PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY FOR ECONOMIC WARFARE Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu strongly condemned the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) for its economic warfare against Israel. He contrasted Israel's assistance to the P.A. economy, with the P.A. campaign to keep Israel out of the OECD. The U.S. may have urged the OECD application reviewers to consider Israel's admittance solely on economic grounds and not on extraneous political grounds. Then why doesn't the U.S. condemn the P.A. for its economic warfare against Israel, just when he is trying to get it to make peace. After all, the U.S. readily condemns Israel on lesser matters. Why don't American friends of Israel condemn the Obama administration for its silence on the P.A. economic warfare "and other PA activity that undermines confidence in their sincerity to make progress in the 'peace process' with Israel?" (IMRA, 5/14/10).
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
JAGGED PETALS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 15, 2010. |
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://freddebby.blogspot.com/ to see more of his graphic art. |
|
CONTINUED U.S. TRAINING OF PA SECURITY FORCES: A DANGEROUS VENTURE
Posted by Arlene Kushner and David Bedein, May 14, 2010. |
|
It has been reported that U.S. President Barack Obama recently pressed Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu to continue the American program for helping the Palestinian Authority upgrade its security forces
That program in question began in March 2005, with the establishment of a U.S. Security Coordinator Team, headed by Lt. General Keith Dayton. Plans called for selected PA National Security Force troops to be trained and equipped by the United States. Presumably, over time, the old PLO militia would be transformed into a professional force that would help to build a nation.
Five years later, with millions of dollars and much effort having been expended on this on-going program, cogent reasons for doubting its wisdom present themselves.
Major-General (res.) Ya'akov Amidror-former head of the IDF's
Research and Assessment Division suggested last year that Americans
may be acting with "a certain na&ium;vete," attempting to fulfill
their dreams [for peace] while ignoring pertinent facts. Concurring,
an Arab journalist with connections to the PA has stated forthrightly
that, "To expect political fruits from this is a mistake — an illusion."
One of the more serious questions that has surfaced concerns the loyalty of the troops that are being trained. General Dayton says they are loyal to "the Palestinian flag, and the Palestinian people." Palestinian society, however, is founded on traditional Arab culture, whose first allegiance is to the clan (hamula), and not the nation.
Dr. Mordecai Kedar, research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University, observes, "...when (not if) there will be domestic problems in the PA/Palestinian State these people will be loyal primarily to their clan rather than to the state, since they will never shoot their brothers or cousins..."
The role that Hamas might play vis-à-vis these forces is a cause of alarm. PA troops being trained are expected to stand against Hamas, so that it cannot take over in Judea and Samaria.
Yet a proposal for a "unity government" that would forge a Fatah-Hamas coalition remains on the table.
JINSA, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs in Washington DC, has voiced strong reservations about the wisdom of U.S. training of a Palestinian security force without a clear understanding of the authority to which that force would ultimately answer. It is within the realm of possibility that the very PA troops expected to contain Hamas might ultimately be commanded by Hamas. After all, that is precisely what occurred in Gaza, where we witness the Hamas armed forces brandishing American weapons.
Meanwhile, the fear that Palestinian troops may turn their weapons on the IDF stems from the precedent of what occurred with the outbreak of the second Intifada ten years ago, when Palestinian troops that had been nurtured and trained by the US and even by the IDF engaged in a full scale armed rebellion against Israel.
Indeed, only last week, The Palestinian Authority issued an official report, funded by the American government and by the European Union, which indicates that the the Palestinian security forces had risen to that of a "pre-army." level That report, available http://arab-reform.net/IMG/pdf/annual_rep_010_english.pdf, published by the Palestine Center for Policy and Social Research, mentions that the PA armed forces have been significantly professionalized under the U.S. military aid program, which, over the past 18 months, has trained five Palestinian battalions, under the framework of a U.S.-sponsored training in a four-month course held in Jordan". The report states that that the United States has increased funding for PA security forces and plans to allocate more than $100 million over the next year.
In other words, were PA troops, in frustration and anger, to turn on Israel, they would do so with a new-found competency, thanks to the intense training they are being provided by the U.S.
Perhaps the time has come for Prime Minister Netanyahu to recall that a major stipulation of his plan for a Palestinian State that he presented at Bar Ilan University on June 14th, 2009 was that "In any peace agreement, the territory under Palestinian control must be disarmed, with solid security guarantees for Israel"
This article is reprinted from May 10 issue of Defense News, p.37,
|
|
DOES J STREET STAND FOR JORDAN STREET?
Posted by Moshe Phillips, May 14, 2010. |
|
J Street, the controversial Jewish pressure group that was created to lobby for a Palestinian state, is back in the news. J Street is now in the news in, of all places, Amman, Jordan because of their unauthorized, freelance diplomacy mission there. The Jordan Times reported on May 2 that "Their Majesties King Abdullah and Queen Rania on Sunday met with delegates from the American organisation, J Street, who are on a visit to the Kingdom as part of a regional tour." The question is why would the Jordanian monarchy be interested in meeting with J Street in the first place? One might think that a group that only held its first national convention in October of 2009 would not be deemed worthy of meeting with Jordan's King and Queen. It is also curious that their visit to Jordan did not generate the headlines that J Street has been getting somewhat used to. After all, J Street has been making the news a lot since 2009. Perhaps the Jordanian government believed that it was worth meeting with J Street because of the connections J Street has with the Democratic Party. A key strategy of J Street from its very outset has been to use the gravitas that even the most radical Democrats now have in the Obama era to provide it with the cover it needs to advance its pro-Palestine agenda. Five of the Democratic congressmen who signed a controversial letter that urged President Obama to increase pressure on Israel were rewarded by the radical J Street lobby organization with a five day President's Day weekend tour of Israel, Jordan and the so-called "Palestinian Territories". That this letter precipitated what many have termed the worst crisis in U.S.-Israel relations in decades must not be discounted. Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the first Muslim to be elected to the United States Congress, was the key organizer of the letter to President Obama asking the administration to use diplomatic pressure on Israel to end the co-called blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza. Ellison and the 53 other Democrats who signed the letter were widely labeled as the "Gaza 54". Matt Brooks, the Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition released the following statement about the letter on January 29: "By now, you've probably heard that 54 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives (no Republicans) sent a letter to President Obama — a letter in which they urge him to pressure Israel to loosen security measures on Israel's border with Hamas-controlled Gaza. This is outrageous. And we need to raise our voices to respond! These security measures were implemented to counter the threat from terrorism originating from the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip." Every Congressman on the J Street sponsored President's Day trip signed Ellison's letter which J Street endorsed. J Street's February 12 press release on its "first Congressional mission" read in part: "Representatives Lois Capps (CA-23), Bill Delahunt (MA-10), Bob Filner (CA-51), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH-15), and Donald Payne (NJ-10) will meet with Israeli, Palestinian and Jordanian government officials as well as civil society leaders to get an in-depth, on-the-ground look at the state of the peace process, and to explore the American role in bringing about regional, comprehensive peace. "We're excited to start bringing members of Congress to the Middle East as part of our overall effort to promote strong US leadership to achieve a two-state solution and regional, comprehensive peace," said Jeremy Ben-Ami, Executive Director of the J Street Education Fund." Several important nuanced phrases in Ben-Ami's statement and the press release illustrate the cause for alarm that J Street has generated from its critics both in Israel and in the U.S. Zionist community. J Street's very radical stance is based on the idea that the U.S. should pressure Israel into accepting a "two-state solution" and that a "two-state solution" is the remedy for a "regional, comprehensive peace". This is a seriously dangerous view. How will a "two-state solution" make peace magically happen between Muslims and Christians in Lebanon or Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq? Will a "two-state solution" bring a stop to the murder and persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt? This "two-state solution" rhetoric gives credence to the ridiculous claims that Israel's existence is the obstacle to peace in the Middle East. According to the May 2 Jordan Times King Abdullah stated to J Street "that the continuation of the status quo will lead to a new cycle of tension and violence in the region." There is no reason to believe that a "two-state solution" will be any solution at all. After all, the creation of a de-facto Islamic Republic in Gaza not only hasn't brought peace to the region, it has dramatically increased the footprint of Iranian backed Islamic terrorism in the area. J Street had stated that the Congressmen were to meet with "Palestinian ... government officials." Which officials did they mean? The Fatah terrorists posing as a government in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) or the Hamas terrorists posing as a government in Gaza? Were leaders of Israel's settlers be granted any access to the Congressmen? Without meeting the settlers — the only community being transferred and displaced by J Street's "two-state solution" Palestinian statehood scheme — how could these Americans ever hope to get an accurate idea of the full situation? J Street is more interested in the views of Jordan. Jordan's Prince Zeid Ra'ad Al-Hussein, Ambassador of Jordan was a presenter at the J Street Conference on October 26, 2009, the first full day of the Capitol Hill event. And this was just weeks after Christiane Amanpour's October 2, 2009 CNN interview with Queen Rania when Rania directly attacked Israel stating "can the world afford for this conflict to keep the way — I mean, it is — it's a disgrace to humanity that there is still this occupation, that there's an entire population that's still dehumanized, that's still under occupation and suffering." J Street seemed in part to be following Queen Rania lead when it joined an alliance of organizations with a strong history of criticizing Israel when it too endorsed Ellison's letter. These staunch critics of Israel include The Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF), The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), The American Near East Refugee Association (ANERA), The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) and Rabbis for Human Rights. Since being elected to Congress in 2006 Ellison has caused controversy several times. Perhaps, most significantly when he demanded to use a Koran for his ceremonial swearing-in in 2006. Ellison has travelled to Iraq, Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Gaza since being elected. In February 2009 Ellison and fellow Democratic congressman Brian Baird toured Gaza. At the time Ellison and Baird issued a joint statement assigning moral equivalency to Israel and the Hamas terrorist group saying: "The first and most urgent priority must be helping the people in Gaza. At the same time, the rocket attacks against Israeli cities must stop immediately. Just as the people of Gaza should not be subject to what they have experienced the Israeli civilians should not have to live in fear of constant and indiscriminate rocketing." So far J Street's JStreetPAC has distributed over half a million dollars to US Congressional candidates it is backing for the November 2, 2010 elections. Ellison was among those that the JStreetPAC financially contributed to and has officially endorsed. Did these Congressmen show their appreciation to J Street by setting the stage for J Street's unusual May visit to the Jordanian Royal Court when they were there back in February? How will J Street reward the 49 others of the Gaza 54? We will have to keep watching.
"Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the
Philadelphia Chapter of Americans for a Safe Israel — AFSI. The
chapter's website is at: www.phillyafsi.com and Moshe's blog can be
found at http://phillyafsi.blogtownhall.com. This article originally
appeared in American Thinker with the title "Does J Street Stand For
Jordan Street?" on May 12, 2010:
|
|
ARAB MK: REPLACE ISRAEL WITH ISLAMIC CALIPHATE
Posted by Miskin, Maayana, May 14, 2010. |
Israel should be integrated into an Islamic Caliphate, and Hamas and Hizbullah should be respected as legitimate political movements, according to Israeli-Arab MK Masoud Ganaim in an interview with the weekly paper Kul al-Arab, which is published in Israel. The interview was translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). Ganaim explicitly said that he is opposed to Jewish statehood, stating that his Ra'am Ta'al party is "against the Zionist movement and its racist ideas." If Israel is absorbed into an Islamic Caliphate, he said, Jews will be allowed to remain in the region. Ganaim (in left side of picture) is a member of the southern branch of the Islamic Movement, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Regarding Jerusalem, which Ganaim referred to as "occupied," the MK said that Arabs must be prepared to fight. "Jerusalem and Al-Aksa [Mosque] are both in danger," he declared. He backed extremist Muslim leaders in saying that Israel is threatening the Al-Aksa Mosque and plans to rebuild the Temple. When asked if the struggle for Al-Aksa should be peaceful, the MK said Muslims "must not relinquish any means." Ganaim expressed support for Hamas and Hizbullah, which both strive to destroy Israel. "The Iran-Syria-Hizbullah axis represents the policy of resistance and non-capitulation, so naturally I am with this axis," he said when asked which side he would support in a battle between Iran and a handful of Arab nations. Hizbullah is "a model for a political party that assigns a special place to religious discourse," he continued. The world, Israeli included, should accept Hamas, Ganaim said. Hamas was voted into power in democratic elections, and Israel should "respect the will of the Palestinian people," he explained. Ganaim's interview comes on the heels of a dispute involving six other MKs from Israeli-Arab parties. MKs Ahmed Tibi, Mohammed Barakei, Taleb a-Sana, Haneen Zoabi, Jamal Zahalka and Afo Agbaria visited Libya. Following the visit, members of the coalition suggested that the Knesset strip the six of their parliamentary immunity.
Maayana Miskin
writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.
|
|
SHAVUOT: A TASTY HOLIDAY
Posted by Stephen Michal Kramer, May 14, 2010. |
|
Shavuot (or Shavuos/Weeks /Yom Habikkurim) is celebrated from sundown of the 5th of Sivan until nightfall of the 7th of Sivan, corresponding this year to May 18-19 on the Gregorian calendar. Shavout commemorates the bestowing of the Torah upon the Jewish People, which, in large part, shaped the nature of the world and especially Western democracies. The bestowing of the Torah took place over 3,300 years ago, setting the Jewish people on the way to the Land of Israel. It also highlights the eternity of the Jewish people. Jewish sages have compared the Sinai experience to a wedding between God and the Jewish people. Shavuot also means "oath" and on this day God swore eternal devotion to the Jewish people, and we in turn pledged everlasting loyalty to Him. Thus Jews are both the "chosen" people and the "choosing" people, because on Shavuot the Israelites accepted the commandments of God as transmitted by Moses. It is said that all Jews, those living at the time and all the generations that would come after, were present at Sinai for the giving of the Torah. What is the Torah, which means instruction or guide? The Torah is composed of two parts: the Written Law and the Oral Law. It contains the Five Books of Moses, the Prophets and the Writings. Together with the Written Law, Moses was also given the Oral Law, which explains and clarifies the Written Law. Jewish religious tradition holds that Moses wrote the Torah through a process of divine inspiration. The short but joyous holiday of Shavuot is characterized by the following: the lighting of holiday candles to usher in the holiday; all night Torah learning sessions; special meals; abstention from "work"; synagogue attendance to hear the reading of the Ten Commandments; a Yizkor (memorial) service; reading of the Book of Ruth, as King David, whose passing occurred on this day, was a descendant of Ruth the Moabite. Many Jews, both religious and secular, eat dairy foods on Shavuot. It's less well known that religious Jews eat two meals on Shavuot, one "milk" and one "meat", taking care not to mix the two. Here are a sample of the fascinating reasons for the widespread tradition of eating dairy foods on Shavuot: When the Jewish people received the Torah at Mount Sinai, included were special instructions for kashrut, or how to slaughter and prepare meat for eating. Until then, the Jews had not followed these laws, thus all their meat, plus the cooking pots, were now considered "unkosher". The only alternative was to eat dairy, which requires no advance preparation. (The revelation at Sinai occurred on Shabbat, when slaughter and cooking of meat are prohibited. The Jews already had milk available from before Shabbat, which they had been using to feed the various animals that accompanied their journeys in the wilderness.) Torah is likened to milk, as the verse says, "Like honey and milk [the Torah] lies under your tongue" (Song of Songs 4:11). Just as milk fully sustains the body of a human being (i.e. a nursing baby), so too the Torah provides all the "spiritual nourishment" necessary for the human soul. The gematria (numerical value) of the Hebrew word for milk, chalav, is 40. We eat dairy foods on Shavuot to commemorate the 40 days that Moses spent on Mount Sinai receiving instruction in the entire Torah. Moses spent an additional 40 days on Sinai, praying for forgiveness following the Golden Calf, and then a third set of 40 days before returning with a new set of stone tablets. The Torah says: "Bring Bikkurim (first fruits) to the God's Holy Temple; don't cook a kid in its mother's milk" (Exodus 34:26). In ancient times, when the Temple still stood in Jerusalem, farmers would go to their fields and tie a thread around the first fruits to bud. These would be brought to the Temple as an offering in a fancy basket during the holiday, when it was mandatory to visit the Temple. Since the first day for bringing Bikkurim is on Shavuot, the second half of the verse, referring to milk and meat, corresponds to Shavuot. An alternative name for Mount Sinai is Har Gav'nunim, the mountain of majestic peaks. The Hebrew word for cheese is gevina, etymologically related to "gav'nunim". Further, the gematria of gevina is 70, corresponding to the "70 faces of Torah." This refers to 70 facets or valid ways to understand each part of the Torah. The eating of dairy foods commemorates a phenomenon concerning milk in the early life of Moses, which occurred on Shavuot. Moses lived at home for three months with his family, before being placed in the Nile River on the sixth of Sivan to save him from Pharaoh's evil decree. He was rescued by Pharaoh's daughter, who adopted him and took him to live in Pharaoh's palace. Immediately a problem arose: what to feed the baby. Eventually Pharaoh's daughter found the one woman who Moses agreed to nurse from — Yocheved, his biological mother. The holiday of Shavuot is widely celebrated in Israel, as are all the Jewish holidays. That doesn't mean that everyone is religious. Secular kibbutzim, for example, celebrate Yom Habikkurim exuberantly as their harvest festival. Everyone knows that eating dairy foods is customary. All the restaurants and bakeries feature a myriad of dairy delicacies and most people know that Shavuot is the "birthday" of the Ten Commandments and the coming of age of the Jewish people. If it takes the eating of cheesecake to remember that Shavuot is the day that we became the Chosen People, that's good enough for me. Happy holiday to all my readers! See www.aish.org and www.chabad.org for more information on all of the Jewish holidays. 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." Contact him at mskramer@bezeqint.net |
|
SHAMEFUL: LIBYA ON THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL!
Posted by Elias Bejjani, May 14, 2010. |
|
What an insult, a dire humiliation and a dismal disgrace to the essence, core and spirit of global human rights institutions, groups and efforts when a terroristic, fanatical, fundamentalist, and dictatorial country like Libya is elected by a majority of its fellow UN members to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Council. Unquestionably, May 13, 2010 will be remembered as a sad, bleak and shocking day for human rights activists and their efforts all over the world. This day will go in history as a real shame for the UN because human rights values and principles were all slaughtered and downtrodden when in a secret ballot Libya received 155 votes and will henceforth serve a three year term on the UN Human Rights Council. It is worth mentioning that to get elected onto the UN Human Rights Council each country requires 97 votes. There are a total of 192 countries that make up the United Nations. Libya with the support of Arab, Muslim and African members paved its way to the Human Rights Council that actually negates all human rights values with its notorious and savage and anti-human rights record. Is the previously reputable UN falling apart and becoming a mere arena and battlefield for terrorists, fundamentalists, dictators and tyrants? In fact there is no logic nor justice, fairness or any kind of reason that could justify this murky infringement. There is no sanity in giving the bizarre and repugnant Libyan dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, and his repressive regime a UN voice and a voting power on the UN Human Rights Council. How can the Free World countries swallow such a violation to the whole Charter of Human Rights and allow a country like Libya to sit on a UN human rights body? Aren't they all aware of Libya's abysmal human rights record, or they don't know its well documented and deeply rooted history of terrorism, crime, kidnapping, hijacking, assassinations and its well known ties to worldwide terrorism and terrorist organizations? This notorious scandal is actually a humongous setback for the UN and with no doubt will make of the UN Human Rights Council a mere joke with no credibility whatsoever. The UN is being distantly derailed from its original mission of peace and humanity. Unfortunately, this latest development demonstrates that the direction of the United Nations today is slipping from a bad state to even worse. Can one fathom that a terrorist country was brought into the UN Human Rights Council, a body that once had American First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt as its chairman? In keeping with that legacy, shouldn't the American administration of President Barack Obama have made further efforts to ensure that terrorist Libya did not become a member of the UN Human Rights Council? Sadly, the US administration did not make these efforts and effectively abandoned its human rights obligations. And it did so even though a 2009 report from the US State Department states that in Libya there is routine torture of detainees, amputations and flogging of political opposition members without trial, indefinite detention of women "suspected of violating moral codes", and the criminalization of Christian and Jewish worship. Meanwhile their president, Muammar al-Gaddafi, claims that the Christian Bible and the Jewish Torah are forgeries. One wonders about the reaction of the families and friends of the Lockerbie victims when they see the Libyan regime that killed their beloved ones is now a member of the UN Human Rights Council. How can the countries which voted for Libya ignore the crime that its regime committed in 1988 when it exploded Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland killing all its passengers? Although Libya has paid $1.5 billion to the families of the victims of the Lockerbie terrorist bombing in order to overcome the final obstacle to full relations with the United States, the country has yet to answer for the numerous global crimes it has committed. One of these unanswered crimes relates to the reputable Lebanese Shiite religious and political leader, Sayyid Mousa Al Sadr, who in August 1978 with two of his companions, Sheikh Muhammad Yaacoub, and journalist, Abbas Badreddine, departed Lebanon for Libya to meet with government officials. The three were never heard from again. It is widely believed that the Libyan leader, Muammar al-Gaddafi, personally ordered their killing. The fate of the three is still not clarified and the Libyan authorities continuously refuse to admit their responsibility. Finally, what the UN members who elected Libya did is that they have placed a wolf in charge of the sheep. It is really a joke. This irresponsible conduct ought to be condemned by the countries of the free world that must assume their responsibilities and put an end for such intolerable breaches against human rights. Elias Bejjani is a Canadian-Lebanese Human Rights activist,
journalist and political commentator. Email him at
phoenicia@hotmail.com and visit his websites:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: REALLY ANGRY
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 14, 2010. |
|
Because of Shabbat preparations I was going to skip a post today but circumstances have motivated me to write, although it will be brief. I'm calling out the troops. Yesterday I wrote about what Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch said regarding the fact that demolition of illegal Arab housing in Jerusalem was going to proceed. The delay in carrying out these (court ordered) demolitions, he said, was the result of "diplomatic sensitivities" but that this situation no longer applies. Not much. And this is why I am very angry. If you were with me you'd see the steam coming out of my ears. I anticipated that the US would protest, but it's gone further than that. The US has asked for a "clarification," and now the Public Security Ministry expects Netanyahu to put a hold on the demolitions. Yesterday, the Ministry put out a statement that: "Police do not destroy homes, but rather secure the demolitions, in line with court decisions. Police will carry out every mission given to it by the courts. The rule of law is not a vehicle for a Middle Eastern political and geostrategic discussion." I had addressed this issue of rule of law yesterday, and this is a marvelous and appropriate statement coming from a sovereign democracy. However, there was also a clarification in that statement: "We are subordinate to decisions by the attorney-general and the government, and we will act according to their decisions." Put simply, we know what is right, but cannot be responsible if the government overturns us. Damn, damn, damn. You read my description of one case yesterday. There are many others as well. Ahmed Sheikh not only built beyond what he had permission for, he made a commitment to stop building while the appeals were going on, but defiantly continued to build. The court ordered what he had constructed to be razed a full year ago. And the government is tying the hands of the local authorities in carrying out this court order and others. Because the PA will scream and yell if we act with full legal authority and Obama will be angry. This will be an "obstruction to peace," you see. ~~~~~~~~~~ And so... First, please, contact Prime Minister Netanyahu. Using your own words, please, but tell him that a sovereign state acts with independence and a democracy acts according to rule of law. Tell him that in caving to demands of Obama he is undermining our sovereignty and the underpinnings of our democracy. Demand that he stand strong.
E-mail: Memshala@pmo.gov.il and also pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm) use both addresses There are two phone numbers listed for his Knesset office — not the best way to contact him, but the only working numbers I have at the moment: 02-6753-227 and 02-640-8457. ~~~~~~~~~~ Contact Minister Aharonavitch, as well, and tell him that you appreciate his strength on the matter of illegal housing demolitions, and that you stand with him.
~~~~~~~~~~ When calling Israel from the US: 011-972 and then drop the first zero and continue with the number. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then messages must go out in the US. Repeat what I said above about undermining Israeli democracy and sovereignty. Point out that the demolitions were planned only for Arab homes built illegally that the courts ordered to be demolished. Additionally, point out that there is inequity in the response of the US government. Allude to the Palestinian Media Watch report describing the most recent PA incitement on TV that denies Israel's right to exist. I reported on this recently. It can be found at:
Promises aside, Abbas is continuing to turn a blind eye to incitement, and the US is ignoring this. If you are faxing (best) or using e-mail, include this URL. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is probably pointless to contact the president, but do so anyway. Politely but firmly express your anger.
~~~~~~~~~~ More important, contact your elected representatives in the House and Senate. Politely express your concerns, as above, and ask that Congress reign in the administration with regard to its unreasonable pressure on Israel and its inequities. Explain that this stance will not and cannot bring peace. For your Congresspersons:
For your Senators:
This is important, and, as always, numbers count. We are immersed in a serious struggle and your active support here helps. Put this up on blogs, share with lists. Make noise because the situation stinks. ~~~~~~~~~~ If you are not already angry, this should do it: When Netanyahu addressed the Knesset on Yom Yerushalayim, he spoke about the numerous references to Jerusalem in the Bible (it refers to Jerusalem and Zion 850 times). Now PA negotiator Saeb Erekat says he found these references "distasteful": "[using] religion to incite hatred and fear." ~~~~~~~~~~ More after Shabbat... |
|
SAUDI MEDICS BARRED, SAUDI WOMAN DIES; PA TV: JEWS GET OUT, ISRAEL NOT
YOUR HOMELAND; EU, NEW ISRAEL FUND, FORD FOUNDATION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 14, 2010. |
|
OBAMA'S POPULARITY IN U.S. STILL SINKING You probably have heard the general news of the voters' revolt against incumbents, especially Democratic incumbents and candidates. There is a Jewish revulsion against Obama and his Party, too. According to David Goldman, Senior Editor of First Things magazine and 'Spengler' columnist for Asia Times Online, Jews who voted for Obama on the basis of their ideals, and whom he assured is pro-Israel, find themselves deceived. They think of him as a con man. Reflecting this disappointment, Democratic Members of Congress are being booed off the dais of Reform synagogues. Jewish contributors to the Democratic Party are switching their donations to the GOP. Many Christian Evangelists, for whom Israel is a major issue, are rumbling. They are likely to note in higher numbers, now. Meanwhile, his whole foreign policy is shaky. It could collapse by election time. Iraq may falter as he withdraws U.S. troops. Iran may have a nuclear weapon by then. Obama is trying to persuade people that he is getting legislation through and that the Republicans are trying to block it Arutz-7, 5/13/10). Suppose the people find out that the Republicans are trying to get actual reforms through, such as the McCain effort to restrict Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgages in number and to restore prudence in mortgage lending? Suppose they find out that Obama and his party blocked them? Most people are not impressed by recently passed legislation, which hardly solves their problems so much as create new ones and a vacuum cleaner for their money and liberty. The unfortunate part of this voter and taxpayer revolt is its
shotgun approach. It indiscriminately takes down incumbents who are
fairly well aligned with the people's preferences.
WHOM DOES OBAMA'S ENVOY TO MUSLIM WORLD REPRESENT? President Obama appointed Rashad Hussein the U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference. He gave an interview to the English-language edition of the Arabic international daily Asharq Al-Awsat. It drew objection for his gratuitous denigration of the Bush Administration. The State Dept. responded with a translation of the transcript that not offensive and was much milder. It claimed that the newspaper misrepresented the Envoy. Commentary analyst Jennifer Rubin, the whistleblower, is not satisfied. Even the translation shows our Envoy apologetic to the Muslim world and evasive about any link between Islam and terrorism. Mr. Hussein ignores the great danger of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, in favor of on the much narrower conflict between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Ms. Rubin wonders whether it pays to give interviews if they are going to be distorted into anti-American and pro-Palestinian Arab "talking points." Hussein said, "...as a Muslim I know full well that the Al Aqsa Mosque was the first Qibla" [direction in which Muslims pray] (Arutz-7, 5/13/10). Whose translation is false? Whom does Mr. Hussein represent? Himself, as a Muslim, Obama, a former Muslim, or the U.S. national interest? Hussein may be a Muslim, but he misrepresented the first Qibla. The first direction in which Muslims prayed was Jerusalem, on which there were no mosques at the time, and was holy because of its Jewish and Christian associations. Muhammad was trying to interest the Jewish people in his new religion.
FATAH OFFICIAL: BOYCOTT GOODS FROM STATE OF ISRAEL, TOO Fatah Central Committeeman Mahmoud al Aylool suggested at a conference that the Palestinian Arabs boycott products from the State of Israel, not just from Judea-Samaria. The Palestinian Authority has an agreement not to boycott Israel. The Committeeman is suggesting an informal boycott. "However, Akiva Eldar, a columnist for the left-wing Haaretz newspaper, not only backed the PA boycott on Judea and Samaria but also called on the Israeli government to 'follow in the PA's footsteps and cut itself off from the settlers.... Instead of hiding behind the self-righteous claim that it is providing livelihoods for thousands of indigent laborers, let the government open the Israeli markets to more Arab goods and workers from the territories.'" (Arutz-7, 5/13/10). When members of the ruling Central Committee and probably P.A. officials will endorse this expanded boycott, it would be difficult sophistry for them to disclaim official responsibility for that additional violation of the Oslo Accords at a time when the Obama Administration may be sensitive to distrust between the negotiating parties. Haaretz again shows itself pro-Arab and anti-Israel. To feel sorry for an enemy that wants to destroy one's country and exterminate one's people is sick enough. To mock the fact that Jews residing in the Territories provide thousands of jobs for the Arabs belies the sympathy for the Arabs. If not sympathetic for the Arabs, then they hate their fellow Jews' sovereignty. How Israel is closed to Arab goods is not stated. Some years back, there were scandals over food from the P.A. being too laden with pesticides or otherwise spoiled. As for labor, Israel is awash in illegal aliens itself, and has no need for chancing the entry of terrorists from the P.A.. Let the P.A. eradicate terrorism, instead of fostering it, and then Mr. Eldar may raise the question. In view of the P.A. seeking Israel's destruction, with popular support, should Israel and Israelis in the Territories allow any enemy population to work or live in their areas? Russia's President Medvedev met with the head of Hamas in Damascus. Medvedev and Turkey's President Abdullah Gul met with each other in Turkey. Both urged Israel to negotiate with Hamas as well as Fatah. Pres. Gul said that if Israel wants to unite the Palestinian Authority, it should include Hamas in negotiations. The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned Medvedev's hypocrisy in urging another country to work with terrorists, while his own fights Chechen terrorists Arutz-7, 5/13/10). Actually, they all are hypocrites. Turkey has had a terrible experience with Kurdish terrorists, but, like Russia, it doesn't mind terrorists fighting someone else. Their objection to terrorism is like the Arabs, only when it affects them. It is not an ethical objection on principle. For apparent but mistaken expediency, Israel, like the U.S., works with one set of terrorists, Fatah in the PLO, but not with Hamas. What hypocrisy! Both organizations promote terrorist against Israel, which both want to destroy. Israel was unwise in ever taking up with the PLO, but at least the original agreements in 1993 pledged to end terrorism. How many years of PLO violation of that pledge, and how many years of PLO encouragement and commission of terrorism does it take before Israel concludes the PLO does not want genuine peace and is too barbaric to deal with? Years ago, Israel should have declared the peace process a farce, because holy war dominates the Palestinian Arabs. SYRIA AND WTO, JORDAN AND BOYCOTT, RUSSIA AND TURKEY NUCLEAR Syria has been granted observer status in the World Trade Organization, a step toward membership. Jordanian professional organizations are publishing lists of companies that normalize with Israel and buy its products. The lists are designed to shame the listed. Russia is investing in construction of a nuclear power plant in Turkey (IMRA, 5/12/10). Apparently, the World Trade Organization no longer believes in free trade, Syria being a boycotter of Israel. Jordan shows the meaning of peace agreements with Israel. Turkey, perhaps the new Iran, will learn half the technology it needs for developing nuclear weapons. SAUDI MEDICS BARRED, SAUDI WOMAN DIES A female college student in Saudi Arabia fell ill. Faculty summoned the Red Crescent Society. Then it barred the medics, because they were men. Saudis believe it inappropriate for men to treat women patients. Saudis also believe it inappropriate for women to be medics. Besides, they also believe it inappropriate for women to drive, even ambulances. Besides, it would be inappropriate for women medics to ride with male drivers [although many thousands of foreign men are hired to drive Saudi women]. They can't take a chance on having a female medic in the back with a male patient, while a man drives in the cab. No, an attempt to recruit women would not be acceptable there. Men consider the job beneath them, getting messy while seeing people in distress. Where there were 1,000 vacancies in emergency medical services, only 100 men applied. While the Saudis argued over whether to let the medics in, the college student died, her honor and that of the faculty preserved (IMRA, 5/12/10). So much work is beneath the dignity of Saudi Arabians, who expect the government to support them one way or the other, that millions of them do not work; foreigners are hired in their stead. The Saudi government keeps announcing plans to "Saudify" the work force, but employers keep hiring foreigners. Jordan also has a much higher proportion of foreign workers, than in, say, the U.S.. Fellow Americans, do you want your female relatives treated like Saudi females? Is so, accept the jihadist attempt to impose Islamic law in the States. Palestinian Arabs used to claim that their ailing people died at Israeli roadblocks. Any such deaths were not Israel's fault. Sick people always were given preference at roadblocks, but instead of asking, taxis carrying the patients used to turn back, suspiciously. Strange that they insist on a right to have Israeli hospitals save their lives when they weren't murdering Israelis. Now that we find that conservative Islamic standards cause untold numbers of women in Saudi Arabia and in Afghanistan to die, will there be even half the complaints against those Muslim barbarities as there is slander against Israel, which treats many Palestinian Authority Arabs free?
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY TV: JEWS GET OUT, ISRAEL NOT YOUR HOMELAND Palestinian Authority (P.A.) TV told the Jews to depart from Israel and return to Europe and Ethiopia, their real homelands. The broadcaster accused the Jews of stealing "Palestinian land." A children's program showed a map of Israel and the P.A. combined under the P.A. flag. No Israel! This is common fare. Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon told visiting U.S. envoy, Lt. General Paul J. Selva, checking compliance with the Road Map, that the P.A. engages in all sorts of non-compliant "incitement" against Israel. He included the boycott recently announced by the P.A., the P.A. attempt to block Israel's admittance to OECD, encouraging popular violence, and naming places after "mass-murderers of innocent civilians" (IMRA, 5/12/10). He should add such TV programs to the list. Such indoctrination gives the Arabs something to fight for. One would think that Christians, who know that the Land of Israel is the Jewish homeland, and Jews however liberal, would be disgusted with the constant and increasing Muslim Arab fabrication of history. This disgust should translate into skepticism about the other jihadist claims. But where is a sense of honesty in those who let such false remarks and indoctrination pass unchallenged? Can't blame too many Westerners, for their media filter out most such news. When it is reported, readers filter out its meaning and implication. The implication is continued war. Repetition of the defamation mocks U.S. peace efforts. Arab antisemitism, no longer entirely religious, has taken a racist cast. Thus Muslim Arab preachers depict Jews as inherently evil, though there is nothing in Judaism or Jewish culture to back that up. [The Muslim Arab record of aggression, mass-murder, and oppression should not be a source of pride for anyone.] There is, against the Jewish people, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but that was written about something else and forged into an antisemitic document by the Czar's police. There also is Mein Kampf, the autobiography of the Nazi leader, a book almost as popular among the Arabs as the other one. It is the raving of a maniacal aggressor, who murdered about 10 million people and caused a world war that killed millions more. Some Arab case! Race should be determined by genetics, not accusations. Genetic studies have shown the Jews to be primarily from the Mideast, though naturally there has been some intermarriage. This finding is supported by numerous archaeological digs. How to the Arabs deal with ancient Jewish artifacts? Destroy them when possible, deny their existence when impossible. The concept of "Palestinian land" is never defined. For about 1,900 years, the area had Turkish rulers, then British, then the League of Nations divided the Turkish Empire, liberating the Arabs and allotting a small piece of land to the Jewish people, in view of their "historical connection" to the land. How could the League of Nations have been mistaken about that, in those days when Zionism was almost powerless but its case was recognized by the civilized world? Then what is "Palestinian land?" Apparently it means land that well after the founding of Israel, Arabs on it decided that they are a separate nationality. On the other hand, the PLO Covenant also admits they remain of the Arab nation. Self-contradictions do not embarrass supporters of jihad. Will the media and State Dept. keep telling us that the Palestinian Arabs want a two-state solution?
U.C. IRVINE FACULTY OBJECT TO MUSLIM STUDENTS UNION HATE-MONGERING Here is a balanced objection to the hatred and intimidation, signed by dozens of U.C. Irvine faculty members. I quote the statement in full, to show its reasonableness. "We, faculty at the University of California — Irvine, are deeply disturbed about activities on campus that foment hatred against Jews and Israelis. The troubling events over the past few years include the painting of swastikas in university buildings, the Star of David depicted as akin to a swastika, a statement (by a speaker repeatedly invited by the Muslim Student Union) that the Zionist Jew is a party of Satan, a statement by another MSU speaker that the Holocaust was God's will, the tearing down of posters placed by the student group Anteaters for Israel, and the hacking of their web site. Some community members, students, and faculty indeed feel intimidated, and at times even unsafe." "Some of these actions are protected by the First Amendment and in no way do we want to limit freedom of speech. We welcome open dialog among all members of the UCI community. We respect and value our Muslim colleagues, including those members of the MSU who support and encourage open dialog and civility on campus. At the same time, we take issue with hate-promoting actions that we find unacceptable. They run counter to the peaceful co-existence and civility that are essential to a university environment. Actions that demonize and derogate others, such as the previous events that have occurred on our campus noted above, have contributed to UCI's developing a growing reputation as a center of hate and intolerance. Our campus deserves better." (via e-mail from Zionist Organization of America, headquartered in New York and which initiated the focus on intolerance at that campus, 5/13/10.) Freedom of speech has been abused there. The Islams bigotry is no better than that of the old Ku Klux Klan. Both are extremist. Is the MSU trying to demonstrate that there is no difference between moderate and radical Islam? Some of the actions are not protected by the First Amendment. When will those who commit them be disciplined? In the interest of multi-culturalism, should our universities let themselves become deserts of Islamo-fascism? Where is the line between normal disagreement about U.S. policies and a fascist approach that is so un-American as to be subversive?
NEW ISRAEL FUND, FORD FOUNDATION EU agencies, New Israel Fund, Ford Foundation, and Open Society subsidize an NGO called Ir Amim, which blames Israel for lack of peace and champions Arab policy on Jerusalem. "Ir Amim produced Jerusalem Moments films. David Horovitz, editor of the Jerusalem Post, commented that this film series 'contained just about every imaginable one-sided, context-deficient, unbalanced misrepresentation of Israel rolled into one nasty package.... a relentless Palestinian Israel-bashing, interspersed with near-relentless Israeli Israel-bashing.'" For examples: "Expansion of the Israeli presence is an act of sabotage against the city's political future ... this process of accelerated Judaization and Israelization in East Jerusalem intensifies the points of friction between two hostile populations." (Ir Amim Update, October 2009) "Israel continues to exploit its superior power in order to try to determine what 'reasonable' borders are, thus emptying the negotiations of any practical significance." (Ir Amim Report, December 2008) "This marks a significant unilateral Israeli action to pre-judge and de-rail a negotiated agreement to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in Jerusalem."
Use this URL to read the full Ir Amim Factsheet
http://server1.streamsend.com/streamsend/clicktracker.php?
cd=7464&ld=3&md=247&ud=f44ab95cdcdccaa5aac7f3f6f6
81d6e2&url=http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/
ir_amim_european_funded_political_lobbying_on_jerusalem
What does Ir Amin mean, "expansion of the Israeli presence?" The Arabs have built more houses in Jerusalem than Jews, in recent years. The Arab presence is expanding proportionately. What does it mean, "two hostile populations?" The hostility is all on the jihadist side. What does it mean, Israel tries to determine the borders? Both sides have policies on borders and build houses. So one-sided is Ir Amim, that it perceives only Jewish building as trying to determine borders. What about Arab building? NGO monitor did not state what Ir Amim meant by "unilateral Israel action" to de-rail a negotiated agreement. At that time, the Arabs refused to negotiate. Israel asked the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to stop violating its agreements to eradicate terrorism and cease inciting to violence against Israel. More recently, although Israel had not agreed not to build houses for Jews in annexed parts of Jerusalem, the P.A. refused to negotiate unless Israel stopped. That is a unilateral Arab action to pre-judge and de-rail a negotiation process. Is this viciousness what the liberal Europeans intend to cultivate? Do donors to New Israel Fund know what viciousness their contributions underwrite?
P. A. ARABS CLAIM EGYPT MURDERS FISHERMEN A Gaza fisherman claims that an Egyptian corvette rammed his fishing boat, near Egypt, knocking his father into the water. Then, the son says, the corvette kept ramming his father until dead, rather than rescuing him. He said this has happened before (IMRA, 5/12/10). This report is not independently confirmed.
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY QUESTIONED BY OWN PEOPLE ON BANNING ARAB WORK IN 'SETTLEMENT Two Palestinian Authority (P.A.) Arabs on a TV show questioned the sense of immediately prohibiting Arab workers in Jewish communities in Judea-Samaria. They thought that first, alternatives should be found for the 25,000-30,000 Arabs who work in them. A P.A. official said those 25,000 are no different from the 250,000 unemployed in the P.A. (IMRA, 5/12/10).
EUROPE DETECTS TERRORIST PLOTS DIFFERENTLY FROM U.S. The U.S. relies primarily upon technical systems to detect terrorism. Europe relies primarily upon human intelligence agents and contacts. France claims it can better discover plots before they get carried out. The U.S. needs to build up its contacts within communities of people likeliest to commit terrorism. Those communities know who their weak links are, whom Islamists try to recruit. The U.S. is more tolerant of Islamist web sites, citing First Amendment rights (IMRA, 5/12/10). Recently I reported that the U.S. government came to a similar conclusion. The CIA was decimated and browbeaten, until it became largely ineffective. The U.S. would be wise to employ all types of methods. Radical Islamic propaganda can envelop followers in criminal/war conspiracy more readily than traditional subversives. Therefore, the broad interpretation of First Amendment rights is not realistic, in the standard of "clear and present danger," in dealing with jihad.
INDONESIA FACING DOWN RADICAL ISLAM Indonesia seems to be holding radical Islam at bay. The jihadists have gone on the defensive, as Muslim community leaders denounce them and governments track them down and arrest them. For a while, the radical movement grew and became menacing (IMRA, 5/12/10). Wouldn't it be nice if Muslim community leaders in the U.S. denounced radical Muslims here? The major Muslim organizations in the U.S. defend radical Islam.
MYSTERIOUS DISEASE STRIKES AFGHAN POPPY CROP The Taliban warned farmers that the U.S. would eradicate their poppy crop. Now a mysterious disease has reduced output significantly. Actually, the U.S., as we reported, had given up efforts to destroy the crop, as more likely to alienate farmers. But farmers blame the U.S.. Nobody knows whether the disease is from fungus, virus, or aphids. The crop reduction has had the effect of raising prices 60%. The drug dealers are making more money than before (IMRA, 5/12/10 from the New York Times). By that measure and conspiracy theory, the Taliban must have introduced the disease. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
TOP 10 LIES ABOUT ISRAEL
Posted by Susana K-M, May 13 2010. |
|
This was published in Aish.Com with permission from The Simon Wiesenthal Center |
|
Lie #1: Israel was created by European guilt over the Nazi Holocaust. Why should Palestine pay the price? Three thousand years before the Holocaust, before there was a Roman Empire, Israel's kings and prophets walked the streets of Jerusalem. The whole world knows that Isaiah did not speak his prophesies from Portugal, nor Jeremiah his lamentations from France. Revered by its people, Jerusalem is mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures 600 times — but not once in the Koran. Throughout its 2,000-year exile there was continuous Jewish presence in the Holy Land, with the modern rebirth of Israel beginning in the 1800s. Reclamation of the largely vacant land by pioneering Zionists blossomed into a Jewish majority long before the onset of Nazism. After the Holocaust, nearly 200,000 Shoah survivors found haven in the Jewish State, created by a two-thirds vote of the UN in 1947. Soon 800,000 Jews fleeing persecution in Arab countries arrived. In ensuing decades, Israel absorbed a million immigrants from the Soviet Union and thousands of Ethiopian Jews. Today, far from being a vestige of European guilt or colonialism, Israel is a diverse, cosmopolitan society, fulfilling the age-old dream of a people's journey and 'Return to Zion' — their ancient homeland. Lie #2: Had Israel withdrawn to its June 1967 borders, peace would have come long ago. Since 1967, Israel has repeatedly conceded, "land for peace." Following Egyptian President Sadat's historic 1977 visit to Jerusalem and the Camp David Peace Accords, Israel withdrew from the vast Sinai Peninsula and has been at peace with Egypt ever since. In 1995, Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel but neither the Palestinians nor 21 other Arab states have done so. In 1993,Israel signed the Oslo Accords ceding administrative control of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority (formerly the PLO). The PA never fulfilled its promise to end propaganda attacks and drop the Palestinian National Charter's call for Israel's destruction. In 2000, Prime Minister Barak offered Yasser Arafat full sovereignty over 97% of the West Bank, a corridor to Gaza, and a capitol in the Arab section of Jerusalem. Arafat said NO. In 2008, PA President Abbas nixed virtually the same offer from Prime Minister Olmert. In 2005, Prime Minister Sharon unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Taken over by terrorist Hamas, they turned dismantled Jewish communities into launching sites for suicide bombers and 8,000+ rockets into Israel proper. In 2010, Prime Minister Netanyahu renewed offers of unconditional negotiations leading to a Palestinian State, but Palestinians refused, demanding more unilateral Israeli concessions, including a total freeze of all Israeli construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Lie #3: Israel is the main stumbling block to achieving a Two-State solution. The Palestinians themselves are the only stumbling block to achieving a Two-State solution. With whom should Israel negotiate? With President Abbas, who, for four years, has been barred by Hamas from visiting 1.5 million constituents in Gaza? With his Palestinian Authority, which continues to glorify terrorists and preaches hate in its educational system and the media? With Hamas, whose Iranian-backed leaders deny the Holocaust and use fanatical Jihadist rhetoric to call for Israel's destruction? Today, it is a simple fact that while the State of Israel is prepared to recognize all Arab States, secular or Muslim, these states adamantly refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish State and demand "the right of return" of five million so-called Palestinian "refugees" — a sure guarantee for Israel's demise. Lie #4: Nuclear Israel not Iran is the greatest threat to peace and stability. Though never acknowledged by Jerusalem, it is generally assumed that Israel has nuclear weapons. But unlike Pakistan, India, and North Korea, Israel never conducted nuclear tests. In 1973, when its very survival was imperiled by the surprise Egyptian-Syrian Yom Kippur attack, many assumed Israel would use nuclear weapons — but it did not. Contrary to public condemnations, many Arab leaders privately express relief that Israeli nuclear deterrence exists. While Israel has never threatened anyone, Tehran's mullahs daily threaten to "wipe Israel from the map." The U.S. and Europe can afford to wait to see what the Iranian regime does with its nuclear ambitions. But Israel cannot. She is on the front lines and remembers every day the price the Jewish people paid for not taking Hitler at his word. Israel is not prepared to sacrifice another six million Jews on the altar of the world's indifference. Lie #5: Israel is an Apartheid State deserving of International Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaigns. On both sides of the Atlantic, church groups, academics and unions are leading deceitful and often anti-Semitic boycott campaigns demonizing what they call the Jewish "apartheid" State. The truth is that unlike apartheid South Africa, Israel is a democratic state. Its 20% Arab minority enjoys all the political, economic and religious rights and freedoms of citizenship, including electing members of their choice to the Knesset (Parliament). Israeli Arabs and Palestinians have standing before Israel's Supreme Court. In contrast, no Jew may own property in Jordan, no Christian or Jew can visit Islam's holiest sites in Saudi Arabia. Lie #6: Plans to build 1,600 more homes in East Jerusalem prove Israel is 'Judaizing' the Holy City. Enemies of Israel, exploit this phony issue. Jerusalem is holy to three great faiths. Its diverse population includes a Jewish majority with Muslim and Christian minorities. Since 1967, for the first time in history, there is full freedom of religion for all faiths in Jerusalem. Muslim and Christian religious bodies administer their own holy sites. Indeed, the Waqf is allowed to control Jerusalem's Temple Mount, even though it rests on Solomon's temple and is holy to BOTH Jews and Muslims. Meanwhile, Jerusalem's municipality must meet the needs of a growing modern city. The unfortunately-timed announcement during U.S. Vice President Biden's visit of 1,600 new apartments in Ramat Shlomo, was not about Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, but for a long established, heavily populated Jewish neighborhood in Northern Jerusalem, where 250,000 Jews live (about the same population as Newark, NJ.) — an area that will never be relinquished by Israel. Lie #7: Israel policies endanger U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. The charge that Israel endangers U.S. troops in Iraq or the AF-Pak region is an update of the old "stab in the back" lie that Jews always betray their own friends, and the libel spouted by Henry Ford and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that "Jews are the father of all wars." U.S. General Petraeus has stated he considers Israel a great strategic asset for the U.S. and that his earlier remarks linking the safety of U.S. troops in the region to an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal (which 2/3 of Israelis want) were taken out of context. A resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would benefit everyone, including the U.S. But an imposed return to what Abba Eban called "1967 Auschwitz borders" would endanger Israel's survival and ultimately be disastrous for American interests and credibility in the world. Lie #8: Israeli policies are the cause of worldwide anti-Semitism. From the Inquisition to the pogroms, to the 6,000,000 Jews murdered by the Nazis, history proves that Jew-hatred existed on a global scale before the creation of the State of lsrael. In 2010, it would still exist even if Israel had never been created. For example, one poll indicates 40% of Europeans blame the recent global economic crisis on "Jews having too much economic power," a canard that has nothing to do with Israel. The unsettled Palestinian-Israeli dispute aggravates Muslim-Jewish tensions, but it is not the root cause. During World War II, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a notorious Jew-hater, helped the Nazis organize the 13th SS Division, made up of Muslims. Unfortunately, in addition to respectful references to Jewish patriarchs and prophets, the Koran also contains virulent anti-Semitic stereotypes that are widely invoked by Islamist extremists, including Hezbollah (whose agents blew up the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires in 1994), to justify murdering Jews worldwide. The disappearance of Israel would only further embolden violent Jew-haters everywhere. Lie #9: Israel, not Hamas, is responsible for the "humanitarian catastrophe" in Gaza. Goldstone was right when he charged that Israel was guilty of war crimes against civilians. The Goldstone Report on Israel's defensive war against Hamas-controlled Gaza, from which 8,000 rockets were fired after Israel's unilateral withdrawal in 2005, is a biased product of the UN's misnamed Human Rights Council. The UNHRC is obsessed with false anti-Israel resolutions. It refuses to address grievous human rights abuses in Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and beyond. Faced with similar attacks, every UN member-state including the U.S. and Canada would surely have acted more aggressively than the IDF did in Gaza. Yet, Richard Goldstone, a South African Jewish jurist, signed a document prepared by investigators whose main qualification was rabid anti-Israel bias. He accepted every anonymous libel against the IDF. But he insisted that hearings in Gaza be televised, guaranteeing that fearful Palestinians would never testify about Hamas' use of civilians as human shields and their hiding of weapons in mosques and hospitals. Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz denounced Goldstone's Report as a modern "blood libel" accusing Israeli soldiers of crimes they never committed. Lie #10: The only hope for peace is a single, bi-national state, eliminating the Jewish State of Israel. The One-State solution, promoted by academics, is a non-starter because it would eliminate the Jewish homeland. However, the current pressures on Israel are equally dangerous. In effect, the world is demanding that Israel, the size of New Jersey, shrink farther by accepting a Three-State solution: a PA state on the West Bank and a Hamas terrorist state controlling 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza. All this, as Hezbollah, Iran's proxy in Lebanon, stockpiles 50,000 rockets, threatening northern and central Israel's main population centers. In 2010, most Middle East experts believe that the only hope for enduring peace is two states with defined final borders. But too many diplomats, pundits, academics and church leaders ignore the fact that current polls show that while most Israelis favor a Two-State solution, most Palestinians continue to oppose it. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
WAKE UP AMERICA!
Posted by Rock Peters, May 13, 2010. |
|
"While America slept Rock Peters is an author, songwriter, poet and patriot. His multimedia website — www.godsaveusa.com — is dedicated to fighting Muslim terrorism. It is both factual and attractive. Contact him at rockpeters@aol.com |
|
US MUSLIM ENVOY: REPRESENTING WHO?
Posted by Hana Levi Julian, May 13, 2010. |
|
Controversial U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference Rashad Hussein is back in the spotlight over an interview published Monday in the English-language edition of the Arabic international daily Asharq Al-Awsat. Commentary magazine's political columnist Jennifer Rubin first raised the alarm over the interview, charging in an Internet post that in a "foreign, Arabic publication," Hussein "skewers, without justification or basis in fact, the Bush administration." However, within 24 hours, Rubin was posting an update to inform readers that "no doubt alarmed by the Rashad Hussein interview, the State Department has provided a transcript and an audio recording of the interview that departs in significant respects from the interview that was printed at the Asharq Al-Awsat website." The Arab version was indeed quite different than that which the U.S. Government later provided to Commentary, leading Rubin to "wonder whether there is utility in speaking to such publications if the words of our special envoy are simply converted to anti-American and pro-Palestinian talking points." It was not clear whether the State Department would ask for a retraction. Numerous political commentators pounced on the transcript posted on the Asharq Al-Awsat website, which called into question the issue of who the American Muslim envoy was really representing. A sampling from the site follows: Q: Do you think it will be easy to overcome the hostility in the Islamic world towards certain US policies, especially in light of the actions taken under the previous US administration? A: We are concerned about this but we are determined to move forward, without looking to the past and the negative effects of this, in order to erase the hostile feelings caused by the administration of former President George W. Bush. There is now a suitable opportunity to overcome the past, and open a new page in relations between the US and the people in the Islamic region. However, the State Department's transcript and audio recording of the interview revealed a different response entirely: "What we are really concerned about and moving forward on, is implementing new areas of cooperation. Just to give you an example, to be fair to the previous administration, the envoy to the OIC was something that President Bush announced towards the end of his administration, so we are looking to go forward and really build on that and to make sure that the cooperation between the envoy and Muslim communities around the world is based on a whole range of issues, and some of those I've discussed with you." Other examples between the inflammatory attitude displayed on the Arabic site, and the actual words spoken by the American Muslim envoy, can be seen below. On the Asharq site, the following was posted: Q: What is your strategy to heal the rift in relations between the people of the Islamic world and the United States of America? A: "U.S. President Barack Obama's speech from Cairo was clear in drawing up the policy that will be followed by the U.S. administration towards the Islamic world, and putting an end to the ongoing conflict over the issue of Palestine that has caused wide hostility among the Islamic people." Q: Do you think the Israeli settlement building in Jerusalem complicates your mission to improve US relations with the Islamic world? A: Of course, there are fears that any action or provocation will negatively affect feelings, and as a Muslim I know full well that the Al Aqsa Mosque was the first Qibla [direction in which Muslims pray] and is the third holiest site for Muslims and is revered by Muslims. President Obama is committed to calming the situation in the city of Jerusalem, and finding solutions that are both acceptable to the Palestinians and the Israelis. There is also a clear position by the president to reject any settlement building in east Jerusalem, and there is a statement to this effect from the US administration, which has many ways to settle the conflict in the region that has lasted for 60 years. However, it is not easy for this to be settled overnight so we must bridge the differences between the conflicting parties. Over the last few days we have heard good news to the effect that indirect negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis have begun, so I think we are making progress in this regard, and we must not take a step backwards. The State Department audio transcript subsequently released to clarify matters indicates a much milder comment on how America plans to repair the "rift in relations between the people of the Islamic world and the United States of America": "The main thing which is going to improve relations between the United States and Muslims around the world is first of all when we make it clear that we have created a framework of cooperation, and that our cooperation will not simply be based on one or two issues such as violent extremism, and that the United States makes it clear that we recognize that this is an issue where Muslims reject violent extremism and terrorism. That is the first step. "But another step will be to really show results in a number of areas and those include working towards resolving the political conflicts... The United States is working tirelessly on a solution with the parties involved on the Middle East issue, but we've also implemented programs in the area of education where we've increased exchanges, in the area of health we're working on polio eradication, we've cooperated before Hajj on H1N1.The President just held an entrepreneurship summit as you know, and we have many forums for interfaith dialogue. So we think that as we continue to develop these areas and Muslims and all people around the world see progress, then we'll have a good basis for restoring positive relations." Nevertheless, it is still clear, as Rubin points out, that Hussein takes an apologist stance in dealing with the Muslim world, and sidesteps the issue of whether there is a link between Islam and terrorism. Hussein also chooses to narrow his focus to the PA-Israel conflict, and avoids discussing the real threat to the region and the world posed by Iran's headlong rush towards the nuclear technology that will enable the Islamic Republic to achieve an atomic weapon of mass destruction. Hana Levi Julian writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
INDIVIDUAL AND NATIONAL RIGHTS IN THE TORAH
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, May 13, 2010. |
|
Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by their families, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of names, every male, by their polls; From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel: you shall number them by their hosts, you and Aaron. (From this week's Torah portion, Bamidbar, Numbers 1:2-3) The ultimate purpose of the journey of the Israelites in the desert was the establishment of a kingdom of priests — a nation that testifies to the existence of the Creator and expresses His will in His world. To this end, the entire book of Leviticus delineates how to conduct ourselves as a holy nation that will enter the Holy Land and establish G-d's royal palace in the holy city on the holy mountain and crown the Creator of the world as King. The Torah teaches us how to build G-d's royal palace, dictates its measurements and how to attend to it, how to build the Land and how to live in it. It tells us how the Nation of Israel should relate to its Land and how it should relate to itself. The entire treatise on proper conduct for a kingdom of priests and a holy nation ends with positive reinforcement for doing the job right — and alarming threats for failure to live up to the Torah directives. After this introduction, the Torah opens the Book of Numbers with a census. Why a census? We are about to establish a kingdom of priests — we have the perfection of the world weighing on our shoulders — why do we need to count the individuals? With such lofty goals on our sights, what difference does it make exactly how many people are in each tribe and each family? The 20th century era of revolutions catapulted the world between ideologies that erased the individual and those that erased the nation; between socialism and capitalism; fascism and democracy. The Torah, however, includes both contradicting worldviews. The Land of Israel belongs to the Nation of Israel as a nation. But it also belongs to each individual. The state should not erase the individual as it did in Gush Katif, and the individual should not erase the state — even if that individual happens to be the prime minister. 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)
|
|
ISRAEL CELEBRATES JERUSALEM DAY; REPELLING BEDOUIN JORDAN VALLEY INFILTRATION; TIMES SQUARE RALLY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 13, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL CELEBRATES JERUSALEM DAY At the annual Jerusalem Day celebration at the Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva in Kiryat Moshe, Jerusalem, PM Netanyahu stressed the Jewish people's unbroken connection to that city and its importance to them. The Yeshiva has been celebrating this Day since the Old City's liberation from Jordanian invaders, 43 years ago. After the speeches, the whole school sings and dances its way to the Old City, reaching it in the middle of the night. Jerusalem is important to them! The first minutes of the Old City's liberation were described by the Chief Rabbi of Haifa, Rav Sheer Yashuv Cohen, whose father was in the vanguard. It was the moment of a lifetime, astounding to those involved. Non-religious soldiers who first reached the Wall uttered the traditional Jewish prayer "Hear O Israel," alongside the religious soldiers, so moved were they. Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin laments that the joy at that recovery has worn off secular-minded people, as the outside world makes up a story that the Jewish people stole the Temple Mount, that the Jews' ancestors built. Some Zionist politicians who voted for laws protecting the integrity of Jerusalem, now seek loopholes. This worries him. Rivlin warned, "...it is clearer than ever that a people whose loyalty is fickle will find that its existence is limited, G-d forbid. Zionism without Zion, without Jerusalem, is an empty shell. Our ability to withstand attacks on Jerusalem depends a great deal on our resolve and patience, on our ability to bide our time until the sword that is drawn over the city is removed." In response to similar concern by the Yeshiva head, Netanyahu assured the overflow audience that he has not given up on a united Jerusalem and asserted he is internally strong enough to protect it. He said the battle over it is a battle for truth (Arutz-7, 5/12/10). Notes: The Hebrews conquered the Old City many hundreds of years before Arabs were near there, and absorbed the pre-existing pagan population. When the Old City walls were too confining, about 1850, Jews started building the New City. Islam originally acknowledged that the city belongs to the Jewish people, as I have reported. In the present, more acute state of jihad, the Arabs forget this. Zionism is named after Mt. Zion in Jerusalem. Those are some of the truths that PM Netanyahu was referring to, as needing to be brought forth. Here is something metaphysical that would puzzle most secularists. This is especially true of those who suppose the Arab-Israel conflict to be territorial rather than religious. The Jewish state cannot survive without Jerusalem, and the Jewish Diaspora cannot survive without a Jewish state. The metaphysical concept is that the whole has greater meaning, here, than the sum of its parts. Ordinary logic is too simplistic for this. In non-metaphysical terms, if the traditional sector of Jerusalem can be detached from the Jewish people in behalf of its enemies, what legal barrier is there to detaching all the rest of Israel from the Jewish people? The news brief does not indicate there were any challenges to Netanyahu over his freezing Jewish construction in the annexed part of Jerusalem. How would he reconcile that action
with his self-description as a defender of Jerusalem?
ISRAELIS REPEL BEDOUIN INFILTRATION IN JORDAN VALLEY Bedouin are sweeping over Israeli public land and land in Judea, squatting with impunity. Jews encountered the same land-grab in the Jordan Valley, but countered it. 
A dozen Jewish families live in Maskiyot, Jordan Valley. Bedouin from Schechm (Nablus) and Tubas try to infiltrate by setting up camp around Maskiyot. Appeals to the government go unheeded. This encourages the squatters. Recently, a Bedouin family went right up to Maskiyot's entrance junction, to camp. The government did nothing, as usual. To counteract the intruders, the Maskiyot people set up their own camp, right there. Haaretz reporter Amira Hass wrote that the Bedouin had been there for many years, but the family hand no of evidence of that. In Maskiyot they arrived just days ago. [Note: wandering does not confer land title.] Finally an Israeli policeman came. What did he say? He advised the Jews to break camp, saying they weren't doing any good. Refusing futile appeasement, the Jews stood fast. On the fourth day, the Arab governor of Tubas brought 200 people with PLO flags, clubs, rocks, and metal rods. When reporters arrived, the Arabs tried to dismantle the Jewish encampment. They punched one in the eye, and started chocking another. The attack ended only by the arrival of Israeli soldiers, who cocked their rifles (Arutz-7, 5/12/10). No arrests mentioned. This is typical. Whereas anti-Zionists claim that the government of Israel is anti-Arab, truth is, the Arabs are anti-Jewish and the government largely condones their violence and illegality.
ETHIOPIAN JEWS CELEBRATE JERUSALEM DAY AND THEIR SACRIFICES GETTING THERE 
In their period of exile, Ethiopian Jews dreamed of being restored to Jerusalem. When the modern State of Israel was established, the Ethiopian Jews ached for Jerusalem, their spiritual Mecca. When Israel was ready for them, the call went out. Ethiopian Jewry went on the march. Weeks and weeks, they trod. No trains. Just "mare's flank." No buses, just robbers. Food ran out. 4,000 died or were killed. Finally, the survivors reached the awaiting airplanes, which it took a lot of Israeli diplomacy to place there. And so the Ethiopian community in Israel celebrates a combination of the liberation of Jerusalem with their liberating restoration to it. They are a spiritual community (Arutz-7, 5/12/10). Their salvation seemed miraculous, just like the rescue of the Yemenite Jews, the harboring of the Holocaust survivors, and the survival of the Jewish state against heavily armed attackers.
OBAMA SHOULD CONDEMN P.A. FOR CREATING MISTRUST The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) urges President Obama to condemn and penalize the P.A. for creating distrust by its recent campaign to block Israeli admission to the OECD. ZOA President Klein depicts those efforts as "the surreal quality of the so-called peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. In any normal peace process, there are good-faith negotiations, fulfillment of agreements, reconciliation and normalization of relations." The P.A. however does not fulfill signed obligations to end terrorism and its cultivation by indoctrination in bigotry. Neither does the P.A. accept Jewish statehood and normalize relations. [The P.A. first refused to negotiate, then set pre-conditions to negotiate.] Does the PA really want peace with statehood? If it did, it would "be working closely with Israel for mutual advantage..." Instead, it "openly and actively works to harm Israel abroad. Far from working for peace and harmony with Israel, Abbas' PA works for Israel's international isolation and ostracism." "This is a negation of peace" (5/12/10 press release of ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member).
CAN MIDEAST NEGOTIATORS TRUST OBAMA? President Obama blames his predecessor for all the policy messes confronting him. Of all U.S. politicians, got the most donations from British Petroleum, responsible for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Obama's Secretary of the Interior authorized British petroleum to drill without passing certain safety certification. Obama also received the second-largest donation from Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac, the most responsible for the financial crisis [along with the Federal Reserve cheap money policy, the pre-Bush demand that mortgages be granted to people who could not afford them, lying credit raters, and lax, perhaps under-funded, S.E.C. oversight]. The Obama administration did not demand that those agencies return bonuses. He did raise their debt limits. [Senator Obama was influential in the vote against a bill to curb the excessive mortgage issuance by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.] By make one-sided demands of Israel, Obama in almost no time got the Arabs back to refusing to talk directly with Israel and to making extreme demands. He thus made negotiations less likely to succeed. Then there are his other foreign policy gaffes, leaving a sour taste in many countries (Michael Widlanski, IMRA, 5/11/10). Why mention those domestic problems? They provide context. Obama asks foreign countries to trust him. His behavior on domestic issues indicates he is blindly corrupt and blames others for problems to which he is a major contributor. (For a poll on Obama before the public heard of those domestic
scandals,
click here.)
TIMES SQUARE RALLY AGAINST BOMBING: PART 1. 'AMERICA IS WORLD'S LAST HOPE'
The Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam(HRCARI) held a rally in Times Square on Tuesday, May 11, against the jihadist bombing there. At the center were speakers and posters. At the periphery were activists who distributed leaflets and explained the issues to passers-by.
According to its leaflet, the Coalition is a grassroots movement that welcome all people of tolerance, discriminates against none, and educates and mobilizes for tolerance, democracy, and freedom against Radical Islam. Besides committing terrorism, the subject of the speakers, Radical Islam: (1) Initiates hate crimes and "fatwas" against Muslims who dispute it and non-Muslims independent of it; (2) "Murders homosexuals and apostates;" and (3) "Abuses, mutilates and murders women and children through beatings, stoning, and 'honor killing.'" www.hrcari.org
Andrew Upton, A founding member of HRCARI and who organizes rallies against jihad, accused the government and media of withholding [or muting] for years what they know about the menace of international jihad. They know that jihadists attacked Mecca's main mosque several years ago. 2,000 people were killed. The Saudi regime made a deal with the jihadists — we'll help you spread your ideology and jihad elsewhere, but leave us alone.
Saudi money may very well keep the media quiet. Saudi money went to lobbyists, the Carter center, and U.S. university Middle East Centers. They are buying us off.
Our task is to "wake up the media and politicians," Mr. Upton declared. "America is the last hope for humanity" against the "fascistic jihadists."
He said, "There are 50 places throughout the world where Israel is causing death and destruction." Therefore, the notion that jihad is incited by Israel and the U.S. makes no sense.
Acknowledging that "Most Muslims are moderate," he explained that their "leadership is radical in Europe and the U.S., in the U.S. military, in the prisons." We cannot work with them. America's leaders do not understand that or do not want to.
"Jihad is Nazism covered by a veil."
TIMES SQ. RALLY AGAINST BOMBING: PART 2. PAKISTAN THE FONT OF TERRORISM
Narain Kataria, Board Member of Hindu Rights Watch¸ said about the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam, "The aim of our group is to create an awareness in our country about the scourge of terrorism."
We "waste money when we think we can appease them," Kataria said. "They want to destroy us economically and in every way."
"Saudi Arabia has funneled more than 100 billion dollars in the last three decades to Wahabi Muslims, who extol the virtue of violence and hatred.
About Pakistan's central role in international jihad, Kataria said that country has 11,000 madrassas. Every year, from among their millions students, about 10,000 become hard core ideological warriors.
Pakistan trains terrorists who attack all over, including the Times Square bomber and others that tried to attack the U.S.. Kataria is "thankful to the FBI and others who caught the Times Square bomber in just 53 hours."
"Pakistan is the most untrustworthy ally in the war on terror. Pakistan is fooling us. They use sophistry and subterfuge to hoodwink us. Pakistan is using the doctrine of taquiya which authorizes radical Muslims to lie and cheat in the furtherance of Islam."
"The terrorist attacks whether they take place in Mumbai or Madrid, Bali or Bangalore, Manila or Morocco, Thailand or Philippine, Algeria or Nigeria, New York or Beslan — all [or most] of them happen to be the handiwork of Radical Islamic terrorists produced in Pakistan."
Since 9/11/2001, Islamist terrorists "have carried out 15101 deadly terrorist attacks and killed more than 75,000 people."
Charles Jacobs, of Americans for Peace and Tolerance, known for redeeming slaves of the Sudanese Arabs, told people streaming by at the evening rush hour, "Political correctness keeps government from realizing what is happening" and what to do.
Mr. Jacobs mocked Mayor Bloomberg for his confusion and disingenuousness about the Times Square bomber's motive, rushed into an opinion before the suspect had confessed. Bloomberg said, "Maybe he was a tea party guy." President Obama tells officials they may not say "jihad,' lest it make Muslims angry. "They already are angry," and not because of remarks and countermeasures we take in reaction to jihad. [First comes jihad, then come countermeasures. Governments are reluctant to admit we are under siege.] Bloomberg and Obama act stupid.
Arish K. Sahani, Treasurer and a founder of the Indian American Intellectuals Forum, said about Islamist terrorists, "They are using the money we spend on oil against us."
Mr. Sahani asked, "Look at Iran. Do you want us to become like Iran? Look at Iraq. Do you want us to become like Iraq? No? Then we have to stop" drifting on this life-and-death issue.
Charles Jacobs, of Americans for Peace and Tolerance, known for redeeming slaves of the Sudanese Arabs, told people streaming by at the evening rush hour, "Political correctness keeps government from realizing what is happening" and what to do.
Mr. Jacobs mocked Mayor Bloomberg for his confusion and disingenuousness about the Times Square bomber's motive, rushed into an opinion before the suspect had confessed. Bloomberg said, "Maybe he was a tea party guy." President Obama tells officials they may not say "jihad,' lest it make Muslims angry. "They already are angry," and not because of remarks and countermeasures we take in reaction to jihad. [First comes jihad, then come countermeasures. Governments are reluctant to admit we are under siege.] Bloomberg and Obama act stupid.
Arish K. Sahani, Treasurer and a founder of the Indian American Intellectuals Forum, said about Islamist terrorists, "They are using the money we spend on oil against us."
Mr. Sahani asked, "Look at Iran. Do you want us to become like Iran? Look at Iraq. Do you want us to become like Iraq? No? Then we have to stop" drifting on this life-and-death issue.
TIMES SQUARE RALLY: PART 4. ISLAMIC EXPANSIONISM OLD, WIDESPREAD, CLEVER
Dr. Duncan, a history teacher, debunked the notion that Islamic
expansionism is recent and just a reaction to grievances against the
West. "It's been going on for 1,400 years!," he said. Within its first
hundred years, he said, Islam had seized an "empire larger than
Rome's." This empire included the Mideast, N. Africa, India, part of
Europe, and then some. Islam is not a passive religion.
The Muslim Turks had seized Spain in Western Europe and much of Eastern Europe. If not for two battles, the Europe we know would have disappeared.
Islam succeeds, Dr. Duncan explained, by a combination of expansion and oppression. Expansion is the result of jihad. Oppression is the result of imposing Sharia, or Islamic law on people.
For a period, rising Western strength forced Islam back in on itself, lulling us off guard. But Radical Islam has returned to its roots. Western loss of self-confidence correspondingly encourages Islam to resume expansion. "This is part of its 1,400-year global jihad. Obviously, "This is not because of Israel."
"Saudi Arabia protects its own culture." "We need to defend our culture." In this, "We are combatants." "We must protect our culture." "This is not a matter of race but of culture." "What is this multi-cultural nonsense that all cultures are equally valuable, when we have our own" that cherishes liberty?
We have to declare, this is the free world. "We must not admit people from Pakistan, for example." "Otherwise, we lose our freedom."
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE OBSCENE STATE OF THE WORLD
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 13, 2010. |
|
Before I talk about the obscenities, I would like to share news that might put a smile on your face: Israeli marine scientists were astonished to discover the presence of a gray whole — a mature male some 39 feet long and weighing roughly 20 tons — in the Mediterranean off the coast of Herzliya. There have not been gray whales in this part of the world since the 18th century — at which time pods here became extinct. Remaining gray whales live in the Pacific Ocean. Speculation is that this whale left the Pacific and entered the Atlantic via the Northwest passage, where reduction of ice made movement possible. The confused whale, instead of turning left into the California Gulf moved left at Gibralter and into the Mediterranean. Scientists say it seems happy, and will be able to find food here as its eating preferences are flexible. There is speculation as to whether other whales might follow. ~~~~~~~~~~ Having alluded to California, I will segue right into the next subject, which also involves that state; the issue at hand is highly obscene and left me speechless last night. Author David Horowitz — who is founder of the Freedom Center and publishes Front Page Magazine — routinely gives speeches on US campuses as part of his effort to expose the extreme left-wing and radical Islamic strains found there today. The URL below provides a short video clip in which David, having finished giving a talk at the University of California at San Diego, was taking questions from the student audience. To my mind, even worse than what the Muslim student's opinions are, is the fact that she was not afraid to express them — within the climate established on that campus she felt free to publicly espouse destruction of the Jews. The climate? Of course it is not all students are filled with hate. But according to what this student says, the Muslim Student Association holds a Hitler Youth Week.
I mourn for America. ~~~~~~~~~~ But there is hope. Every time I see decent Americans fighting back, I know there is hope. On June 6, 2010, at 12:00 noon, there will be a rally in NYC at Ground Zero — organized by Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) — protesting the plans to build a mosque at that site. Pam Geller of the AtlasShrugs blog is director of SIOA and hosting this event. SIOA works to defend human rights, religious liberty, and the freedom of speech against Islamic supremacist intimidation. What I have learned is that the unanimous approval extended by the Community Board for New York City's financial district — which I wrote about last — was not just for a "simple" mosque of a couple of stories in height, but for the construction of a 13-story mosque and Islamic cultural center right across from Ground Zero, which they have dubbed Cordoba House. This is a projected concept of the exterior. Imagine the outrage of this looming over Ground Zero.! ~~~~~~~~~~ Rally speakers will include Nonie Darwash, former Muslim from Egypt, who is courageous in speaking out, and Simon Deng, Christian Sudanese ex-slave, equally courageous in campaigning against Sudanese Muslims who destroy human rights. I am sure you will hear from Geller, and from Robert Spencer, the knowledgeable director of JihadWatch.org, who is associate director of SIOA and co-host of the event, as well as others. According to the release about this rally, "...the planned mosque has clandestine funding sources. Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf is a radical Islamic wolf in sheep's clothing, a seductive practitioner of taqiyya (dissimulation for the purpose of furthering the interest of the Faith) who blames America for the terrorist attacks on 911. Shortly after 9/11 he said in a CNN interview: 'US policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.' Elsewhere he said: 'The US and the West must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.'" There is every reason to believe that the radical Islamist hatred that fomented 9/11 would be espoused and disseminated within that mosque, were it to be built. Not only is this something to be fiercely fought on its own grounds, in this case there is the further issue of the insult to the memory of those killed in the Twin Towers, and the grief this would bring to those who mourn them. ~~~~~~~~~~ Edmund Burke first said it, I believe: "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing." As strongly as I ever urged participation at a rally, I urge your participation. Numbers help to send the necessary message. Stand up and be counted, here and at every other possible opportunity. A reader of mine, responding to my pessimism about America, wrote some months ago, "Don't despair, the posse is coming!" I was deeply saddened to learn last week that he died after a long fight against a chronic illness. His words stay with me: "The posse is coming." America can be saved. If good Americans care enough. ~~~~~~~~~~ A number of groups — ACT for America, ZStreet, etc. — are supporting this rally. If you can get your organization to sign on, that would also be wonderful. You can contact Pam Geller and Robert Spencer by e-mail via this
page:
The URL for the SIOA website is:
~~~~~~~~~~ Today, my friends, I concede a point on which I have held out. Many of you have written, challenging me to deal with Obama's motivation. Until now I have declined, saying it's complex, and all that I can monitor are his words and acts, and the effects they have. But now... The news has broken that the Obama administration is cutting the funding for Homeland Security in New York City. Yup, in the city where the Twin Towers came down, and where there have been at least 11 terror attempts since, most recently two weeks ago in Times Square. A 27% cut is projected for mass transit security and 25% for port security. Additionally, Obama wants to eliminate a $30 million program called "Securing our Cities," that would create a ring of radiation detectors around the city to monitor for nuclear and dirty bombs. He has even redeployed the Coast Guard's Maritime and Security Team from New York to Boston Harbor. "For the administration to announce these cuts two weeks after the attempted Times Square bombing shows they just don't get it and are not doing right by New York City on anti-terrorism funding," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said. Rep. Pete King (R-LI), the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, said the cuts were "dangerous and unconscionable." "The threat against New York City, the top target of al-Qaeda, is increasing, not decreasing." (Once again, for this tip, I thank Reisa S.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Still the rumors persist — concerning what Netanyahu has promised Obama with regard to no building in Jerusalem over the Green Line. Can't say for sure that none of these rumors are true, but neither can I stand behind them as if they are fact. I can only report on the unease, the suspicion, that is in the air. What I have determined as fact is that construction of housing is going on in Har Homa, that once-controversial Jewish neighborhood in the south-east of Jerusalem way past the Green Line. I qualify by noting that it is likely that the permits and bureaucratic paperwork that provided the go-ahead for this construction were all in place before the recent controversy. None-the-less, it has not been halted, as construction that had prior approval was halted in Judea and Samaria once that freeze went into effect. And so, we now wait to see if anything new will be approved. ~~~~~~~~~~ MK Aryeh Eldad (Ihud Leumi — National Union) wrote a piece in yesterday's JPost that touches on this issue. Eldad is a medical doctor by training and experience. He says that he recognizes post-traumatic syndrome when he sees it, and that after his first meeting with Obama, Netanyahu exhibited symptoms of that syndrome; he was in a state of shock. On his own, argues Eldad, Netanyahu would succumb to the pressure coming from Washington. But, thankfully, he is also confronting pressure from the opposite side: "...there is pressure, and it will grow stronger...A few months ago, a 'Lobby for the Land of Israel' was established in the Knesset. It is led by a Likud Knesset member, in fact the chairman of the governing coalition, Zev Elkin, and by me...with the opposition in the Knesset. Forty-one members of Knesset, government ministers and deputy ministers joined this lobby whose goals are to stem the leftward tide, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, to prevent the dilution of Jewish settlements and to strengthen such settlement. Within this lobby are represented the National Union, Jewish Home, Shas, Israel Beitenu, Likud and even Kadima parties." Says Eldad: "Obama's error is that of a proud novice in foreign policy: he has stretched out his hand towards Jerusalem. Three cheers for Aryeh Eldad and the Lobby. This, too, is standing up: in this case, against the evil that Obama intends for us in Jerusalem. ~~~~~~~~~~ Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch (Yisrael Beitenu) announced yesterday that illegal Arab houses in eastern Jerusalem that the court has ordered be taken down would soon be razed. There had been a delay in this action because of "diplomatic concerns." ~~~~~~~~~~ To clarify the picture a bit — or perhaps, better, to give you a more realistic sense of how convoluted and highly politicized it all is — I would like to provide a description of one such case: The buildings in question in this case were constructed by one Ahmed Sheikh on land he owns in Silwan. Back in 2000, the Jerusalem Planning and Building Committee gave him permission to build one two-story structure on that land. In 2001, authorities realized that he had constructed one building of two-stories and had already laid the foundation for a second building. They issued a stop-work and demolition order. A hearing was scheduled and the municipality agreed to postpone execution of the order until after the hearing. In return, they secured a promise from Sheikh that he wouldn't continue building. At some point, in the course of various legal delays, authorities discovered that Sheikh hadn't honored his promise to not continue building. This matter was bounced around from one court to the other, with Sheikh seeking postponements and cancellation of the orders. In the course of all of this, the two buildings were completed, and occupied. Ultimately, the court ordered that the demolition proceed. Deadline was set for May 2009 — a year ago. Sheikh appealed again and the court turned him down. But, a year later, this court-order demolition has not been effected. That's because the owner — and undoubtedly the residents — are Arab. It causes an international furor when we demolish illegal Arab housing; headlines lament the suffering of the expelled occupants. Many authorities here thus prefer to simply look the other way. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, not far from the houses built by Sheikh is a seven-story residence called Beit Yehonatan, built for Jews. It too, was lacking certain permits because it was supposed to have fewer stories. The court ordered that it should be sealed up and the occupants evacuated, but this was not done. Certain legal authorities (the municipal attorney, for example) were most perturbed by this and demanded that the mayor take action. Sure, said Nir Barkat, I'll do it — but then I'll take down the illegal Arab houses that are sitting in the area as well. That, these same authorities were not so eager to see happen. Barkat proceeded with his plans, but was stopped by Netanyahu because it was "too sensitive" an issue following the Ramat Shlomo "crisis." Now, Aharonovitch says illegal Arab housing will be razed. I will celebrate if this happens, because it would mean we have an administration that is not running scared of what the world says (see more on this below). ~~~~~~~~~~ I fully expect that, if we really do raze those illegal Arab houses, we'll hear from Obama about how we are being obstructionist with regard to "peace." The fact that there is less than no regard for our due process of law within our democracy is as infuriating as anything else. Also infuriating, however: Twice this past week, the message delivered on PA TV was that this land belongs only to the Arabs — this has been reported by Palestinian Media Watch. On one occasion the narrator said we should go back to Europe and Ethiopia, "your original homeland." On another occasion the camera zeroed in on a map from which "Israel" had been erased. But for all of Obama's talk about holding both parties responsible for obstructions to peace, and in spite of the talk about Abbas trying to prevent incitement (which we knew was a crock), I notice Obama has not seen fit to hold Abbas accountable. ~~~~~~~~~~ And then, lastly, Heaven help us, we have Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who called upon people to "act responsibly and avoid harsh or provocative statements on Jerusalem." He was concerned, you see, about "an attack by senior ministers in the Israeli government against US attempts to restart the peace process." An attack by ministers against US attempts for peace? Well, he was referring, for example, to Interior Minister Eli Yishai (Shas), who said there will never be a freeze in Jerusalem: "We will build everywhere in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of our homeland, and this is my clarification to our allies and friends the Americans." But Barak was worried: "These words hurt Israel's interests with the US and the entire world. They can present Israel as a peace objector and thus cause its global status to deteriorate." Saying Jerusalem is ours means we object to peace? Expecting us to put US demands before our legitimate rights? These remarks are not only disgusting and the sign of a self-hating man, they are also dangerous for Israel.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
HIGH-BROW AND LOW-BROW: SCHOLARLY REFUTATION OF LAWFARE ATTACKS AND CUTE CARTOON
Posted by US4Israel, May 12, 2010. |
|
1. Danger: Lawfare against Israel: Many senior Israeli public figures have identified lawfare against Israel as a strategic threat against Israel and the world Jewish community. The chief lawfare argument is that Israel's settlements in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) — crucial for cushioning Israel's large population centers — are illegal. Sadly, even the President of the United States has lately participated
However often the allegation is repeated for various political reasons, the "Israeli settlements are illegal" charge is nonsense. Please therefore assist Israel by forwarding the following full
scholarly response
Credentials for the author of the scholarly response, Julius Stone: According to Harvard Law School's Professor David Kennedy, Stone "was a lion of international jurisprudence, his influence as a theorist and innovator felt by generations of students and scholars." For more: http://www.law.usyd.edu.au/jurisprudence/juliusstone.shtml Help Israel — defend Israel against lawfare.
2. A well-produced cartoon on Israel and its Jewish history: Short History of Judaism. Pass it on! Thanks for helping Israel.
Contact US4Israel at us4israel@gmail.com |
|
TALIBAN AND TIME SQUARE BOMBING ATTEMPT; HOW ISRAEL GOT INTO OECD; US AIRPORT VS ISRAELI CHECKPOINT DELAYS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 12, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL ARRESTS TURKISH ISLAMIST WHO ALSO IS BLOCKADE RUNNER 
Israel arrested a Izzet Sahin, Turkish student of Hebrew University for aiding, in behalf of a pro-Hamas organization, IHH, several banned terrorist organizations in Judea-Samaria. Mr.Sahin founded IHH, which, coincidentally, according to the secret service, and not by coincidence according to Turkish protesters, organized a flotilla sailing from Turkey and Greece to break Israel's partial blockade of Gaza. Some Turks call this an insult to Turkey. The Oslo Accords, which the Palestinian Authority endorsed, leave control of Gaza coastal waters to Israel. The flotilla violates the Accords. Part of the flotilla has begun sailing. The ships carry humanitarian goods, although Israel lets humanitarian goods into Gaza every day. They also are carrying construction materials of the same type that Hamas used to build war bunkers and that Israel restricts entry of (Arutz-7, 5/11/10). The caption that came with the A.P. photo interprets the arrest as part of an Israeli crackdown on foreign activists (who pass into or through Israel in order to help the Arabs against Israel). Whether the secret service believes it is acting against both problems with Sahin, we do not know. Since Israel is within its rights to prevent war materiel from entering into Gaza, over whose portals is has administrative and security authority, its motives hardly matter. Israel is not insulting Turkey because it arrested for cause an individual who holds Turkish citizenship. To perceive an insult in that arrest assumes that all one's citizens are perfect. It also is hysteria. There seems to be much hysteria in that part of the world, and an increasingly similar hysteria in the U.S., here called political correctness. A certain amount of cynical manipulation is involved these days in everybody pretending to be insulted over every little thing. Who is more insulting than President Obama, who invites Supreme Court Justices to an affair at which he publicly reproves them, who calls for bi-partisanship while calling the leaders of the other Party liars, who returns to the British a bust of Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who denounces Honduran democrats saving their country from a growing dictatorship, and who reduces Zionism to a reaction to the Nazism it preceded? The answer is that Islamists are more insulting. They do not recognize the civil liberties of most of the world, because they do not consider most people of equal worth to themselves. In the Mideast, their talk is constant insult and accusation. Exacerbating their reactions is the Arab shame-honor syndrome, described by author David-Pryce Jones. This syndrome squelches humility in a refusal to admit error. If the Israeli indictment is accurate, and so far there is no reason to doubt it, then the same man who promotes terrorism professes humanitarianism. My articles have shown that many groups that express concern over Arabs in conflict with Israel express no concern over Arabs in conflict with each other. Then they are not really humanitarian. Their self-described humanitarianism, like the civil libertarianism of NGOs who favor those most illiberal of people, radical Muslims bent on conquest, is a ruse. Since democracy, humanitarianism and civil liberties are popular in the West, dictatorial types act in their name. One gets more U.S. and EU subsidy that way. One can maneuver within democracies that way, without being ousted as enemies. The ruse works, most Westerners being deceived.
TIMES SQUARE BOMBING: U.S. NOW BLAMES TALIBAN At first, U.S. investigators thought that the Pakistani Taliban played only a peripheral role in the Times Square bombing. Now they conclude that the Taliban were major sponsors of it. The confessed bomber continues to "cooperate." Attorney-General Eric Holder said that means that Miranda warnings against having to talk do not hinder interrogations. He also said the Administration wants a law making an exception to the Miranda rule for cases of public safety (Wall St. J., 5/10/10, A1). If Miranda warnings do not hinder investigations, why seek an exception to Miranda? Not logical. Neither is it logical to say that the one example shows that Miranda does not hinder investigations. The one example shows that Miranda does not always hinder investigations. But sometimes it does. Hence an exception is needed or such cases should be treated under military justice, because it is part of war, global jihad.
IRAN CALLS GROUP IN U.S. TERRORIST Iran accuses the Los Angeles branch of the little known Tondar organization, which works to overthrow the government of Iran, terrorist. Iran claims that in Los Angeles, Tondar agents raised funds for, and directed terrorist attacks, in Iran. Iran claims that one bombing killed 14 people in a mosque. Tondar said it killed 24 people in a military installation. Two men in Los Angeles run broadcasts for Tondar deny the accusation. The U.S. does not classify the organization as terrorist and does not think the broadcasters organize anything in Iran. But the pair acknowledges that the organization in Iran has fighters and that their Facebook authorizes "all means." An Iranian man in Los Angeles was convicted of plotting to assassinate one of the broadcasters, Djamshid Sharmahd. Their office was broken into twice. The pair believe they still are targets. The convict's lawyer claims it was liquor talking through his client's voice. Former U.S. UN ambassador John Bolton remarked that the U.S. should oppose all terrorist organizations, because they attack innocent civilians, but not all "groups that seek to overthrow authoritarian governments are terrorists" (Tamara Audi, Wall St. J., 5/10/10, A3). In this report, the unknowns outweigh the known. Here are some considerations. UN members are not supposed to make war on other UN members. Tell that to Iran, which arms proxy militias to fight Israel! And they use terrorism to do so. But what is war? Seldom is it declared, these days. That leaves a legal limbo. Who are terrorists? Just those who arrange and perpetrate terrorist attacks? What about their recruiters, fundraisers, and members at large? The whole organization contributes to the terrorist cause. The U.S. has an inconsistent record on identifying groups as terrorist or opposing them. For years, it protected a Kurdish terrorist group in Iraq that attacked Turkey. The U.S. also directly subsidizes Fatah and PLO, which has murdered Americans, among others. Fatah uses foreign funds, in turn, to subsidize the Gaza government. The U.S. also arms the Lebanese Army, although it is allied to Hizbullah and subject to a regime that Hizbullah is part of.
HOW ISRAEL GOT INTO OECD After 15 years of economic reform, Israel has been accepted into the OECD. PM Netanyahu is pleased that none of the 31 prior members blackballed Israel. He finds this like a seal of approval for the Israeli economy, it sets economic standards, and it encourages more investment in members. Israel still is reforming. Two reforms in process, Netanyahu started as Finance Minister. One is reducing governmental expenses, as by switching from allowances to employment. The other is to reduce taxes. Israel's corporate income tax went from 36% in 2001, to 24% now, and is on its way to 18% in 2016. Reducing taxes, Netanyahu says, encourages investors to anticipate making money and makes an economy more competitive. So the reductions have proved, for Israel. They did not lower tax collections, as feared. Earlier steps stopped blocking the economy. One ended currency import and export restrictions that hampered trade. Another allowed in competitive imports. Prices fell. Therefore, the standard of living rose. A major reform, also still going on, was privatizing much of the economy: El Al, some banks, refineries, ports, and telephone type communications. He privatized the refineries in ways that encourage competition among them. Competition lowers prices. He made credit more widely available, in order to enable more investment and economic growth. New steps are expanding the transportation and education infrastructure and eliminating red tape that keeps land off the housing market and delays construction. A new goal is to decentralize the private economy, which stifles competition by cross-ownership [by a small number of families]. Business corporations own financial institutions, not healthy for the economy as a whole. Not to sour the celebration, Dr. Aaron Lerner noted Netanyahu's omission of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) lobbying to keep Israel out of OECD. He thinks that Israel is fighting the hostile P.A.-Obama combination with one hand behind its back. Israel limits itself to complaints about P.A. incitement to violence against Israelis. Israel ignores the array of P.A. economic and diplomatic warfare tactics against Israel. Dr. Lerner perceives Obama as setting Israel up to blame for lack of successful negotiations and for U.S. failure to halt Iran's nuclear arms development. Obama can be headed off, if Israel shows that the P.A. constantly takes many steps to promote distrust and prevent peace (IMRA, 5/11/10). Netanyahu's solutions could be applied in large measure to the U.S..
FINANCIAL TIMES MISREPRESENTS JERUSALEM AS OCCUPIED For years, Time Magazine, Guardian, Independent and other journals have criticized Israel for setting up checkpoints. They complain about lengthy delays for Arabs and humiliation. Hours long! Some of them assert that the delay is made deliberate. They show no understanding of the murders of innocent people that otherwise would occur. An A.P. reporter, Ben Hubble, tested those delays. He spent a week observing the Kalandia checkpoint between Jerusalem and Judea-Samaria. Mr. Hubble found that the duration of the process varied, depending on whether it was rush hour and whether Arabs were fighting or menacing. Rush hour waits varied from 22 to 25 minutes. When Arabs in line had a fight, the wait lasted 33 minutes. When a terrorist was apprehended with pistol and four knives, the wait was 54 minutes. CAMERA checked fairly recent logs of three terminals at JFK airport in New York City. The waits averaged 35-45 minutes. At Albuquerque, NM, the process took 40-50 minutes. The delays for Arabs averaged no greater than delays that terrorists impose on Americans. U.S. terminals may be more comfortable (Alex Safian, 5/10/10) I went through a checkpoint near Jerusalem that took just a couple of minutes. The New York airports took me about 15 minutes. At London on the code Orange day that terrorists had plotted to destroy airliners en route to the U.S., it took about three hours. I wish stone floors had some padding in winter when we stand without shoes on.
Israel has made some of its checkpoints sheltered.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
JERUSALEM DAY IS DAY OF REMEMBRANCE FOR ETHIOPIAN JEWS
Posted by Hana Levi Julian, May 12, 2010. |
Yom Yerushalayim – Jerusalem Unification Day – is the day Ethiopian immigrants memorialize the thousands who died or were killed on the their trek through the Sudan to reach the planes that would bring them to Israel in Operation Moses, the first aliyah from Ethiopia. “Decades ago, [they] left their homes in the dead of night. They went to the Land of Israel. They went to Jerusalem. They organized secretly, in small groups, left all their belongings behind, and began their own exodus to Jerusalem,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu noted Wednesday in special greetings on the holiday. For Ethiopian Jewry, Jerusalem, rather than the entire State of Israel, was all they dreamed of throughout their years in exile. But for this particular population, isolated as it was from the rest of the world, Israel's capital was more of a spiritual dream city rather than a real city. “They marched for long weeks, sometimes longer, with babies on their backs, children holding their grandparents' hands. They went north, toward the horizon, in the direction of the Land of Israel. “They suffered from hunger. They were robbed and attacked,” Netanyahu added. “The story of the Ethiopian community's desire to return to Jerusalem is the essence of our people's dreams and prayers.” Some 4,000 Ethiopian Jews died trying to reach the “Promised Land,” according to Avraham Edga, who in 2000 wrote (in Hebrew) a book called “The Journey to the Dream.” Edga himself was one of those who trudged through the desert sands to reach the mechanical silver birds that would wing them away to the city they always dreamed of. Renowned author Eli Wiesel praised the book and its author in a statement proudly displayed on the tome's back cover: “You are a living example of a Jew who returns to his homeland and draws from it deep and powerful spiritual strength.” Setting Jerusalem Day as the day of remembrance for those who died trying to reach Israel, said Netanyahu, made sense. “This is the day our capital was liberated from the yoke of foreign occupation, the day on which we were united with the eternal city of the Jewish People. "No day is more fitting for us to remember the members of the community who perished en route to Jerusalem, those who so much believed in the dream – to the point that they were ready to die for it.”
Hana Levi Julian writes for Arutz-7 (IsraelNationalNews.com), where this article appeared today.
|
|
PROTESTS FOR SHALIT'S RELEASE DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 12, 2010. |
|
There are times when it becomes truly difficult to explain the obtuseness of Israelis. And, for a change, I do not mean leftist Israelis, who by and large are simply beyond cure. One of worst illustrations of non-thinking on the part of non-leftist Israelis is the loud public campaign of street protests in Israel demanding that more be done to obtain the release of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. First, let me emphasize that I am as sympathetic to Shalit and his family as anyone else in Israel. I cannot imagine their pain and suffering. If a member of my own family were in Shalit's shoes, I probably would behave like members of his family. So I have no complaints about how family members are dealing with this. Second, I was opposed to Israel's agreeing to any cease-fire with the Gaza barbarians unless Shalit was released. In the summer of 2006, when Haifa was under bombardment by rockets from Lebanon — one of which landed three blocks from my home — I posted a public call to the government of Israel. I demanded that it not sign any cease-fire agreement out of concern for us civilians in Haifa under bombardment, and that they continue the war until Israel's strategic goals were achieved. We Haifa civilians would manage just fine, thank you very much. I similarly demanded that no cease-fire with Hamas be signed ending Operation Cast Lead until Shalit was home. So just what is wrong with Israelis holding street protests demanding the release of Gilad Shalit? The first problem is that these protests issue demands to and put pressure on the Israeli government rather than on Hamas. Hamas is indifferent to the desires and passions of the demonstrators. By demanding that "everything" be done to obtain Shalit's release, the only real effect of the protests is to raise the price it will take to obtain Shalit's freedom. The protests also make such a release more remote and unlikely. Give the Hamas terrorist leaders some credit. They can see the passionate demonstrations for Shalit, the demands that "more" must be done to obtain his release, the bumpers stickers on his behalf, the billboards, the web pages. The terrorists understand perfectly well that all this only serves to increase the pressure on the Israeli government to offer ever-greater capitulations. Israel has already offered to release more than a thousand terrorists, including mass murderers, to obtain Shalit's release. Hamas turned that offer down. And why should Hamas agree to any deal when Israeli streets are filled with demonstrators demanding that Israel sweeten its offer without limit? The only times Israel has dug in its heels during previous negotiations with Hamas was when it refused to release a small number of high-profile ultra-terrorists and when it decided against freeing terrorists with Israeli citizenship. The Shalit protesters are undercutting even those remaining red lines of national dignity. Complaints in Israel that "not enough is being done" to win Shalit's release invite additional demands from Hamas officials, who of course are only too happy to escalate their extortion. Israel has already frozen construction on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem (though that was a capitulation more to Obama than to Hamas). Suppose Hamas demanded a moratorium on Israel's Law of Return in exchange for releasing Shalit? Suppose Hamas demanded that Israel admit 50,000 "Palestinian refugees" as a first step toward implementing the "Palestinian Right of Return"? Suppose Hamas demanded unlimited supply of military materials to its armed forces in Gaza? Resisting such ultimatums becomes all the more difficult when Israeli streets are filled with protesters insisting that Israel is just not doing enough. Hamas leaders will never release Shalit as long as they think they can get more out of Israel as part of a deal. The terrorists will never strike any deal as long as they believe that even more dramatic capitulations from Israel are there for the asking. The street protests make it clear to Hamas that the bottom of the barrel is still far down, with lots of grab room left before it is reached. A far more effective strategy to win Shalit's release would be to organize demonstrations throughout Israel demanding that Israel offer Hamas nothing at all in exchange for his release. Bumper stickers and billboards should feature a photo of Al Pacino as Michael Corleone proclaiming: "To Hamas, we offer you nothing." The high price being demanded now for Shalit is nothing more than the collateral consequence of Israel's past releases of hundreds of murderers. And if a thousand terrorists are released tomorrow to win Shalit's release, more Israelis will be kidnapped and the next "deal" for their release will cost Israel far, far more. From the very beginning, Israel should have embarked on a proactive muscular campaign to obtain Shalit's release. It's still not too late. In 1976 Israel used force to free a planeload of Jews and Israelis kidnapped by Arab terrorists and taken to Entebbe, Uganda. That courageous Israel of yesteryear is today reduced to begging and pleading with the thugs of Hamas. 5. Who wants to tell Tel Aviv University president Joseph Klafter (or Klaffter) what they think of his suppression of freedom of speech for the Governors at TAU? Write to klafter@post.tau.ac.il
Others who should hear from you: Rector: Prof. Dany Leviatan
American Friends Offices of Tel Aviv University:
Other "Friends of" Groups:
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: CELEBRATE YERUSHALAYIM
Posted by Kushner, Arlene, May 11, 2010. |
|
Tonight begins Yom Yerushalayim — Jerusalem Day — a time for honoring and celebrating our holy city. In 1967, we liberated the eastern part of the City, with its place of greatest sanctity, the Temple Mount. United Jerusalem, ours, for all time. ~~~~~~~~~~ In the spirit of the day, I share some links. From Aish, a lovely short video with great shots of Jerusalem liberated, and "Yerushalayim Shel Zahav" — "Jerusalem of Gold" — as background:
~~~~~~~~~~ From the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, a very nice quiz, to see how much you know about Jerusalem, and perhaps to learn:
~~~~~~~~~~ Before I go on to news, I share one more link. This is to an article of mine that went up on YNet today. It contains important facts. Please, share widely.
~~~~~~~~~~ Forty-three rabbis ascended the Temple Mount yesterday, to mark our victory in recovering it 43 years ago. Lovely. The statement from the Temple Mount Heritage Foundation said that this ascent was meant to "express the deep bond with the holy site. "It is also significant in terms of public awareness. The presence of rabbis visiting the site together shows...the value and importance of visiting the Temple Mount in holiness and in purity." Very often, the Kotel (the Western Wall) is alluded to as Judaism's holiest site. It is not: the Mount is. The Wall is a retaining wall that closed in the Mount, upon which our Temples were built. It's important to understand this, for any notion that we should have the Kotel and the Arabs should have the Mount — where they have a mosque and the Dome of the Rock — is completely and totally unacceptable. It would be to relinquish the heart of our sacred heritage. We had Temples on that Mount before there was an Islam. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat — a good guy in my book — said yesterday, in response to the news about Ramat Shlomo, that construction would continue in all parts of the city. And, most significantly, he says, "The real test is the test of action." Indeed. My sentiments yesterday. Accompanying the JPost article about this is a picture of a crane in the Har Homa neighborhood, where a new development is being established. The establishment of Har Homa a few years ago, which is in the south east of Jerusalem, caused a huge furor, which has since dissipated. If the caption of this picture is accurate (and I'm trying to check it) it means construction is going on in Jerusalem past the Green Line, as I write. Har Homa ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Shalom Achshav (Peace Now), which misses no opportunity to cause trouble, reports that this week initial construction began on 14 housing units in Ma'aleh David, a planned housing complex inside of the Ras el-Amud neighborhood that is slated to become the largest Jewish residential complex past the Green Line. The property in question is privately owned by the Bukharian Community Committee. Headquarters for the Judea and Samaria police had been on that site, but the police have now relocated. According to the Peace Now charge, the renovation currently being done required no permits because it was taking place inside this private compound. But larger plans, which were submitted by the Bukharian Committee to the municipality last summer, call for the complete razing of the police building in that compound and construction of seven buildings that would house 104 apartments. In light of this, the charge that the current building was being renovated is confusing. The plans that were submitted have not been approved, reportedly because they do not conform to "city planning policy for that area." This may be legit, as the mayor has laid out a plan for the city. I rather like the Peace Now description of Mayor Barkat: "he has emerged as one of the most faithful allies the east Jerusalem settlers (sic) could have." May the mayor go from strength to strength as he recognizes the right of Jews to be resident in all parts of our city. ~~~~~~~~~~ As we work to keep our city united — in the face of pressure from Obama, who frowns on our building in Jerusalem anywhere past the Green Line — it is important to remain vigilant and not be too quickly mollified. Of late, the president has been doing a full court campaign to woo the Jewish community — to which I give next to no credence. Actions, in the end, are what he must be judged by. And what I'm seeing of late is action such as the new US push to get Israel to sign on to the NPT, which is to Israel's severe detriment. Why do I mention this now? Because Elie Wiesel — who wrote an open letter to Obama in the Wall Street Journal last month, in which he referred to Jerusalem as "heart of our heart" — was invited to lunch at the White House. Emerging from this auspicious kosher luncheon, Wiesel told journalists, that "The tension [between Jerusalem and Washington] I think is gone." Now, he said, the ties between Israel and the Obama administration were "good." Well, it would be hard to prove this. The insistence by Obama that we should not build in Jerusalem, even in solidly Jewish neighborhoods past the Green Line, has not changed. I am certain that Wiesel intends well, and equally certain that the president charmed him thoroughly. Please, do not use the considered opinion of Elie Wiesel on this matter as a gauge of the situation. (With a nod to Reisa S here.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Moving away from the subject of Jerusalem, to New York City: I ask with bewilderment and horror what is going on. For the news has reached me that a mosque is to be built a stone's throw from Ground Zero. Precisely how far can political correctness be taken? Writes Gadi Adelman, in his article,"Spitting in the Face of Everyone Murdered on 9/11" : "I read about this last December, plans for a mosque at Ground Zero, but like a fool, I assumed that New Yorkers would never let this come to pass. A mosque just 600 feet from where the World Trade Center towers once stood. I thought to myself; no way will New York or anyone with a heart or soul, not to mention just plain common sense, ever allow a mosque to be built anywhere near Ground Zero. But, as I said, I am a fool. ~~~~~~~~~~ And more: "As Youssef M. Ibrahim wrote in his article 'It is an established fact that a significant percentage of the mosques built in the USA in the past two decades are receiving a disproportionate amount of their funds not only from the Saudis, but also the UAE, Qatar and Iran — all problematic Islamists activist nations.' ~~~~~~~~~~ The same sort of garbled thinking was apparent with regard to Faisal Shahzad, who is charged with attempting to blow up Times Square. Evidence has emerged that he was working with the Taliban in Pakistan. Yet, somehow no one seems panicked by this. People don't want to see it. Daniel Pipes argued recently, with solid reason, that, "When news comes of Muslims engaging in violence..., the triad of politicians, law enforcement, and media...should begin with a presumption of jihadi intent. That is, the default expectation should be ideological passion." But this is not the case. Pipes documented some of the outlandish speculations that were offered — by journalists, politicians and the like — to explain the explosives in the SUV: [] "somebody with a political agenda who doesn't like the health care bill or something. It could be anything." ~~~~~~~~~~ Fouad Ajami, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, writing in the Wall Street Journal, has this to say about the situation: "'A Muslim has no nationality except his belief,' the intellectual godfather of the Islamists, Egyptian Sayyid Qutb, wrote decades ago. Qutb's 'children' are everywhere now; they carry the nationalities of foreign lands and plot against them. The Pakistani born Faisal Shahzad is a devotee of Sayyid Qutb's doctrine, and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, was another. Who hears this in America? "The Islamists are now within the gates."
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
US CONDITION FOR ARAB-ISRAEL NEGOTIATION; US JEWS SUPPORTING OBAMA? MUSLIM PAC PRO-TERRORIST
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 11, 2010. |
|
U.S. CONDITION FOR ARAB-ISRAEL NEGOTIATION After U.S. envoy Mitchell's first negotiating session, the State Dept. explained, "As both parties know, if either takes significant actions during the proximity talks that we judge would seriously undermine trust, we will respond to hold them accountable and ensure that negotiations continue." What does "significant actions" to "seriously undermine trust" mean? Does it mean general incitement to violence [which the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) continues]? IMRA suggests these candidates:
Will the Obama-Clinton team ignore those forms of incitement against Israel or is it sincere in seeking a peace based on moving toward peace in a trustworthy way? Will the Israeli team raise these issues as disqualifying the P.A. from negotiations for peace, or will it, too, automatically give the P.A. a free pass? (IMRA, 5/9/10). In the past, both the U.S. and Israeli diplomats ignored Arab disqualifying violations of agreements. The result is that the Arabs never had to reform and build peace. They kept on with their violence. Ironically, they have more international approval than does Israel, which does not foment attacks and does not work against the P.A.. The U.S. acts as if Israel must make concessions to earn the trust of the Arabs, who violate their agreements. A good point of propaganda for Israel, though it usually does not try to make a case for itself, would be, why negotiate another agreement with the P.A., while the P.A. makes continuous, major, and numerous violations of existing peace agreements.
TREND IN U.S. JEWISH SUPPORT FOR OBAMA Opinion shifts and polls flood. The greatest current interest in U.S. public opinion is in whether: (1) The trend in loss of public support for President Obama is continuing; or (2) Obama's efforts to make up with insulted foreign and domestic leaders and to polish sharp edges of his legislative program is winning back public opinion. A McLaughlin Group poll of current U.S. Jewish opinion found that from enjoying 78% of U.S. Jews' approval on Election Day 18 months ago, Obama now is down to 42% versus 46% who say they would vote for his opponent. He has lost almost half his former support from that sector. On the other hand, 50%:39 approved of his handling of relations with Israel. But 52% disapproved of his intent to recognize a PLO state in two years. 62%:19% believe that such a state would continue its efforts to destroy Israel, including by terrorism (Arutz-7, 5/10/10). Other polls show a significant loss of support for Obama among U.S. voters as a whole. As a candidate, Obama avoided tangible stances and discussion about his appointment of anti-Zionist advisers. Voters filled in the blanks favorably. Now that he has taken radical stances at variance not just with some of Bush's policies but with the whole American ethos, his support fell drastically. His personal popularity seems to be higher than his political popularity, but that could change if his methods of pressure and dissembling, whose usage in the Arab-Israel conflict my articles expose, become more widely known. The Wall St. Journal exposes his and his legislative allies' bullying of industry. Jewish weeklies expose his orchestration of the rift with Israel and preemptive and not a reaction to an Israeli announcement. Polls have or show interesting little inconsistencies. For example, the McLaughlin Group poll finds that 52% of Jewish voters disapprove of a PLO state, but 62% believe such a state would be terrorist. One expects that if 62% believe that a PLO state would be terrorist and warring, at least 62% would disapprove of statehood for the PLO. What is the point of setting up a state one thinks means to exercise the sovereign right to declare war? So many polls pour forth, that I am forced to be selective. I pick ones that show a new trend or issue, regardless of its finding, or whose methods or results do not justify what is commonly believed about those polls. Wasn't it Abraham Lincoln who said you can fool all of the Jews some of the time and some of the Jews all of the time, but you can't fool all of the Jews all of the time?
OBAMA-STYLE APARTHEID BEING APPLIED IN JERUSALEM 
There us confusion over whether Israel is applying Obama's demanded segregation in Jerusalem or is adhering to PM Netanyahu's voiced opposition to it. Arutz-7 checked with Yair Gabbai, member of the Jerusalem Construction and Building Planning Committee. Mr. Gabbai said that building permits are being distributed without discrimination in Jerusalem areas that Israel had before annexing more. Building permits are discriminatory in the annexed parts, being issued only to Arabs and not to Jews. Jews are discriminated against there. Such discrimination could be successfully challenged in court as illegal. Gabbai believes that the impetus for this form of apartheid comes from President Obama (Arutz-7, 5/10/10). How peculiar to discriminate against one's own people! The result of this discrimination is to let the Arab side to negotiations put more "facts on the ground." Obama gives the Arab side an advantage. He would excuse his demand as necessary to start negotiations. But it was not necessary until he indicated to Abbas that he would demand it, himself. As for negotiations with a Palestinian Authority that still seeks total conquest based on bigotry and terrorism, what is the point? How does weakening our Israeli ally and strengthening forces of the same jihad that the U.S. is combating with "boots on the ground," help the U.S..
P.A. TRIES TO KEEP ISRAEL OUT OF OECD The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) is asking the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) to reject Israel's application. It takes a unanimous vote to approve an application. The P.A. argument is that Israel abuses P.A. residents' human rights, which violates OECD policy. The P.A. also contends that Israel provides false financial data by including Israeli citizens in the Territories. Israel is counter-lobbying with OECD members. Israel's Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, points out that this is economic warfare against Israeli, with whom the P.A. ostensibly is negotiating peace (Arutz-7, 5/10/10). The Obama administration declared that it would hold accountable a negotiating side that sowed distrust. Will it hold the P.A. accountable for this lobbying, which doesn't do it any good but harms its negotiating partner? The news brief did not identify what human rights Israel violates, but there is no greater violator of human rights than the P.A., except in scale. The P.A. violates human rights on nationality, religion, gender and gender preference, freedom of speech, press, and assembly, due process, and not to be murdered. Were there justice in this world, the UN and human rights organizations would swarm all over the P.A. for its violations. The P.A. objection on human rights is as amusingly hypocritical as is the news about Iran objecting to an Iranian organization that broadcasts in the U.S., as terrorist. Iran, itself sponsors terrorism. On terrorism, Hamas also is hypocritical, because it approves deliberate murder of civilians, i.e., terrorism, when it concerns Israelis, and condemns accidental killing of civilians in Gaze during Israel military operations made necessary there by Hamas placement of Its troops among civilians. International law holds Hamas responsible for those accidental deaths of civilians. If the Territories were under sovereign control of another country, its production figures should be omitted from Israeli figures. But the Territories are not allocated to any nationality. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with including the production figures of Israeli cities in the adjoining Territories in overall Israeli figures.
HIGH COURT SUIT: BAR P.A. ARABS FROM HIGHWAY 443 Joined by more than a thousand Israeli commuters, the Israel Law Center is petitioning Israel's Supreme Court to require the Defense Minister to bar Palestinian Arabs from Route 443. The Court recently required him to avail P.A. Arabs of the highway. It had been closed to their traffic after terrorists used the village crossroads to gain access to the highway and attack vehicles with Israeli license plates. After murdering Israelis, terrorists also fled back into those villages for concealment. Plaintiffs asked Gen. Uzi Dayan to assess the IDF security measures taken in anticipation of Arab traffic. Gen. Dayan found the measures insufficient to prevent some terrorist access. Highway 443 has become the alternative to the crowded Tel-Aviv route to Jerusalem. However, half the Israeli commuters say they would restrict or end their use of the highway, if potential terrorists restart using it. 70% of Israeli commuters believe there would be terrorist attack (IMRA, 5/10/10).
The IPT (Investigative Project on Terrorism) released the first part of its 88-page study of the Muslim Political Action Committee (MPAC). MPAC is important, because both the Bush and Obama administrations have worked with it. According to the news organization, Main Justice, MPAC is one of two U.S. Muslim organizations that attend regular meetings with the FBI and Homeland Security Dept., led by the Justice Dept. Civil Rights Division. MPAC depicts itself as a civil rights organization. The study found that it actually sets Muslims against the rest of the population. The organization also consistently defends officially designated terrorist organizations and supporters, opposes counter-terrorism measures, and espouses antisemitism. A co-founder of MPAC, Hassan Hathout, acknowledges as his mentor the founder of that original Arab terrorist organization, Hassan al Banna. Starting out focused on the Arab-Israel conflict, MPAC supported the 1987 [terrorist] Intifada against Israel. Now it professes to be "working for the civil rights of American Muslims, for the integration of Islam into American pluralism, and for a positive, constructive relationship between American Muslims and their representatives." The group's spokeswoman, Edina Lekovic, was managing editor of a college student magazine, al Talib, in 1999, which features Ayatollah Khomeini and Osama bin Laden on its cover, and describes him as a "freedom fighter and philanthropist." Bin Laden already had declared and committed war on the U.S.. He said, kill Americans, she called him a freedom fighter. (Act for America, 5/10/10.) Let us wait for the rest of the study. MPAC is typical of pro-terrorist organizations, whether in the U.S. or among NGOs in Israel and the Territories subsidized by New Israel Fund and the EU. It asserts interest in civil rights but supports terrorism against those rights. The kindred U.S. Muslim organizations usually have leaders who also are active in other pro-terrorist organizations. How dismaying that such organizations can deceive the very agencies the U.S. has set up to protect Americans from terrorists! What better evidence that the U.S. government is not properly handling this greatest menace of our time? Note also the perverted use of vocabulary, calling a mass-murderer of innocent people a "freedom fighter." Ironically, his followers impose dictatorship.
DID CBS SMEAR ISRAEL THE WAY OBAMA DID? 
Last month, President Obama accused Israel "of costing the United States blood and treasure.' He implied that Israel bears partial responsibility for the deaths of American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, rather than placing the blame with America's own failed policies vis-a-vis the Arab world." [Primary responsibility would be that of the radical Muslims trying to conquer the world and, as Fouad Ajami wrote in the 5/10/10 Wall St. Journal, turning nihilist over the world's modernity.] On Sunday, CBS interviewed Phillip Mudd, former FBI domestic terrorism expert. Mr. Mudd explained that Muslim terrorists in the U.S. feel part of an international movement, which the Web weaves. My source went on, "But when asked what people are seeing on the web that prompts them to commit acts of terror on American soil, Mudd also blamed Israel, saying, 'They're seeing images, for example, of children and women in places like Palestine [sic] and Iraq, they're seeing sermons of people who explain in simple, compelling, and some cases magnetic terms why it's important that they join the jihad. They're seeing images and messages that confirm a path that they're already thinking of taking.'" (Arutz-7, 5/11/10). Did Mudd smear Israel? My source implies he did. I do not think so. He did not say that the terrorist propaganda is valid. He just said it is powerful. If Muslims align themselves with terrorist genocidal aggressors against their victims' self-defense, that does not mean that the victims are doing anything wrong. It means that the viewers of terrorist propaganda have warped loyalty and misinformation. Unfortunately, terrorist propaganda mud sticks. Obama went further, and implied that the victims, when Israelis, are doing something wrong. He suggests that those victims give up. Let themselves be attacked. Give to the assailants their immediate demands. He implies that after than, the assailants would be satisfied. Do terrorists sound like people who have limited goals, when they proclaim their goal to be a universal caliphate? Are terrorists people who keep their agreements, such as eradicating terrorism from the Palestinian Authority that still glorifies it? Does Obama, raised as a Muslim, not know the radical Muslim imperative of world conquest?
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
NUCLEAR BAN IN MIDDLE EAST; SANCTIONS GAME; NEGOTIATION CHARADE MUST END
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 10, 2010. |
|
Nuclear Ban in Middle East — Why not all World? The world's major powers are drafting an initiative to ban all weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. The proposal, involving exploratory talks with Israel, Iran and Arab states, will be a central issue at a major conference. (As was predicted, the Arab countries sought to turn attention to Israel as delegates from 189 countries debated how to stem the spread of nuclear weapons.) The New York conference brings together more than 150 countries in a month-long effort to repair and update the 1968 nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) at a time when it is threatening to unravel... Some officials call the NPT review conference a ''nuclear Copenhagen''. Like the climate summit last December, it demands trade-offs between powerful nations, emerging powers and weaker states. (and will fail to stop the Iranian nuclear program by shifting attention to Israel! Why wouldnt the US and Russia perform the major reduction of their own nuclear arsenals first, not just a cosmetic public spin which involves only the removal of old and obsolete atomic warheads and bombs! Note: The United States alone has a total of 5,113 warheads operationally deployed, kept in active reserve and held in inactive storage.) &India and Pakistan — all with nuclear arsenals — remain outside the treaty. North Korea withdrew seven years ago and has since been building its own bombs. Iran is suspected of cheating, and the five nuclear powers recognised under the pact are under fire for what non-weapons states see as hypocrisy and the slow pace of disarmament. (Israel still maintains policy of ambiguity in relation to its nuclear capability, but Obama's administration and others are attempting to strip Israel of its strategic advantage and weaken the Jewish state!) What was the Noise About — Just another anti-Israel Spin? US president Barack Obama reaffirmed his commitment to back up Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity in a 20-minute telephone conversation with prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Monday, May 3. Ahead of the start of proximity talks with the Palestinians, Obama assured Netanyahu that the joint US-Egyptian drive for a nuclear-free Middle East would not apply to Israel before a comprehensive peace is forged with all its neighbors. (Meaning: "When 'kosher pigs' fly!") Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Israel's ridiculous unwillingness to deal with enemies who have been occupying Jewish land for over 60 years encourages the rise of opportunistic aggression from Muslim countries and resurrection of habitual anti-Semitic behaviour among traditional 'friends' of Jews in Europe and America. Words Must be Supported by Deeds. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told a Jewish Agency conference that "it would be difficult for this generation to picture a world without Israel ' it would be a different world, but for generations the Jewish people prayed for 'next year in Jerusalem' and in the end they achieved this". Netanyahu also said: "The Zionist revolution is mainly one of the spirit... It is a great privilege to belong to the Jewish nation." (Zionist ideals have not been realized yet! Netanyahu is squandering in his second time as PM the opportunity to move Israel toward their achievement.) UN's Accuser of Israel was the Apartheid Criminal. Israeli newspaper Yediot Achoronot is publishing an expose on Judge Richard Goldstone who headed up the UN's Goldstone commission on Israel's Cast Lead operation which reveals that as a judge on South Africa's Transvaal Supreme Court from 1980 until he was appointed judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in 1989, Goldstone enforced the draconian "emergency laws" of the Apartheid regime. The paper reports that in the 1980's Goldstone ordered the execution of at least 28 blacks when he was a judge in apartheid led South Africa. PA vs Hamas — Sanctions Game. Chinese president Hu Jintao was taken by surprise by the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas's plea to support tough sanctions against Iran's nuclear program when they met in Shanghai Saturday, May 1. A Middle East war, a real peril in the absence of sanctions, would cost the lives of many Palestinians who would be caught in the middle. Sanctions will not Work — Decisive Strike is Needed! Turkey and Brazil are trying to revive a stalled atomic fuel deal with Iran in an attempt to help the Islamic Republic avoid new United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program. De facto Freeze. The Jerusalem Regional Planning Commission last week convened for the first time in two months. But, due to American pressure, it has not discussed any major construction projects for Jews in North, South or East Jerusalem. Quote of the Week: "Israel must make every effort to find alternatives to gasoline, in order to reduce worldwide dependence... It is crucial for fighting terrorism by taking away its financial base." — Israel's National Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau — Not an original idea but a vital one — although anti-Semites, not just Islamists, will hate Israel with or without oil! Sad Achievement. Dr. Edna Foa, a clinical psychologist made this year's Time 100, the weekly U.S. magazine's prestigious annual list of the year's most influential people. Foa made the list for the specialized therapy she developed to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Israel is a country-laboratory for the study of PTSD. It can be ended by removing all enemies from Jewish land.) The USA is Attacked Again. On April 30, twenty-four hours before a smoking SUV Nissan containing an improvised bomb was defused among the teeming crowds of Time Square, New York, the Pakistani Taliban's top bomb-maker, Qari Hussain Mehsud, recorded an audiotape taking "full responsibility for the recent attack in the USA" (As I wrote before — War against the Judeo-Christian West was declared long ago under... It is global! Israel was just the first target of Islamic expansionism. New targets have already been chosen and hit!) Children Dental Care. The government on Sunday approved a program that would provide dental care for all children under 18 as part of the national health law. Hypocrisy of the Headlines: Top atomic watchdog focuses on Israel... — Iran is participant of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The treaty has done nothing so far to stop Iran from developing and obtaining nuclear weapons. But just imagine what vigour and determination it would display against Israel as a member! Law Enforcement on Jews 100%, on Arabs 0%. The Regavim land survey organization condemned selective law enforcement in Judea and Samaria: "Hundreds of illegal Arab villas are being built at this very moment near Shavei Shomron. While the government enforces the law against Jews by 100 percent, its enforcement on illegal Arab construction is zero percent" No Media Frenzy. Kuwaiti security forces uncovered an Iranian Revolutionary Guards squad that collected information and spied on Kuwaiti and American targets. (At the same time, suddenly the subject of 27 'Mossad assassins' is put to rest by all media outlets. Were they actually MI6 and/or CIA spies?) Another anti-Israel Smear Exposed. Police investigators who examined that mosque that was ablaze last Tuesday in the village of Luban, located between Nablus and Ramallah, ruled that it was not a case of arson. They came to this conclusion because no combustible materials were found on the site. Negotiation Charade Must End. Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are doomed to hit a brick wall said Vice Premier and Regional Development Minister Silvan Shalom: "No matter what we do, I do not see a Palestinian leader who is willing to accept what Arafat rejected, and I don't see a Jewish prime minister who can give more than what Ehud Barak offered. Therefore, I see it as a dead end." Shalom said bluntly that he did not believe the Palestinians would ever recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Israeli Military Intelligence Research Director Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz warned on Tuesday, the day before proximity peace talks are launched by US envoy George Mitchell: "We do not recognize in Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas a true attempt to be flexible on the core issues." He will stall and then blame Israel. Fake Negotiations Game is Back? Palestinian Authority Chairman, Mahmoud Abbas stated on Monday, April 26 that he is willing to go back to negotiations with Israel, without pre-conditions(?). Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa announced that his organization has decided to endorse the resumption of negotiations. ('Indirect peace' talks, which are going to be 'supervised' by the US, will apply heavy pressure on Israel. It looks like the fixed poker game is being set, with all players ganged up against one — Israel, who is forced to participate!) Hours after the Arab League half-heartedly endorsed a renewal of talks with Israel, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said all is dependent on Israel implementing a full construction freeze in Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem. (The words of the lying snake are worth nothing!) 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 |
|
INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE BUILDING ON ISRAEL
Posted by Susana K-M, May 10, 2010. |
|
Following the lead of Iran's President, the international community is increasing pressure on Israel to expose its nuclear capabilities and to eventually disarm. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has formerly asked member nation's to join in forcing Israel to expose its supposed arsenal. This is an unprecedented action. This focus on Israel is proof positive that the international community is not serious about the Iranian nuclear threat. Meanwhile the Obama administration has joined with the permanent members of the Security Council in support of a nuclear free Middle East. Again this is a provocative act against Israel. Only Israel is being pressured to expose its defenses. All this is pressure is coming in the midst of an Obama administration charm offensive directed at Israel and the American Jewish community. In public, the Obama administration is reaching out to some Jewish critics and saying nice things, but in reality Israel continues to be squeezed by the pro-Muslim bias of the Obama administration. Lee Smith, the author of the important book on Middle East politics The Strong Horse, has written an important analysis of the wrongheaded approach of the Obama administration. Mr. Smith asks: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has little or nothing to do with most of the conflicts that are tearing apart the Middle East. So, why do Arab governments — and the United States — insist it does? In answering this question Mr. Smith exposes the dangerous premises on
which American policy stands. Read this important essay in The Tablet:
You can hear an interview with Mr. Smith: here. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
JERUSALEM FIRST
Posted by MK Dr. Arieh Eldad, May 10, 2010. |
|
These lines are being written on the day the U.S. envoy George Mitchell arrived in Israel to open indirect "proximity" talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. These talks have been much delayed, in part as a result of PA chairman Abu Mazen's having noticed that the U.S. president has taken his side, thus enabling him to make any demands he wishes preconditions for the talks, including a building freeze in Jerusalem. Abu Mazen and Obama intend to force Israel to surrender to Arab demands to establish a Palestinian state that will reduce Israel to its 1967 borders; this state is to have its capital in Jerusalem; and it is not to be forced to recognize Israel as a Jewish state or give up demands for the return to Israel of Arab refugees. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to avoid this trap, but by having agreed to the talks, he has already corralled himself. Arguably, Israel need not be overly worried. That which evaded Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat in direct negotiations overseen by Bill Clinton at Camp David — will not be accomplished by Mitchell shuttling between Ramallah and Jerusalem. That which evaded Ehud Olmert and Abu Mazen in dozens of hours of intimate private conversations, when Olmert was willing to give up everything, will not be accomplished now when the Arabs are not even willing to sit next to Netanyahu at a negotiating table and even the U.S. envoy is suspected by Israel of siding with the Arabs. Nonetheless Israel has reason to worry, because the talks are not direct and the Americans are mediating. President Obama is more antagonistic towards Israel than any president in generations. With him and his envoy mediating, the Arabs know they do not have to make any concessions, and should the talks reach a dead end, Israel will be blamed. The U.S. faces a weak Israeli prime minister, perhaps the weakest in memory. I saw Netanyahu when he spoke to the Knesset Security Affairs Committee a year ago, after his first meeting with Obama. Having served in the Israeli army's Medical Corps for decades, I am certainly able to diagnose shell shock when I see it. Netanyahu looked like a soldier suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. The Americans who participated in the talks with him knew they had achieved all they wanted. They also know that further shock exacerbates the disorder, and so Obama and Hillary Clinton bared their teeth when a zoning committee in Israel's capital Jerusalem announced plans for 1,600 housing units in a Jewish neighborhood, Ramat Shlomo, during a visit by Vice President Biden to Israel. Clinton yelled at Netanyahu by phone, Obama degraded him when they met, and the path was cleared: Netanyahu collapsed, and they could promise Jerusalem to Abu Mazen. Obama's error is that of a proud novice in foreign policy: he has stretched out his hand towards Jerusalem. The Israeli slanderers of the extremist left, who run to report to the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv every time a house is built in Judea and Samaria, misled him. J Street misled him. Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod misled him. Obama figured, if there are Jews who support giving half of Jerusalem to the Arabs, it shouldn't be a problem to force Netanyahu to go along. But Netanyahu can be beaten down only when there is no counter pressure. In this case, Netanyahu is not operating in a vacuum; there is pressure. Some may have thought this pressure would come from inside his Likud Party, on the part of Moshe Feiglin and his followers, but the recent party vote in which Netanyahu trounced Feiglin proved the party's institutions to be powerless. Feiglin's theory that the Likud could be conquered from within in order to prevent political disasters was once again proven wrong. Previously he and followers failed to prevent the withdrawal from Gaza, they failed to prevent Netanyahu from committing himself to a Palestinian state in violation of the Likud's platform, and they failed to prevent a building freeze in Judea and Samaria. All they can do is promise once more that next time things will turn out better for them. But there is pressure, and it will grow stronger, Feiglin's failure notwithstanding. A few months ago, a "Lobby for the Land of Israel" was established in the Knesset. It is led by a Likud Knesset member, in fact the chairman of the governing coalition, Zev Elkin, and by me, who am chairman of the Hatikvah Party, which is part of the National Union and sits with the opposition in the Knesset. Forty-one members of Knesset, government ministers and deputy ministers joined this lobby whose goals are to stem the leftward tide, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, to prevent the dilution of Jewish settlements and to strengthen such settlement. Within this lobby are represented the National Union, Jewish Home, Shas, Israel Beitenu, Likud and even Kadima parties. As a graduate of MIT Netanyahu understands the numbers: Obama's suggestion that he dump the "extremists" from his government and replace them with Kadima doesn't work mathematically. Forty-one is more than twenty-eight. If Netanyahu gives in to Obama's demand — he will no longer have a government. The lobby began with a baby-step, just a symbolic one. Netanyahu wanted to announce with great fanfare plans to invest millions in national heritage sites. Because he was afraid of incurring Obama's wrath, he left out one of the Jewish people's most important heritage sites — the cave of Machpelah in Hebron, the burial site of the Patriarchs. At the last minute, the lobby forced him to include it. Then the lobby set a major goal: to ensure that the prime minister and the ministers to his right in his Cabinet stand by their commitment to renew building in Judea and Samaria as soon as the freeze ends in September. We can expect this to be a difficult struggle. It will be a litmus test for anyone proclaiming fidelity to the Land of Israel and to Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. But the Israeli public is divided on this issue, and many Israelis are tired; if someone promises them true peace they may concede. And then — Jerusalem was put on the table. Jerusalem — this is something else. The vast majority of Israelis are not prepared to give up Jerusalem even for promises of peace. Whoever prodded Obama to put Jerusalem on the table did a great service to Israel. At this point, unfortunately, many good-hearted Jews, such as Elie Wiesel, tried to convince Obama to defer on this issue and to push Jerusalem off till the end of the negotiations. Effectively this means: to poison Israel more slowly. But because Obama and Abu Mazen know that Netanyahu has indeed frozen construction in Jerusalem, even though he cannot say so publicly because his government coalition would evaporate, and because they know the Netanyahu government has not built a single house in East Jerusalem, and has instead put insurmountable bureaucratic obstacles in the way of construction in the eastern Jewish neighborhoods despite bombastic statements to the contrary — they were mollified and agreed to allow Netanyahu into the trap without an official statement of surrender before the talks opened. Mitchell will come and go, back and forth, from Jerusalem to Ramallah to Washington, and in another month or two he will put on the table an American-Arab plan with a loaded gun next to it. There is only one way out: Jerusalem first. We need to put all our efforts into building in Jerusalem. We need to demand that the issue of Jerusalem be brought up as soon as the talks open. If anyone thinks the state of Israel needs to save Jerusalem they are mistaken; they will discover that Jerusalem will save the state of Israel.
|
|
IF JEWS BACK OBAMA'S PRESSURE, WHY WAS THE 'CHARM OFFENSIVE' NECESSARY?
Posted by Susana K-M, May 10, 2010. |
|
This was written by Jonathan Tobin and it appeared May 5, 2010 in
Commentary
|
|
For those who were thrilled by President Obama's decision to distance the United States from Israel and to treat Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem as illegal settlements, the recent "charm offensive" by which the White House has sought to deflect the growing criticism from friends of the Jewish state has to be a downer. With recent polls showing that a majority of American Jews disapprove of Obama's handling of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and with most of the centrist leadership of American Jewry expressing dismay over the president's positions on Jerusalem, the left's assertion that the president can count on Jewish support for his pressure on Israel has been effectively debunked. But that hasn't stopped The New York Times from once again trotting out one of the standards of their coverage of American Jewry. The headline of a piece published at the end of last week on their website couldn't make the agenda of the article any clearer: "On Israel, Jews and Leaders Often Disagree." The familiar conceit of the feature is that while the big names of American Jewry and the leaders of the alphabet soup of organizations still support Israel, the rank and file do not. The piece argues that the overwhelming support for Obama in the 2008 election and the reliably liberal Democratic cast of Jewish voters must mean that they applaud his clear animus for Israel. Of course, if that were true, Obama wouldn't have bothered campaigning as if he were a devoted friend of Israel. Despite that, the leader of the left-wing J Street lobby is still trying to promote the idea that most Jews don't support Israel's policies and want Washington to pressure it to accept a two-state solution. But as uneasiness over the administration's hostility grew in recent months, it became clear that even most Jewish Democrats knew that Israel's government has accepted such a solution but that it is the Palestinians who won't make peace. Thus, J Street has made little headway in Washington with a Congress that is still reliably pro-Israel and unhappy about the administration's drift. But that doesn't stop the Times from treating its claims as self-evident. But for all the protestations by the left of Jewish support for pressure on Israel, it has to be obvious that the White House doesn't buy it. If they were as confident as J Street that their Jewish Democratic base liked what they were doing, then why would they have spent so much time in the last month trying to back away from a fight with Israel that they had picked in the first place. Why shlep Elie Wiesel to the White House yesterday for a private audience with the president after he published an ad in several newspapers warning Obama that Jerusalem was the "heart of our heart and the soul of our soul" if the administration wasn't convinced that the famed Holocaust survivor's concerns weren't far more representative of public opinion than the partisan natterings of J Street founder Jeremy Ben-Ami? While the charm offensive may not do much more than calm some panicky Jewish Democrats who are willing to believe Obama's new promises just as they swallowed his campaign pledges, it does prove one thing: the White House knows that an open feud with Israel and its friends is political poison. Indeed, the best the Times could do to support its thesis that Ben-Ami is right is to gather a few members of a Secular Humanist Temple in suburban Detroit to find a some Jews who are willing to attack Israel's government. While the members of that tiny slice of Jewish demography are as entitled to their opinions as anyone else, the notion that this small splinter group of Jews who eschew religious faith in favor of a secular ethnicity is representative of American Jewry is absurd. But even there, among members of a Temple who cannot help but be far more liberal than the average Jewish congregation, the Times still discovered that there were some who were concerned about those who unfairly blame Israel for the conflict. As 87-year-old Rosetta Creed stated: "It makes me angry that the Israelis are always blamed for the problems and asked to make concessions," Ms. Creed said. "You know, the Israelis are not the ones launching rockets and placing fighters in houses with children inside." Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: BIG DEAL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 10, 2010. |
|
Unfortunately, with print communication there is no way to convey the absolute sarcasm with which I mean this. The beginning of the "proximity talks" is not a big deal at all. On Saturday, both the PLO and Fatah gave the go-ahead to Abbas for these indirect talks. Mitchell had met with Netanyahu twice already, and then met with Abbas and company and headed home. This first round of talks was labeled "positive." Mitchell left a team behind and will return in two weeks. ~~~~~~~~~~ I know of no honest analyst who predicts anything good coming from these talks. They are a charade, with each side doing what seems in its best interests — to keep the international community and Obama at bay, to keep the donations coming to the PA, etc. But entering talks is not the same as going anywhere in the course of those talks. ~~~~~~~~~~ State Department spokesman Phillip Crowley said yesterday that both sides had taken some "constructive" steps. The PA, with Abbas's statement that he would work against incitement "of any sort." This I flatly do not believe. Abbas will refrain from naming any new squares after terrorists and everyone will say it is a wonderful step in the right direction. But the fact is that the school books are rife with incite, and unless a project is undertaken to start printing revised versions of these texts, the rest is a joke. A whole generation of young people is learning that jihad is good, Israel is not legitimate, and all the rest. ~~~~~~~~~~ For our part, it has been announced that Netanyahu pledged not to do any construction in Ramat Shlomo for two years. This is the neighborhood in Jerusalem, past the Green Line, for which we announced plans to construct 1,600 new apartments while VP Biden was here — an incident that Obama parlayed into a crisis. There were hints of this coming. It smells like a disgusting effort to make amends for the horrible crime of having "embarrassed" the vice president. However...Netanyahu, in a statement to the Likud faction today, provided a different take on this: He said he made no commitment regarding freezing Ramat Shlomo construction. He said at the time of the hullabaloo regarding the announcement, he had made it clear that for bureaucratic reasons there would not be any construction for some time. This is true; I remember this. Now he explains, "When the Americans asked us to estimate when construction will begin, I said that I don't believe it will begin before the two-year period ends. This is just a factual description of the project's status." What he is saying is that he had made it clear that the project would move slowly, for bureaucratic reasons, and that this was turned around as if he had made a commitment to freeze or stall the construction. Note that he refers to "before the two-year period ends." What two year period? The period during which Obama wanted construction frozen. He told the US, look, it's going to take that long anyway. ~~~~~~~~~~ There was no US announcement of a freeze elsewhere in Jerusalem, and our government insists there is none. Netanyahu has himself said, again, that there is no Israeli commitment to stop construction in Jerusalem. My response: Show me, don't tell me. I want to see building being done. And I'm waiting. PA representatives are still saying that they entered these talks because of assurances by the US — among which was an assurance that there would not be building in Jerusalem. So, who's lying? ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Ariel Kahane, writing in the Hebrew Makor Rishon on Friday, the American Ambassador to Israel, the Consul in Jerusalem and other official representatives of the United States in Israel regularly meet with the Israeli ministers associated with construction in Jerusalem to get detailed information about projects planned for Jerusalem. "This ongoing interest is thought to have a chilling effect." See the entire story (in translation):
~~~~~~~~~~ Of concern to me is the continual insistence by the US that if one side seriously undermines the process that side will be "held accountable" and the process will continue. What the hell does that mean? How much is the US planning on imposing itself on us? Abbas says nothing has changed: talks cannot continue unless there is a total building freeze. If (a big if?) we should actually do some construction in Jerusalem past the Green Line, Abbas will cry foul and Obama will point a finger, even though we had never agreed to this, and say we're being obstructionist. And then what? Not for a fraction of a second, by the way, do I believe Obama would charge Abbas with being obstructionist in any case. And there were commitments from Abbas beyond the avoidance of incitement — a commitment, for example, to stop acting against Israel in international forums. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is so much information flying around on the Internet, much of it is sent to me by loyal readers and others. But I want to caution one and all to take care, because often what sounds like a legitimate report, or warning, turns out to have no solid backing. "You cannot believe everything you read" goes double for the Internet. And I would advise against sharing with others material from unnamed or dubious sources because it "sounds" official or credible. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is some very good news today: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has officially accepted Israel into its ranks as a full-fledged member. A careful assessment of our financial status was undertaken before we were accepted — with a major report issued. We also had to pass certain legislation regarding intellectual property and patents. This is a big deal both because it is a sign of our acceptance within the larger international community, and because it is acknowledgement of the solid financial standing of Israel. The developed countries (I believe some 31 belong to the OECD) have now recognized Israel as an advanced, developed country. For 20 years we attempted to get in, and could not. It did not hurt, I am certain, that the OECD's Secretary General, Jose Angel Gurria (Mexican) is a great fan of Israel and a personal friend of Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz. Likely this was a factor in securing us a fair hearing, at last. This stamp of approval will have the added benefit for us of attracting foreign investments. It should be noted, by the way, that the PA, its commitments not withstanding, attempted to block us from securing this membership: the PA foreign minister sent a letter to OECD countries requesting a delay in the vote because "Israel infringes on Palestinians' human rights, violates OECD values." ~~~~~~~~~~ Of great concern here is the growing pressure with regard to Israel signing the NPT and relinquishing whatever atomic weapons we may have. As I indicated earlier, there is a significant shift on the part of the US in this regard. Defense Minister Barak is the only one I've encountered to date who says this represents no threat to Israel: "I do not believe there is a real threat to Israel's traditional stance." Let us hope not. ~~~~~~~~~~ "The Emperor has no clothes" by American political consultant Michael Fenebock, writing on YNET, provides a look at the way that establishment Jewish organizations function. I don't agree with everything he says, but in this I am certainly in agreement: "Mainstream Jewish organizations and their leadership are most often driven by the need to placate a left-wing donor base and by a fear of losing their insider status." We should not minimize that "insider status." "It's certainly no over-exaggeration to say President Obama and his administration have played the mainstream Jewish leaders like a violin." Painful — and shameful — stuff. I raise this here because we so badly need the support of the mainstream Jewish organizations in the US, and it has been so absent of late. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
CANADIAN-AMERICAN PLAN FOR ARAB-JEWISH JOINT CONTROL OF HOLY SITES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 10, 2010. |
|
CANADIAN-AMERICAN PLAN FOR ARAB-JEWISH JOINT CONTROL OF HOLY SITES Paid for by Canada, former Canadian and U.S. officials, including Daniel Kurtzer, spent seven years of research and consultation on how the Palestinian Arabs and Israel should share control of the holy sites in Jerusalem. A culminating conference was held in Washington, introducing a 144-page report of suggestions. Jerusalem would not be divided or internationalized. However, after presumed statehood for the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), the two states would share control of the holy sites of Jerusalem, under "an effective and empowered third-party" commissioner the two states appoint. This solution will be difficult, because of distrust. It must respect the beliefs of the two states and of believers all over the world. [Didn't mention Christian believers.] "These proposed security arrangements ...success will depend on the ability of Israelis and Palestinians to ...develop conditions that permit coexistence in this most contested and sacred of cities..." "The police service should be professional, effective, impartial, accountable and integrated, and composed of international officers from countries acceptable to the Parties and with clear hiring criteria consistent with international standards." "...Arrangements touching on the sanctity of holy sites and access to them should be dealt with to the satisfaction of the religious communities, subject to the requirements of public order. Special security arrangements should be developed for these sites in close coordination with advisory religious and heritage bodies." They admit that security arrangements require harmonious coexistence and would fail if one side wants them to fail. Access to the holy sites depends on the requirements of public order. This means that Jews are likely to be barred from the Temple Mount and even from the Western Wall, because Muslims now want Jews barred from it, calling it holy to Muslims. Under British rule, Jews were barred from blowing shofars at the Wall, because Muslims said the noise disturbed them. [Muslims use loudspeakers to call the faithful to mosque.] Such is the folly of "peace initiatives" that assume best cases and do not first experiment with scenarios of what may go wrong (IMRA, 5/8/10). When Ambassador, Daniel Kurtzer acted imperious, interfering in Israeli security arrangements while Palestinian Arabs promoted and conducted terrorism. His proposals therefore are more likely to be cynical fig leaves than naïve, as they appear. There would be no harmonious co-existence. The PLO terrorist organization a.k.a. Palestinian Authority often refused joint health projects. In according with its jihadist ideology, the P.A. declares conquest of Israel its sacred obligation, denies that Judaism has history or rights there, and refuses to preserve Jewish artifacts it digs up. If Jews pray on the Temple Mount, Muslim Arabs riot. Hence Israeli police, in what many of you thing is a Jewish state, bars Jewish prayer there, to preserve public order. Do you think that Mr. Kurtzer does not know that? Foreign police would be like UNIFIL. They would be blind to Arab arming, would fear for their own lives, and likely would side with the Arabs. This is another case of Westerners, either bent on their own agenda or mistakenly assuming that other cultures share their values of civility, try to impose a solution likely to lead to discrimination and violence. If the Arab version of Islam were one of peace and tolerance, these Western proposal might work. On the other hand, there would be no need for them. Muslims have access to their holy places, to the extent that they do not riot. If interested in peace and tolerance, they would have nothing to complain about. But they are not tolerant and not peaceable about it. They want exclusive control for Islam and have become increasingly genocidal about it, part of a global jihad. Canada probably means well, but its officials had better work on preserving itself from jihad. As in the U.S., it is difficult for public speakers at colleges in Canadian to make presentations that jihadists oppose.
ARAB-ISRAEL PROXIMITY TALKS BEGIN, OR DO THEY? On Sunday, May 10, the Palestinian-Arab proximity talks began, or did they? Both parties were awaiting the return of the U.S. envoy, who is to be the intermediary. Negotiations are expected to fail, though President Obama may insist upon an agreement. Obama and Party head Barak are suspected of trying to engineer another ouster of PM Netanyahu in favor of someone even more accommodating to demands for outright appeasement of the Arabs. Many other government heads also support the Arab position. The Arabs give the negotiations four months. At the end of that time, the confused Israeli construction freeze is supposed to be lifted. That is, the freeze officially would be lifted, not necessarily the confusion. A short Arab time limit is interesting, in view of Palestinian Arab stated intent to then ask the UN for statehood (Arutz-7, 5/9/10). http://www.israelnationalnews.com/ Time limits and proximity talks are symptoms and causes of diplomatic failure. Time limits encourage an intransigent party enjoying strong foreign support to hold out for onerous terms that the other side cannot accede. That solves nothing. Did the talks begin with some Palestinian Arabs in one room, Israelis in another room, and the room in between empty until envoy Mitchell arrives? That is comical to envision. But the whole process is farce. On the other hand, another report said that Mitchell conducted the first round of interviews on the first scheduled day (IMRA, 5/9/10). Netanyahu is difficult to figure out. He misleads supporters, so he cannot be trusted. He is known to cave in under pressure, but is suspected of intending to. Suppose he really does not want to cave in. He probably thinks that by having Labor Party head Barak in the Cabinet, he can avoid some criticism as being too right wing. Has he noticed any diminution of criticism? Anti-Zionism, like other forms of antisemitism, is a psychosis whose enduring hostility no Israeli action short of national suicide can abate. Imagine being Netanyahu, betraying his people while pretending not to, and getting reviled by the Left and even by the U.S. for not betraying his people! Having Barak in the Cabinet enables the Left to impede policies bolstering Israel vis-a-vis the Palestinian Authority. It also gives Barak more opportunity to harass Netanyahu supporters and to subvert the regime, as Labor has done before. As signs of imminent war increase, Israel needs a Defense Minister tougher than Barak. Barak ordered the IDF to flee from the Lebanon security zone, although Israel was holding Hizbullah off. His ignominious flight was done in unwarranted panic. The IDF left heavy weapons behind, actually ran, and betrayed Lebanese allies. This encouraged terrorists.
ISRAELI ARAB INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE GROWING Israel has complained about Palestinian Authority incitement to violence against Israel, but Israeli Arab incitement to violence is at least as bad. Part of the incitement is by slanderous accusations of Israeli violence. Israel's northern branch of the Islamic Movement accused "Israeli Occupation Forces" of attacking Muslim worshipers at al-Aqsa mosque last Friday. Police and media report no such occurrence. A Saudi-based Arab News website reports that Saudi King Abdullah has donated funds to an "al-Aqsa uprising fund." Meanwhile, A British-based, Muslim News website claimed that during an arrest attempt, Israeli police wounded nine residents and attempted a kidnapping. Muslim Arabs increasingly refer to arrests of terrorists as kidnappings. Jerusalem's Grand Mufti, Sheikh Tayssir Tamimi, accused Israel of planning an exclusively Jewish district' in Jerusalem where any signs of a Christian or Muslim presence would be forbidden." He repeated older slander that Israeli excavation in the Old City has damaged the mosque. By contrast to Israeli tolerance, when Jordan seized and ruled the Old City from 1948 to 1967, Jordan barred Christians, except for a few VIPs, from Christian holy places, expelled all Jews, and destroyed dozens of synagogues (Arutz-7, 5/9/10). Arab residents of Jerusalem are permitted in all parts of Jerusalem. No damage has ever been shown to the mosque. One part of the Temple Mount, where the Muslim Waqf had been careless with construction work, did collapse. Israel buttressed the area. Can you imagine Israel, which keeps Jews from praying on the Temple Mount because Arabs would riot if they did, suddenly would want to do destroy the mosque¸ when the UN is so anti-Israel? What do you think of the Muslim Arab practice, which I report frequently, of making up false accusations of Israeli plots, violence, and destruction of Muslim religious sites, in order to arouse Arab mobs? Do you think such a practice is consistent with the supposed peace process? Notice the 1984ish reversal of truth, by calling arrests of murderers "kidnapping," and by calling the tolerant Israelis intolerant? What does that tell you about other Arab accusations against Israel? They, too, seek to vilify Israel. Not having good arguments, the Palestinian Arabs make them up and smear Israel's reputation. 
Israel has complained about Palestinian Authority incitement to violence against Israel, but Israeli Arab incitement to violence is at least as bad. Part of the incitement is by slanderous accusations of Israeli violence. Israel's northern branch of the Islamic Movement accused "Israeli Occupation Forces" of attacking Muslim worshipers at al-Aqsa mosque last Friday. Police and media report no such occurrence. A Saudi-based Arab News website reports that Saudi King Abdullah has donated funds to an "al-Aqsa uprising fund." Meanwhile, A British-based, Muslim News website claimed that during an arrest attempt, Israeli police wounded nine residents and attempted a kidnapping. Muslim Arabs increasingly refer to arrests of terrorists as kidnappings. Jerusalem's Grand Mufti, Sheikh Tayssir Tamimi, accused Israel of planning an exclusively Jewish district' in Jerusalem where any signs of a Christian or Muslim presence would be forbidden." He repeated older slander that Israeli excavation in the Old City has damaged the mosque. By contrast to Israeli tolerance, when Jordan seized and ruled the Old City from 1948 to 1967, Jordan barred Christians, except for a few VIPs, from Christian holy places, expelled all Jews, and destroyed dozens of synagogues (Arutz-7, 5/9/10). Arab residents of Jerusalem are permitted in all parts of Jerusalem. No damage has ever been shown to the mosque. One part of the Temple Mount, where the Muslim Waqf had been careless with construction work, did collapse. Israel buttressed the area. Can you imagine Israel, which keeps Jews from praying on the Temple Mount because Arabs would riot if they did, suddenly would want to do destroy the mosque¸ when the UN is so anti-Israel? What do you think of the Muslim Arab practice, which I report frequently, of making up false accusations of Israeli plots, violence, and destruction of Muslim religious sites, in order to arouse Arab mobs? Do you think such a practice is consistent with the supposed peace process? Notice the 1984ish reversal of truth, by calling arrests of murderers "kidnapping," and by calling the tolerant Israelis intolerant? What does that tell you about other Arab accusations against Israel? They, too, seek to vilify Israel. Not having good arguments, the Palestinian Arabs make them up and smear Israel's reputation.
SAUDI ARABIA BANS TERRORIST FINANCING The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia issued a fatwa making the financing of terrorism criminal. This weekend, the King thanked him for it (IMRA, 5/8/10). In the prior article, however, we find that Saudi King Abdullah has donated funds to an "al-Aqsa uprising fund." An uprising by Palestinian Arabs, incited to violence in behalf of jihad and usually for slanderous accusations against Israel, means terrorism. Rich Saudis have contributed to terrorist fronts called charities. Worse, they finance radical mosques and madrassas that teach the Saudi emphasis on holy war.
EGYPT REVISING CURICULUM, FOR TOLERANCE Egypt's Ministry is revising the curriculum in order to promote tolerance of other religions, races, languages, and genders as a moral duty and for avoiding communal violence. The reform would be supervised by al-Azhar, Egypt's conservative religious center. The reform partly came out of the question, how can Muslims expect other religions to respect theirs, if they do not respect other religions. The government explains that Islam defines the other monotheistic religions respectfully. Therefore, the new curriculum selects respectful statements from the Koran and omits disrespectful statements that incite against other faiths. This reform would promote national unity. Critics of the reform deny the propriety of choosing from among tenets of the faith and deny the possibility of teaching morals separately from teaching religion. Critics also accuse the government of making the change under U.S. pressure and so Egyptians will love the U.S. and Israel. They accuse the U.S. embassy of having worked for years on curriculum change for Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia (IMRA, 5/9/10). It is difficult to change a religion that considers itself immutable as the divine will. Islamic scholars had to confront the self-contradictions between Koranic passages. They decided that later passages govern earlier ones. Unfortunately for Jews, earlier passages expressed tolerance to Jews but later ones expressed hostility. Is this reform a back door to a Reformation that could end jihad and bring world peace? A few years ago, the Palestinian Authority claimed to have revised its Jordanian textbooks for tolerance, but its books remained intolerant. I do not recall any effort to get Jordan to reform its books. Israeli textbooks stress tolerance.
ISRAELI MISSILE DEFENSE CLAIMS AND COUNTER-CLAIMS The Israeli military and arms industry held a ballistic missile and rocket defense conference last week that touts Israel's anti-missile defense. A former air force pilot and now military analyst, Prof. Reuven Pedatzur scoffed at the program. According to Prof. Pedatzur, the claimed 99% success rate against potential nuclear warheads is: (1) Too high, because simple counter-measures could be taken by the launcher; and (2) Too low, because only one a-bomb need get through for the enemy to win. Pedatzur called the Iron Dome defense against shorter range rockets a scam. He said it takes 14 seconds to get a Kassem rocket to target in Israel, but it takes 15 seconds for the Iron Dome to shoot it down. Can't shoot down what already landed. [Nor is it so beneficial to shoot down explosives over one's own country.] This means that Iron Dome is useless against rockets fired from closer than five kilometers. He thinks it is not much good against ones fired from more than 15 kilometers. Nor is the program cost-effective, he points out. It costs just a few dollars to launch a Kassem, but 100,000 to destroy it. Who will run out of money first, Israel or Iran? Each David's Sling missile, that can destroy a rocket from Hizbullah, costs $1 million. He did not cite the cost of Hizbullah rockets, but Hizbullah has more than 40,000 of them. To shoot them all down would cost Israel $40 billion. [The air force might bomb some, but one doubts that Israel has, say, $35 billion worth of Davids' Sling missiles ready to launch.] Pedatzur is planning a rational conference on the subject in late May (IMRA, 5/9/10).
IRAN ANNOUNCES NEW SPY AIRCRAFT 
Iran announced a new type of aircraft tested in recent war games. This vehicle's purpose is to trace all radar and wiretapping signals in the region (IMRA, 5/9/10). Iran makes similar announcements about new military capabilities, in some months every week, and in some weeks every day. To some extent, Iran may be exaggerating its prowess or may have purchased the weaponry it claims to have developed itself. The impression undisturbed in these sources is that Iran has a creative military industry and a powerful military. To what extent to Western military planners take this into account?
EGYPT MAY STOP EXPORTING OIL
Egypt exports oil and gas, but its reserves are dwindling. Sales bring in much revenue, but if it runs out of produce, it would have to pay high prices to import. Egypt inclines now to stop exporting, to preserve its reserve (IMRA, 5/9/10).
That is the handwriting on the wall. As oil and gas exports industrialize, more of their reserves go for domestic needs. Less becomes available to foreign importers. The foreign importers must find ways to develop energy domestically.
Israel gave up the Sinai oil it had developed, for a treaty in which Egypt assured it of an oil supply.
DERSHOWITZ DENOUNCES ANTI-ISRAEL PROFESSORS, AT TEL-AVIV U. Delivering the keynote speech at the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University, Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz denounced the anti-Israel faculty there for harming Israel and even its universities. Acknowledging the anti-Israel faculty's legal right to be mistaken, he urged others to defeat them by superior debate. That is difficult, because the leftists try to repress the academic freedom of non-leftists there, including by harassing pro-Israel students (Prof. Steven Plaut of Haifa U., 5/10/10). Prof. Dershowitz is consistent in upholding free speech, as some of you may recall from my reviews of his panel discussions at 92nd St Y in Manhattan and of a book of his. Patriotic Israelis should not have to suffer insults from their professors, and their professors should educate rather than indoctrinate. Perhaps the most outrageous incident was of a reservist hurrying back to class (so far, so good) from a recent recall, no time to change into civilian clothes. His professor would not admit him in uniform, because it offended that professor, an Arab. For years, my source, Prof. Plaut, has been describing the subversive activities of leftist professors in Israel, who predominate in the social studies programs at Israeli Universities, such as Ben-Gurion U. and Tel Aviv U.. They often use academic freedom not only to repress academic freedom, but also to urge draft-dodging, enemy policies, and even terrorism. Dershowitz had chutzpah to question the Establishment in the lion's den. Most leaders of Jewish organizations are afraid to broach disturbing subjects when they visit the President of the U.S.. ZOA President Mort Klein does broach them, but has not been re-invited. University Boards of Governors seem oblivious to the excesses of their faculties. Perhaps Dershowitz will wake them up. Is it enough to urge better debate, in an environment where appointments and promotions are ideological? Is that consistent with a university's mission? Would Dershowitz find any standards of discipline of politically and administratively abusive professors consistent with academic freedom?
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
IF THIS IS OUR FUTURE
Posted by Sheridan Neimark, May 10, 2010. |
|
Please do me a favor, read this Daniel Gordis commentary.
It appeared May 7, 2010 in the Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx? id=174863# |
|
Imagine this, if you can. A prestigious university in the United States, with deep roots in the American Jewish community, invites Israel's ambassador to deliver its annual commencement address. But instead of expressing pride in the choice of speaker and in the country that he represents, the university's students, many of them Jewish, protest. They don't want to hear from the ambassador. (See this Facebook page.) He's a "divisive" figure, the student newspaper argues, and the students deserved better. Tragically, of course, there's nothing hypothetical about the scenario. Brandeis University recently decided to award honorary degrees to Michael Oren, Dennis Ross and Paul Simon, among others, at its May 23 commencement, and Ambassador Oren, an extraordinary orator among his many other qualities, was invited to deliver the commencement address. But the days in which Jewish students on an American campus would have been thrilled to have the Israeli ambassador honored by their school are apparently long since gone. Brandeis's student newspaper, The Justice (how's that for irony?), deplored the choice, writing that "Mr. Oren is a divisive and inappropriate choice for keynote speaker at commencement, and we disapprove of the university's decision to grant someone of his polarity on this campus that honor." The ambassador is a polarizing figure? Why is that? Because, the editorial continues, "the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a hotly contested political issue, one that inspires students with serious positions on the topic to fervently defend and promote their views." This is where we are today. For many young American Jews, the only association they have with Israel is the conflict with the Palestinians. Israel is the country that oppresses Palestinians, and nothing more. No longer is Israel the country that managed to forge a future for the Jewish people when it was left in tatters after the Holocaust. Israel is not, in their minds, the country that gave refuge to hundreds of thousands of Jews expelled from North Africa when they had nowhere else to go, granting them all citizenship, in a policy dramatically different from the cynical decisions of Lebanon, Syria and Jordan to turn their Palestinian refugees into pawns in what they (correctly) assumed would be a lengthy battle with Israel. Israel is not proof that one can create an impressively functioning democracy even when an enormous portion of its citizens hail from countries in which they had no experience with democratic institutions. Israel is not the country in which, despite all its imperfections, Beduin women train to become physicians, and Arab citizens are routinely awarded PhDs from the country's top universities. Israel is not the country in which the classic and long-neglected language of the Jews has been revived, and which produces world class literature and authors routinely nominated for Nobel Prizes. Nor is Israel the place where Jewish cultural creativity is exploding with newfound energy, as the search for new conceptions of what Jewishness might mean in the 21st century are explored with unparalleled intensity, particularly among some of the country's most thoughtful young people. No longer is Israel understood to be the very country that created the sense of security and belonging that American Jews — and these very students — now take completely for granted. No, Israel is none of those things. For many young American Jews, it is only the country of roadblocks and genocide, of a relentless war waged against the Palestinians for no apparent reason. For everyone knows that Palestinians are anxious to recognize Israel and to live side-by-side with a Jewish democracy. That, of course, is why Hamas still openly declares its commitment to Israel's annihilation, and that is why Hizbullah has, according to US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, accumulated "more missiles than most governments in the world." None of this is to suggest that Israel is blameless in the ongoing conflict with the Palestinians, or that the present government has a plan for ending it. Those are entirely different matters. The point is that even if these students hold Israel partially (or even largely) accountable for the intractable conflict with the Palestinians, even if one believes that it should have conducted Operation Cast Lead differently, or even if one disapproves of its policies in the West Bank, for example, it is a devastatingly sad day for world Jewry when those issues are the only ones that one associates with Israel, when mere mention of the Jewish state evokes not the least bit of pride from students graduating from a prestigious institution long associated with the very best of American Jewish life.
WHAT WOULD have happened had Brandeis invited President Barack Obama to deliver the commencement address? Obama is, after all, not exactly a non-divisive figure. He is president of a country at war in Iraq and in Afghanistan, places in which (a small number of) American troops have committed their share of atrocities, a country in which civil rights issues are still far from resolved, in which the bounty of America is still far beyond the reach of millions of its citizens. One suspects that the students would have been thrilled to hear Obama, despite the fact that many do not agree with his policies. They would have been honored to host him despite the fact that some must be disappointed that he has not lived up to his campaign promise to call the Turkish treatment of the Armenians a "genocide," despite the fact that he is intent on pursuing the war in Afghanistan, to which many of the students must certainly be opposed. They would have been delighted by Obama's presence because even if they disagree with some of his views or some of America's actions, they understand that the US is more than Obama, and more than this war or that policy. And they are, quite rightly, enormously proud of what America stands for and what it has accomplished. But that kind of instinctive pride in the Jewish state is, sadly, a vestige of days gone by, even for many American Jews. Reading some of the reactions to Oren's invitation, one is struck by an astounding simplicity, and frankly, an utter lack of courage to stand firm against the tidal wave of unbridled hostility toward Israel. Jeremy Sherer, president of the Brandeis J Street U Chapter, wrote to The Justice, "I am... bothered [by the invitation to Oren] because I disagree with his politics." That's what education is now producing — people who want to hear only those with whom they agree? "I'm not exactly thrilled," Sherer wrote, "that a representative of the current right-wing Israeli government will be delivering the keynote address at my commencement." Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, of course, is now busy fending off members of his coalition who are far to the right of him, like Moshe Feiglin and Avigdor Lieberman, and whether or not one takes him at his word, he is the first head of the Likud to endorse a two-state solution, no small matter for those who know the history of the Likud. But Sherer makes no mention of that complicating data, for it doesn't fit his overarching conception of the intrinsic evil of Israel's "right-wing" government (of which the Labor Party is also — inconveniently for Sherer — a member). The president of the Brandeis J Street U Chapter, who writes that he's of "Israeli heritage" (whatever that means), did not see fit to say a single positive word about Israel. Not one. One wonders what the "pro-Israel" part of J-Street's "pro-Israel, pro-Peace" tag line means to Sherer. Ironically, though, some of the attempts to defend the invitation to Oren were no less distressing. A student representative to the Board of Trustees writes in a disappointingly anemic piece to the The Justice that Oren "is being invited for his academic achievements, not his political ones," and then launches into a recitation of Oren's many academic accomplishments. Here, too, however, not a single positive word about Israel, or of the honor that having not only a world-class historian, but also its representative to the US, might be for the university. That sort of pride appears nowhere in The Justice's editorial, the J-Street representative's piece or the op-ed defending the invitation. For too many American Jewish undergraduates, it's simply no longer part of their vocabulary. Imagine that Sherer had written something like this: "I disagree passionately with Israel's policies regarding the Palestinians, and welcome President Obama's new pressure on Israel to bring the conflict to a close. But as a Jew who understands that despite my disagreement with Israel's policies, the Jewish state is key to the Jewish revival of which my entire generation is a beneficiary, I honor Ambassador Oren for his service to a country of which I am deeply proud in many ways, and I look forward to welcoming him to campus." Or if the pro-Oren op-ed had said, "There is a radical disconnect between our generation and today's Israeli government. Many members of my generation believe that Mr. Netanyahu and his government either do not know how to speak to us, or are uninterested in doing so. Ambassador Oren's appearance on campus is a perfect opportunity for the Israeli government to address us and our concerns; I urge our campus to listen carefully to what may well be a watershed address at this critical period in Israel's history and in the relationship between Israel and the future leadership of American Jewry." Imagine. But nothing of that sort got said. Indeed, the seeming refusal of any of the student articles to say even one positive thing about the Jewish state was all the more galling given other events that took place across the globe on the very same week that the Oren controversy was unfolding. At the University of Manchester, pro-Palestinian protesters tried to attack Israel's deputy ambassador to the UK, some holding Palestinian flags up to the windows of her car and others climbing on the hood and trying to smash the windshield. In Berlin, a Danish street art duo known as "Surrend" blanketed several neighborhoods with maps of the Middle East in which the State of Israel had been removed, with the term "Final Solution" at the top. The Scottish Labor Federation reaffirmed its support for a boycott of Israel, and the student government at the University of California, Berkeley fell just one single vote short in a bid to override a veto against a divestment bill; a similar bill was also debated at UC San Diego. None of the writers to The Justice felt that they had to distance themselves from those views, even as they critiqued or supported the invitation to Ambassador Oren. The student-thugs at UC Irvine, who disrupted Oren's speech on campus in February, have won. They have set the standard for how one treats any mention of Israel on any campus. Israel is nothing but a legitimate whipping post even at institutions of higher learning, and sane discussion of its rights and wrongs need not be defended, even in communities ostensibly committed to civil and intelligent discourse. Tragically, even these students at Brandeis, one of the great institutions of American Jewish life, had nothing terribly different to say to the world. Theirs are only more tepid versions of the delegitimization now spreading across the international community like wildfire. One shudders to imagine a future in which they might be our leaders. |
|
TEL HEBRON: CELEBRATING HEBRON LIBERATION DAY (THIS THURSDAY)
Posted by David Wilder, May 10, 2010. |
|
The Roots of Tel Rumeida by David Wilder February 24, 2003 Shalom. Yesterday, the Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, halted construction of new apartments in the Tel Rumeida-Admot Yishai neighborhood. What is the background of this building and this neighborhood? Almost five years ago, Rabbi Shlomo Ra'anan, the 63 year-old grandson of Israel's first Chief Rabbi, Rav Avraham Yitzhak HaCohen Kook, was murdered in his Tel Rumeida caravan home bedroom. Among the visitors during the shiva, the week of mourning, was then Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu promised Hebron's Jewish community that his government would issue permits allowing construction of permanent housing to replace the 'caravan' mobile homes, which had been brought to the neighborhood in the summer of 1984 with the permission of then Defense Minister Moshe Arens. Tel Rumeida's real name is Tel Hebron, site of the ancient home of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs, as well as King David and others. According to archeologists, there is positive evidence that Jews have lived in this area since the days of Abraham and Sarah. The land presently lived on was purchased from Arabs in Hebron in 1811 by Rabbi Haim Bajaio, (who also bought land adjacent to the ancient "Jewish Quarter," today known as the Avraham Avinu neighborhood, in 1807) on behalf of Hebron's Jewish community. However the property was not utilized for residential quarters until the summer of 1984, when the defense minister, on behalf of the Israeli government, agreed to a Jewish presence at the site. During excavations conducted during the Jordanian occupation of Hebron in the early 1960s, many ancient artifacts were uncovered, including giant walls dating back to the days of Joshua. In order to allow construction of permanent housing anywhere in Tel Rumeida, it was understood that the building would be preceded by additional archeological excavations. The Israel Antiquities Authority, in conjunction with the director of archeology in Judea and Samaria, began digging in the area. In the midst of the excavations, Ehud Barak was elected Prime Minister. Following conclusion of the six-month dig, the Barak government refused to issue the necessary building permits. However, cement roofing, covering the excavations was begun, and finished after Ariel Sharon replaced Barak. Following months of waiting, Sharon's Defense Minster, Labor-party leader Binyamin ben Eliezer finally signed the building permits, and construction began. The new building will house six new apartments and a Torah study hall, in memory of Rabbi Ra'anan, called Ohr Shlomo. When ben Eliezer was asked by his own Labor party members why he, a Labor minister, issued building permits to Hebron settlers, he replied that the situation in Hebron was so dangerous that caravan homes provided no safety for their occupants, and therefore, new, stone houses were a security necessity. This, of course, due to the "Oslo War." The caravan homes in Tel Rumeida were shot at day and night for over two years. Bullets hitting the caravan walls pierced not one wall, rather two or three walls. Only Divine miracles prevented anyone from being hit by these terrorist bullets. Ben Eliezer's comrades then asked him, if it is so dangerous in Tel Rumeida, why doesn't he close the area and remove its Jewish residents, to which the Defense Minister replied, "There are some places you cannot throw Jews out of." The construction has continued for a number of months and should be completed by the coming fall. However, several people, including two Arabs, two archeologists, and a left-wing former MK, are attempting to stop the building. They appealed to the Israeli Supreme Court, claiming that Israel is destroying ancient archeological artifacts. The court yesterday issued a temporary injunction halting all work, until the claims are examined and ruled upon. Let's for a moment, take a look at the petitioners. First, the Arabs, both of whom live in Tel Rumeida. Zakariah el-Bakri lives right next to the building site, adjacent to the Israeli caravan homes. He lives in a real, stone house. His house is, without any doubt, sitting on top of archeological antiquities which will never be uncovered, due to the fact that his house is covering them. The Jewish community's construction has been fully approved by the Israeli antiquities authority and the director of archeology in Judea and Samaria, Dr. Yitzhak Magen. All measures were implemented to ensure that the artifacts unearthed would be conserved. However, when Zakaria el Bakri built his house, he took no such precautions, thereby causing irreparable damage to artifacts under his home. In addition, el Bakri rented his home to the Israeli construction company in charge of the building. In other words, he was fully aware of the impending construction and even took advantage of it to make some money. Yet now he is trying to stop the building by appealing to the courts. Strange, no? The other Arab petitioner is the principal of an Arab girl's school, across from Beit Hadassah. Their house also rests on ancient Tel Hebron and covers antiquities. Mrs. Hekal is known for her vicious hatred of Hebron's Jewish residents and has been involved in many more that one scuffle with Jews living in the vicinity. There are also two archeologists complaining to the court. Dr. Avi Ofer was involved in excavations in Tel Rumeida in the 1970s. When it was decided to excavate again, several years ago, he wanted to participate as director of the dig, but was overruled by the Israeli antiquities authority. He went to court in an attempt to receive the appointment, but lost. Two interesting points concerning Ofer. First, the excavations were labeled as "rescue excavations," whose objective is to allow construction at the archeological site following conclusion of the dig. Ofer himself wanted to direct this dig. In other words, he knew, when applying for the directorship, that the site would be used for construction of apartments after the dig was completed. He didn't then complain about future building. The second point is the Dr. Avi Ofer told Noam Arnon and me, in our offices, years ago, that Tel Rumeida is the second most important archeological site in Israel after Temple Mount in Jerusalem. However he added, 'it all belongs to Arafat.' In other words, Avi Ofer isn't interested in the well-being of Tel Rumeida. He is infected by two horrible inflictions: deep-rooted jealousy and rampant leftism. The other archeologist bringing suit is Professor Moshe Cochavi, who is, incidentally, Avi Ofer's mentor. So you know where he's coming from. So there you have it. Again, an attempt by the left to stop growth and development in Hebron, this time in Tel Rumeida. However, they will not succeed. Tel Rumeida is the virtual roots of the Jewish people, beginning with Abraham, and leading up to the present. Those roots are so deep that no one will ever be able to displace or destroy them, hard as they may try. The roots of Tel Rumeida stretch out through almost four thousand years of Jewish presence in this world. They will continue to exist for eternity. With blessings from Hebron. Hebron, the Real Tel Aviv
The year was 1979. Ten women and forty children had recently moved into the basement floor of Beit Hadassah in Hebron, and set up house, as best as possible. Sort of like an urban kibbutz. A large eating area and several rooms for the mothers and their children. Swings hanging between tree branches and makeshift see-saws comprised the playground. Showers were a bucket of water poured over the head outside, blocked off from the others by a flimsy curtain. Running water was a luxury not yet available. One morning Miriam Levinger, waking up her six-year old son, suddenly opened her eyes in shock. A registered nurse, Miriam's own eyes darkened as she looked into her son's eyes. What she saw was yellow. Literally. The child wasn't scared. He was sick. Without any running water, without normal sanitary facilities, living in a filthy building vacant for years, jaundice was a real possibility. Seeing her son's yellow eyes, Miriam Levinger knew that the disease had arrived. She also knew that jaundice is very contagious and would likely spread quickly from child to child. As she describes it, Miriam was certain that the Beit Hadassah venture would soon be over. She was sure that as soon as the other women heard that her son was infected with jaundice, they would all leave, immediately. Girding her strength, and ready for the worst, she started making the rounds. "My son has jaundice." "Oh, really. What else is new this morning?" And that's the way is was, from one to the other. "O.K. — it will pass — he'll be healthy soon." Not one woman left. One of the women was pregnant, and of course, jaundice and pregnancy are not overly compatible. "Shoshana, you can't stay here and risk infection." Shoshana's reply: If I leave, I won't be able to return. I'm staying." (Beit Hadassah was then under siege — anyone who left couldn't go back, and no one else was allowed in.) "But Shoshana?". "No buts — I'm not leaving. Miriam will take care of me." Shoshana, after receiving special permission to leave Beit Hadassah and return, later gave birth to a little girl, named her Hadassah, and returned to Beit Hadassah. The Beit Hadassah women and children all survived one of the first tests of their will and determination: jaundice. Almost exactly eleven years ago the Ze'ev family was enjoying their Passover holiday meal at the new home they had just finished building in Shilo, in the Shomron. As is customary, during the meal the younger Ze'ev children 'stole' a piece of Matza, needed to later complete the traditional ceremonies. As the time approached to conclude the meal, their father Yisrael, and mother, Miriam, looked at the eight kids and asked them to return the Matza. "What will you give us if we give it back," they asked. "Well, what do you want?" What do children usually ask for — a basketball, a doll, a book, or maybe a bicycle. But this time the kids had a different idea in mind. Glancing at their sister, Isca, then 18 years old, they took a deep breath and answered. Watching them closely, Isca smiled to herself. A first-class instigator, Isca had coached her younger siblings well, one by one. "We want to go live in Hebron. If we can go live in Hebron, we'll give you the Matza back. Otherwise?" Yisrael and Miriam looked at each other and shrugged. "O.K.," Yisrael answered, "if that's what you want, that's what you'll get. Now, go get the Matza." And that's how the Ze'ev family decided to move to Hebron. Almost exactly a year later, troublemaker Isca received her own personal reward. Isca had already been living and working in Kiryat Arba for a year, performing her national volunteer service at Midreshet Hevron. Now, living in Hebron, not far from Rabbi Moshe and Rebbetzin Miriam Levinger, Isca's sparkling personality drew the attention of one of the Levinger daughters. She decided to play matchmaker and arranged a meeting between Isca and one of her brothers. Soon after there was an engagement party and then a wedding. Isca Ze'ev married the little boy who came down with jaundice in Beit Hadassah, sixteen years earlier, Shlomo Levinger. For most of their married life the young Levingers, today parents of four, lived in the same building where Shlomo spent a year of his early childhood. But this time, rather than live in the basement, Shlomo and his family lived on the top floor of Beit Hadassah. I have a personal affinity to the Shlomo, Isca and their children, as we have been neighbors for almost seven years, living across the hall from each other. But a few days ago, on Friday, we bid them farewell. Early Friday morning the movers arrived, packed up their truck, and chugged up a very steep hill, about 3 minutes away. No, they aren't leaving Hebron. Rather, the Levingers became the first family to move into Hebron's newest building in the Admot Ishai (Tel Rumeida) neighborhood. The new building, called "Beit Menachem" in honor of the Lubavitcher Rebbi, Rabbi Menachem M. Shneerson, will house seven families and a Torah study hall. The site's official dedication will take place during Hebron's upcoming Passover festivities. I think it very auspicious that the Levinger family initiate this new apartment building. Directly under their apartment is the Hebron Archeological Park, which contains artifacts from 4,500 to 1,500 years old, including a wall from the days of Abraham and a house from the era of King Hezekiah, some 2,700 years ago. What could be more fitting than to have a representative of Hebron's 'first family,' a son of Rabbi Moshe and Rebbetzin Miriam Levinger, known as the 'father and mother' of Hebron's modern Jewish community, be the first to move into this new edifice? To me, this site could be called Tel Aviv. Why? Today's Israeli metropolis is named after Theodore Herzl's book, Altneuland, which literally means 'old — new land,' with 'Tel' [the name for a hill containing the remains of an ancient city-ed] representing the old and 'Aviv' (which means spring in Hebrew), representing the new. However, the authentic 'old' is here in Hebron, the roots of our existence, at the site called Tel Hebron. And the new is directly above the old — a beautiful new apartment complex, the buds of the rebirth of the Jewish People in the City of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs. It won't be long before "Beit Menachem" will be full of families with many children running around. These families and children are the blossoms on the trees planted by Abraham and Sarah, almost 4,000 years ago, at this very site. We thank G-d for the privilege to follow in the footsteps of such esteemed ancestors, being able to rebuild and live in the real Tel Aviv.
David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron.
You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of
Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il
or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760
Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone:
718 677 6886.
|
|
ALAN DERSHOWITZ BLASTS ISRAEL'S ACADEMIC FIFTH COLUMN IN KEYNOTE SPEECH
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 10, 2010. |
|
Alan Dershowitz blasts Israel's leftist academic fifth column in keynote speech at Tel Aviv University Board of Governors assembly. Alan Dershowitz denounces Israel's academic fifth column in keynote speech at Tel Aviv University Board of Governors assembly. While defending the "right of anti-Israel academic extremists to be wrong," Dershowitz called on Israeli academics to defeat the anti-Israel radicals in the marketplace of ideas. He denounced leftist professors who harass students for being pro-Israel. He denounced attempts to suppress academic freedom for non-leftists at Tel Aviv University. He denounced the far Leftist anti-Israel academics for the harm they do to Israel and to Israeli universities. The full speech may be viewed in English — as the second half of this clip: Click here. (Speech may appear soon in mainstream media in print form — heads up!) Hebrew news report about the speech in Haaretz: see especially the talkbacks. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
ULTRA ORTHODOX INCREASING IN ARMY; SYRIA/HIZBULLAH ARM FOR WAR; OBAMA PROTECTING PA JIHAD?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 9, 2010. |
|
ARMY IS ULTRA-ORTHODOX PATH INTO ISRAELI JOBS AND SOCIETY 
The Israeli Army has initial success with a program to accommodate ultra-Orthodox men. The program, to put it bluntly, is all-kosher and no sex. Participants are able to be fully observant and fully military. They started behind secularly educated youth in math and certain other subjects. However, having gained self-discipline and intellectual prowess by lengthy Jewish study, the trainees catch up swiftly. They want to become officers; some already are. They tend to renew military stints. They usually are married, and join with the approval of their rabbis and with their families attending pre-induction orientation. One of their trainers observed their pride in belonging and in accomplishment. They are taking the traditional IDF path into Israeli society and into the business world. In Israel, the ultra-Orthodox emphasize Torah study more in relation to work than do American ultra-Orthodox. [The IDF used to be hostile to Jewish religious needs and values.] The program is being expanded, but not as much as applications (IMRA, 5/7/10). There were other such units, very highly regarded. The Jewish population of Israel is increasingly ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox. Most younger IDF officers are Orthodox. The country needs them, especially as the secular sector wanes not only in numbers but in fervor for national defense.
IRAN-EMIRATES ISLAND DISPUTE FLARES The "...United Arab Emirates recently compared the Iranian occupation of the three Gulf islands it claims — Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb — to 'the Israeli occupation of Arab land.'" Iran fired back that the UAE statement serves Zionist interests. Iran hinted that it may claim sovereignty over the whole UAE, if the UAE does not shut up about the islands. [Remember when Saddam claimed sovereignty over Kuwait?] This is an old conflict. Iran is exacerbating it by unilaterally encroachment. The UAE has the support of the Arab League and General Assembly, but mutes its distress out of fear of Iran. The UAE sees that nobody is stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Iran demands that the issue not be internationalized, but be handled under the joint agreement, that it violates. Strategic considerations are involved. The islands bear oil. They are situated nearer the oil tanker lanes. Iranian control would enable Iran to Strait-jacket the Gulf more easily. Iran claims "historical rights" to the islands. Before the Emirates united, the islands belonged to two Emirates. In 1971, a day before Britain withdrew from the Gulf, Iran seized the islands by force. Later it agreed to joint rule of Abu Musa, the inhabited one. Iran has violated that agreement. It forced UAE citizens to get Iranian visas to visit the islands, and barred foreigners. Iran built a landing strip, and enlarged its garrison. In 2008, it opened ministries on Abu Musa. Reports have it that Iran has denied the hundreds of resident UAE families supplies, medical access, and communication with the mainland. Other reports are that Iran is developing 27 oil sites nearby A.P. photo/ Ennio Leanza — UAE Min. of Foreign Trade Sheikah Lubna bint Khalid Al Qasim (IMRA, 5/7/10 from INSS). The UAE is realistic about Iran not being stopped from developing nuclear weapons. Nobody is stopping it, though Obama pretends to be. Iran already has violated the nuclear treaty and UN sanctions. Therefore, it is up to Iran voluntarily not to develop nuclear weapons. Considering Iran's treachery against the treaty, the UN, the Emirates, and its own citizens, why should anybody believe that Iran will restrain itself and forgo the power of nuclear arms? Look at the effect upon the Arabs already, of that looming power! The Arabs talk tough about Israel and an alleged occupation, but not tough about actual Iranian aggression and occupation. The UN should send Judge Goldstone to the islands, to report on the alleged blockade. All those people who decry Israel's (but not Egypt's) partial blockade of Gaza have a new cause to champion, really oppressed Arabs. Think they will protest? MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: 7. ARABS, BEING SEMITES, CANNOT BE ANTISEMITES Let's go back to the origin of the term, "anti-Semite." A Germanic hater of Jews, Wilhelm Marr, wanted a simple term to express that hatred. He coined the term, "anti-Semite," designating himself as one, to mean hatred of Jews. It denotes hatred of Jews as a people, and therefore has no basis for encompassing the Arabs. It meant and means nothing else. There is no population group called "Semites." There is a linguistic grouping, called "Semitic," including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, and others. People who contend that "Arabs are Semites, so how could they be anti-Semites," misunderstand what the term means. They are using a rationalization adopted by Arabs who manipulate the English language for propaganda. It is an evasion of responsibility for bigotry. It also is part of a pretense that Arabs are particular victims of ethnic prejudice. There is so little of that, as to be insignificant. The contention also disregards the fact that people of the same ethnicity have fought against one another for centuries. Example: the American Civil War. Example: internecine Arab conflagration. If we called anti-Semites "Judeophobes" or "Jew-haters," what would they say, then, about the appropriate label?
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: 8. NOT BEING A PEOPLE, JEWS DO NOT DESERVE A STATE The Arabs claim religious entitlement to the Land of Israel — their Islamic doctrine holds that any area formerly conquered by Islam but now independent must revert to Islam. Then they deny the Jewish claim to their homeland by asserting the Jewish claim is religious and that religion is not the basis for a territorial claim. An interesting self-contradiction. The Arab rationale misunderstands that there is more than one type of religion. One type is international, such as Roman Catholic and Anglican. Some religions start out as national ones, but become international. Examples are Lutheranism and Islam. Judaism basically is ethnic. It is a spiritual tradition practiced by the Jewish people alone. As such, they have a national history in their homeland, their patrimony. In the Jewish tradition, Jews have a trinity of identity: (1) People of Israel; (2) Religious tradition of Israel; and (3) Land of Israel. Besides denying that Jews are a people, the western Palestinian Arabs also deny that the Jews had a history in what is called Palestine, though all the old towns have Hebrew names and when history was recorded, so was the Jewish presence recorded. The Arab claims are false. The Jewish nation, one of the oldest, has a 3,000 year history in the Holy Land. It had sovereignty there for a thousand years. Some families remained to the present day. More, beset by invaders, had to flee. Their descendants vowed to return. A few million did. That required much melting pot work, but they have their ancient language and in general a common culture and religion.
EGYPT BARS ISRAELI DOCTOR FROM MEDICAL CONVENTION The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis is to start in Cairo on May 22, but Egypt is denying entry to Dr. Uri Seligsohn, head of the Israeli branch of the Society. Dr. Seligsohn had approved the venue of Cairo, and looked forward to helping improve the state of medicine in Egypt. He thought that the peace treaty with Egypt still is in effect. He did not think that Egypt would bring politics into a matter of medicine and science. As a result, many researchers have canceled plans to attend. Egyptian medicine will be the loser (IMRA, 5/7/10). Muslim discrimination against Israelis attending international conventions or sports events is not uncommon. Muslim governments bring politics into everything. Westerners do not realize how much Islam is a total way of life and how important jihad is to them. Much is lost without international cooperation.
SYRIA AND HIZBULLAH ARM FOR WAR Not only has Syria heavily armed Hizbullah. "While Syria retains its tanks and artillery, its recent investments have been in its commando units, antitank missiles, rapid deployment capabilities and the construction of ghost towns along the border to trap IDF troops." "Hizbullah is almost completely stationed inside cities and villages throughout Lebanon. A future war will be fought not in the hills but in the narrow alleys and streets of Bint Jbail, Maron a-Ras and Hirbet Selm." Hamas also has entwined itself in civilian infrastructure. It will use hospitals and schools as havens and firing platforms. The IDF is preparing counter-measures, arranging for more "inter-operability" to give commanders greater choices, and using more urban-like training bases. The difficulties in urban warfare are: (1) Houses conceal weapons and positions; (2) The enemy wears civilian clothes [a war crime]; (3) In any case, it is difficult to fire back without killing civilians; (4) The enemy can pop out of tunnels, by surprise; (5) Houses can be booby-trapped (IMRA, 5/7/10); and (6) Narrow alleys make fighting more man-to-man and give the enemy an advantage and deprive Israel of some of its advantages of weaponry and maneuverability Judge Goldstone bears some responsibility for this encouragement of Arab aggression and higher Israeli casualties. His UN report failed to condemn Hams war crimes of using human shields and improperly condemned Israel, careful as it was, for killing civilians. Under international law, civilians killed in a genuine military operation are the responsibility of the armed forces that operated among them, in violation of the rules of war. That makes sense, not to give an advantage to the cynical side that uses human shields.
WATER PHOTOGRAPHY EXHIBIT USED TO DEFAME ISRAEL The Annenberg Space For Photography in Century City, California is running an exhibit of National Geographic photos on the global water shortage through June 15. The exhibit defames Israeli use of water as anti-Arab. It claims that Israel wallows in water it withholds from Arabs. Israel's Consul General for Los Angeles, Jacob Dayan, complained to the exhibitors that they turned a world problem, in which Israel is leading in solutions, into sordid politics. He noted the absence from the exhibit of these facts: 1. Israel recycles water more than any other country, 75%. The runner-up is Spain, at 12%. 2. Israel has a 70-8-0% efficiency in use of water in agricultural. That also is the highest in the world. 3. Israel has the largest and most cost-efficient seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant. 4. As a result, Israel consumes no more water now than it did in the 1960s, despite a great population increase. 5. Israel share its successes with other countries. It has trained about 200,000 people from 140 countries, and held dozens of demonstration projects abroad, including on water management (StandWithUs) Egypt took Israeli tutoring in this, several years ago. I would add: 6. A fifth of Israel's citizens are themselves Arabs. 7. Drought is restricting available water in the region. 8. In Israel's peace treaty with Jordan, Israel agreed to divert 50 million cubic feet of water a year to that country. 9. When Israel took over Gaza, it found the Gaza aquifer brackish. Israel flushed away the salt with its own water. The Palestinian Authority has let the aquifer degrade again. 10. In Judea-Samaria, Arabs have been drilling unauthorized wells, thereby lowering the water pressure. 11. Several years ago, I saw studies of high rates of leakage from water carriers in Arab countries. The Israeli Consul could have explained other aspects of this, too. I recently published an article about Israel teaching dry farming to African countries. Western anti-Zionists taint innocent events with their aggression.
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, PROTECTOR OF PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY JIHAD? 
SecState Clinton and Prez Obama make false statements to protect Arabs. (AP/J. Scott Applewhte) As Senator, Hillary Clinton stressed getting the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to stop inciting its people to violence against Israel. Now she and President Obama either deny that the P.A. incites to violence or make excuses for it. Examples: 1. Obama's Cairo June, 2009 speech to the Muslim world criticized Holocaust denial and hatred of Jews, but did not mention the P.A. nor incitement. 2. Next day, Obama praised Abbas for making progress on the matter, as if he were constructive rather than one of the chief inciters. 3. Other times, too, after having been criticized over this, Obama and Clinton mentioned it, but did not discuss P.A. penalties nor responsibility. 4. At its August convention, Fatah again rejected Israel's existence as a Jewish state, glorified terrorists, praised "armed struggle," insisted on flooding Israel with Arabs, and refused to include in a peace agreement an end to all claims against Israel. [The flood of Arabs would take over Israel. Not ending claims means there still would be no solution to the Arab-Israel conflict.] The Administration ignored all those bellicose statements. 5. When Sen. Spector pressed Clinton to object, Clinton falsely claimed that the convention upheld a two-state solution, supported negotiations, and asserted that individuals who spoke to the contrary were in the minority. 6. In January, 2010, when terrorists murdered Rabbi Meir Chai, Abbas and Fayyad ignored it but condemned Israel for slaying the murderers, and offered condolences to the "martyrs" families. The Administration said nothing. 7. On January 29, a sermon in Nablus, broadcast over P.A. TV, called the Jewish people enemies of Allah and of mankind and cited a religious exhortation to kill them. The Administration paid it no attention. 8. During Vice-President Biden's visit, Israel announced completion of another stage in a building project, and the P.A. named a Ramallah square after a major terrorist killer. The Administration became almost apoplectic over the project but hard of hearing over the terrorist advocacy. After a few days, Clinton excused the P.A. with the falsehood that Ramallah is controlled by Hamas. She praised the P.A. for strengthening law and order. [They may be reducing ordinary crime, but that does not make peace, whereas P.A. incitement to terrorism promotes war.] 9. The P.A. instigated violence around Jerusalem. The Administration mentioned instigators without identifying and their side. Obviously, the Administration protects the P.A. from exposure as promoters of war and violence. The Administration is upset only over houses being built for Jews (Press release by ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member, 5/8/10) The Administration, with major media complicity, gives the impression Israel, rather than the Arabs, keeps the Arab-Israel conflict fueled.
YEMEN BLOCKS ARAB CONFERENCE ON DARFUR 
Yemen dispensed unconditional visas to foreign Arab delegates for a pan-Arab conference on Darfur. A few hours before it opened, security men barred the entrance. Delegates said, "...the justification we heard from a high Yemeni official is that the government avoids and does not allow a conference in Sanaa which may direct abuse to a fellow Arab country." Delegates thought that Sudan must have pressed Yemen to prevent a conference. The UN estimates that the government of Sudan, aided by an Arab militia, chased two million people from their houses and slew another 300,000. The estimate is not clear whether those figures apply to all of Sudan or Darfur, alone. Southern Sudanese formed an army to oppose the government. The government estimates that the fighting killed 10,000 (IMRA, 5/7/10). Abuse means misuse. The abuse here is by Sudan, committing genocide and cover up, and Yemen, blocking discussion of problem and solutions. Today I reported Egypt barring a prominent Israeli doctor from an international convention in Cairo. Muslim delegates to the UN have been trying to ban "offensive" discussions, but they call offensive anything truthful about historical matters in which their religion or people played a negative role. Those governments endanger the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and religion that Western countries struggled to achieve. Do we Westerners want them to manipulate the UN to deprive us of our freedoms? Do we want them to come into our countries and use our democratic processes and terrorism to replace our freedoms with their restrictions? Arab genocide is a taboo topic in the Arab world. Must not admit the truth, must not acknowledge Arab guilt for misdeeds. Can't allow certain nationalities into an otherwise constructive conference on medical issues. Since they have such pervasive attitudes against truth, and since they go so far in pursuit of jihad, how much credence should we put in their assertions of Israeli wrongdoing? Some of us have been pointing out for years that whatever crimes and sins the Arab/Nazi side commits, it denies and imputes to Israel and the Jews, a la traditional antisemitism. The Palestinian Arabs deny Zionist and other Jewish history and attribute much of it to themselves. They fabricate a Palestinian nationality and history, to replace the long known nationality and history of the Jews. Hardly a month goes by without another blood libel against Israelis. Other countries knew that Nazi and Communist antisemitic "agitprop" was false. These countries now are so infected with it themselves, or politically correct, that they do not want to know it about Muslim countries. Informed and thinking people should, by now, have a built in skepticism of Arab accusations 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 and visit his website:
|
|
RETRIEVING THE JEWISH LAND AND KEEPING IT IN JEWISH HANDS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 9, 2010. |
|
The Israel Land Fund
"Take part in the restoration of the Land of Israel now!" calls out the new website of the Israel Land Fund. The group was founded by Jerusalem land activist Aryeh King and others in 2007, with the stated goal of "continuing the original efforts by the Jewish forefathers, and in more recent history, over a century ago, by pioneers of the State." Specifically, the Fund (ILF) has set out to "acquire all the land of Israel for the Jewish people," by inviting Jews around the world to help retrieve properties currently under Arab ownership, or that are in danger of becoming so. The ILF's website states that it strives to "enable all Jewish non-Israeli citizens to own a part of Israel [and] to ensure that Jewish land is once again reclaimed and in Jewish hands." The organization offers a combination of business prospects and ideology. "Invest in Israel and yield high returns," it states, offering various properties around the country that are currently available — and recommended for Jewish purchase. "With hundreds of properties all over Israel being offered for sale," ILF states, "the Israel Land Fund offers every Jew, regardless of location, the opportunity to obtain a portion of the land. House by house, lot by lot, the Israel Land Fund is ensuring the land of Israel stays in the hands of the Jewish people forever. You, too, can take part in this great endeavor." The site has sections on the various areas of Israel, proposing sale of properties in Jerusalem, where Arabs have made it their goal to purchase widely, as well as the Galilee, the Negev, Acco (Acre), Jaffa, and elsewhere. Information Treasures and Proposals It is also a veritable treasure house of information on the different parts of the Land of Israel. It tells us, for instance, that Acco, in northwestern Israel, is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities, dating back to 1504 BCE, and was once a leading port in the Middle East, in the same league as Alexandria and Constantinople. Web-site visitors are offered a three-story house in Acco, with arches and a sea-view balcony, next door to Jewish neighbors and in need of some renovation. Group investments are encouraged as well, such as in the following proposal in Jaffa: a 300-square-meter plot with three large apartments offered, with an option to add another penthouse apartment. Information on the religious-Zionist Jaffa core-group, currently numbering 28 families, is provided. Rising Values, Jewish Law, Politics The website also emphasizes and details the increasing land values in Israel in general, the importance in Jewish Law of buying plots in the Land of Israel, and the need to counter-act the trend of hostile and enemy elements to purchase properties. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com). |
|
INDIRECT TALKS 'BEGIN" WITH LOUD SILENCE
Posted by Arutz-7, May 9, 2010. |
|
This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, who writes for Arutz-7. |
|
The American-mediated "indirect talks" between the Palestinian Authority and Israel began Sunday with a loud silence as both sides wait for U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell to return to the region, probably in the next 10 days. He is to leave Israel Sunday night. The Palestinian Authority officially approved the American initiative to resume what once were described as "negotiations" in the "peace process." Following years of bargaining the terms of what now is usually called the "diplomatic process," the PA has won wide international support for all of its demands. It has the support of the Obama administration, which opposes Jewish "settlements' — decades-old neighborhoods, some of which are populated by nearly 30,000 Jews — in a large part of Jerusalem. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said there must be direct talks before an agreement can be reached, while PA negotiator Saeb Erekat stated in Ramallah, "The proximity talks have started." In fact, they took a recess as Mitchell prepares to return to the United States Sunday night, presumably to map out further tactics. With virtually all analysts and observers saying his chances for success are low, the PA is working from the advantage that if Israel does not agree to its demands, it will wait for the right time to turn to the United Nations to pass a resolution recognizing it as an independent country. PA concessions continue to be on the tactical front, agreeing to "proximity talks" despite Israel's refusal to formally accept U.S. President Barack Obama's demand for a building freeze for Jews in areas of Jerusalem that the PA claims as part of its would-be capital. Under a cloud of confusion, a general de facto building freeze on new Jewish homes is in effect in Judea and Samaria as well as parts of eastern, southern and northern Jerusalem. Mitchell has four months in which to work, which is the time limit the Arab world has set for the talks to fail or succeed. It also coincides with the approximate end of Israel's 10-month temporary building freeze on new Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria. President Obama is expected to continue to move aggressively to force both sides to accept an agreement, which from the PA side would include sovereignty over all of the land restored to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War. There also are growing suspicions that Defense Minister Ehud Barak, chairman of the Labor party that is in the Netanyahu government, has forged a close political friendship with President Obama, who would prefer a new coalition government that includes the Kadima party, headed by Tzipi Livni. |
|
SAMARIA RESIDENTS : DEMOLITIONS; RAMAT SHLOMO: 2-YEAR FREEZE; YOSEPH
CHAI YESHIVA: DEMOLITION
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 9, 2010. |
|
(1) "Samaria Residents On War Footing Against Demolitions"
(Israelnationalnews.com) Grassroots leaders in Samaria are ratcheting up their resistance to the government's demolitions of Jewish homes, in response to what they see as an escalation of the Defense Ministry's campaign against them. Last week's demolitions of homes in Ganei Modiin and Shavei Shomron, and the beating of Shavei Shomron's rabbi, convinced the grassroots Samaria Residents' Council that it was time to roll up its sleeves and organize resistance. The Council has established an Emergency Headquarters that is manned 24 hours a day and that has called upon residents to be alert and report any movement of police vehicles. The HQ is interested in reports of movement by regular police, Border Police and special Yassam police, especially if there are signs that they are headed to one of the Jewish communities for demolition of homes and other structures that are deemed illegal. The HQ crosschecks such information with reports it receives from other sources and issues alerts to activists whenever destructive action by the authorities is identified. The HQ then calls up "reinforcements" to try and prevent the demolitions. Council Director Esther Karish said that in several cases, the HQ has already succeeded in organizing resistance to the arrival of inspectors and security forces, thanks to citizen reports to the HQ. "In the Shavei Shomron demolition last week," she said, "the destruction forces arrived in small units so that a large scale convoy would not be detected."
(2) "Two-Year Building Freeze in Ramat Shlomo"
(Israelnationalnews.com) Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has agreed to freeze construction in a Jewish neighborhood of Jerusalem for two years, officials in the United States State Department said Sunday. Netanyahu has reportedly agreed not to build in Ramat Shlomo in northern Jerusalem until 2012. US officials said the move was part of an effort to create the right atmosphere for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has agreed to freeze construction, and the PA has agreed to fight incitement, they said. Israel has long complained that the PA engages in incitement and indoctrination of its populace to revere terrorist murderers and hate Jews. The PA announced Sunday that it has agreed to hold indirect negotiations with Israel, after threatening for several weeks that it would not do so unless Israel extended the freeze on construction in Judea and Samaria to eastern Jerusalem as well. The Israeli decision not to build in Ramat Shlomo may be a compromise between the pressure from the US and PA to declare a complete freeze in eastern Jerusalem, and the official government position that construction in the capital will go on. US envoy George Mitchell left Israel on Sunday; the talks are scheduled to begin with his return to the region next week. Earlier this year US officials were upset when the Jerusalem municipality confirmed the approval of a construction project in Ramat Shlomo during a visit from US Vice-President Joe Biden. At the time, Israeli officials said the US anger was misplaced, because the declaration was simply part of a long bureaucratic approval that would take years anyways. During the same visit, PA officials met to honor deceased female terrorist Dalal el-Mughrabi, who led the most bloody terrorist attack in Israel's history. Ramat Shlomo is a predominantly hareidi-religious neighborhood in northern Jerusalem. It was built on state land that was not previously owned by Arabs, and is surrounded by other Jewish neighborhoods. The land was under Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967. The PA claims Ramat Shlomo as part of the capital of a PA state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. According to PA officials, all land east of the 1949 armistice line is rightfully Arab, including historically Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. (3) "Demolition Orders for Od Yoseph Chai Yeshiva in Yitzhar"
(Israelnationalnews.com) The Civil Administration for Judea and Samaria issued an order Sunday night to destroy the Od Yoseph Chai (Joseph Still Lives) yeshiva in the Samarian Jewish community of Yitzhar, south of Shechem. Defense sources claimed that students at the yeshiva participated in most of the "price tag" activities, in which Yitzhar residents are accused of harming Arab neighbors after hostile Arab acts against Jews. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
AIMS OF PALESTINIAN ARABS
Posted by Sanford Aranoff, May 8, 2010. |
|
Evidence is clear that the real aim of the Arabs is the destruction of Israel for religious and revanchist motives. Diplomacy is a tactic for buying time and camouflaging this motive. A state faced with an aggressor but unwilling to confront him, whether because of fear, internal political constraints, or its own national interests, will use diplomacy to create the impression that something is being done, substituting words for deeds. Contact Sanford Aranoff at aranoff@analysis-knowledge.com |
|
SPRING LEAVES
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 8, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il and
go to |
|
EGYPT ANTI-TUNNEL FENCE A FARCE; FAMINE IN YEMEN; MISCONCEPTIONS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 8, 2010. |
|
EGYPT ANTI-TUNNEL FENCE A FARCE Egypt has been spending millions of dollars to build a super-strong, bomb-proof, underground fence between Sinai and Gaza, to block smugglers' tunnels. Gaza Arabs spend about $1,000 on blow-torching a hole through the fence big enough for a tunnel. One of those wielding an oxygen-fueled blowtorch laughs at the Egyptian effort. Unclear is whether Egypt is paying for this folly or farce, or whether the U.S. is funding the money, like fools (IMRA, 5/6/10 from BBC). IMRA long has suggested that Egypt could stop the smuggling if it wanted to, by intercepting the trucks on their narrow approach along flat terrain or by moving the town providing cover for the tunnels further back.
EGYPT AND ISRAEL ON IRAN'S NUCLEAR CAPABILITY Israel has asked Egypt to withdraw its demand that Israel give up its nuclear arms capability. Israeli sources say that Egypt knows that Iran and not Israel poses the regional nuclear menace. Egypt, however, feels it cannot oppose Iran's capability without also opposing Israel's. Egypt seems to think that Israel's supposed nuclear arsenal is worse than Iran's not yet existent but developing arsenal (IMRA, 5/5/10 from Reuters). Winston Mid East Analysis & Report reminds us that it predicted that the U.S. would get some Arab country to demand that Israel submit to the International Atomic Energy Association. In perhaps a year, Iran may be able to bomb more than one country. Its contempt for death in this life may make it undeterred by retaliation. Therefore, the fact that Iran may need a little time to finish its development does not make It less dangerous than Israel. Israel, if not attacked, does not attack. Is Egypt bound by Islamic political correctness on this, or is it trying to kill two birds with one stone?
FAMINE IN YEMEN 
One-third of the people in Yemen lack food. Malnutrition is spreading among children. Farmers had to sell their cattle. Relief supplies have lost some funding. Refugees are afraid to return to areas still in revolt. A few million people are caught up in this. Al-Qaida is trying to exploit this problem [partly of its own creation]. People have a choice: Starve, move, or revolt (IMRA, 5/5/10 from Jordan Times). If the people had to wait for succor from the critics of Israel who purport to care about Arabs, they surely would starve. Affirmation of concern about Arabs is a pretext for Israel-bashing.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS 3: ISRAEL OCCUPIES YESHA, PART 2 The prior article, about "Occupies," showed that the term is misunderstood, and this continuation explains that this term, as are others, often is misused deliberately. The Arabs have found that certain, loaded terms, inflame Western sentiment against Israel. Some of these terms are "occupies," "illegal," "settlement," and "violate UN Resolutions." The Arabs sling those terms at Israel on every occasion. They don't apply, but the mud sticks. Mud sticks when the biased world refuses to wash it off. First the Arabs and Israeli leftists called certain Jewish houses and communities "illegal," though they really were in various stages of legal approval which the government delayed and then claimed were illegal. Then the Arabs and their friend in the White House claimed that all the Jewish settlements are illegal. Then some call the non-occupation "illegal." Finally, someone ahead of the pack wrote to me and called Israel "illegal." The term is a weapon. The Arabs fling it like one of their rocks flung at Israeli motorists. Arab build settlements, too. They built thousands of houses in Israel and in Israeli-administered areas of the Territories on land the Arabs do not own and very often without building permits and in defiance of legitimate town planning. When Israel correctly calls them illegal, the world denounces Israel. Sec. of State Clinton demanded that Israel not demolish them, only Jewish "outposts." I would be suspicious of a Secretary of State having that double standard and of a President who, like the Arabs, calls something illegal inappropriately and without explanation. It is just name-calling.
NY BOMBER CASE PRODUCES LEADS & TACTICS. Leads and tactics are emerging from the Times Square, New York bomber case. 
The no-fly list of terrorist suspects almost failed, because airlines did not have to consult the list often enough during the day to stop flights for which tickets were bought shortly before boarding. The government now makes consultation more frequent and responsibility more its own. After the underwear bomber was caught, everybody realized that someone who pays cash for airplane tickets and who has little luggage for or from a long stay should be scrutinized carefully. The Times Square bomber paid cash, but was not scrutinized. The Times Square bomber was influenced by the same imam who influenced the Fort Hood shooter. This shows a gap in national defense. The National Counter terrorism Center wants more responsibility to counteract domestic radicalization. No, counters Homeland Security, let's train citizens to be more alert, like the street vendors who reported the burning car in Times Square. Why should American choose between two approaches? Why not adopt the best of both, suggests the National Security Council (Wall St. J., 5/6/10). Not discussed in my New York newspapers is how Internet propagandists can influence these youngish Muslims to become murderers. Why do the youngish fellows consider the radical imams genuine representatives of the religion? Why don't the youngish people take the moderate view of their religion? Why don't Americans know more about the danger radical Islam poses to the U.S., the greatest political danger since the Cold War? What do our schools teach about this danger? What can our country do to teach it to people becoming naturalized citizens? Do our leaders and Establishment experts even know what to teach? Why haven't these questions being asked before? Political correctness? Political correctness, lets America's enemies manipulate our democratic system in order to impose an undemocratic system. They struggle against us, but use our tolerance to keep us from struggling back. Does that make sense? Imagine if we had political correctness during WWII and the Cold War! National defense would have been poorer. Shouldn't we end political correctness?
ARAB ARSON OR ACCIDENT IN HEBRON 
Arabs set afire part of Hebron's ancient Jewish cemetery. They damaged some old grave sites. Jewish residents said that this is the third fire there, this week. Police said it was just a matter of children playing with matches. The problem with the police rationale is that the fire occurred at midnight. What were children doing at play, at that hour? (Arutz-7, 5/7/10.) Over the years, Arabs have attacked that cemetery many times, not that it was noticed by the U.S. media. Many people read of Arab accusations against Israel, usually disinformation, and are uninformed about Arab attacks against Israel. Anti-Zionists formulate a distorted image of Hebron Jewry as all vicious and the Hebron Arabs as all victims. The West has a tendency ot to judge attacks as terrorist until unavoidable.
NEW JEWISH OR ANTI-JEWISH LOBBY IN EUROPE? The other day, we reported formation of a European counterpart to J Street. It has just come out that European governments subsidize J Call. They subsidize it because it blames Mideast problems on Israel, just as they do (Arutz-7, 5/7/10). Then is it a Jewish organization? Can a Jewish organization accept funds from anti-Israel sources and still call itself a pro-Israel organization? In the original article on J Call, I mentioned that J Street was organized with participation of Obama aides, with intent to split U.S. Jewish opinion. J Call serves the same function. What are the ethics of subsidizing neurotic individuals alienated from their own people, in the name of that people they really reject, so that they can confuse more of their people, in order to promote the polices of outsiders against their own people? EGYPTIAN ISLAMISTS AGAINST A CLASSIC Islamic lawyers in Egypt asked the Attorney-General to ban Arabian Nights. They found references to sex in it. It invites sin, they believe. The name of the petitioners' group seeking to shackle readers? Lawyers Without Shackles. The country's writers union would fight a ban in court. Writers' Union spokesman said the lawyers were behaving "'like the Taliban. Those who want to destroy our heritage are taking the same path as the Taliban when they destroyed Buddha's statues,' Mohammed Salmawy told the news agency AFP, referring to the destruction of the giant sculptures of Buddha in Bamiyan" [Afghanistan]. The books are published by the government. The publisher said the edition was sold out. "'Egyptians are avid readers and they will not be influenced by a bunch of people who take advantage of Islam in order to suppress freedom." Among the folk tales are "Sinbad the Sailor" and "Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves." (IMRA, 5/6/10). Those stories they were among my childhood favorites. I didn't notice the sex, so it failed to entice me into a life of sin. Do not feel superior at observing the oppression and absurdity of Islamist political correctness. American has its own self-righteous censors, who misunderstand our native literature, and tried to censor Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn for its depiction of a black slave whom it actually treated as a hero. But the censors could not bear its description of slavery, even though it did not indicate approval of slavery, but, instead, indicated respect for the enslaved. The lesson is, if you don't like other people's ideas, persuade them of yours. Don't censor except for national defense.
U.S REGULARLY INSPECTS JERUSALEM BUILDING PLANS The U.S. Ambassador to Israel regularly meets with Israeli officials to inspect Jerusalem building plans. No more houses have been sold in Jerusalem for months (IMRA, 5/6/10). The ban was not described by the news brief as limited to eastern Jerusalem. Israel is not acting like a sovereign state. A sovereign state would refuse to show building plans to U.S. officials. Israelis say they need good relations with the U.S.. Meanwhile, the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, and China nuclear powers are demanding that Israel give up its nuclear weapons, if any. Absent an Israel nuclear deterrent, the Arabs, who continue pursuit of jihad against Israel, would unleash their own weapons of mass-destruction and their U.S.-subsidized Jordanian and massive Egyptian armies and the petrodollar purchased arms and overwhelm Israel, especially if U.S. diplomacy deprives Israel of secure borders. The result of U.S. policy would be war, destruction of a U.S. ally, and a triumph that would encourage Muslims to fill the coffers and regiments of Islamists fighting against the U.S.. Are those wise policies and good relations? Incidentally, the U.S. is doing nothing about North Korea and nothing of substance and even blocking action against Iran.
ISRAELI AND PALESTINIAN ARAB WRITERS' FESTIVALS 
Simultaneous but separate writers festivals were held in Jerusalem, Israel, and in Ramallah, Palestinian Authority (P.A.). The two most prominent Israeli writers mentioned were Amos Oz and David Grossman. Another, Nir Baram talked about, "There are many things that we don't talk about," such as, "the systematic confiscation of the rights of non-Jews in Israel and the Territories." At the Arab festival, a British Jewish writer, who had spent a year on an Israeli kibbutz described his visit to the P.A.. "You hear so much about the rage, the violent mood, but I have found a language of peace, freedom and justice. The festival is recognition of the independent life of the Palestinian people. Coming through the invisible barrier of fear has actually filled me with hope. I found deep humanity on the other side." Shouldn't the two sets of writers meet? Yes, said Anthony David, an American writer at the Arab festival. Writers from all over the world converging on the same city and not meeting? [Ramallah is near, but not in Jerusalem.] No, said the Arab festival manager, an Egyptian-British author. He said that the Palestinian Arabs deserve their own (Ethan Bronner, NY Times 5/7/10, A8). Generally speaking, the Arabs separate themselves from Israelis, whom they accuse of apartheid. The two most prominent Israeli writers there are leftists, who sympathize with Arab views. People think that Israelis represent the Jewish nationality, but they often represent the Arab one. That is why a radio debate, at which an Israeli Jew is matched against an Arab, by a moderate who usually takes the Arab side, is stacked, 3:0. The Israeli Jews selected usually is leftist and anti-Israel. The Arab usually is more extremely anti-Israel. How nice for the British Jews filled with hope! It might interest him to know that people in anti-democratic cultures have learned to advocate their repressive rule in terms of peace, freedom, justice, and democracy. It plays well in the naïve West. As good hosts, of course, the Arabs are renowned. Perhaps if that British writer had turned in to P.A. TV or listened to broadcasts of a Friday night mosque sermon after which Arab men pour out and attack Israelis, he would have gotten a different impression. My friends probably could arrange for him to rent an Israeli-licensed car and direct him to a particular highway at a particular time where Arab rage would try to bash in his windshield and get at him. What he does not understand is that people are not always in the same mood. There is a time for this and a time for that. When not roused, the rabble does other things. MAJOR MIDEAST MIISCONCEPTION 5: 'NO ALTERNATIVE TO A PLO STATE' Those who have proposed what they call "land-for-peace," and who propose turning the Territories into another Palestinian Arab state, assert that there is no alternative. They also assert that nobody has proposed one. Alternatives have been proposed. They don't get much publicity. For one reason, the media opposes proposed alternatives and does not engage in national debate with those who don't have much access to the media. For another reason, although the Israeli Left fulminates against the supposed Right, actually, very few supposed right-wing parties propose a Zionist solution. Perhaps they are too discouraged and intimidated to propose one. There have been a couple of proposals similar to turning the Territories into an Arab state. The similarity is in their not being Zionist solutions. PM Netanyahu proposes self-rule just short of sovereignty. Others have proposed turning the Territories over to Jordan and Egypt. That would position Egypt and Jordan for a swift invasion of Israel. Jordan and Egypt don't want the Territories any more. They might, however, accept the proposal long enough to wrest the Territories from Israel, and then let the Territories become independent. Privately, Jordan is afraid that a sovereign Palestinian Arab state as neighbor would not be neighborly but seek to take over Jordan, which also is a Palestinian Arab state. Land-for-peace cannot work. The Arab mind cannot accept Israel on a religious and nationalist basis (as Abbas more or less admits). On that, Arabs find compromise unacceptable. They think this way: if I am right and you are wrong, then if I compromise, I am wrong, too. Land-for-peace advocates assume that the Arab-Israel conflict is territorial, but territory is just a means to power in what is a religious conflict. That conflict arises from Islamic imperialism. Appeasement by territory does not change the Muslim Arab bigotry and desire to conquer non-believers. It facilitates the conquest. Indeed, land-for-peace has been tried. It failed. It led to wars in Lebanon and Gaza and the build-up of an Egyptian Army getting ready for war with Israel. Land-for-peace is not a realistic alternative. The status quo, local Arab autonomy short of statehood, is not good, but is better. What is not good about it is that it does not solve the problem, and the Arabs abuse autonomy to commit terrorism. What would a Zionist solution be like? Just to mention it here and not to flesh it out, a Zionist solution would annex abutting Jewish towns and adjoining vacant land in the Territories, cease building up the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) economy, and gradually gain secure borders, reducing the likelihood of war and ending P.A. terrorism. Would that end the Arab-Israel conflict? No. Ending it would require Muslim Arab Reformation, a gaining of tolerance and a relinquishing of imperialism. But that Zionist solution would help Israel survive until the Muslim Arab Reformation finally comes.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: 6. U.S. FAVORS ISRAEL The misconception that the U.S. favors Israel has an extreme version, that Israel dictates to the U.S.. A less extreme version is that the U.S. supports Israel unstintingly. U.S. policy contradicts that allegation. Congress does subsidize Israel, but it appropriates as much for Arab areas. The Executive branch conveniently but falssely certifies that the Palestinian Authority meets the anti-terrorist conditions of such aid. If the various Administrations favored Israel, they would not subsidize its enemies. Some people are misled into the misconception by the State Dept.. The State Dept. disavows any crusade against Jewish sovereignty. Other traditional anti-Zionists, such as the New York Times, feign friendship. Not wanting to be seen as directly responsible for Israel's extinction, they propose that Israel cede Judea and Samaria, with their natural tank barriers, and grant sovereignty to the Arabs, although sovereignty confers the right to import arms and armies. The rationale is that this would be in exchange for another of the many peace agreements that the Arabs violate. This State Dept. pretense at peace-making would lead to war. Israel's security needs were recognized in UN Resolution 242, that the U.S. sponsored, and by a U.S. Chiefs of Staff analysis that to survive, Israel must retain some or most of the Territories, respectively. The Executive branch, however, disregards that life-or-death matter in favor of Arab claims for which it has yet to provide a convincing rationale. A broad historical observation was the State Dept. has always opposed Zionism, even before Israel became a state. Example: When Pres. Truman wanted to recognize the state, he had to outmaneuver State Dept. attempts to intercept or defy him. Example: When the Arabs invaded the newly reconstituted Jewish state, Sec. of State Marshall proposed rescinding Israel's sovereignty. Example: The U.S. sabotaged every Israeli victory over Arab aggression. It rearmed some Arab states, even as they renewed bellicosity by vituperation, non-recognition of Israel, and fostering terrorism. Example: The Executive branch does not recognize Israel's capital, apparently out of sensitivity to Arab religious claims to the city. Inconsistently, it does recognize the declared capitals of other countries, including ones whose capital was contested. This is a double standard against Israel, whom it allegedly favors. The State Dept. appears to base its rejection of Israel's capital on the mere suggestion by the UN, in 1947, that Jerusalem be a separate entity. The UN proposed withholding the most significant Jewish-majority city from the tiny new state. The UN advisory partition resolution was totally rejected by the Arabs, whose aggression attempted to nullify the concept. Jordan seized the Old City, ethnically cleansed it of Jews, denied Jews accessed to their holy site, destroyed most of the synagogues in it, and broke its agreement to allow Israelis access to Hadassah Hospital in it. In stark contrast, Israeli liberation of eastern Jerusalem was accompanied by access of Muslims to their religious sites. Under the terms of the Mandate, and as the victim of aggression, Israel had the right to annex areas of the Mandate still unallocated to any country. It annexed eastern Jerusalem. All of Jerusalem always was regarded as the capital of the Jewish people. Jerusalem never was the capital of any Arab country. The Koran does not mention Jerusalem. During Jordanian rule, no Arab head of state ever visited Jerusalem. It became important to them only when Israel liberated it and allowed all faiths access to it. In seeking to void Israel's annexation of eastern Jerusalem, thus favoring the Arab claim over Israel, the U.S. would facilitate renewal of religious discrimination and terrorism. The U.S. had promised Israel its intelligence about Arab military developments. Nevertheless, the U.S. secretly withheld key data. It released some data deliberately incomplete. If Israel had to rely upon it in war, it would have suffered high casualties. That is not "supporting Israel unstintingly." The U.S. gave Israel guarantees. It did not live up to them. Recently, Pres. Obama and Sec. Clinton denied, and then misrepresented Pres. Bush's publicly known letter approving Israeli retention of big settlement blocs. Pres. Johnson did not honor the guarantee of equal access to the Suez Canal nor that Egypt would not move missiles forward, if Israel did not bomb them. Again, the U.S. claimed it had no record of a guarantee. The U.S. is supposed to review whether its arms gifts to Egypt or sales to other Arab states would change the balance of power. In each announcement, the Defense Dept. inserts boiler plate language about not altering the balance of power, without explaining or checking. Sec. of State Rice denounced almost every Israeli measure of defense from terrorism. Pres. Obama, too, put convenience for Palestinian Arabs above security for Israelis, in demanding that Israel remove checkpoints. When Israel tries to accommodate, terrorists get through. The U.S. demands that Israel refrain from approved building in eastern Jerusalem or in Judea-Samaria, but does not object to illegal building by Arabs there. Every six months, the U.S. President, exercises an alleged waiver in the law requiring him to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. He says it is for national security. He does not give a credible explanation, if any. The U.S. subsidizes the Lebanese Army, an ally of the anti-American terrorist organization, Hizbullah. The U.S. directly trains military forces under the control of Abbas and his aides, lifelong terrorists and jihadists, who also are anti-American. "Unstinting support for Israel?" We have seen that U.S. diplomacy is directed against Israel and in favor of the western Palestinian Arabs. It has been said that countries have neither friends nor enemies, only interests. What is the "national interest?" Likewise, what is "national security?" The powers that be define it, rightfully or wrongfully. How many countries would have maintained their identity, if their rulers had understood what was in their national interest!
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
ISRAEL AND THE USA — VERY DISTURBING NEWS
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 7, 2010. |
|
Friday, April 23, 2010 4:40 PM I have just received this: Tonight Clive and I heard very disturbing information — we heard it from a consultant to the United States who meets once a month with the President in the White house. He is in the know. This is what actually has happened with the relationship with Israel and the USA and it is not pretty: 1. Israel during the Bush and Clinton Administrations — had landing rights in Turkey, and in the USA bases in the middle east and more recently under George Bush, in Iraq. This was in case they were invaded by Iran, or Saudi or any other Arab country. Obama has withdrawn those landing rights. Israel now has nowhere to refuel in the middle east. 2. Netanyahu was instructed to come to the white house for a meeting. He was brought in through a servants entrance — the only head of state ever in US history to be given that disgraceful treatment. He was not offered even a cup of tea — but was lectured to by Obama who told him that he is not permitted to attack Iran and that he has to withdraw all forces from the West bank and may not build any more settlements (neighborhoods) in East Jerusalem. 3. Israel found out that there were four terrorists meeting in Dubai. As they have done for the past 62 years, they informed the US of that and said that these terrorists had to be dealt with. Obama said under no circumstances. Israel decided to go ahead. They killed the one terrorist who showed up. However the CIA was sent there to film the entire event by Obama — and then a concerted PR campaign was waged by the White house to discredit Israel and what they did — this kind of action has taken place with US support for the past 62 years since we have common enemies. 4. Obama has refused to oppose Syria's re arming of Hezbollah and Hamas — Israel now sits in imminent danger from the amounts of missiles that can be sent into her territory. 5. Israel will never tell the US again of its plans — since they cannot trust us. 6. Israel intends to attack Iran — there are over 30 installations of which 4 have underground bunkers that contain nuclear weapons. Israel cannot wait any longer. The US is no longer supporting Israel's self defense. 7. This is the same man that gave the White House a full file on the 9.11 attack — his warnings and proof were laughed at. 8. He believes that the next attacks in the USA will be mass transportation — subways and malls — especially the largest malls where the most people can be killed — and that Vegas and wherever there are conventions of employees will be a huge target. We are not prepared and are naïve in our lack thereof. 9. Once Israel attacks Iran, every Jew and Jewish institution will be at risk — temples, religious schools etc. We must be prepared. 10. This kept a room of 200 people spellbound. It is not fiction. It is fact. What can be done? It is essential that everyone who doesn't know yet, now understands that the protection and survival of Israel is not on Obama's list — and he is now taking ACTUAL steps to move all protections away — no more landing rights, negotiating with Iran and Syria, making nice to the Moslem World in the face of allies of long standing and he is no friend of the Jewish people and Israel. We must be sure that we elect politicians who protect Israel as well as the USA — our interests are intertwined. Please forward to everyone you know. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
THE UNDERLYING CAUSE OF THE ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT
Posted by Yaacov Levi, May 7, 2010. |
|
This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg, an Internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer. He is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy, a Jerusalem-based think tank for improving Israel's system of governance. Contact him at list-owner@foundation1.org This was published February 2, 2000. |
|
Why Arabs want to destroy Israel receives only superficial commentary by students of the Arab-Israel conflict. Most say the Arabs want to destroy Israel because it is a Jewish state. Notice, however, that the state's ruling elites are only nominally Jewish. This includes not only Ehud Barak, Israel's Prime Minister, but Aaron Barak, the President of Israel's Supreme Court, the most powerful court in the world, and the only one that scorns the legal and moral heritage of its own people. Others say that the Arabs want to erase Israel from the map of the Middle East because it is democracy that threatens, by its example, the autocratic power structure of the Arab-Islamic world. And yet, despite the veneer of democracy — periodic multiparty elections — anyone who has studied the great political philosophers from Aristotle to John Stuart Mill would see that, such is the concentration of power in Israel's government, on the one hand, and such is the impotence of its legislature on the other, that Israel should be classified as an oligarchy. (Since the government owns or controls almost 90 percent of the country's assets, Israel may rightly be called a corporate state.) Still other commentators say that the Arabs want to annihilate Israel because Islam is a militant and expansionist religion. Although there is truth to this point of view, the question remains: What is there about Israel that the Arabs most detest or fear if it is not, strictly speaking, a Jewish as well as democratic state? Could it be the state's secular character, its having ever been dominated by secularists? Consider what two Arab commentators say. One writes: "The propagandists of secularism, who leave out of account the religious factor in the Palestine problem, ignore the fact that this is the only bone of contention in the world which has persisted for thirty centuries." Another Arab spokesman declares: "Apart from the political conflict, there is a basic philosophical and spiritual incompatibility between the two contending nationalisms. Even if all political disputes were to be resolved, the two movements, Zionism and Arab Nationalism, would remain, spiritually and ideologically, worlds apart — living in separate 'universes of discourse' which are incapable of communication or meaningful dialogue." Notice that neither of these Arab spokesmen regard territory or geographical boundaries as a decisive issue in the Arab-Israel conflict. Which means that Israel's "territory for peace" policy is doomed to fail, indeed, that the so-called peace process cannot but lead to Israel's territorial dismemberment. Territorial nationalism, however, was the paramount principle of secular Zionism. That being the case, the "peace process" signifies — as indeed it has — the end of secular Zionism! What is crucial here, however, is not the noun "Zionism," but the adjective "secular." From the Arab point of view — which, after all, is of decisive significance — it is Israeli secularism that constitutes the greatest threat to Arab-Islamic civilization, as may be read in the pages of Moslem scholars such Harvard-educated professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr. To be sure, Arabs murdered religious Jews even before the establishment of the secular state of Israel. But anti-Zionism was the principal motive of such murders, and the Zionist movement was dominated by secularists — one may even say atheists. In short, Arab hostility toward Israel is primarily motivated by the fact that Israel is ruled by irreligious Jews — and it makes no fundamental difference whether these Jews belong to the political Left or the political Right. In other words, the primary cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is Jewish rejection of, or indifference to, the God of Israel. This conclusion accords with basic Jewish sources as well as with Jewish history. When Jews turn away from God, God turns away from Jews. Stated another way, when Israel fail to exalt God's name, God will use various instruments, be it the United Nations or the Arabs, to condemn and humiliate Israel. The underlying and hidden cause of the Arab-Israel conflict, therefore, is nothing less than Israel's failure — and this applies to many religious Jews — to act as the God-bearing nation, the nation chosen to exemplify in word and deed ethical monotheism. This underlying cause is obscured by the very brilliance of well-intended critics of the "peace process." Which is why they have had no discernible impact on the obviously irrational and suicidal course of Israel's government. The same critics would accomplish infinitely more if they would but recognize that the irrational and suicidal nature of the "peace process" is a consequence of the godless character of Israel's government. They would then see that Yasir Arafat is merely an instrument of divine providence. He is simply facilitating the demise of a secular state, a precondition of Israel's spiritual redemption. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
JOY BRIGHTON TALKS AT THE BREAK THE SILENCE RALLY, 25 APRIL 2010
Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus |
|
One Voice was Different. One Message was Fiduciary Mismanagement on what seems a Mammoth Scale New York City. Most of the 2,500-plus people who came down to the Israeli consulate at 42nd and 2nd Avenue to show their support for the state of Israel and the undivided capitol of Jerusalem were pretty much aware of the important — if familiar — tropes of the speaker slate addressing the huge crowd in the steady rain. Break the Silence, organized by activist group Jewish Action Alliance, was pitched at community leaders who had failed to stand up against administration slights and charges against Israel's prime minister, the country's internal dealings, and policy issues. The rallying cry was for the President to stop pressuring sovereign Israel to do what the administration wanted them to do. One speaker, though, caught my attention. Another Democrat, as am I — and another former voter for President Obama — a striking auburn-haired woman came to the wet podium, introduced as banking specialist Joy Brighton. She stopped most attendees in their tracks. She sure stopped me, one of a couple of thousand listeners in the crowd, with her surprising detailing of yet another way that jihad seems to be worming its way into Western society. Shariah finance — also called Islamic banking, by those in the know, which she certainly is — gets its calling card from Koranic text. Initiated by Iran in 1978 when the Shah was overthrown, and secular government, freedoms and equal rights for women, children and gays were tossed out at the same time, it bypasses the usual route of financial instruments common to US banks and financial institutions. It bypasses interest, and puts a premium on so-called "ethical investing," which translates roughly, according to expert Ms. Brighton, as no deed or agreement or property involved in any way with either pork or alcohol, and maybe sex or the sale of sex. A hidden worm in the agreements ensure that a small but fairly significant percentage of any end-term profits go to some sort of unspecified Islamic 'charity.' That should mean, you would think, orphans and widows, the disabled or handicapped. Hospitals and athletic fields. But in reality, such monies never end up going to real charities. "Problem is, these charities have been shut down or designated as sponsors of terror by our own government," says Brighton. Time and again, with the number somewhere north of 27 such foundations or recipients, these funds find their way into thinly covered pro-terrorist funding arms. Brighton expands the information. Citibank, Goldman Sachs (yes, the very same), AIG, UBS, Blackstone and Blackrock are all creating specialized shariah-financing agreements. They hire and pay so-called shariah scholars, sheikhs and imams to sit on boards and designate which financial vehicles are OK, and which aren't. And if you think it's just peanuts we're talking about, Brighton adds that today, "Shariah banking has nearly one third of the banking market — or $300 billion invested in such investments." And just where is this money held? Mostly in Iranian, Saudi and United Arab Emirati banks, those countries where shariah is law of the land, since the changeover in '78. The bulk of these funds is held in Iran. Which is, as we all know, the world leader in terror funding. Mosques go up. Tainted textbooks are distributed. Weapons are bought and handed over. Our men and women are blown up, maimed and slain with money supplied by these little deductions. Our infrastructure is compromised with weaponry we, in this sneaky way, are supplying. Few in the vast crowd knew very much about this, but Brighton provided the scenarios now unfolding at HSBC, Smith Barney and all the other heavy hitters. Instead of closing ranks against this insidious form of fiscal takeover, the Big Boys respond with a shrug: "If I don't close the deal, someone else will..." "You make it illegal, first, and then I'll stop doing these deals." And the most blasé answer of all: "It's just business." Lighten up, will you? A little under two years ago, determined to put a halt to the seeping takeover of our capitalist system, Ms. Brighton approached the President of Goldman Sachs. She asked to show him the octopus arms of shariah banking. "We really aren't very involved in that," he replied blandly. A mere six months after that face-time meeting, however, Citibank (Islamic division) and co-lead Goldman Sachs fronted and sold a half-billion dollar bond for General Electric. It is called, in Arabic, a Sukuk bond. He is not the only one to eagerly capitulate. Sukuk deals and their sibling arrangements are the opposite of transparent. They have no local banking oversight. Minimal disclosure. They can't even be countermanded or checked through our legal system. They are foreign, wrapped in the writ of a foreign orthodoxy, a foreign language, a foreign system of repayment and underwriting. Perhaps worse, these officers abdicate their fiduciary responsibility and, by failing to clarify precisely what's going down, they deliberately mislead their investors. Omission is as much a sin as commission, especially in the tricky business of finance. Makes you stop and think. As the current administration and the SEC, TSY, the Congress and our fine traditional institutions are squabbling over how to fix the system and clean up the credit swaps, derivatives and ETF's (exchange-traded funds), as everyone seems to be calling for more transparency and rescue tape for the latest Wall Street meltdown, the people at the apex of these ungoverned, alien financing schemes are wearing blinders. CEOs, COOs and CFOs are opening their branch offices to the insidious investment vehicles that will prove to be an even worse undoing than the everyday corruptions of selling junk bonds short when the rest of the client list is long. Same old banking snarls. But with a whole new, terror-touching twist. Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in China on the university level. She can be contacted at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com |
|
AMONG THE RIGHTEOUS: LOST STORIES FROM THE HOLOCAUST IN ARAB LANDS
Posted by Mdsdm, May 7, 2010. |
|
Conceived by Prof. Robert Satloff
|
|
Among the Righteous, which required eight years to complete, is indeed valuable and compulsively interesting. But as Phyllis Chesler writes (in pajamas media), this is something of a false notion — in these eight years, Prof. Robert Satloff unearthed and chronicles three Arabs who saved Jews. At the same time, as difficult as it was for him to unearth these unusual (even atypical) souls, it is just as clear that, largely, the descendants of these men are only grudgingly accepting of their forebears' efforts to save those most of their contemporaries now despise. The filmmaker has to convince the progeny of these saviors to accept the honor of their parents' actions. They would, in a word, rather leave old ghosts buried, even if the ghosts are now being feted for bravery and decency. Prof. Satloff says he could not find documented Arab/Muslim women who saved Jews, but acknowledged that many Arab women, without special documentation he could find other than hearsay, took in Jewish children, and certainly helped with feeding Jews, because Arabs/Muslims in North Africa got more generous food rations than Europeans, and both got more than did Jews, the lowest of the low, especially in Vichy-ruled Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria and so on. I was conflicted while moved because in my month in North Africa, this February, I heard none of the information needed that I sought on these matters. Instead, my local informant/guide gave me the pretty history of the Romans and the various dead peoples who left picturesque ruins and mortuary stele. The brutal treatment — by and large — of the N. African and escapee European Jews, thousands upon thousands of whom were interned in horrific concentration camps in the three countries bordering the Med, despite an occasional imamic fatwa (Algeria, note-worthily) forbidding Muslims to co-opt the effects or properties of the Jews in camps and in incarcerations. And elsewhere, where the king refused to go along with the Vichy nazis to force 'his' Jews to wear the ugly yellow identifier, JUDE. These were exceptions. The rule was grotesque, even compliant cooperation. Where I was constantly unsettled was the accuracy of Satloff's claim: Indeed, where the European aspect of the murder of more than 6 million Jews was copiously recorded in film, photography, records (the meticulous Germanic obsession) and personal histories captured in book and tape and spielberg's Shoah recordings, few today have ever heard of this North African contingent of Holocaust that murdered so many, with so little remnant left. Professor Satloff is owed a huge debt, an enormous debt, for his massive digging in stubbornly opaque libraries and hamlets now crumbling. Elsewhere, yellow stars. They were systematically denied rights given to African Muslims. They were beaten, underfed, and worked to death in the swelter of the desert. Yes: They had it slightly better than European Jews, who were frozen and worked to death or incinerated. But relative terribleness is no comfort to those guillotined or shot for nothing but for being Jewish. There is a rich and unending source material treasury of reasons to be mordantly concerned with the dangers presented by surging, infiltrative Islamic seepage. A colleague says the same was said of Irish, Italians, Jews and others during the influx at the start of the 20th century. But none of those people promised to take over the political, religious and social fabric of the country, vowing to usurp our Constitution, promising to supplant the freedoms with the shackles and hideous mistreatment of 'kufars,' women, children and homophiliac citizens. We are scarcely ignorant. And our vast research and knowledge, our continuing attention to the alarming dangers presented by shariah supplantation, religious primitivism and voting rights we see oozing into our country, after its spread in Eurabia, is a sign that we are in fact not asleep, nor islamophobes. We are awake. We see the dangers on the edges and middle. We have no reason to love this people, gory since the inception of their religion. We have no reason to warmly embrace a people that, when they can, attempts repeatedly to destroy the systems it finds outside of their Umma, for the toxic replacement 'values' of a belief system that has no love for anyone but their particular strain of exclusionary vitriol. I know this is harsh: Reality is harsh. Even though you will be moved by the film on Monday on PBS, narrated beautifully by Robin MacNeil — do not be fooled. It is a tremendous piece of research, wonderfully realized in old footage, clips, newsreels and judicious re-enactments. But even Israel is dubious about adding the three names to their gallery of the Righteous Gentiles in Yad Vashem. I cannot but think they have some reason for their caution on these names. And to date, Professor Satloff's remarkable book of exploration to find these very few good Arabs in the face of Jewish extinction efforts in North Africa cannot find a publisher in two countries: France (because the French come off as fairly horrific, as one imagines, especially the Vichy sellouts to naziism) and — Israel. We can only conjecture why the Israeli publishing industry chooses not to publish this interresting and research-based historical accounting of the infinitesimal fraction of Arabs who managed to save a Jew or two. Politics no doubt plays a large chunk of the reason behind the de facto freeze-out. marion ds dreyfus Contact Mdsdm by email at mdsdm@rcn.com |
|
PETITION "With ISRAEL, STAND WITH REASON", IN REPLY TO JCALL
Posted by K_Hallal, May 7, 2010. |
|
The attack against Israel by the Jcall document is inspired by a short-sighted view of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, the signatories of this appeal do not have the clear perception of the global physical and moral threat to which Israel is currently exposed. It is indeed incredible that intelligent and cultivated people like Alain Finkelkraut and Bernard-Henri Levy — instead of dealing with Iran that will soon keep the whole world under the threat of the range of its atomic bomb — play with the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu is the true hindrance to peace, that the essential obstacle to a resolution of the conflict is a reproachable attitude of Israel. The intellectuals who have signed the French document ignore history and don't care about the help that it will give and is already giving to the unprecedented delegitimization threatening the life of Israel. Pushing Israel to concessions without rewards, simply means to surrender the enemy without any guarantee: the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza has produced disastrous consequences, the land Gush Katif inhabitants has been kicked out from is since then a launching pad for missiles and terrorists; Ehud Barak's concessions in Camp David, designed to give Arafat practically everything he was asking for, led to the horror of the second Intifada, with its two-thousand people killed by suicide attacks; the evacuation of Southern Lebanon in 2000 strengthened the Hezbollah, supplied them with 40,000 missiles and led to the 2006 war. Finkelkraut, Henri Levy and their fellow signatories claim that they are concerned about the future and the security of Israel. But they actually ignore the basic element that has prevented success of any peace process, namely the Arab and Palestinian refusal to recognize the very existence of the State of Israel as a permanent nation-state in the Middle East. This all-encompassing rejection of Israel's right to exist is reflected day by day in the Palestinian and pan-Arab media. The attack against Netanyahu aims at breaking up his right wing coalition. But it actually never mattered whether an Israeli government was right or left: anyhow the Palestinians refused any proposal of peace. Israeli land concessions like the ones the French intellectuals advocate will never bring peace. Only a cultural revolution in the Arab world can achieve it, but nobody asks for that, not even Obama, who devotes US great strength to pressure only Israel. This is the current fashion. Peace will not come because Israel becomes smaller. What will bring us closer to peace is if Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas stops naming public squares after mass-murderers like Hamas bombmaker Yehiya Ayash; if the Palestinians stop passing out candies when Jewish families are murdered by suicide bombers in restaurants; and when the Arab world accepts Netanyahu's modest request to recognize the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish people. This reality is ignored as well by the Israeli intellectuals who have signed a document against the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel, who wrote a very noble letter to support Jerusalem spiritual core and historical homeland of the Jewish people. This sadly politically correct epidemic is probably designed to give some oxygen to the defeated pacifist movements that is actually able only to crash against the rock of the Islamist hatred culture and to defame Israel. But in this approach there is no contribution to any better future for the Middle East: the world must find the courage to face the new Islamist frenzy that springs from Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas and points to the destruction of Israel. Iran and its allies are of course arming themselves with lethal weapons, not with vain words, like those who signed "The Call for Reason". But even words can kill and destroy. The signatories of the J-Call manifesto show a blatant ignorance of the extended hand policy adopted by Netanyahu since his Bar Ilan speech in June 2009, the ten-months settlements freeze, the lifting of many check points and the adoption of important measures to ease the Palestinian economy. And you can clearly see that the "Finkelkraut document" has an Obama flavour, a prissy and respectable trendy attitude intellectuals are often unable to say no. This makes possible nowadays to the increasing number of Israel's enemies to delegitimize the Jewish State rejoicing "even the Jews are with us". If this was the signatories aim, they have indeed achieved it. SIGN THE PETITION "STAND FOR ISRAEL, STAND FOR REASON"
Here.
Contact k_hallal by email at k_hallal@yahoo.com
|
|
SHAVOU'OT (PENTECOST) 2010 GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 7, 2010. |
|
1. Shavou'ot commemorates the bestowing of the Torah upon the Jewish People, which shaped the nature of the world in general and Western democracies in particular. The bestowing of the Torah took place over 3,300 years ago, setting the Jewish People on the Road Map to the Land of Israel. It also highlights the eternity of the Jewish People. Thus, the first and the last Hebrew letters of Shavou'ot (constitute the name of the third son of Adam & Eve, Seth, the righteous ancestor of Noah, hence of all mankind. The Hebrew meaning of Seth is the Hebrew word for the bestowing of the Torah at Mt. Sinai. 2. Shavou'ot is a derivative of the Hebrew word Shvoua' — vow in English, referring to the exchange of vows between G-D and the Jewish People. It is celebrated on the 6th day of the Jewish month of Sivan, 50 days following the Exodus. Shavouot took place 26 generations following Adam. The Hebrew word for Jehovah equals 26 in Gimatriya. There are 26 Hebrew letters in the names of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs: Abraham, Yitzhak, Yaakov, Sarah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah. 3. The Hebrew root of Shavou'ot (and Shvoua') is the word Seven — Sheva. Shavou'ot (the Festival of Weeks in Hebrew) is celebrated 7 weeks following Passover, reflecting the 7X7=49 gates of impurity in Egypt, which had to be rectified, in order to be worthy of the Torah. It also represents the 7 earthly attributes employed by God to create the universe (in addition to the 3 divine attributes. It stands for the 7 basic human traits, which individuals are supposed to resurrect/enhance in preparation for Shavou'ot. 7 key Jewish/universal leaders — Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aharon, Joseph and David — represent the qualities of the Torah. Number 7 represents the wholesomeness of Judaism and the Land of Israel — 7 days of Creation and a 7 day week. The Sabbath is the 7th day, the first Hebrew verse in Genesis consists of 7 words, 7 species of the Land of Israel (barley, wheat, grape, fig, pomegranate, olive and date/honey, there are 7 directions (north, south, west, east, up, down, one's own position), 7 gates to The Temple, 7 Noah Commandments, Moses' birth/death was on the 7th day of Adar, Jethro had 7 names and 7 daughters, Passover and Sukkot last for 7 days each, each Plague lasted for 7 days, The Menorah has 7 branches, Jubilee follows seven 7-year cycles, 7 Continents, 7 notes in a musical scale, 7 days of mourning, 7 blessings in a Jewish wedding, 7 Jewish Prophetesses (Sarah, Miriam, Devorah, Chana, Abigail, Choulda and Esther), etc. Pentecost is celebrated — by Christians — on the 7th Sunday after Easter. 4. Shavou'ot is the second of the 3 Jewish Pilgrimages (Sukkot-Tabernacles, Passover and Shavou'ot), celebrated in the 3rd Jewish month, Sivan. It highlights Jewish Unity, compared by King Solomon to a triangular cord, which cannot be broken. The Torah — the first of the 3 parts of the Old Testament — was granted to the Jewish People (which consists of 3 components: Priests, Levites and Israel), by Moses (the youngest of 3 children, brother of Aharon and Miriam), a successor to the 3 Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and to Seth, the 3rd son of Adam & Eve. The Torah was forged in 3 ways: Fire (commitment to principles), Water (lucidity and purity) and Desert (humility and principle-driven tenacity). The Torah is one of the 3 global pillars, along with labor and gratitude/charity. The Torah is one of the 3 pillars of Judaism, along with the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. 5. Shavou'ot highlights the Scroll of Ruth, who lived 3 generations before King David, son of Jesse, grandson of Ovad, the son of Ruth. The Scroll of Ruth is the first of the five Biblical scrolls: Ruth (Shavou'ot), Song of Songs (Passover), Ecclesiastes (Sukkot), Book of Lamentations (Ninth of Av), Esther (Purim). Ruth — a Moabite Princess — stuck by her mother-in-law, Naomi, who lost her husband (president of the Tribe of Judah) and two sons, in spite of Naomi's Job-like disastrous times, financially and socially. Naomi's suffering constituted a punishment for the desertion of the People of Israel (emigration to Moab) during a most difficult draught. Leaders do not desert their people when the going gets rough! Ruth's Legacy: Respect thy mother in-law, principles (loyalty, concern, modesty and love) over convenience. The total sum of the Hebrew letters of Ruth — in Gimatriya — yield the number of laws granted at Mt. Sinai (606), which together with the 7 laws of Noah total The 613 Laws of Moses. The Scroll of Ruth highlights the Judean Desert as the Cradle of Jewish history — is it "occupied territory???" 6. Shavou'ot sheds light on the unique covenant between the Jewish State and the USA — Judeo-Christian Values (Torah and Biblical values of morality and justice). These values impacted the world view of the Pilgrims, the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Separation of Powers, Checks & Balances, etc. John Locke wanted the "613 Laws of Moses" to become the legal foundation of the new society established in America. Lincoln's famous 1863 quote paraphrased the 14th century John Wycliffe's dedication to his English translation of the Bible: "a book of the people, by the people, for the people." 7. Shavou'ot is the day of birth/death of King David (as well as the day that Moses was saved by Pharaoh's daughter), who united the Jewish People, elevating them to a most powerful position. David — along with Moses and Abraham — was a role model of humility and repentance, hence the Hebrew acronym of Adam (human being in Hebrew): Abraham, David and Moses. In contrast with King Saul, King David assumed responsibility and accountability for his sins. He didn't just talk the talk; he walked the walk! 150 candles are lit at King David's tomb on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem, consistent with the 150 chapters of Psalms mostly attributed to David. Number 150 is the numerical value of Nest, the warm environment of the Torah. David's personal history (from shepherd to king) provides a lesson for individuals and nations: Every problem is an opportunity in disguise; the road to success is paved with ups & downs; human beings are fallible but they must recognize their own fallibility, as a springboard toward improvement. 8. The Torah was granted on the small, modest Mt. Sinai — to a small People — in the desert. The Torah was delivered by Moses, "the humblest of all human beings." The content of the Torah doesn't require an impressive stage. Humility constitutes a prerequisite for studying the Torah and for constructive relationships and leadership. 9. The Torah was granted in the desert, a platform of Humility & Liberty. Celebrated fifty day following the Exodus (physical deliverance), Shavou'ot signifies spiritual liberation. Shavou'ot — Holiday of Reaping, Holiday of First Fruit, Day of Solemn — celebrates the culmination of the agricultural, physical and spiritual harvest season of optimism, which starts on the second day of Passover. Shavou'ot highlights the critical connection between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. 10. Dairy dishes consumed during Shavou'ot, commemorate divine providence. According to the Kabbalah (Jewish mystical school of thoughts), milk represents divine quality. Babies — divine creation — are breast fed by mothers. Dairy dishes commemorate the most common food — of shepherds like King David — during the 40 years in the desert, on the way to the Land of Milk and Honey, the Land of Israel. Unlike wine, milk is poured into simple glasses. The total sum of milk is 40 in Gimatriya, which is equal to the 40 days and nights spent by Moses on Mt. Sinai and the 40 years spent by the Jewish People in the Desert. 40 is also the value of the first Hebrew letter of key Exodus-Terms: Moses, Miriam, Manna, Egypt, Desert, Menorah, Tabernacle, Mitzvah-Commandment, etc. 40 generations passed from Moses — who delivered the "Written Torah" — to Rabbi Ashi and Rabbi Rabina, who concluded the editing of the Talmud, the "Oral Torah." The first and the last letters in the Talmud is the Hebrew Mem, which equals 40 in Gimatriya. 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 |
|
TIME TO PLAN FOR WAR
Posted by Paul Rotenberg, May 7, 2010. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared originally in the Jerusalem Post. |
|
So much for US President Barack Obama's famed powers of persuasion. At the UN's Nuclear Non-Poliferation Treaty review conference which opened this week, the Obama administration managed to lose control over the agenda before the conference even started. Obama administration officials said they intended to use the conference as a platform to mount international pressure on Iran to stop its illicit nuclear proliferation activities. But even before the conference began, with a little prodding from Egypt, the administration agreed that instead of focusing on Iran, the conference would adopt Iran's chosen agenda: attacking Israel for its alleged nuclear arsenal. Last week the Wall Street Journal reported that US officials were conducting negotiations with Egypt about Egypt's demand that the NPT review conference call for sanctions against Israel for refusing to join the NPT as a non-nuclear state. The Journal quoted a senior administration official involved in the discussions saying, "We've made a proposal to them [Egypt] that goes beyond what the U.S. has been willing to do before." Among other possibilities, that proposal may have included a US agreement to appoint a UN envoy responsible for organizing a UN conference calling for the Greater Middle East to become a nuclear-free zone. In diplomatese, "Middle East nuclear-free zone" is a well-accepted euphemism for stripping Israel of its purported nuclear capability while turning a blind eye to Iranian, Syrian and other Islamic nuclear weapons programs. Egypt's demand, which it convinced more than a hundred members of the Non-Aligned bloc to sign onto, is for Israel to open its nuclear installations to international inspectors as a first step towards unilateral nuclear disarmament. On Wednesday the US joined the other four permanent members of the Security Council in signing a statement calling for a nuclear-free Middle East and urging Israel, Pakistan and India to accede to the NPT as non-nuclear states. Following the US's lead, on Thursday Yukiya Amano, the new Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency wrote a letter to IAEA member states asking for their suggestions for how to convince Israel to sign the NPT. So as Iran — an NPT signatory — makes a mockery of the treaty by building nuclear weapons in contempt of its treaty obligations, the US has actively supported Iran's bid to use the NPT review conference as yet another UN forum for bashing Israel. It bears recalling that the primary goal of the NPT is to prevent nuclear proliferation. From the amount of attention Israel is receiving at the NPT review conference, you could easily get the impression that Israel's purported nuclear arsenal is the gravest proliferation threat in the world today. But history shows that this is nonsense. Israel's alleged nuclear arsenal, which it has reportedly fielded for four decades, has not led to a regional nuclear arms race. Notwithstanding their protestations to the contrary, Israel's neighbors fully recognize that the purpose of Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal is to guarantee Israel's survival and consequently only threatens those who would attack the Jewish state with the intention of annihilating it. This is why although it is four decades old; Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal has never caused a regional nuclear arms race. It has never harmed or called into question the relevance or usefulness of the NPT's international non-proliferation agenda. Moreover, as a non-signatory to the NPT, Israel has the right to develop a nuclear program. Iran on the other hand gave up that right when it joined the NPT regime. So too, in sharp contrast to Israel's alleged program, it is clear that Iran's nuclear project is aggressive rather than defensive. Consequently, it is universally recognized that if Iran becomes a nuclear power, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other states will begin developing their own nuclear arsenals in short order. That is, it is absolutely clear that if the NPT is to have any relevance in the coming years, if there is to be any hope that counter-proliferation regimes can be useful; preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons must be its signatories' chief aim. But due to the Obama administration's diplomatic fecklessness and ideological blinders, administration officials were incapable of making these points. And so, instead through its actions, the administration has advanced the cause of nuclear proliferation. The US has now joined the ranks of fools who claim that nuclear weapons in the hands of states like the US and Israel are as problematic as nuclear weapons in the hands of states like Iran and North Korea. BUT THEN, in the end it makes no difference that the US has followed Iran's lead at the NPT conference. Even if the administration had managed to make Iran's nuclear weapons program the focus of debate, it wouldn't have mattered because diplomacy is no longer a relevant tool for preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Appeasement has failed. Sanctions are dead in the water in the Security Council. And even if the Security Council passes a sanctions resolution, they will have no impact on Iran's behavior. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made that much clear in his speech on Monday and in subsequent remarks to the media. As he put it, "While we do not welcome sanctions, we do not fear them either. Sanctions cannot stop the Iranian nation." What all of this demonstrates is that the diplomatic track — from appeasement to sanctions — is irrelevant for contending with Iran's nuclear program. The only way to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear bombs is to use military force to destroy or severely damage its nuclear installations. And this of course is something Obama will not do. His begging-to-shake-hands policy towards Iran and the one hand and his iron fist policy towards Israel on the other makes it absolutely clear that Obama will do nothing to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Rather than correct his abysmal failures, Obama seeks to hide them by minimizing the seriousness of the threat. In remarks to the media this week, a White House official downplayed the Iranian threat. He told the Financial Times that Iran's "nuclear clock has slowed down. They are not making dramatic technical progress given the difficulties they are facing in their [uranium] enrichment program and the fact that their efforts to build secret facilities have been disclosed." The fact that the US's published intelligence estimates of Iran's nuclear program contradict this claim didn't seem to faze the official. The US's abdication of its responsibility as the leader of the free world to prevent the most dangerous regimes from acquiring the most dangerous weapons means that the responsibility for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has fallen on Israel's shoulders. Only Israel has the means and the will to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. And the message the NPT follies convey is that Israel must develop contingency plans for attacking Iran as quickly as possible. Daily reports of weapons build-ups and military exercises in Iran and among Iran's clients Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas expose the contours of their war plans. Syria and Iran have armed Hizbullah with some 40,000 missiles and rockets, including hundreds of Scud missiles and guided surface-to-surface solid fuel M600 missiles with a 250 km range and. This week Hizbullah threatened to attack Israel with non-conventional weapons. Syria itself has a formidable chemical and biological arsenal as well as a massive artillery and missile force at its disposal. As for Hamas, since Operation Cast Lead Iran's Palestinian proxy Hamas has expanded its own missile arsenal. Today it reportedly has projectiles capable of reaching Tel Aviv and beyond. As for Iran, as its seemingly endless military exercises make clear, the mullocracy has the capacity to use conventional weapons to imperil global oil shipments from the Persian Gulf. So too, this week's report that Osama Bin Laden may have decamped to Iran in 2003 merely served to underline Iran's ability to utilize jihadist terror forces throughout the world. From the open preparations for war that Iran and its clients have undertaken, it is clear that if they initiate the next round of fighting they will fight a four front war against Israel. That war will be dominated by missile attacks against the entire country aimed at breaking the will of the Israeli people while forcing the IDF to divert vital resources away from Israel's primary target — Iran's nuclear installations — to contend with Iran's proxies' missile stores. AS THEY CONSIDER Israel's options going forward, Israel's political and military leaders have to take two considerations into account. First, the side that initiates the conflict will be the side that controls the battle space. And second, there is a real possibility that the Obama administration will refuse to resupply Israel with vital weapons systems in the course of the war. The fact that Israel will be roundly condemned by the UN and its component parts is a certainty regardless of who initiates the conflict and therefore is irrelevant for operational planning. Armed with these understandings, it is apparent that Israeli contingency plans for war must have limited goals and should be guided by the overarching aim of beginning and ending the war quickly. Luckily, Israel excels at limited, swift campaigns. Responding to one of Syrian President Bashar Assad's recent threats, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman promised last month that if Assad attacks Israel, Israel will bring down his regime. While bringing about the utter defeat of Iran's regional proxies is a reasonable goal, it cannot be Israel's goal in the coming war. In the coming war, Israel will have only one goal: to destroy or seriously damage Iran's nuclear installations. Every resource turned against Iran's proxies must be aimed at facilitating that goal. That is, the only thing Israel should seek to accomplish in contending with Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas is to prevent them from diverting Israeli resources away from attacking Iran's nuclear installations. This means that Israel must launch a preemptive strike against Hizbullah's missiles and missile launchers, Syria's missiles, artillery and launchers, and Hamas's missiles and launchers. As for their short-range rockets, Israel should do its best to intercept them and otherwise hunker down to weather the storm of Katyushas and Qassams. Life of the homefront won't be easy. But it won't be impossible either, as we saw in 2006. Almost every assessment of a possible Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear installations has assumed that Israel will use its air force to strike. All that can be said of that analysis is that, just as there is more than one way to skin a cat, so there is more than one way to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. An Israeli strike should utilize all of them to keep the Iranians off balance and on the defensive. These are dangerous times. Iran, which seeks to position itself as a regional superpower, has been emboldened by the Obama administration's abdication of US global leadership. Only Israel can prevent Iran from endangering the world. But time is of the essence. Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com |
|
EU PROMOTES ARAB NEGOTIATING POSITION, IN ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 7, 2010. |
|
EU PROMOTES ARAB NEGOTIATING POSITION, IN ISRAEL; SYRIA NOT FORCED TO CHOOSE BETWEEN JIHAD AND WEST 
NGO Monitor reports on an EU program, Partnerships for Peace. The EU describes the program as fostering tolerance and understanding between the Arabs and Israel. In this case, the EU grants funds to Neve Shalom School and Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation (CCRR). CCRR is a Palestinian Arab NGO that urges a boycott of Israeli academics and their institutions, whether they support what CCRR calls an occupation or not. CCRR alleges this occupation has existed "for more than 50 years." Israel acquired the Territories 43 years ago. The funds are supposed to influence Israeli journalists and other opinion makers. They are to be influenced to support the Arab peace initiative [probably the Saudi plan that the Arab League endorsed]. MEP Bastiaan Belder (Netherlands) has asked the European Delegation in Tel Aviv to explain why the project should not be considered "unilateral interference in the pluralistic Israeli media landscape," "contrary to journalism ethics," and "a serious incident." (IMRA, 5/5/10). NGO monitor has shown contradictions before between such ideals stated by governments, foundations, and NGOs for Arab-Israel relations, and their pro-Arab, anti-Israel ideologies and activities. This EU program follows the pattern. Neve Shalom is a mixed Arab-Jewish village in Israel, formally dedicated to mutual tolerance. As I reported years ago, its performance differs from its professed principles. It observes Arab holidays and not Israeli ones. Its Arab children browbeat less informed Jewish ones. It is the kind of tolerance the Arabs understand, in which Muslims dominate. Based on the CCRR definition of "occupied," that EU beneficiary, like the Palestinian Authority that the EU also subsidizes, considers the State of Israel occupied and to be overthrown. This means no harmony but struggle. It further demonstrates that the Arab-Israel conflict is not a territorial one but a religious, existential conflict by the Arabs as continuous aggressors. It means war. Influence only Israel and to the Arab diplomatic position? What tolerance does the program foster and by whom? Israel is tolerant, in policy and in general. By contrast, the Arabs primarily are intolerant in religion, nationality, gender, gender affiliation, culture, and freedom of expression. The Palestinian Authority glorifies religious murder. By contrast, Israeli doctrine is peace but defense. What is the Arab diplomatic position? Israel should cede to the Arabs, whose ideology will remain based on religious hatred, secure borders, strategic depth, its holiest sites, half of its water supply, and take in enough, vengeful Arabs to overthrow the Jewish state from within, if by some miracle it defends itself from invasion. This is in addition to the Egypt/Obama effort to deprive Israel of its nuclear deterrent. What would such a treaty change? Fatah, Hamas, and CCRR doctrine would hold that all of Israel is occupied Arab territory. Islam still would have the doctrine that any area formerly conquered by Islam should revert to Islam. The Arabs consider it honorable to deceive the enemy, and break their agreements with Israel. Therefore, Abbas vowed never to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state. If not legitimate, then do not expect peace. The Saudi initiative is a plan for the conquest of Israel. If Israel accepts it, it would render itself dependent upon the Arabs. But the Arabs still show it ill will. One can expect the Arabs to discontinue the armed struggle against Israel. The Saudi terms, and the resulting demoralization of Israelis, would make that struggle brief and bloody. And then the jihadists would turn their attention more fully upon Christendom.
U.S.-NETANYAHU PLOT TO FREEZE JERUSALEM HOUSING? National Union MK Uri Ariel suspects that PM Netanyahu froze new construction in annexed parts of Jerusalem before the obvious rift made by Obama over a routine progress report on a 1,600-unit project. In response, Housing Minister Ariel Atlas said that none of the thousands of housing awaiting sale in Jerusalem were put on the market since last December. That would bear out MK Ariel's suspicions (Arutz-7, 5/6/10). The implication is that while PM Netanyahu talks like a nationalist
enough to draw the ire of anti-Zionists, he is working with them in
order to smooth the way to negotiations during which they would impose
an anti-Zionist agreement. He has been like that, before.
JEWISH-ARAB CONFLICT-AVOIDANCE IN JERUSALEM 
Fast approaching is the annual Jerusalem Day parade and street dancing celebrating the unification of the holy city and its Temple Mount. In prior years, however, some participants confronted Arabs along the route. This time, the organizers, including MK Uri Ariel, are asking the yeshivas and others to instruct their followers in conflict-avoidance. Violence would distort the celebration into the opposite of the intended message (Arutz-7, 5/6/10). Aggressive religious confrontation is improper at any time. Particularly foolish is the arrogance of those who have an unconsolidated position of superiority, as does Israel. Israel's national security against invasion is precarious (think of Hizbullah's 50,000 rockets). Its national security against its huge Arab fifth column, which enjoys much support from the Supreme Court and other leftist institutions, is precarious. Its place in international diplomacy is precarious. Its standing even among democratic countries is precarious. Loyalty to it by its own people and affection for it by Diaspora Jewry are precarious. Its educational system, largely controlled by leftists, is destabilizing. Hard work could consolidate what arrogance could sunder.
SYRIA NOT FORCED TO CHOOSE BETWEEN JIHAD AND WEST Syria is enjoying the luxury of tightening its relations with the West while also tightening its grip on Lebanon. It is not forced to choose between the West and jihad and Iran. That is part of the briefing given the Knesset by Brigadier General Yossi Baidatz, Head of Research Division in Military Intelligence. Gen. Baidatz also said that the Scuds are not the main problem with the rearming of Hizbullah. Hizbullah has been given masses of rockets of many types, some more accurate than Scuds. Deliveries from Iran via Syria are so routine and massive, [and so little interfered with by UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army] as not to warrant being called "smuggling" (Arutz-7, 5/5/10). The UN and its Resolution against rearming of UNIFIL are part pretense and part farce. This is a world of make-believe.
OBJECT TO IRAN BEING SEATED AT UN COMMISSION ON WOMEN Datelined New York and Washington, "International human rights and women's rights leaders, attorneys, scholars, columnists, Iranian human rights activists, media figures, women in the arts, and other prominent women" "urge Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to denounce the recent election of Iran to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women." They asked her why she let Iran be seated on the commission by acclamation, without demanding a vote [and objecting, and voting nay, for the record]. The letter explained, "There are sickening and horrific videos, websites, documented reports of gang rapes, stoning, mutilations, hangings, beatings, burnings and other barbaric acts of violence, intimidation, and humiliation against the women of Iran. Political dissidents, gays, non-Muslim minorities, apostates, and infidels are also targeted in widespread human rights violations and gruesome attacks — all these atrocities are egregious violations of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights." It is not as the UN delegations were uninformed. A couple of hundred Iranian women sent them a message that in Iran, women have no right to choose their husbands and to education after marriage, to divorce, to child custody, and to protection from violence in public. Quotas restrict their college admission. They are arrested, beaten, and imprisoned for peaceful reform efforts. Elections are not free and criminal trials are not fair and the judiciary is not independent. Security forces and vigilante auxiliaries held incommunicado, killed, raped, and tortured detainees and election protesters and political prisoners. Certainly no First Amendment or workers' rights. Corruption and antisemitism persist. (Sent me by Action Alliance, 5/5/10 from
HAMAS EXECUTES INFORMANTS ON TERRORISM, FLUSHING OTHERS OUT Hamas executed two people whom it accused of giving information to the Israeli secret service. As a result, other such informants and their families have been appealing for amnesty, if they turn themselves in. They are receiving amnesty (IMRA, 5/5/10). Now Israel' intelligence agencies must be all the more careful what and whom they expose to informants and how much to rely upon them. The U.S. armed the Palestinian Authority, but P.A. arms in Gaza fell into the hands of Hamas. The U.S. also has trained P.A. forces in counter-terrorism, as if the P.A. were not itself terrorist. When PM Rabin cooperated with the P.A. by identifying for it the P.A. individuals who worked with Israeli intelligence, the P.A. liquidated those individuals. (How intelligent of Rabin was that?) One has to wonder how much of the counter-terrorism in which the U.S. trains the P.A. is used by the P.A. to thwart Israeli counter-terrorism. How much of that U.S. training in counter-terrorism has fallen into Hamas hands? Hasn't Israel made a mistake in letting the U.S., which takes the Arab side in negotiations, train Arabs in what were called the Israeli-administered Territories? Hasn't Israel made a mistake in letting the U.S. be involved in Arab negotiations with Israel?
WEDGE DRIVEN INTO U.S.-JEWISH OPINION OF ISRAEL? Part 1. Purported Report The New York Times reports a divergence of opinion among U.S. Jews about Israel. Part 1 summarizes them. Part 2. Interprets them. J. Street founder Jeremy Ben-Ami, described as a liberal supporter of Israel but not of some of its policies or of Israel's "every wish," notes a significance to 78% of Jewish votes going to Obama. He does not explain the significance. Surveys have suggested that most back Obama's policies. Rabbi Tamara Kolton says that although U.S. Jews support Israel, they have mixed feelings and were not heard from before. ADL national director Abraham Foxman says, "People are angry. Americans do not want peace shoved down the throats of the Israelis." He sees a downward trend of support for Obama. Prof. Steven M. Cohen finds younger, liberal Jews frustrated at being called anti-Israel or antisemitic for opposing Israeli treatment of Arabs in the Palestinian Authority. Does the traditional U.S. Jewish leadership represent those Jews? They think that one need not support Israeli policies to be supportive of Israel. The Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco cracked down on a film group that sponsored "screening of an Israeli documentary critical of Israeli security forces, 'Rachel,' an American killed in Gaza." William Daroff, V.P. of the Jewish Federations of N. America draws a line over that film, between "constructive discussion and destructive communication that does not recognize Israel as the eternal home of the Jewish people." President Obama is working to defuse U.S. governmental tensions with Israel. His critics think he is undermining the foundations of Israel, as, for example, by demanding a housing freeze in part of Israel's capital. The report ends by emphasizing a decline in the centrality of Israel to U.S. Jewish life and of Judaism in it, as assimilation and intermarriage proceed. Even unaffiliated Jews, however, realize that persecution can rise up unexpectedly and Israel remains a haven. One such person said, "It make me angry that Israelis are always blamed for the problems and asked to make concessions. You know, the Israelis are not the ones launching rockets and placing fighters in houses with children inside." The New York Times concludes that all this amounts to an honest difference of opinion over how to make peace (Paul Vitello, 5/6/10, A15). Part 2. Making Sense of the New 
Honest polls count pulses. What counts common sense? In politics, common sense no longer counts. I've seen a trend of diminished support for President Obama policy on the economy and on Israel, both by Jews and non-Jews. Having lost much approval, Obama is attempting damage control. It is not fair to credit him with trying to repair the rift with Israel that he created. His pro-Arab policies behind the rift have not changed. For example, Obama still demands the housing freeze. It is demanded only of the Jews. All his demands are only of the Jews, although it is the Arabs who commit the terrorism. By trying to head off Israeli exercise of sovereignty in its own capital, Obama continues State Dept. policy of squeezing concessions out of Israel in behalf of Arab diplomatic goals. I have lived long enough for problems to reappear as if younger people have discovered them. About 35 years ago, on the American Jewish Congress' National Governing and Metropolitan Councils and elsewhere, I participated in discussions whether Jews must always endorse Israeli government policy and about the problem of assimilation. Leftist Jews were heard from before! But the issue was misunderstood then and is misunderstood now. One fallacy is that Israeli government policy is good for Israel. It isn't, just as U.S. government policy is not always good for the U.S.. Examples for the U.S.: (1) U.S. isolationism that let the Axis build up power, so that WWII became much harder for us; (2) The U.S. Pakistan distribute arms to Afghans fighting Russia, without U.S. supervision to keep the arms from radicals we now have to fight. Examples for Israel: (1) Withdrew from Gaza, which immediately became a terrorist base against Israel; (2) Failed to destroy Hizbullah, now aiming about 50,000 rockets at Israel; and (e) Let tens of thousands of Arabs enter Israel, where they increasingly radicalize, throw firebombs, and become a fifth column Every decent person, but especially Jews, should criticize the government of Israel for those policies of appeasement that led to thousands of Israeli casualties and enabled the Arabs to start more wars. J Street types proposed such appeasement before they led to wars and still do, in the name of peace. The Times story has the false premise and pretense that J Street and similar critics of Israel really support Israel. The Times failed to make full disclosure: (1) J Street was founded in coordination with Barak Obama in order to drive a wedge into U.S. Jewish opinion; (2) Part of its donations that J Street donations is required to report includes significant sums from Iranians and other Muslims, who one may suppose are not pro-Israel; and (3) A Times publisher in 1920, named Sulzberger, formed the American Council for Judaism, to oppose Zionism. The Times still does, but pretends its suggestions are for Israel's own good. Its subtlety takes in many liberals, but many Jews have dropped their subscriptions. When Jewish critics say they oppose certain policies of Israel and Israeli treatment of the Arabs, what does that mean? They, like the State Dept., oppose every Israeli means of self-defense against terrorism. Couple that with failing to demands, in the interest of the peace they claim to want, an end to Muslim Arab indoctrination in Muslim superior rights, hatred of Jews, and glorification of violence against Jews. Hardly friends of Israel! Then why did so many Jews vote for Obama? (1) Jews vote not for self-interest if they even know it, but for their notion of social justice, which they think the Democrats embody; and (2) Obama downplayed his radical associations and his hiring anti-Zionist advisers, and talked vaguely about change when Americans were dissatisfied with war and then the economy. He did not admit he wanted to overthrow our economic order. Mr. Foxman put it incorrectly. It is not a matter of resenting "peace being shoved down the throats of Israelis." He confuses peace with pact. A pact can be labeled peace, without bringing peace. What Obama is attempting to shove down Israelis throats are the Arab terms for Israeli surrender. With every term weakening Israel, how would Israel keep those predators at bay? Omitted from the Times and Obama discussions is recognition of the Arabs' religious-style imperialism and bigotry that, still unreformed, make peace impossible. This is like the wolf telling the ram to cut off his horns, in the interest of peace. (This is like the Muslim aggressors telling Israel they do not feel secure unless Israel cuts off its nuclear arms capability.) The film, "Rachel," is about a member of the International Solidarity Movement, which commits violence against Israeli troops and favors Arab terrorists. She had interfered with an anti-terrorist operation, beyond the vision of a bulldozer driver, and was killed by accident. Far Left Jews who share Rachel Corrie's support for terrorists should indeed be beyond the Pale. So should U.S. Administrations that arm PLO terrorists, who continue to glorify terrorism and who moonlight terrorism. The New York Times story is an iron hatchet job in a velvet cover.
TIMES SQ. BOMBING AND THE TALIBAN OF PAKISTAN Pakistan has arrested a man suspected of assisting to the New York Times Square bomber. The confessed bomber had informed U.S. officials about training trip to Pakistan. Journalistic analysis centered on the reach of the Taliban and whether they are shifting to attacks on the U.S.. The Taliban say their agents already are in the U.S. (New York Times and Wall St. J., 5/6/10). The Taliban are not shifting — they are embattled where they are. But as we've seen with the underwear bomber with the Ft. Hood therapist shooting, the international Islamist movement uses the Internet to reach and radicalize Muslims now placed in most countries. Some of these people pay their own way to go to training camps abroad. The articles focus on immediate border control. They ignore the problem of access by fifth columns already in our midst and of YouTube crossing our border electronically. The Wall St. Journal seems much more aware than is the New York Times that not too much can be expected from Administrations that are afraid to name the enemy. That failure blocks consideration of broad problems, leaving it to the financially pressed police forces to deal with lesser but immediate problems that the lack of effective broader policies lets arise. TIMES SQ. BOMBING AND THE TALIBAN OF PAKISTAN Pakistan has arrested a man suspected of assisting to the New York Times Square bomber. The confessed bomber had informed U.S. officials about training trip to Pakistan. Journalistic analysis centered on the reach of the Taliban and whether they are shifting to attacks on the U.S.. The Taliban say their agents already are in the U.S. (New York Times and Wall St. J., 5/6/10). The Taliban are not shifting — they are embattled where they are. But as we've seen with the underwear bomber with the Ft. Hood therapist shooting, the international Islamist movement uses the Internet to reach and radicalize Muslims now placed in most countries. Some of these people pay their own way to go to training camps abroad. The articles focus on immediate border control. They ignore the problem of access by fifth columns already in our midst and of YouTube crossing our border electronically. The Wall St. Journal seems much more aware than is the New York Times that not too much can be expected from Administrations that are afraid to name the enemy. That failure blocks consideration of broad problems, leaving it to the financially pressed police forces to deal with lesser but immediate problems that the lack of effective broader policies lets arise. |
|
APOSTASY, PABLO CHRISTIANI AND MICHAEL LERNER
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 6, 2010. |
|
This was written by Cynthia Ozick. |
|
CAMERA — Apostasy among Jews has a long tradition. In its most literal expression under the hegemony of the medieval Church, apostasy meant conversion to Christianity — and something more. The apostate felt obliged to confirm, and to prove, his new commitment by initiating even harsher persecutions than those already customary. And of course the apostate was in one respect far better credentialed and equipped for perfidious Jewish inventions than his Christian compatriots. Even as a former Jew, even having repudiated his old identity, it was explicitly as a Jew that he was called upon to be useful, since it was by virtue of his being a Jew that he could be regarded as authoritative, and his views as authentic. As an authentic and authoritative Jew, clearly he was privy to the inmost heart of Jewish arcana, and uniquely positioned to expose it for what it was, for the wickedness and blasphemy it harbored. Franciscans and Dominicans might intuit that the Talmud was the source of enmity to Christianity and mockery of the Saviour, but with no access to its literature, they were helpless to produce the evidence. With Jewish apostasy zealously in its service, all clerical doubt vanished, and the miscreant Jews could be authentically and authoritatively punished by all the merciless means at the disposal of Christian piety according to the principle of divine supersessionism. The apostate prevaricated; the clerisy believed. Who benefited from this collusion? The holy friars certainly, since their religious convictions, requiring the suffering of Jews in recompense for the Crucifixion, were further stimulated and fed; and also the local monarchs: influenced by the friars, they regularly profited from pressure on the Jews, whether through impoverishing taxation or, more directly, through confiscation and pillage. And for ordinary folk witnessing a mammoth bonfire of Torah scrolls and volumes of Talmud sending their flames into the sky, where the angels dwell, there was the holiday elation and uplift of soul a communal festivity always ignites. But what of the apostates themselves? How did such impressive figures as Nicholas Donin and Pablo Christiani fare? From being despised as societal pariahs they were instantly elevated to honored public pundits. They were intelligent men — they were, in fact, sophisticated intellectuals. Were they cynical political opportunists with an instinct for where the power lies? Were they thoughtful pragmatists who for the sake of quotidian ease simply determined that it is prudent to belong to the safe majority rather than to a harassed minority? Or were they genuine believers who had been persuaded of the higher truth of Christianity? An apostate in those times may have been any of these — but whatever his motivation, the apostate had to recognize, in full awareness, that he was entering into a virulent bargain: the price for his acceptance, and his ascent, was to increase the anguish of the Jews he was leaving behind. As with the apostasy of individuals, so with the mega-apostasies of world history. When developing Christianity, whatever its motivations and convictions, departed from Judaism, it was the Jews who were made to suffer. When developing Islam, whatever its motivations and convictions, departed from Judaism and Christianity, it was again the Jews who were made to suffer. Christianity belatedly reformed itself, latterly through shame in the face of the Holocaust, initially through loss of the temporal power to enforce the old theologically instigated crimes. Islam, its Islamist branches notoriously supported and succored by states, awaits its own reformation. But perhaps these huge collective movements, evolving through the centuries with all their internal divisions and kaleidoscopic complexities, can no longer be defined as apostasies. Christianity, while not forsaking its central messianic creed, has come to regard itself, in the words of Pope John XXIII, as Judaism's younger brother. Islam, by contrast, far from seeing itself as derivative or fraternal, points to both Judaism and Christianity as apostasies willfully broken away from the original — hence the purest — source of God's word, the Koran. How, then, should we look at this word apostate today? That it has mostly fallen into disuse we know; yet its freight has been put to many uses, especially under the noose of successive creedal tyrannies. Inevitably, in contemporary terms, it returns us to the theme of defamation. The apostate is one who defames — if not his origins explicitly, then his living counterparts, the people to whom he was born. In the Soviet Union, for instance, the Yevsektsia, the "Jew section" of the Communist Party, composed of avowed Communists "of Jewish descent," was an instrument of the oppression of Jews. As for the present moment, though the medieval Church is no more than a literary memory in the mind of the largely secular West, and the Soviet Union is gone, the notion of apostasy, as applied to the individual, still holds. But its meaning has been curiously reversed. The Nicholas Donins and Pablo Christianis of ages past ran to abandon their Jewish ties even as they subverted them. The Nicholas Donins and Pablo Christianis of our own time run to embrace their Jewish ties even as they besmirch them. So it is as self-declared Jews, as loyal and honorable Jews, as Jews in the line of the prophets, as Jews who speak out for the sake of the integrity of Jews and Judaism, that we nowadays hear arguments against the survival, or the necessity, or the legitimacy, of the State of Israel. These negating Jewish voices can be lyrical, as from the poets; or nimble, as from the novelists; or transcendent, as from the philosophers; or dour, as from the revisionist historians; or pragmatic, as from the realists; or apoplectically apocalyptical, as from the unregenerate Marxists; or Houdinishly knotted, as from the theologians; or self-referential, as from all of the above. They include, among innumerable well-known others, Adrienne Rich and Irena Klepfisz and Jacqueline Rose and Judith Butler and Tony Judt and Marc Ellis — and, most engagingly, Michael Lerner. I am compelled to call Lerner engaging, even entertaining, because there is something of the mime about him — a very garrulous mime. Yet he can, like the late Marcel Marceau, assume a particular pose with lifelike effect, and then instantly go on to contort into a wondrously different persona. His latest role is that of rabbi. Despite his history as a dropout from the Jewish Theological Seminary's rabbinical school, Rabbi Lerner, as we must now call him, was belatedly eased into the rabbinate through a "private ordination" at the hands of Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, holder of the Chair in World Wisdom at the Naropa Institute in Colorado, the Buddhist center beloved by Allen Ginsberg; and if you should wish to cast doubt on Lerner's rabbinic validity or the competence of his rabbinic learning, you may see the proof of it in the little white knitted yarmulke he sports while discoursing with Bill Moyers on television, speaking in one breath both of the perniciousness of the "Israel lobby" and of the urgency of universal love. In addition to his prestigious clerical status, Rabbi Lerner is renowned as the founder and editor of Tikkun, a magazine specifically designed to counter the influence of Commentary. Tikkun's political affinities lie with the Nation, though in the writing of English it is radically inferior to almost every other journal intended for grownups, especially when it is Rabbi Lerner who is doing the writing. As a journalist, as a polemicist, as a putative philosopher, Rabbi Lerner is chaotic, disorganized, frequently ungrammatical, self-contradictory, puerile, and unbearably long-winded. Nevertheless, his central point always comes through with radiant repetitive clarity: Israel is culpable, Israel is wicked, Israel is an oppressor, and so on. By now nearly everyone understands that tikkun means "repair of the world"; it is one of those many noble terms, like "peace," "justice," and "human rights," that have been despoiled and betrayed by Orwellian political chicanery. To create a new magazine — even if inspired by envy and spite — is impressive enough. But Rabbi Lerner is also the founder of at least two aspiring social movements. Decades ago, when — still in the bloom of youth and declaring that "the synagogue as currently established will have to be smashed" — he headed the Seattle Liberation Front, an enterprise as pugnacious as its name. After a dustup with the police, he was arrested and tried as one of the honored Seattle Seven. According to Rabbi Lerner, the violence was not of the Front's making, and his sentence of several months in jail was unjustly imposed. But the world has since moved on; except for creaky old Cuba and vim-and-virulence Venezuela, Liberation Fronts are no longer in fashion, having been replaced by the softer urgencies of Spirituality. By now the time had surely come for the founding of a front more in conformity with the present — hence Rabbi Lerner's most recent coinage: the NSP, the Network of Spiritual Progressives. Never mind the treacly oxymoronic rubric. It is a curiosity in itself that "progressive" has lately been resuscitated in common parlance. An amnesiac generation has forgotten that this term, as embraced by Stalin's Western cadres, was once so steeped in earned opprobrium and shame that it seemed likely to vanish forever, along with that other lost political ideal, Kinder, Küche, Kirche. "Progressive," however, has turned out to be a boomerang: it goes away only to return, its threadbare mantras intact. Those old progressives, aka fellow travelers, were, like Stalin himself, hard-headed, hard-hearted atheists: not for them this gossamer vapid wingèd thing, composed of vaporous rainbows and spun sugar, called Spirituality. With consummate ingenuity, Rabbi Lerner's Network of Spiritual Progressives manages to link scurrility with sentimental religiosity: only imagine Karl Marx davening, and you will comprehend the dazzlement of Rabbi Lerner's current achievement. Lately, as it happens, he has added yet another element to his mix: perhaps the NSP will soon morph into the NSPR, the Network of Spiritual Progressive Realists. Should this come to pass, it will be because Rabbi Lerner, mentor to many, has acquired two celebrated mentors of his own: John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, academics noted for political realism, and co-authors of the problematic The Israel Lobby and U. S. Foreign Policy. In an article typically prolix and moistly dedicated to the common good, Rabbi Lerner, with some minuscule demurrals, strides in lockstep with these eminent representatives of the realist school. Not only does he parallel and support their conclusions, but he is able to go beyond their limited analysis. After all, as a faithful Jew, and certainly as a rabbi, he is in possession of a privileged intimacy with internal American Jewish society, which the two professors naturally lack, and can only surmise and invent. Besides, Mearsheimer and Walt, in their scrupulous civility, while condemning what they take to be large public conspiracies, are careful not to intrude on the individual practices of synagogues and households. Not so Rabbi Lerner. "First," he writes, "the Israel lobby cannot be understood apart from the vast number of Jewish institutions and even individual communities, synagogues, and families that impose on their members a certain discipline that goes well beyond any normal political party or force, challenging the human, ethical, and Jewish identities of anyone who disagrees with its fundamental assumptions." Let us interrupt for a moment to reprise one brief passage: a certain discipline that goes well beyond any normal political party or force. Of what notorious nineteenth century czarist fabrication, the favorite of neo-Nazis and their admirers, do these words remind us? Who and where are those sinister Jewish families, including teens and toddlers, whose lives are devoted to the machinations of this amorphous lobby? As for the synagogues, when a shul is discovered openly raising funds to purchase an ambulance for an Israeli town daily attacked by rockets, is that shul an active branch of the Israel lobby? And what precisely is the nature of this "discipline," and on whom is it exerted? I will readily testify that I was not knowingly under the imposition of a discipline, or compelled by any party or mysterious force, when of my own free will I once had the pleasure, in public, of dubbing the pre-rabbinic Lerner an "intellectual wimp." Is it possible that this rude ad hominem, and several other rudenesses herein, will qualify me as a member in good standing of the Israel lobby? The answer is plainly yes, and Rabbi Lerner has already fingered me in print. "I am sure," he goes on, "that the instinctive reaction of a large section of the American Jewish community affiliated with the Jewish lobby will be the predictable assault on Mearsheimer and Walt and on Tikkun and on anyone else who speaks up in criticism of the Israel lobby." And having praised "the often careful and thoughtful work of Mearsheimer and Walt," while also conceding that he has been "referring frequently with their permission" to their book, he offers this comment: "The Israel lobby has become a major perpetrator of the fear orientation in politics that the NSP believes to be at the heart of the many problems facing the world. The Israel lobby sees threats everywhere." Rabbi Lerner and his reality instructors perhaps do not see threats? Of course they do — the multiple threats that flow from American policies toward Israel, controlled and manipulated by the Israel lobby; and it is the Israel lobby that stands in the way of world peace and serenity by inciting the enmity of Ahmadinejad and all other jihadists determined to annihilate the Jewish state. Rabbi Lerner emphasizes in a headline: "AIPAC Has Democratic Congresspeople Scared." In fact, so scared of the Israel lobby are Democrats and Republicans alike, that — as Rabbi Lerner writes elsewhere — he "would not be surprised to learn that some branch of our government conspired either actively to promote or passively to allow" the agony of the Towers. Ah, and who scares and influences and virtually runs the government? The Israel lobby. Here Rabbi Lerner joins unclean hands with Amiri Baraka and Rosie O'Donnell. As a scholar (he claims two doctorates), Rabbi Lerner has not troubled so much as to glance at the masses of serious analytic criticism exposing his mentors' unprofessional methods, reliance on secondary and tertiary journalism, errors of fact, errors of recent history, and promulgation of shameless ancient charges; instead, he repeats their vilifications and lauds their "careful and thoughtful work." It is easy to dismiss, even to lampoon, Michael Lerner. His magazine is negligible; his Network of Spiritual Progressives is risible. But he is one of a growing band of vocal and ambitious self-touting Jews whose hostility to the State of Israel more and more takes on the character of the spite that kills. The noise they make they call a silencing. The debate they attract they call a censoring. Some despise nationalism and the nation-state on principle, while at the same time arguing for Palestinian national rights. The insouciant Tony Judt flicks off Israel as an "anachronism." Jacqueline Rose, feverishly psychoanalytical, weaves eros into murder, seeing in suicide bombing an "unbearable intimacy ... an act of passionate identification ... a deadly embrace." Adrienne Rich asks Zionism, the term and its history, "to dissolve before twenty-first century realities": the malevolent siege of Israel, to be sure, is not such a reality. Judith Butler desires her status as a Jew not to be embarrassed by confusing it with the Zionist project, the disappearance of which she longs to accomplish. And in a didactic work of fiction, the lofty George Steiner taints the establishment of Israel with the ultimate taint: he credits Hitler with the invention of Zionism, and Judaism with the invention of Hitler. Nicholas Donin and Pablo Christiani, those clever old friars much experienced in crushing Jewish cultural and political expression, would feel right at home in this company, as clever as themselves: they would sympathize with the familiar sensibility of Jews eager to join the dominating class in a period when the dominating class is hurtful to Jews. But how puzzled they might be by this newfangled modern apostasy, whereby the apostates declare how profoundly Jewish they are! And what they might make of the sight of Rabbi Michael Lerner in his yarmulke as he recites the recognizable medieval canards of Mearsheimer and Walt, only God in his heaven can tell. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE MESS OF OUR MAKING
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 6, 2010. |
|
I would like to back up today and take a look at the broader picture, in terms of the situation in which Israel finds herself today. I am motivated to take this look now because of a couple of messages from my readers (and surprisingly, only a couple), the essence of which is that this is our land and we should just say so — perhaps annex now — and stop fooling around. My observation is that, while this is ultimately desirable, it ain't so simple. ~~~~~~~~~~ The government of Israel has made some disastrous mistakes. The first was in 1967, when we acquired control of Judea, Samaria and Gaza and did not annex these areas (although ultimately we placed eastern Jerusalem and the Golan under civil law). In fact, the Arabs in Judea and Samaria were packed to leave. After all, that is what Jordan did to us in 1949 when they made the areas they acquired Judenrein. The Arabs expected it. But, no, big sports that we were, we said, stay... ~~~~~~~~~~ Then jump to 1993, when we made the next disastrous mistake in signing on to Oslo, which committed us to negotiating a final status for the Palestinian Arabs living in Judea and Samaria, and Gaza. Actually this was one long series of disastrous mistakes, melded together: What we did with this was to concede, at least in theory, some notion of the right of the Palestinian Arabs to live on part of our land — or to claim part as theirs. (That "final status" was not specifically a state, although this is the concept that evolved over time.) What became ensconced then, as well, was the "land for peace" concept, which turned out to be a farce. Incredibly, because they were thought to be the ones who had ultimate influence and could wage peace, the terrorists of the PLO were brought by the Rabin government from Tunis to Jericho and Gaza, and ultimately Ramallah. And we cut the Arabs slack repeatedly. We did not hold them to their commitments, but just kept sailing along as if they had honored them. The issue of incitement serves as example. Arafat instituted incitement big-time: he was out to teach his people that we weren't legitimate and actually were the lowest of the low, so that killing us was praiseworthy. Yet Oslo called for cessation of all incitement. Did we stop our cooperation with Arafat because he failed to honor this stipulation? Don't be silly. It's as if we just had to keep going, no matter what. ~~~~~~~~~~ Perhaps worst of all since 1993 is that we have had governments that essentially adopted the Palestinian Arab narrative, at least in some measure: the story of a suffering people with a long history in this land, displaced by the Jews, oppressed by the occupation, and longing for a state of their own. Put another way, we have had at least some leaders who were, in essence, advocating for our enemy. Ach... were we kind people, so sensitive to our adversaries, so willing to make sacrifices to be "fair." I call this galut (diaspora) mentality. Having been at the mercy of others for 2,000 years, we remain inordinately eager to please. ~~~~~~~~~~ The other day I made the point that it is not a question of one narrative vs. another, but a question of invention versus fact. You could say that we failed to tell our narrative — but what we did, with bleeding hearts, is fail to expose the facts: The Arabs spoke about the '67 "borders" and there was no clear and immediate Israeli government retort — repeated as often as necessary — that the '67 line was an armistice line and not meant to be permanent. By default, if nothing else, we left the impression that behind that line was where we most properly "belonged." And the flip side of this was that everything on the other side of that line was "Palestinian." The Arabs spoke about "Arab East Jerusalem," and we did not forcefully clarify the fact that part of Jerusalem had a predominantly Arab population only because Jordan had thrown out every Jew, when in fact this very area was actually the heart of Jewish heritage. We didn't tell our history and make our claim clear. The Arabs represent UNRWA as being a humanitarian agency that helps the disenfranchised "Palestinian refugees" live until they can "return" to Israel. Did we ever forcefully push the fact that UNRWA's rules are different from the rules for all other refugees in the world, who are managed by UNHCR? Don't be silly. Regularly do I find people shocked by the difference in the rules, yet this is something that every politically aware person in the West ought to be aware of. Who knows that a "Palestinian refugee" who has acquired US citizenship is still considered a "refugee" on the UNRWA books because he didn't return to Israel, whence his grandfather had come in 1948? And on and on and on... ~~~~~~~~~~ Perhaps most significant of all is the fact that the PLO has never officially renounced its call to destroy Israel, and Fatah still embraces the concept of "armed resistance." Coupled with this is the fact that when the Arabs speak about "occupation," they are referring to everything from the river to the sea. According to this conceptualization, there is no place here where Jews belong. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Arabs have been masters at promoting their vision. And so, unsurprisingly, the international community has bought it hook, line and sinker. Why shouldn't they have? They were more than eager in any event, and they weren't presented with a forceful and cogent alternative version of the situation. They saw that even some Israeli leaders were on board. How many people know that the San Remo (properly: Sanremo) Conference and the Mandate for Palestine are enshrined in international law to this day and give us the right to this land? How many have even heard of San Remo and the Mandate? Who knows that Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967 does not speak either of a Palestinian people or a Palestinian state — while it does speak about Israel's right to secure borders? The overriding concern is for "justice" for the poor beleaguered Palestinian people. ~~~~~~~~~~ For a long time, a good part of the Israeli people — longing for peace and acceptance by neighbors — bought into the "two-state solution" and the constructs of Oslo. That, thank Heaven, has changed significantly. The people have been disabused of this notion as they have seen what concessions have brought us, and how we have suffered the onslaught of rockets from Gaza since we pulled out. And so now people are demanding that we stop the train we've been on, before it brings us to disaster. And this is great. There is a difference in tone that is enormously important. But others are saying that we must, quickly, reverse that train and bring it back to its starting gate And it is this that I think will take time. ~~~~~~~~~~ Anyone who reads my material regularly knows that I am not in favor of concessions to the Arabs and most certainly not in favor of surrendering our land and establishing a state for them. I believe that tough stances are necessary, and that it is important — as I've just indicated — that the facts be exposed forcefully so that there will be a shift in perception, at least in some quarters. It's time for us to take the offensive in a number of different ways. I regret that we haven't fought our wars to win, but have withdrawn prematurely for political reasons or to please the world. We shouldn't have stopped in Lebanon when we did, and we should have been more forceful in Gaza last year. I believe, as well, that we should bomb Iran, because no one else in the world will do it, and it needs to be done. ~~~~~~~~~~ However, I do not delude myself that we can simply stand against the world with impunity. Anti-Semitism is rampant and much of the world would gladly do us in without thinking twice, should they find the rationale. I astound myself as I say this (because it is so counter-intuitive and so inherently obscene), but I believe the international community would level crippling sanctions against us more quickly than they have been willing to do against Iran. I believe the world would attempt to bring us to our knees were we to attempt now to annex all the land that is properly ours. Depriving the Palestinians of their "legitimate" rights? Acting like an "apartheid" nation? They'd come after us big time. Part of what we're seeing is that the Arabs are battling us on the field of international law. There is an effort to delegitimize us. And so there's a process that we must entertain, and a stance we must assume that will allow us to grow stronger, step by step. Efforts must be made to turn the tables on the current situation. That time will come... It will come as we grow stronger inside ourselves and believe in the rightness of our stance, and act on our own behalf in a variety of spheres. We're not there yet. We have a great deal of work to do. ~~~~~~~~~~ Part of what must be done is to change the perception many have of the "Palestinians" as the innocent, suffering underdogs deserving of much support. I am reminded of a speech this winter by Netanyahu advisor Ron Dermer, at the Jerusalem Conference. Expose the reality of the Palestinian Arab culture, he said, so that progressives and liberals can began to understand. Talk to the people who are feminists about their abuse of women, for example. Honor killings and all of that. Lastly, I refer here to what Daniel Pipes said just days ago. He has a peace plan, he wrote: Israel defeats her enemies. That is the way to peace. I do believe that down the road this will come. ~~~~~~~~~~ Finally, a word to the readers who I anticipate will write to me and tell me, for shame, for I must believe in the protection from Heaven that will keep us safe as we stand against the world. I believe with certainty that we are here as a people, on this land, because the Almighty has protected us and brought us here. I believe there is a brit, a covenant, that keeps us in this respect. I believe in the miracles of our return, and of the wars we have fought and won. I do not believe that we will be banished from this land again. But I also know that the covenant is with the people as a whole and not individuals. So I don't imagine for a moment that every Jew here will be safe because the Almighty will keep him or her from harm if our enemies go after us. And so there are ways to go about what must be done. We are in a process. We waited 2,000 years to return. Nowhere is it written that the final resolution must be immediate. Step by step we will achieve, undoing the errors of the past decades. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE MAINSTREAMING OF ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, May 6, 2010. |
|
This was written by Lauri B. Regan and it appeared in
American Thinker
|
|
It is time for American Jews to stand up and speak out. Enough of the debate about whether there is a gray area on which we can all agree. Anti-Semitism is a black-and-white issue. Hitler was evil. Ahmadinejad is evil. Period. And if American Jews do not wake up to the reality that there really is a right and a wrong, and stop talking about two sides to every issue, they will find themselves reliving a second Holocaust. In a recent Shabbat sermon, the senior rabbi at one of Baltimore's largest congregations explained why, whether he liked it or not, he felt compelled to talk about Israel. He suggested that due to the voluminous number of e-mails he received discussing an article written by Ed Koch and a sermon delivered by local rabbi Mark Wohlberg, he felt compelled to discuss the topic on everyone's mind. The opening remarks of the sermon reminded me of Obama's recent statement that "... whether we like it or not, America remains a military superpower." And while Americans have come to expect Obama's ridiculous apologies for America's exceptional nature, American Jews do not and should not accept this attitude from anyone — least of all our rabbis. Our history and faith dictate, and our survival depends upon, our leaders — our rabbis — celebrating Israel's greatness and the success of the Jewish people. The rabbi discussed a recent poll in which Israel joined Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea at the bottom of a list of 28 nations viewed favorably in the world. From there, rather than discuss what American Jews could do to help improve world perception of Israel, the rabbi politicized the two-state solution by characterizing it as an internal Israeli policy debate rather than what it is — a fight for Israel's survival. Though there was no coherent message being conveyed, the rabbi used two words to describe Israel that said more than anything else in the speech — "occupying state." The clear message was that Israel is occupying land on which Jewish people are not entitled to live. After the service, I told the rabbi that I was offended by his description of Israel as an occupying entity — a description reserved for use by anti-Semites. I suggested that, especially in light of recent rifts in U.S.-Israel relations and the virulent growth of anti-Semitism globally, rabbis need to choose their words wisely. He responded, "Oh, I see, you're from the far right." The rabbi then stated that he would use another term if I could suggest something appropriate to describe what Israel was doing. I looked at him inquisitively and asked how Israel could be occupying land that God gave to the Jewish people thousands of years ago. And with his next question, the rabbi took the conversation to a new low for Jews and Christians the world over: "How do you know that? Just because the Bible says so?" Rabbis whose views are driven by political ideology rather than faith-based spirituality enable leaders like National Security Advisor Jim Jones to feel comfortable making a pathetic joke about those greedy Jews. It is because of congregants who sit in the pews of liberal shuls and do not understand the issues, who agree with the liberal "blame the Jews" mantra, or who are too apathetic to speak up that Jones has not been forced to resign. Imagine the reaction of the African-American community if Jones had begun a speech with a joke about black people that feeds into negative stereotypes about that race. And that's exactly what Jones' joke was — racist — but when it comes to the Jews, the only response is perhaps a whisper, but mostly silence. The dichotomy between the American Latino response to an Arizona law addressing illegal immigration and the American Jewish response to the numerous anti-Israel policies emanating from the White House, including Obama's outrageous reaction to legal construction in Jerusalem, is also telling. While Latinos quickly unite, plan mass protests, and have the support of the liberal establishment, who threaten to boycott Arizona; Jews across the country debate and point fingers at each other about who is right and who is wrong, yet have no one but themselves to stand up for the Jewish homeland. It is time for American Jews to stand up and speak out. Enough of the debate about whether there is a gray area on which we can all agree. Anti-Semitism is a black-and-white issue. Hitler was evil. Ahmadinejad is evil. Period. And if American Jews do not wake up to the reality that there really is a right and a wrong, and stop talking about two sides to every issue, they will find themselves reliving a second Holocaust. In reaction to my response to the rabbi's sermon, a relative labeled me an extremist. If a fellow Jew labels me extreme for questioning a rabbi who openly pronounces that Jews should not look to the Bible for guidance on matters pertaining to the Promised Land because it apparently does not fit with his own ideology, then Jews the world over have a serious problem. If I am considered a right-wing lunatic because I believe that God gave the land of Canaan to the descendants of Abraham, then Israel has a problem. Perhaps they should consider that if more American Jews had been "extremists" in the early 1930s, the Holocaust may have been avoided, or at least have ended sooner. Great Britain is expelling Israeli representatives while the U.S. is sending its first ambassador to Syria in five years. The president and his minions accuse Israel of being responsible for the death of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and fan the fires of ever-growing anti-Semitism worldwide. And self-hating Jews like Richard Goldstone, who have set Israel up as the scapegoat on the international stage, have the support of Obama, the Europeans, the Arab League, and the U.N. Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syria have their missiles aimed at Israel and set on standby, and the Palestinians, to whom the world wants to cede parts of Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, educate their children to kill the Jews. At the same time, Obama intends to force a two-state solution on tiny Israel, all the while claiming that Israel has not proven its interest in peace and ignoring the reality of Palestinian rejectionism. Hamas and Hezbollah have been completely rearmed since previous conflicts with Israel, scud missiles are being shipped to Syria, the Islamic fanatics in Iran are building nuclear weapons, and the president has not approved a single major weapons request by Israel since taking office. It is clear not only that Obama has no intention of helping Israel militarily, but also that members of his administration have made outright threats of armed action against our ally. When questioned about Obama's Mideast advisor Brzezinski, who believes that the U.S. should shoot down Israeli war planes if they fly over Iraqi airspace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, simply responded, "I just wouldn't get into the speculation of what might happen and who might do what." Here at home, American Jews have become complacent and apathetic. They are unmoved by the protests of anti-Semites screaming "Go back to the ovens" and "Nuke Israel." They have no interest in J Street's desire to divide the Old City of Jerusalem and its protests about Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren speaking at Brandeis University's commencement, nor in rabbis who claim that Jewish people do not have a Biblical and historical right to Israel. This past week, anti-Semitic attacks have been directed at middle-school-age children in my hometown just outside New York City. Sixth-graders are checking out a website called "I Hate Jews," and Holocaust-deniers speak openly at the high school level. This country desperately needs leadership that will bring people together, not feed into the biases that will tear it apart. American Jews bought into Obama's rhetoric hook, line, and sinker, and they were sold a bill of goods. But many of them do not realize it because they have rabbis, driven by liberal ideology, who stand on their bully pulpits preaching from the Torah of Liberalism. It is one thing to claim to be a Zionist. But actions speak louder than words, and when 57% of American Jews still support Obama (and 55% support his handling of Israel), their Zionist declarations may make them feel good, but they have about as much weight as the empty promises made by their Messiah. American Jews need to educate themselves to understand the history of the land of Israel. They must educate their children to be proud of their Jewish heritage. Only then will they move away from labels, differentiate good from evil, and feel comfortable confronting anti-Semitism. Israel's survival may very well depend on it. Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org. |
|
CAMPUS FEARS HERE AND THERE
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, May 6, 2010. |
|
This was written by Brenda Katten, co-chair of Europeans for Israel and public-relations chair of World WIZO
This appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
To what extent are governors conscious of the hatred resulting from those Israeli academics that promote boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel? This coming week will see the start of the annual meetings of the boards of governors of a number of Israeli universities, with members arriving from all over the world. As contributors to their respective universities, one wonders if the governors are aware that many students feel threatened by the language of some professors? Language that condemns the Jewish state, calling it a "colonial power whose indigenous population, the Palestinians, has been kicked out by the Israelis." These students are being educated to see Israel as a pariah state. Those students who are shocked by these pronouncements are frequently too afraid to speak out against the views being projected. They worry that to openly disagree is to pave the way for a poor mark. (Prof, Amnon Rubinstein referred to this in a November op-ed in The Jerusalem Post in which he spoke of the rights of the students.) To what extent are governors conscious of the hatred resulting from those Israeli academics that promote BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against Israel? Is it not strange that they are able to travel abroad calling for the boycott of the very universities from which they receive their livelihood? Do governors recognize the devastating effect of this Israel-bashing on students in their respective countries? For example, a number of Israeli academics spearheaded the recent "Israel Apartheid Week" (now in its sixth year) aimed to show the country as an apartheid state like South Africa was. London was the scene of major anti-Israel activity during this "Apartheid Week," led by an associate professor from Tel Aviv University. The prime objective was to isolate, delegitimize and dehumanize the one Jewish state. This is particularly disturbing when seen in conjunction with Jewish students who feel unable to stand up to the increasingly virulent anti-Israel bombardment on campus.
WHILE WE pride ourselves on being a democratic country where free speech is a given right, every society places a limit on free speech. Surely it is unacceptable that there are those employed by Israeli universities who educate their students to see the country as a colonial and pariah state as well as travelling abroad to call for BDS. Today, it is quite clear that there is a turning away from Israel — sadly also among Jews — the result of both an effective anti-Israel media campaign together with an Israel whose leadership has long dismissed the relevance of hasbara. The student on campus is at the forefront of the battle for Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. The question is, are Jewish students receiving the necessary support to confront the ever-growing hostility? As a former chair of the Hillel Foundation in the UK, I can say that some 12 years ago Jewish students spoke up for Israel with pride and eloquence. Today, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find student activists willing and capable of standing up and being counted. While it is incumbent on communities worldwide to support the Jewish students by ensuring they are armed with the facts, it would seem that we now have to address a second challenge, that of those who educate toward the demise of Israel. It is from universities that tomorrow's leaders will emerge. This applies to the political leadership in each country as well as leadership for the respective Jewish communities. Surely it is incumbent on all of us, but especially on those who have connections with universities here, to do all we can to ensure that our students are not educated to turn away from Israel. It is of vital importance to our Jewish future that our students are made aware of our people's right to its historic homeland, and to feel pride in all that this little state has achieved since its rebirth in 1948. Contact Israel Academia Monitor at email@israel-academia-monitor.com |
|
JERUSALEM! 43 YEARS SINCE LIBERATION-UNIFICATION
Posted by Batya Medad, May 6, 2010. |
|
I can only blame Israel's wishy-washy policies for the fact that the world hasn't accepted, adjusted to the fact that Israel must be sovereign over its Capital, Jerusalem. The modern State of Israel was established in May, 1948, six months after the United Nations voted its "approval." I have no doubt that the vote was just a public relations act without any "teeth." What was the United Nations at the time? It was a very newly established international body totally lacking in any track record. And since then according to the long list of "resolutions" and votes, the greatest danger to world security is the tiny State of Israel. It's inaccurate and lopsided to say the least. And about that November, 1947 vote, I have no doubt that many of the countries that voted in favor of a Jewish State only did it, because they figured that it would be defeated by the British supported Arabs who attacked it. They voted "yes" to look nice and sympathetic after the Holocaust, Nazi atrocities against European Jews had been revealed. I base this on the fact that no country helped Israel in its fight for independence, just like no country did anything to stop the Nazis as they murdered Jews. The international fight against Nazis was to protect, preserve and return European countries to independence and to protect/defend Great Britain. That was the aim of the allied forces. Now, lets look at some simple math. The State of Israel is sixty-two (62) years old. At the time of the cease fire most of Jerusalem including the ancient "walled city" where the Kotel, Western Wall and Temple Mount, site of the Jewish Holy Temple are located was in Jordanian hands. Jordan is a Nazi dream country. It's Judenrein. Jews are forbidden to live there. Nineteen (19) years later, in 1967, after threats of war and annihilation by Egypt, Syria and Jordan, a war broke out, and Israel miraculously defeated those three nations in six days. The result was a much more easily defensible state with straight geographic borders, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, from the Golan Heights to the Suez Canal. In the center is a united Jerusalem which includes Judaism's holiest place, the Temple Mount. That was forty-three (43) years ago, already more than double the amount of time we didn't hold our Biblical Homeland, Judea and Samaria and united Jerusalem. Ironically and ridiculously, with time, instead of our hold and international recognition getting stronger, it's getting weaker. That is bad news and extremely dangerous to Israel's security. The fault is with Israel, its politicians and media. Something stinks. But I don't want to leave you with such a totally negative message on the Eve of Jerusalem Day. Therefore I'll add a photo I took recently. 
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 |
|
KARSH ON ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT; ABBAS WANTS: FAILED TALKS, ISRAEL
BLAMED; GAZA U.INTO TERROR?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 6, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL'S NETANYAHU TO MEET WITH EGYPT'S MUBARAK 
The heads of government of Israel and of Egypt will be meeting to discuss the coming negotiations among the U.S., Israel, and the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). Egypt supports the P.A. positions. "The PA demands that Israel ultimately hand over half of Jerusalem to the PA, which will make it the capital of yet another Arab state. Abbas sees all parts of Jerusalem that were under Jordanian control from 1948 to 1967 as rightfully belonging to the Arab world, including neighborhoods that have historically been Jewish." (Arutz-7, 5/3/10). The officials will meet in Egypt. Mubarak refuses to go to Israel. That is one of his country's violations of its treaty to normalize relations with Israel. The numerous and continues Arab violations of armistices and treaties somehow do not prompt leaders to question the value of yet another agreement. Hope (or anti-Zionist malice) trumps reality. Why does Abbas think these areas belong to the Muslims? Islamic doctrine holds that once an area is conquered by the Muslims, the natives have no right to liberate themselves. The P.A. therefore denies historical Jewish ties to the city and to the country. For the same reason, Egypt supports the P.A., in addition to Egyptian aspirations to be regional overlord (by reducing Israeli strength), just as does Iran and as did Iraq under Saddam. Egypt does not care about Palestinian Arabs and their cause. When it controlled Gaza, it kept the locals from working and traveling except as terrorists dispatched by Egypt against Israel. Egypt invested nothing in Gaza. (One did not hear complaints then, as one does now, that Gaza is like a big prison. Still another double standard against Israel.) By contrast, when Gaza fell into Israeli hands, Israel boosted the standard of living and restored fresh water to the briny aquifer. Therefore, although for political correctness the Arab side depicts the Arab-Israel conflict is a territorial dispute, it really is a matter of its religion.
EX-AMBSSADOR BOLTON DISGUSTED WITH UN, DISMAYED OVER OBAMA Former U.S. ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, is disgusted with the UN. He told Israel Army Radio that it is typical of the UN to give the podium to Ahmadinejad, whose speech was so ridiculous that he probably lost respect. The UN constantly fails to deal with global problems, notably first Communism and now terrorism and nuclear proliferation. The UN is "empty of all content" and lost its legitimacy. There should be extensive discussion of its failures and democracies should transfer to a separate organization. Mr. Bolton believes that just by talking with Egypt about its plan for a nuclear bomb-free Mideast, President Obama is causing Israel harm. Why? It lends credence to Egypt's plan, obviously directed against one country, Israel. This is an example of absurd U.S. diplomacy, an earlier example being one in which the founder of modern Islamist terrorism, Yassir Arafat, was feted by the White House. Bolton quit his UN post out of frustration (Arutz-7, 5/4/10). I recall that the Senate, already controlled by Democrats who, for partisanship, rejected most Bush nominations, were adamant against Bolton because he did not make believe the UN is worth much. They claimed he couldn't get along with people, but his record there was without problems.
NEW STUDY OF ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT Ephraim Karsh, a respected Israeli historian, has delved into recently released archives, and produced a culminating study of the Arab-Israel conflict. The new evidence confirms what everybody knew half a century ago, but which recent decades of propaganda have been revising to suit agendas. The new line is that the Palestinian Arabs were helpless, had no choice, and were expelled. Actually, from early in the Palestine Mandate and even till now, Zionists sought accommodation with the Arabs, while the Arabs sought to exterminate the Jews. The Arabs remain intransigent, even till now, and the Left still seeks accommodation. [Some people are slow learners.] Struggle was the Arabs' conscious decision. They had choice. They could have accepted the UN partition plan. When the General Assembly voted for partition in November 1947, the Arabs in the Mandate redoubled their attacks on the Jews. More than half the refugees fled between then and May 1948, when the British evacuated and Israel declared independence. [Note: Israel started its defense without much arms, ammunition, or training.] So many Arabs fled, that their infrastructure collapsed and life became untenable for many others, who then departed. The masses who fled from urban centers and from villages were not forced out except from Lydda [and probably a few strategic border or hilltop positions]. The Palestinian Arab leadership did not want its people to return, lest that acknowledge Jewish rule. At first, the Zionists would have let the Arabs back, but as they realized the Arabs wanted to destroy them, they changed their minds. The Arabs caused their own tragedy, which they now blame on the Jews, against whom they planned a greater tragedy. An earlier book by Karsh exposed fabrications and errors in revisionist historians' work (reviewed by Daniel Pipes, head of Middle East Forum, in the National Review of 5/17/10).
ISLAMISTS VOW TO END SOMALIA PIRACY As the radical Muslim group, Hezb Al Islam captured Harard, a major pirate town in northern Somalia, it declared it would end piracy and impose Islamic law (IMRA, 5/4/10). Is the distinction there that instead of preying on foreigners, the rulers of that town will prey upon their own people? Terrorists are considered common enemies of mankind which, under international law, is akin to piracy.
ABBAS WANTS TALKS TO FAIL AND ISRAEL TO BE BLAMED Palestinian Authority head Abbas is acting as if he wants talks to fail and then blame Israel, suggests IDF Intelligence officer Brig. Gen. Yosef Baidatz. Abbas is trying to get Israel to make concessions in advance, without offering concessions, and is threatening to walk out if Israel does not make them and unless Israel agrees to all the Arab demands. Abbas called the government of Israel "extremist" (Arutz-7, 5/5/10). Recently I documented P.A. glorification of terrorists and a new history book that finds Zionists attempting to be conciliatory for decades. The P.A. curriculum and indeed the whole society indoctrinate in religious bigotry and irredentism. The Israeli curriculum indoctrinates in peace. Which side is extremist? The Arab demands, drawn up in the Saudi initiative, would have Israel let itself get conquered by insecure borders and millions of incoming Arabs. Conquest means dispossession and probably genocide, considering the weekly mosque sermons to kill Jews. Which side is extremist? In making conditions that would get Israel destroyed, Abbas does seem to be trying to make negotiations fail. An earlier article pointed out his low priority for negotiations, because he anticipates unilateral UN conferring of statehood upon his terrorist organization? The real question is why Israel bothers to negotiate with a party that wants conquest and not peace. There is no Arab peace movement but plenty of war sentiment. Why call it negotiating, when the Arabs simply want Israel to sign on the dotted line, and won't even meet with Israeli negotiators? This is a time for Israel to find some dignity and not attend meetings without Arab negotiators being present. IRAN TRANSMITTING JIHAD THROUGH CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES? 
Ironically, Chavez compares Israel with the Nazis. He also reiterates the old canard that "the Jews" crucified Jesus. Jewish activists get threatened. His state-controlled media call for the government to expel the Jews (Arutz-7, 5/5/10). Christian countries should beware of acting as proxies for Islamist prejudice, in view of the Arab saying, "After Saturday's people, Sunday's people." Perhaps Venezuelan Jews should emigrate before the Venezuelan ax falls.
EU JEWS FORM OWN J STREET Naming it "J Call," 4,000 European Jews emulated J Street by forming an organization that claims to value Israel but oppose its governmental policies [toward the Arabs] and "occupation." The established European Jewish Congress (EJC) called itself a democratically-run representative of the bulk of European Jewry, and J Call divisive and counter-productive. [The established American Jewish organizations reacted the same way.] EJC pointedly confirmed its support for the Israeli government and its efforts to promote negotiations by removing roadblocks and freezing some construction. EJC president Dr. Moshe Cantor advises that continued, one-sided pressure on Israel encourages the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) not to negotiate seriously and to further destabilize conditions. He suggests that European countries press the P.A. to cease its wall-to-wall incitement to hatred and that the EU stop financing those Arabs, who glorify terrorism (as documented in prior article) (Arutz-7, 5/5/10). Not everyone knows that J Street was formed with much Muslim money and in concert with Obama's attempt to split American Jewish opinion. Divide and conquer. (See my earlier pieces on J Street.) The EJC makes valid points about the P.A., but dubious points about Israel. Israel does not need the support of an EJC that praises it for its appeasement of the P.A. and the U.S. at the definite cost of lives of its own people. Roadblock removal is a policy of the government of Israel toward the Arabs that is objectionable. Withdrawal has cost thousands of lives. The problem with Israel is that it has no strategy for a Jewish national agenda that would ensure its long-term survival. Instead, it mostly waits for the Arabs to make peace. But the Arabs are tight in the grip of genocidal bigotry. No Muslim Arab reformation is foreseeable. Therefore, instead of waiting and negotiating, Israel should be acting. And to be sure, it also should be explaining. For all its vaunted "Zionist propaganda machine," the dominant Left there is anti-Zionist and the government has not only not persuaded the world of its case, it has failed to make its case known.
GAZA UNIVERSITY FOR EDUCATION OR TERRORISM? 
The late Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, Hamas leader, founded Gaza University. The curriculum includes Arabic literature, alternative medicine, and other subjects — more on that, later. The University denies that it belongs to Hamas. Gaza U. belongs to the International Association of Universities and three other international organizations for higher education. It is associated with the London School of Economics and Queen Mary college. Intel set up an Intel Information Technology Center for Excellence there. What else goes on there? Students affiliated with Hamas recently used knives and chains to send several students affiliated with Fatah to the hospital. Such clashes are common. According to the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Gaza U. utilizes Western and Muslim aid and its academic affiliation to indoctrinate in Hamas style terrorism and practice. Teachers lecture on their radical Islamic ideology and hostility to Israel and to the West. "...lecturers emphasize the importance of Jihad and the Islamic code while teaching how to use the media for religious coercion. Its academic studies, including those for teachers in grade schools, are linked to Jihadist education and the value of suicide attacks." Military leaders hold secret meetings there. University laboratories develop and produce rockets and other explosives. The University stores explosives. During Israel's counter-terrorism operation in Gaza, the rockets were evacuated. The IDF bombed the weapons laboratories. After that evacuation and destruction, Goldstone's UN fact-finding mission declared, "These were civilian, educational buildings and the Mission did not find any information about their use as a military facility." (Arutz-7, 5/5/10). People forgot or did not know that Faisal Husseini, Arafat's cousin hailed as a moderate, ran a university, I think it was Bir Zeit, that also taught students how to make explosives. That is what terrorists do, whether Hamas or Fatah. The problem is the West's tendency to declare jihadists moderate and to give them money. How clever are the Europeans to donate to Gaza U., which teaches students to hate Europeans and how to kill them? Western universities should be cautious about partnering with Arab ones. Syrian ones could help Syria further on its weapons of mass-destruction. Same caution should go for admitting foreign Arab students to Western university science classes.
NY BOMBING DEVELOPMENTS Having arrested Faisal Shahad, a suspect in the New York Times Square bombing, authorities are gaging how they handle him. The law on that still is unclear on how to treat an American citizen trained abroad but attacking and apprehended in the U.S.. They arrested him as a civilian. Under an exception made for the necessity of ascertaining any immediate danger to the public, Shahad was interrogated before being read Miranda rights. He waived them and seemed to cooperate with interrogators. Federal officials believe they can get sufficient information even after a prisoner exercises Miranda rights. Senator Lieberman wants to amend a law that allows American suspects to be stripped of citizenship so they do not get certain rights, so as to include this kind of case (Peter Baker, NY Times, 5/5/10, A1). Sen. Lieberman's proposition is something like the law that allows prosecutors to freeze an accused gangster's assets, in case they were bought with criminal gains. But then the accused may lack the funds for legal defense. This is the kind of complex situation that needs the benefit of experts' experience, serious thought, and public debate. Like the medical, finance, and energy bills, It also needs skeptics to figure out what may go wrong.
MORE ON NY BOMBING AND YOUTUBE 
Terrorist organizations now use YouTube, some exclusively so, for claiming responsibility for certain attacks [whether true or not] and for posting videos of terrorist attacks to indoctrinate or instruct the faithful. A Taliban commander used YouTube to claim he organized the Times Square, New York attack. His site calls for attacking American cities. His hobbies are: "Jihad, Caliphate, and Shariah." Al-Awlaki uses YouTube ever since his website was shut down after his role in prompting the Fort Hood massacre was revealed. Documenting its study with names of organizations and dates, MEMRI reveals that YouTube has become a key tool of jihad (IMRA, 5/5/10).
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
FORGIVENESS IS NOT JUSTICE
Posted by Leslie J. Sacks, May 6, 2010. |
|
A seemingly unbridgeable divide remains between American liberalism — borne of contemporary, "turn-the-other-cheek" Christianity — and archetypal reap-what-you-sow Judaism. It's strange — for almost 2,000 years the Church persecuted Jews for being different. Yet we now hear calls from many (though, by no means, all) of our country's Christian corners for understanding, love, kindness and forgiveness toward the Other. Nowadays, the Other is the radical Islamist waging war on the Judeo-Christian world. For 2,000 years, peaceful and unthreatening Jews did not deserve forgiveness, absolution, kindness, or love. Apparently, times have changed. Indeed, a Jew is tempted to ask: what gives? Is it not reasonable to assume that the crimes of suicidal terrorism and intentional civilian slaughter are unforgivable and that justice for their victims the only natural course? Is it not emotional cowardice and ethical confusion to indulge our society's worship of peace and quiet and demand forgiveness for crimes that do not belong to us? It smacks of theft; only the deceased and God can forgive. Just so, it is for the murderer to pay penance, to apply restitution through charity, good deeds and by paying his massive debts to society. It is not for us liberals to shower our love on all and project our weaknesses and insecurities in such an obsequious attempt to co-opt these nihilists to our way of life. Despite our confidences to the contrary, our logic is not so persuasive that Sheik Mohammad, Ahmadinejad and their (respective) coteries will melt and be cleansed by our purifying, all powerful forgiveness and understanding. This type of thinking may work for a chunk of the world's Christians. For 18 million Jews, it won't. We lost one-third of our people a short six decades ago; we can no longer afford mistakes. Turning the other cheek to a nuclear Iran is not just appeasement, not just childish forgiveness, it is just suicide. As Golda Meir once said, we have now a secret weapon — "We have no other choice." Leslie J. Sacks lives in Los Angeles, CA. He blogs at http://strengthandtolerance.com/ |
|
EXTREMIST MUSLIMS AND THEIR TOTALITARIAN COUSINS
Posted by Chuck Morse, May 5, 2010. |
|
Radical Islam revealed itself to the world on Sept. 11, 2001, the date in which 19 Islamic extremists killed themselves in their successful quest to kill as many innocent Americans as possible. This radical element continues to manifest itself ... Yet the problem faced by the Western democracies and moderate Islamic states today does not entirely reside with radical Islam. To understand the nature of the immoral enemy confronting the free world today, we need to open up the lens and acknowledge that radical Islam has resonated, historically and presently, with the two great socialist movements of the 20th century, Nazism and Communism, and that those two movements were entirely Western and European in their origin. Like radical Islam, Nazism and Communism sought, as their ultimate goal, world conquest and a one-world utopian government under their respective alleged enlightened rule. All three movements, Nazism, Communism and radical Islam, advanced the cause of the totalitarian state ruled by a strong leader controlling all aspects of the lives of citizens. The Nazis called this the Furherprincip, the Communists called it the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, and the radical Islamists call it the Caliphate. All three radical movements have advocated a state of perpetual war against their own people and an ongoing war to be waged against the rest of the world until the entire planet submits to their will. The Nazis called it Blitzkreig, the Communists called it Revolution, the radical Islamists call it Jihad. All three movements have called for total social control of their respective populations. The Nazis justified this in their quest to create the Ubbermench, or the Master Race, a race that they believed would rule all of mankind with cosmic wisdom. The Communists called it collectivism, and the radical Islamists call it Shariah Law. All three hold the ideal state to be one that involves the overall docility and submission of the population at large to a secular and earthly higher authority. All three have employed the tactic of terror to scare their own people and those living outside their control into a state of submission. All three have sought total state control over their respective cultures, what Karl Marx referred to as public control over the "means of communication." All three believe that the secular state should maintain a literal monopoly over definitions of what is real, which in the de facto sense means that the state controls the minds of its subjects. In the book Hitler Speaks Adolf Hitler, speaking like the true socialist he was, is quoted as saying: "There is no such thing as truth, in the moral or in the scientific domain." Nazism was crushed in Europe in 1945, and Communism mostly went into eclipse with the collapse of the Evil Soviet Empire in 1990 — but a socialized and radicalized form of Islam continues to live on to fight another day. Amin al-Husseini should be viewed as the father of modern radical Islam in the same way his fellow socialists, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao, were the fathers of the two European socialisms, Nazism and Communism. Amin al-Husseini was closely allied with Hitler's regime from its inception and until it's collapse in 1945, and his movement was closely allied with the Soviet Union from 1945 until it's collapse in 1990. Since then, radical Islam has taken on a life of its own. President George W. Bush declared war on radical Islam after the 9/11 attack and made good on that promise by toppling the Taliban in Kabul and Saddam Hussein in Baghdad. In that policy, Bush was following in the footsteps of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who led a coalition of free nations in a war that led to the unconditional surrender of the Nazis, and of President Ronald Reagan, who likewise led a coalition of nations against the evil Soviet Empire. Whether or not President Barack Obama has the vision, or whether he understands the moral imperative to see the war against radical Islam through, remains an open question. Chuck Morse is author of "The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj Amin Al-Husseini". |
|
THREE EMPIRES
Posted by Steve Kramer, May 5, 2010. |
|
We recently attended a terrific lecture at Tel Aviv University on the three empires, Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian, that ruled Judah before Alexander the Great's era. The lecturer was Oded Lipschits, associate professor of Jewish History, Dept. of Archeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures. He is a summa cum laude graduate of TAU, whose Ph.D. Dissertation subject was "The 'Yehud' [Judah] Province under Babylonian Rule." Professor Lipschits is currently exploring the rise, fall and rise of ancient Jerusalem through everyday objects, such as clay seals, at Ramat Rahel near Jerusalem. When King Solomon died, about 926 BCE (all dates below are Before Common Era), the ten northern Israelite tribes refused to submit to his heir, Rehoboam, and revolted. From this point on, there were two kingdoms of Hebrews: in the north, Israel, and in the south, Judah. The Israelites made their capital in the city of Samaria and the Judeans kept their capital in Jerusalem. The two states, together, were roughly the size of contemporary Israel; tiny states like these never survived in that region. Located on the land bridge between the Mesopotamian kingdoms in the northeast (Fertile Crescent) and the powerful state of Egypt in the southwest. Israel and Judah were of the utmost commercial and military importance to these warring powers. Being small and weak was a liability. Nevertheless, the two Jewish kingdoms remained separate states for over two hundred years. Israel was the first to disappear, after being conquered by the Assyrians in 722. (www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org) Professor Lipschits explained that the Fertile Crescent supported major population centers because it had the most water resources. The term "fertile crescent" refers to an ancient area of fertile soil and important rivers stretching in an arc from the Nile to the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. It covers Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq and is known as the "cradle of civilization," in combination with Egypt. Civilizations developed in these rich agricultural areas, located in a region where most land is too dry for farming. According to Lipschits, one main source of water means one main power. The special phenomenon of Israelite society is that though the population was tiny, its distinct, historic depiction (the Bible) parallels that of the competing empires, though it was usually a vassal state of the strongest power. The Assyrians ruled from the 9th century to the 7th centuries. Their dominance over the Middle East is a history of constant warfare. To assure that conquered territories would remain pacified, the Assyrians forced many of the native inhabitants to relocate to other parts of the empire. They usually chose to exile the upper, more powerful classes, for they had no reason to fear the general mass of a population. Assyrians from the heartland would then be relocated to the conquered territory, transforming the population. (Russia and China have used this strategy in the modern era.) The Assyrians forced the ten tribes to scatter throughout the empire. The Israelites assimilated into their new communities and eventually lost knowledge of their roots. They are probably the basis for "the ten lost tribes" tradition. For the Assyrians, Israel was a small, profitable province. There was a lack of independence, but life was relatively good for the Israelites. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained its autonomy; it paid taxes to the emperor as one of many Assyrian vassal states. According to Lipschits, this arrangement with the Assyrians provided some stability, relieving Judah of possible chaos from Beduin invaders attacking from the desert. The Babylonians defeated the Assyrians and absorbed them. They ruled from the 7th to the 6th century. During this time, the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel prepared the Judeans for their coming downfall and expulsion from Jerusalem. In 597, Nebuchadnezzar II conquered Jerusalem and Judah. The upper classes were exiled to Babylon, where they prospered. In 586 the Holy Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and only the Jewish peasants were left in Judah. Lipschits described the extensive archeological and Biblical evidence for this historical narrative. He showed us a slide of him holding and deciphering a scribe's small cuneiform tablet from the period. I was struck by this picture, after noticing that I was holding my Apple Itouch and taking notes in precisely the same way! The Judeans were wise enough to prosper under multiple empires. They accepted life under a foreign king with its consequent taxation and domination, short of the desecration of their religion. The destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem was a great blow to them. The Babylonians located their provincial capital close to Jerusalem — at Ramat Rahel — to spare Judean sensitivities. It had huge buildings and an extensive surrounding garden, the first discovered anywhere, according to Lipschits. Lipschits explained that previous excavations at the Ramat Rahel site had unearthed a large scale citadel with a royal palace dating from the time of the last kings of Judah. It was probably first built by King Hezekiah (2 Kings 18-20). The citadel is surrounded with a large, impressive casemate wall, which is typical of the ancient Israelite monarchies. Inside this wall, a magnificent palace was unearthed. This site boasts the only known Judean palace and it has a special water system to irrigate the beautiful royal gardens. These remains are arguably the first royal gardens of this period to have been found in Israel. A large fortified structure, probably belonging to the royal palace and its gardens, has also been discovered. According to Lipschits, these areas require further excavations. Following Nebuchadnezzar's death, the Babylonian empire declined. The Medes were the rising power in the east, who had joined with the Babylonians to defeat the Assyrians. The Persian king, Cyrus, married the daughter of the Median king to form a new alliance, and then killed his father-in-law — typical regal behavior. The Hebrew, Jeremiah, had foretold that the Jews would be free to return home to Jerusalem after 70 years. During this 70 year period of Jewish captivity, the Persians conquered Babylonia, and the Babylonians lost their status as a world power. Cyrus became ruler of the world's largest empire, which lasted from the 6th to the 4th centuries. He allowed a large number of Jews to return to Jerusalem (the majority remained in Babylon), to rebuild the city and construct a new Temple, just fifty years after its destruction by the Babylonians, fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy. (Read the history in 2 Kings, Jeremiah, and 2 Chronicles.) Lipschits explained that the Assyrian strategy of conquest was to disperse the defeated peoples to promote Assyrian world hegemony, while the Babylonians were more accepting of their subjects, giving them limited autonomy. Cyrus, the Persian king, was even more liberal. He realized that rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem would benefit his empire. Cyrus believed in multiculturalism, a word coined to express the coexistence and peaceful cohabitation of peoples from different background and culture in one land. Because of his permission to reconstruct the Temple in Jerusalem, a strong Jewish presence was guaranteed there. For this reason alone, Cyrus truly earned his epithet, the Great. His empire remained intact until 331, when another visionary, Alexander, came on the scene. But that's another story. Professor Lipschitz spoke longer than usual due to the rapt attention of the audience, and answered many questions. It's apparent why he is one of the university's star professors. His lecture was another excellent program for the English Speaker's Club of Tel Aviv University — we plan to visit the Ramat Rahel site to learn more. (Check the site: www.tau.ac.il/~rmtrachl/archives/oldindex.html) This is a photo taken at Ramat Rahel kibbutz in Jerusalem (segments of wall showing original height). 
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." Contact him at sjk1@jhu.edu |
|
ISRAEL'S DEMOCRACY WARS
Posted by Seth J. Frantzman, May 5, 2010. |
|
Why is it assumed that the doyens of Israeli academia are necessarily democratic and good judges of the country's democratic character? The most common nervous reaction among a certain segment of Israel's left is the refrain that Israel is always threatened by undemocratic forces from within. The Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research at Tel Aviv University recently released a poll showing that the average adult Jewish Israeli believes "there is too much freedom of expression" and that many respondents "favor punishing Israeli citizens who support sanctioning or boycotting the country." Haaretz's headline screamed "Israel's Jews back gag on rights groups." The reaction was fast and furious from the academic establishment, which had commissioned the study. Prof. Daniel Bar-Tal of TAU claimed "Israelis have a distorted perception of democracy — most people are almost anti-democratic." David Newman of Ben-Gurion University and fellow Jerusalem Post columnist claimed the results were "very worrying." THE SURVEY was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Large segments of Israeli academia and various organizations like the Israeli Democracy Institute believe the public is anti-democratic and they craft surveys to tell them exactly that. The fact that the survey measured only Jewish members of society should have been a red herring. It is no different from a survey by Ma'agar Mochrot in March that surveyed Arabs and Jews on "democracy" but primarily wanted to examine young people's attitudes on the state's Arab citizens. What about what the Arabs had to say about the Jews and the state? Why is it assumed that the doyens of Israeli academia are necessarily democratic and good judges of the country's democratic character? Bar-Tal, for instance, is on the editorial board of the Palestine-Israel Journal whose logo is a Palestinian flag and an Israeli flag without the Star of David and which routinely refers to Palestinian terrorism as "resistance." When they "understand" Palestinian terrorism, support boycotts of Israel, the "one-state solution" or encourage soldiers not go to the army, are these "democratic" choices? Is support for "Voices from Gaza" (a TAU conference), part of supporting democracy by bringing the Islamist voice of Hamas to its student body? Maybe the public doesn't understand why year after year their tax dollars go to universities where their sons and daughters are called "Nazis" and they are said to be practicing "apartheid" and where the Jewish people's existence is denied and the Palestinians are called "indigenous" and where the details of the Holocaust are called "unimportant." The public doesn't understand why "democracy" only means hatred of the State of Israel and see no benefit from this form of "democracy," We don't understand why those who call Israel undemocratic, like writer Gideon Levy, are the same ones who embrace Palestinian nationalism and envied the late king (say it again, king) of Jordan. Maybe the public doesn't understand why "human rights" groups never care about their rights, such as those of Ethiopian Jews who wonder why the Israeli left was marching against Sabra and Shatilla in the 1980s but could care less as ten thousand of them died in the deserts of Sudan.
YEAR AFTER year Israelis go to army and leave it with little prospects for economic success. But they soldier on, paying their taxes, waiting in lines and scraping by. They work 12-hour shifts and live crammed into tenements on the Coastal Plain or exposed to Kassams in Sderot. All the while they are demonized with contempt by those at the higher levels of society, the "free thinkers" and "critics" who call them brutish antidemocratic forces. Consider just some of what the public has witnessed in recent years: The late Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz of Hebrew University claimed Israel was a "Judeo-Nazi" state. Yitzhak Laor wrote the play Ephraim Returns to the Army which drew "comparisons between Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Nazi rule in occupied Europe." Moshe Zimmerman, director of the Minerva Center for German History at the Hebrew University, claims "there is an entire sector in the Jewish public which I unhesitatingly define as a copy of the German Nazis." The same Zimmerman wrote that Hitler didn't intend to kill the Jews; "Hitler improvised and raised the question of the Jews." Hanna Yablonka of BGU called the "details" of the Holocaust unimportant. Adi Ophir at TAU opened "Israel Apartheid Week" in London at the School of Oriental and African Studies. Udi Aloni, whose work has been shown at the Museum of Israeli Art in Ramat Gan and who has presented at the Van Leer Institute, wrote in March that the "occupation and the apartheid regime is hovering over the State of Israel." Prof. Shlomo Sand of TAU, author of The Invention of the Jewish People, claims "intellectuals of Jewish origin in Germany, influenced by the folk character of German nationalism, took upon themselves the task of inventing a [Jewish] people." Oren Yiftachel of BGU claims the Beduin are indigenous to Israel and writes on Beduin-Arabs and the Israeli Settler State: Land Policies and Indigenous Resistance. Prof. Ze'ev Sternhell, Israeli Prize winner, advised the Palestinians in an op-ed in May 2001 on their best terrorism strategy: "Palestinians would be wise to concentrate their struggle against the settlements." Ariel Toaff of Bar-Ilan University argued in his book Passovers of Blood that Ashkenazim may have indeed used the blood of Christian children in rituals. Numerous Israeli academics, from Neve Gordon (BGU) to Anat Matar (TAU) and Ilan Pappe (formerly University of Haifa), have all joined calls to boycott their own universities or Israel entirely. Some academics enthusiastically applaud the Palestinian nationalist cause, call for understanding Hamas and teach classes that force students to volunteer for anti-Israel "peace" organizations.
AND AFTER all this there are expressions of surprise that the vast majority of Israelis tire of those whose salaries they pay and who wrap themselves in the Palestinian nationalist flag but abhor the flag with the Star of David on it. Ironically it is the public who are called "undemocratic" when the real haters of democracy are the well heeled who argue that their extremist hatred of Israel is an essential part of democracy. A survey of academics would show that a significant minority, if not a majority, hold to principles that are not mainstream democratic ones, such as supporting chauvinist nationalist Palestinian groups and excusing terrorism as "resistance." In the dustup over Im Tirzu's advertisements condemning Naomi Chazan of the New Israel Fund, Prof. Avner De Shalit, dean of social sciences and Max Kampelman Professor of Democracy and Human Rights at Hebrew University, urged in an e-mail "I wonder if Im Tirzu shouldn't be sued." That's very democratic: If you don't like someone giving their opinion, sue to gag them. Abe Lincoln said, "A nation divided against itself cannot stand," and Samuel Adams elaborated, "A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of [democracy] than the whole force of the common enemy." Some of the country's best educated and brightest thinkers have few principles or manners and they have a deep-seated hatred of the State of Israel. Their constant refrain is that it is the people who have lost faith in democracy. If they have, it is only because they have learned from their cultured peers.
Seth Frantzman is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies.
This articleappeared in Jerusalem Post
|
|
THE CASE OF THE MYSTERIOUS DISAPPEARING RELIGION
Posted by Susana K-M, May 5, 2010. |
|
This was written by Monica Crowley. This is happening all over the world. Its name? The Power of Arab Money at the Immigration Offices + "Trespassing " Gov. Institutions through officials connected to Muslim Funding |
|
Islam? Islam? Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone? We awake to news that after extraordinary police work, investigators have made an arrest in the attempted car bombing of Times Square in New York. Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani native-turned-naturalized-U.S.-citizen, was taken into custody late last night. He was naturalized last year, and shortly thereafter, made a trip to Peshawar, Pakistan — a hotbed of Islamic terrorist activity and recruitment. I have read countless reports about the arrest, in newspapers and websites big and small. So far, I have not seen a single mention of his faith. Not a single reference to his being Muslim. We're left to deduce that by his Pakistani ethnicity and name. Political correctness has stripped us of our ability to be brutally honest about the nature of the threat we face. It's not from a bunch of maniacal Catholics or Jews or Hindus or Buddhists. The lethal threat is coming from radical Muslims. Even after September 11, even after repeated terror attacks and attempts here and abroad, we still cannot be truthful and outspoken about it? Pathetic. This suicidal inability to call the enemy what it is comes straight from the top: the President will not go anywhere near the words "Islam" and "terror" together. His administration has contorted itself into all kinds of politically correct gymnastics to avoid making the connection, going so far as to term acts of terror as "manmade disasters" and the fight against it as "overseas contingency operations." He refused to speak the truth about the motivation of Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who killed 13 fellow Americans in the name of Islam, and would not make the connection with the Christmas Day bomber, Abdulmutallab. He refused to "jump to conclusions" about what propelled them to try to kill Americans (although he had no problem "jumping to conclusions" about Sgt. Crowley of the Cambridge Police and the Arizona immigration law.) New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg made a ridiculous statement before the arrest, suggesting it could be "someone...that doesn't like the health care bill." Bloomberg's comment was idiotic, but he's not the Commander-in-Chief. Obama was notified of the arrest five minutes after midnight. We've gotten a statement from his Attorney General, but as of 8:30am ET, still no statement from the Commander-in-Chief. Unless and until we can call the enemy and what drives him to kill us what they are — Muslims propelled by their religious belief — we cannot and will not win this war. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THE TIMES SQUARE BOMB ATTEMPT
Posted by Dr. Sanford Aranoff, May 5, 2010. |
|
Faisal Shahzad is a soldier, an enemy combatant, fighting a war against the U.S. No one seems to speak this truth. This is because of a profound misunderstanding. Imagine a Nazi young man coming to America during the war. Take your imagination further thinking that he became a naturalized citizen, swearing allegiance to the U.S. Later on he detonates a bomb in a public place. He would be tried and convicted as a soldier in a war, since he was originally a German resident and a Nazi. The difference between the imagined situation and the current situation with Shahzad is that the imagined situation involved America in a war that Congress declared, while today Congress did not declare war. The concept is that war involves countries. During World War II, a state of war existed between the U.S. and Germany. Shahzad was born in Pakistan, and there is no state of war between the U.S. and Pakistan. For this reason, we look at Shahzad as an individual, someone who may have gone off the deep end. The dangerous misunderstanding is that Islam does not view states the way Americans and Europeans do. We view the world as divided into nation-states. Islam views the world as all people are either Moslems who accept Islam, or those who reject Islam. They declared war centuries ago against all non-Moslems. Moslems consider themselves actively engaged in war against the West. Since they have declared war, the rules of war must apply even if we have not declared war. Any Moslem who attacks an American must be considered a war prisoner, and confined until the duration of the conflict. Such people must be held as prisoners following the Geneva conventions, without any trial or specified release date. Our individual responsibility is for self-defense. The rules of war are for our own good and self-defense. If our government releases prisoners of war before the end of the conflict, it puts all of us in serious danger. What we can do while the prisoners are held is to educate them to American principles of freedom, and to teach them the evils of Islam that their religious writing discusses. We must teach them it is evil to kill non-Moslems. We must teach them it is evil to kill themselves, and they will certainly not go to Heaven. That's it. We keep them in military prisons, and work to educate them. We treat them the way we treated captured Nazis during the war. |
|
THE JIHADISTS' DEADLY PATH TO CITIZENSHIP
Posted by Susana K-M, May 5, 2010. |
|
This was written by Michelle Malkin whose weblog is at
|
|
America's homeland security amnesia never ceases to amaze. In the aftermath of the botched Times Square terror attack over the weekend, Pakistani-born bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad's U.S. citizenship status caused a bit of shock and awe. The Atlantic magazine writer Jeffrey Goldberg's response was typical: "I am struck by the fact that he is a naturalized American citizen, not a recent or temporary visitor." Well, wake up and smell the deadly deception. Shahzad's path to American citizenship — he reportedly married an American woman, Huma Mian, in 2008 after spending a decade in the country on foreign student and employment visas — is a tried-and-true terror formula. Jihadists have been gaming the sham marriage racket with impunity for years. And immigration benefit fraud has provided invaluable cover and aid for U.S.-based Islamic plotters, including many other operatives planning attacks on New York City. As I've reported previously: — El Sayyid A. Nosair wed Karen Ann Mills Sweeney to avoid deportation for overstaying his visa. He acquired U.S. citizenship, allowing him to remain in the country, and was later convicted for conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that claimed six lives. — Ali Mohamed became an American citizen after marrying a woman he met on a plane trip from Egypt to New York. Recently divorced, Linda Lee Sanchez wed Mohamed in Reno, Nev., after a six-week "courtship." Mohamed became a top aide to Osama bin Laden and was later convicted for his role in the 1998 United States embassy bombings in Africa that killed 12 Americans and more than 200 others. — Embassy bombing plotter Khalid Abu al Dahab obtained citizenship after marrying three different American women. — Embassy bombing plotter Wadih el Hage, Osama bin Laden's personal secretary, married April Ray in 1985 and became a naturalized citizen in 1989. Ray knew of her husband's employment with bin Laden, but like many of these women in bogus marriages, she pleaded ignorance about the nature of her husband's work. El Hage, she says, was a sweet man, and bin Laden "was a great boss." — Lebanon-born Chawki Youssef Hammoud, convicted in a Hezbollah cigarette-smuggling operation based out of Charlotte, N.C., married American citizen Jessica Fortune for a green card to remain in the country. — Hammoud's brother, Mohammed Hammoud, married three different American women. After arriving in the United States on a counterfeit visa, being ordered deported and filing an appeal, he wed Sabina Edwards to gain a green card. Federal immigration officials refused to award him legal status after this first marriage was deemed bogus in 1994. Undaunted, he married Jessica Wedel in May 1997 and, while still wed to her, paid Angela Tsioumas (already married to someone else, too) to marry him in Detroit. The Tsioumas union netted Mohammed Hammoud temporary legal residence to operate the terror cash scam. He was later convicted on 16 counts that included providing material support to Hezbollah. — A total of eight Middle Eastern men who plotted to bomb New York landmarks in 1993 — Fadil Abdelgani, Amir Abdelgani, Siddig Ibrahim Siddig Ali, Tarig Elhassan, Abdo Mohammed Haggag, Fares Khallafalla, Mohammed Saleh, and Matarawy Mohammed Said Saleh — all obtained legal permanent residence by marrying American citizens. A year after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, homeland security officials cracked a massive illegal alien Middle Eastern marriage fraud ring in a sting dubbed "Operation Broken Vows." Authorities were stunned by the scope of the operations, which stretched from Boston to South Carolina to California. But marriage fraud remains a treacherous path of least resistance. The waiting period for U.S. citizenship is cut by more than half for marriage visa beneficiaries. Sham marriage monitoring by backlogged homeland security investigators is practically nonexistent. As former federal immigration official Michael Cutler warned years ago: "Immigration benefit fraud is certainly one of the major 'dots' that was not connected prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and remains a 'dot' that is not really being addressed the way it needs to be in order to secure our nation against criminals and terrorists who understand how important it is for them to 'game' the system as a part of the embedding process." Jihadists have knowingly and deliberately exploited our lax immigration and entrance policies to secure the rights and benefits of American citizenship while they plot mass murder — and we haven't done a thing to stop them. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
AUSTRIA JOINS IRANIAN AXIS, ALONG WITH INDONESIA
Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, May 5, 2010. |
|
Austria's warm welcome this week of Iranian's foreign minister, along with its increasing trade relations with the Islamic Republic, signal Iran's widening axis that already stretches to South America. Indonesia, which hosts the world's largest Muslim population, also has embraced Iran's "strategic ties." Austria's friendliness with Iran is even more significant because the European country is one of the rotating members of the United Nations Security Council. It has paid only lip service to sanctions against Iran, Simone Dinah Hartmann, director of Stop the Bomb Austria and co-editor of "Iran in the World System," wrote in The Wall Street Journal this week. "To what degree Austria...would actually support tough sanctions is more than questionable," she stated, noting that trade with Iran has flourished the past several years in contradiction to policies of other European nations to distant themselves from Tehran. On Sunday, Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger welcomed his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki, who delivered the opening speech at Tehran's Holocaust denial conference in 2006. Hartmann pointed out the bitter irony of Austria's aligning itself with Iran, which vows to "wipe Israel off the map. "Austria prefers to present itself as Nazi Germany's first victim when in fact it was Hitler's — born and raised in Austria — first collaborator," she wrote. The United States, Britain and France objected to the Austrian welcome mat for the Iranian official, which featured a friendly reception including hoisting the Islamic Republic flag along that of Austria and the European Union. "Vienna has a long tradition of appeasing the Islamic Republic," according to Hartmann. A former foreign minister and former president Kurt Waldheim were the first Western officials in their positions to visit Tehran in the 1980s and 1991. She also charged that several Austrian companies are suspected of working with front companies that are associated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. "Bilateral business relations between Austria and Iran are excellent, but still expandable," said the president of the Austrian Chamber of Commerce during a visit to Tehran last year. Austria was once described as the "gateway to the European Union" by an Iranian minister. Indonesia Indonesia also is in Iran's sights. An Iranian deputy minister, Mohsen Pak-Ayeen, said says that ties with Indonesia "could serve as the main capital for planning strategic, deep and all-out ties," the Iranian Fars News Agency reported. Jakarta as far back as 2006 labeled as "lies" Western claims that Tehran is aiming for nuclear capability. Last week, an Indonesian official attending the observance of the 60th anniversary of Indonesia-Iran diplomatic relations at the National Museum said, "Indonesia believes that the Iranian nuclear project is for science and technology development." Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a writer for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
MIDEAST NUCLEAR WEAPON BAN COULD MEAN PRESSURE ONLY ON ISRAEL TO DISARM
Posted by Jerusalem Post Editorial, May 5, 2010. |
|
On Saturday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Washington and Cairo were negotiating a proposal to turn the Middle East into "a region free of nuclear weapons." Considering the fact that Israel is, reportedly, the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear capability, this would mean that the US had agreed to discuss with Egypt putting pressure on Israel to disarm itself of nuclear warheads. US officials quoted in the report said Israel had been assured that the "nuclear-free zone" would not be foisted upon the region until all parties agreed to it, but added that the move to enter negotiations with Egypt would help defuse criticism of America's "unfair" policy of ignoring Israel's purported nuclear arsenal while singling out for censure countries such as Syria or Iran. On Monday, at the UN's Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed the wider ambition: "We want to reaffirm our commitment to the objective of a Middle East free of these weapons of mass destruction, and we are prepared to support practical measures that will move us toward achieving that objective." Washington's reported willingness to meet with Egyptian representatives over the matter of a nuclear free Israel would seem to be an extension of President Barak Obama's engagement policy with the world's 1.3 billion Muslims. Underpinning this strategy is a belief that dialogue and outreach can often accomplish more than sanctions or military actions. Ratcheting down the war of words and fostering conciliation worked for president Richard Nixon in 1972 with Beijing, runs the apparent thinking, and it must be pursued now with Teheran's mullahs. This policy also evidently incorporates a tougher line on Israel, perhaps as part of an attempt to improve relations with Muslim nations by showing that America is willing to play hardball with the Jewish nation. As John Bolton, US ambassador to the UN under the second Bush administration, pointed out Tuesday morning on Army Radio, Obama's willingness to so much as entertain the notion of pressuring Israel to abandon its nuclear capability marks a radical change in US foreign policy. "In the Bush administration we refused to even talk about these things," said Bolton, adding that the fact that Washington had agreed to negotiate with Egypt played into the hands of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. After all, there is nothing that Iran's leader would like more than to shift the focus not merely of the current review conference in New York, but of the entire international climate, from Iran's nuclear program to Israel's. The dangerous impression being created is of a nuclear-capable Israel being equated with a nuclear-capable Iran — an approach that fails to make the distinction between Israel, the Middle East's only democracy, and Iran, a despotic regime run by rapacious Shi'ite fanatics that openly persecutes homosexuals, promotes misogyny, brutally puts down political protest and shammed its last elections. Not many fair-minded people, including in this region, have lost sleep over the fact that responsible Israel reportedly has nuclear warheads. Much of this region is profoundly panicked by the specter of a nuclear Iran. Preventing this is the single most important challenge that faces the Obama administration. If we take Ahmadinejad's statements at face value, and there is no reason why we should not, he wants to "wipe Israel off the map," and to focus, too, on the "big Satan" America. Among other immediate and dire repercussions for Israel, fear of an Iranian nuclear attack could effectively paralyze the IDF in the face of Iran's Hamas and Hizbullah proxies. Were Iran's nuclear program to reach fruition, it would also quickly exercise its benighted influence throughout this region, notably on the Gulf states, including imposing control over the Straits of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of the world's seaborne oil shipments pass.
IT SHOULD be crystal clear that, instead of allowing Egypt to sidetrack it with talk of disarming Israel, the US should focus on galvanizing the international community to stop Iran. Glibly calling for a "nuclear free Middle East" blurs the moral distinctions between the hegemonic designs of that messianic, apocalyptic regime and the essential deterrent and defensive needs of our small, embattled democracy. The Obama administration should be commended for attempting to reach out to the Muslim world, but it should not be blinded to its own and its allies' interests when the response, as with Iran, is ruthless and uncompromising. And it must stop at nothing to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons.
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: YE OLD STALLING GAME
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 5, 2010. |
|
Well, Mitchell is here in order to begin those "proximity talks." But even though he met with Netanyahu today — and some media sources referred to this meeting as the kick-off of those talks — they have not officially started yet. Mitchell had arrived under the assumption that all systems were "go." However, Abbas then indicated he had additional stops along the way to starting. Yesterday it was said that he had to check with the PLO — with their Central Committee scheduled to meet on Saturday. Today it was Fatah he had to clear things with: to that end the Fatah Central Committee is being convened. Fatah — which is still committed to "resistance" — is less than enthusiastic about talks, but is expected to provide at least a tentative go-ahead. Abbas is not leaving any bases uncovered. Whatever happens, he wants to sure that he had political sanction to proceed and that he's not going to be out there standing by himself. Or, put another way, he's looking to drag this out as long as possible because he really, really does not want to be involved. ~~~~~~~~~~ In case you've just tuned in: The political atmosphere within the PA — influenced to a considerable degree by the radical jihadist Hamas — is decidedly not moderate, whatever the spin of media and certain politicians. In the years that I have been monitoring Fatah, I've watched it pull back from even a semblance of moderation. The stronger Hamas has become, the more blatant is the Fatah-dominated PA in following its line. It's a cyclical, self-perpetuating pattern: Incitement by the PA encourages radicalism, and then the street, which celebrates terrorists as heroes (is taught to celebrate terrorists as heroes), has expectations of its leaders that tilts in favor of violence and obstructionism. Abbas has virtually no wiggle room in terms of compromise with Israel. Agreeing to concessions that are perceived as a sell-out (e.g., that Israel is the Jewish state), could literally cost him his life. And yet, the world is calling upon him to "make the hard decisions for peace." Thus the foot-dragging, an omen of the failure that is bound to follow from this "process." If I did not so thoroughly despise this man, and feel so convinced that he set himself up for this and deserves what he will get, I might be tempted to pity him. Might, metaphorically. This is a man, you understand, who likes to travel abroad, but hesitates to move about in certain areas controlled by the PA, because his life would not be safe. A pathetic pretense for a leader, yet embraced by Obama. ~~~~~~~~~~ I'm hardly alone in my assessment of what's happening — many far more knowledgeable than I have the same (self-evident) take. Pessimism is in the air. Minister of Intelligence Dan Meridor, who is on the left flank of Likud, has already put out a statement to the JPost regarding his concern that the PA will avoid making those "tough decisions." While Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov (Yisrael Beitenu) has declared, "With my hand on my heart, I don't believe the proximity talks will lead to anything..." And National Infrastructures Minister Uzi Landau (Yisrael Beitenu) told Army Radio this morning that the PA is already planning the breakdown of the proximity talks. This was the sentiment of Brig.-Gen. Yossi Baidatz, head of Military Intelligence's Research Division, who delivered a briefing yesterday to the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. The Palestinians were "already preparing the ground for the failure" of the proximity talks, he told the committee. ~~~~~~~~~~ Sure enough, today Abbas made a statement with regard to those talks, even before he had even officially entered them: "Negotiations will focus on final status issues and there's no need to enter into details and small matters because we have had enough of that in the previous negotiations. We said the indirect negotiations will last only four months. After that, we will go to the Arab League to consult on whether to continue or what to do." Abbas and his cohorts have further let it be known that during the course of these four months they want us to pull back to pre-intifada lines, and open Orient House for the PA in eastern Jerusalem. Further they want us to cede full control of the Jordan Valley to the PA. In addition, Abbas has said he will terminate talks if there is building in the "West Bank." ~~~~~~~~~~ During the course of all of this, Netanyahu continued to declare that he was ready. That eager declaration was, once again, undoubtedly for international consumption: "See, see, who the problem is." (Yes, I know...) He has put together a small negotiating team (small, I understand, to prevent leaks.) It's unclear — because of conflicting reports — as to whether the prime minister himself will be heading it, or attorney Yitzhak Molcho, a trusted Netanyahu confidant who has done negotiating for him before. Also included are National Security Advisor Uzi Arad, and Ron Dermer, a key Netanyahu advisor. Whatever the case, today Netanyahu met with Mitchell — part of the time the two were alone, and for a portion of the meeting Arad and Molcho, as well as Mitchell aides Dan Shapiro and David Hale participated. The meeting was pronounced "good" (whatever that means); they will be meeting again tomorrow. In due course, presumably before the end of this week, Mitchell will be traveling to Ramallah for a meeting there, as well. But it will be some days yet before those talks officially begin, if indeed they do. ~~~~~~~~~~ In advance of the talks, Obama placed a call to Netanyahu. In the course of the discussion, as related by Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, "The president reaffirmed his unshakable commitment to Israel's security." Grabs you in the heart, does it not? Allow me to elaborate on how strong and deep that commitment is: The five permanent members of the Security Council — which includes the US — have issued a statement at a NPT review conference saying, "We are committed to full implementation of the 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty resolution on the Middle East and we support all ongoing efforts to this end. "We are ready to consider all relevant proposals in the course of the (NPT) Review Conference in order to come to an agreed decision aimed at taking concrete steps in this direction." This is a call for establishing a nuclear-free zone that would require Israel to relinquish whatever such arms she has. Egypt has been pushing for a conference by next year to rid the Middle East of nuclear arms. Reuters reports that negotiations are on-going with Egypt to come up with a compromise proposal. Clinton has said she supports a nuclear-free zone here, but this may not yet be the time. You might, however, want to read John Bolton's take on this: Explains CBN, in citing Bolton: Successive U.S. administrations — aware of the vulnerability of the tiny Jewish state surrounded by a sea of less-than-friendly Arab neighbors — have supported Israel's longstanding policy of ambiguity on its nuclear weapons programs. "When I was in the Bush administration, we refused to even talk about these kinds of ideas," said Bolton. "I'd be quite worried about the possible outcome here. "The president is not happy with Israel's nuclear capabilities. I think he would be delighted if Israel gave up its nuclear weapons. "The only unknown answer at this point is exactly how much pressure he would exert on Israel to do just that."
See, also, the editorial in today's JPost on the subject: "Not many fair-minded people, including in this region, have lost sleep over the fact that responsible Israel reportedly has nuclear warheads. Much of this region is profoundly panicked by the specter of a nuclear Iran. "Preventing this is the single most important challenge that faces the Obama administration... IT SHOULD be crystal clear that, instead of allowing Egypt to sidetrack it with talk of disarming Israel, the US should focus on galvanizing the international community to stop Iran. "Glibly calling for a 'nuclear free Middle East' blurs the moral distinctions between the hegemonic designs of that messianic, apocalyptic regime and the essential deterrent and defensive needs of our small, embattled democracy."
~~~~~~~~~~ At its joint press conference with the Foreign Ministry earlier this week, the Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) announced release of a study, "From Terrorists to Role Models: The Institutionalization of Incitement." It is important because it makes the point that an attitude of honoring terrorists is pervasive within the Palestinian Arab society — it's not a fringe attitude. PMW director Itamar Marcus outlined four steps in the process of incitement: promoting hate, redefining acts of terror as acts of resistance, calling for the killing of Jews, and glorifying murder and terror. Tomorrow, at 2:00 PM, at the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, Marcus will be releasing his report. I have no idea how widely this is open to the public, but PMW did put out a release. For more information or to RSVP: iromartin@aol.com. In addition to this activity, the Security Cabinet began today to discuss a new mechanism for monitoring incitement: an incitement index for monitoring and quantifying incitement on a regular basis. This is being advanced by Yossi Kuperwasser, director-general of the Strategic Affairs Ministry. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
P.A. GLORIFICATION OF TERRORISM; HAS ISRAEL JURISDICTION OVER RIOTERS
IN TERRITORIES?; ISRAEL, IRAN, EGYPT LINKED?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 5, 2010. |
|
NEW YORK BOMBING: UPDATE Police arrested the current owner of the car bomb van, as he was trying to escape via Kennedy Airport. He is a naturalized citizen from Pakistan. Police described their clues, including the fact that they had a fingerprint of someone from the Mideast, whom they are seeking. The plot is broadening. Homeland Security Sec. Napolitano and New York Senator Schumer rushed onto stages to speculate about the case (New York Times and Wall St. J., 5/4, A1). Napolitano has made embarrassing errors before, in her haste to explain what she does not know. As soon as some problem is publicized, Senator Schumer rides that publicity by proposing legislation. He has to have an answer for everything, and that answer is more laws. He is the trial lawyers' dream Senator. His rush to submit bills may produce some of those unintended consequences that afflict so much of our laws, these days. Most of what was in the news report was speculation about foreign ties. Wouldn't it be wiser for police to be more reticent, than to signal to fugitives that they are being hunted?
ISRAEL'S DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER CRITICIZES P.A. Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon criticized the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) boycott of Jews in Judea-Samaria. He said that if this boycott becomes serious, it could impinge on the negotiations. He also has been raising the issue with UN members of the intent to joint the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO requires applicants to have free trade. A boycott contradicts the membership rules (IMRA, 5/3/10). This May be the first time that an Israeli official threatened to make P.A. behavior a reason for not negotiating. Such a threat, justified or not, is a common P.A. tactic against Israel. The contradiction between WTO membership free trade rules and applicants' trade restrictions is a clear-cut logical point. But the world does not run on logic. Many WTO members subsidize or bar exports and imports. Saudi Arabia's application was accepted on the promise of its ending its boycott of Israel. It did not end the boycott. Neither has it been expelled. Expedience or political correctness trumps logic and justice in this world. Ayalon might have raised the point that just as peace negotiations are about to start is no time for the P.A. to impose an economic warfare against Israel and promote hatred. He could have suggested that the P.A. boycott is a confidence-destroyer. I think that Israel lets itself be treated according to a double standard. In this case, the double standard is that the U.S. demands confidence-building measures from Israel and not from the Arabs. It would be more warranted to demand such measures of the Arabs, who violated the Oslo Accords from the start and still do in the most substantive ways. For years, Israel hardly answered P.a. calumny against it and hardly made its own case. All the while, some readers talked about a "Zionist propaganda machine." The real propaganda machine was the cumulative effect of the P.A., UN, western liberal media, and university leftists. It might restore some balance to the atmosphere if Israel withdrew from negotiations until the boycott were removed. Of course, negotiations are a farce, an attempt to destroy Israel by softening it up via diplomacy, for polishing it off militarily. Negotiations have nothing to do with peace. Israeli diplomacy should have exposed negotiations for the fraud they are. There is no peace movement among the Arabs.
P.A. GLORIFICATION OF TERRORISM, IN PERSPECTIVE Dalal Mughrabi hijacked an Israeli bus. Her terrorist attack killed more Israelis than any other. The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) keeps the memory of her example before its people by naming many places and events after her: Two elementary schools, a kindergarten, a computer center, summer camps, football tournaments, a community center, a sports team, a public square, a street, an election course, an adult education course, a university club, a dance troupe, a military unit, a dormitory in a youth center, a TV series, a TV quiz team and a graduation ceremony. Palestinian Media Watch reports a sample of a hundred places and events named after 46 terrorists. The P.A. announced 26 of those in this year, so far. This is official P.A. policy. When the P.A. so honors a terrorist who murdered civilians, even children, it makes terrorists role models for its children. "Terror glorification is highly visible in Palestinian society. A Palestinian child can walk to school along a street named after the terrorist Abu Jihad, who planned a bus hijacking that killed 37, spend the day learning in a school named after Hamas founder Ahmad Yassin, in the afternoon play football in a tournament named after suicide terrorist Abd Al-Baset Odeh who killed 31, and end his day at a youth center named after terrorist Abu Iyad, responsible for the killing of the 11 Olympic athletes in Munich." Some terrorists, such as Arafat, are both terrorist and politicians. The P.A. also holds rallies, assemblies, and TV specials in honor of terrorist. The P.A. calls those murderers heroes, and if they die in the process, martyrs. Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Aylon told a press conference that peace requires mutual trust. He asked how can Israel trust a society pervaded by honoring of P.A. citizens for murdering innocent Israeli citizens? In view of how the P.A. acts, can anyone believe it is sincere in its commitment to end violence? How can one expect the P.A. to end its war and terrorism, when terrorism is integral to P.A. society (IMRA, 5/3/10).
ISRAEL TO GIVE SEVERANCE PAY TO KNESSET TRAITOR Former MK Azmi Bishara was discovered to have spied for Hizbullah, by acting as an artillery spotter for Hizbullah rocket crews during Israel's war with Hizbullah. Wanted for treason, Bishara went into hiding. The Knesset is going to give him NIS 200,000 severance pay, equivalent to three years of salary for average Israelis. They say that is the law. It is like the social security-like benefits that Israel pays to families of slain terrorists (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/4). Bishara and some other Arab MKs have committed treason for years, going to enemy states and encouraging them and terrorists to oppose Israel and even to attack it, and encouraging Arab rioters within Israel and the Territories. But Israel did not waive their parliamentary immunity and remove them from office. A few MKs called for punishment, but Israel did not act. To be fair, let us recall that some of the officials who worked out the Oslo arrangements also violated laws of meeting with the enemy and working against Israeli national security. They were not prosecuted, either.
HAS ISRAEL JURISDICTION OVER RIOTERS IN TERRITORIES? Israeli security forces arrested two members of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) because of their protests [usually for being violent]. One of the pair, an Australian named Bridgette Chappell, was living in Bir Zeit, Palestinian Authority (P.A.). The secret service had been conducting surveillance of her. During the judicial process, Chappell's lawyer had obtained a temporary order permitting her to stay. The lawyer then petitioned the High Court, to release her on the grounds that her arrest was illegal. The petition argues that Israel has no jurisdiction over civilians where she was arrested, because it is in Area A, and under P.A. civilian and military control. The government replied that Chappell had violated a 1970 order against unauthorized people remaining in Judea-Samaria for more than two days, an 11/2000 IDF ban on entry into Area A., and a temporary injunction against entering Judea-Samaria. The state also reminded the High Court that it previously recognized more than once that security matters give Israel leave to operate in Area A. It wants to expel her. Her lawyer made a sarcastic remark about Israel overriding the Oslo Accords (IMRA, 5/3/10). What her lawyer said misrepresents the Accords. I read their text, on which IMRA has propounded. It does not confer sovereignty. Under it, Israel retains the overriding security responsibility for the Territories. Therefore, Israel has the superior jurisdiction. It would have been more foolish than the Israeli government usually manages to be in agreements, for it not to have reserved this power. It was giving autonomy (which again is not sovereignty) over certain areas to a terrorist organization that claimed in public that it wanted peace now and in private that it wanted war. An example is Arafat's assurances to Muslim diplomats at the start of Oslo that Oslo to him was part of his phased plan for the conquest of Israel. Otherwise, Israel would have no recourse but to suffer terrorism. The problem is that ISM people enter under false pretenses in order to assist rioters. Is expulsion sufficient to stop them, or should they be punished more severely? Their riots are a form of warfare, and should be taken more seriously.
ZIONIST PROPOSES 187,000 HOUSING UNITS MOSTLY IN ANNEXED PARTS OF JERUSALEM Aryeh King, head of the Israel Land Fund released his plan for 187,000 units mostly in annexed parts of Jerusalem, and some outside it. He showed on maps where there was the space owned by individual Jews and the Jewish national fund. He explains that the growing city needs to expand, and unless it does, it would get hemmed in like the Gaza Strip. The undeveloped land is in the northern Pisgat Ze-ev neighborhood and the southern Gilo neighborhood. That portion of the plan including areas outside existing municipal boundaries would require Defense Dept. approval (IMRA, 5/3/10) and probably a new Defense Minister. The incumbent prefers to withdraw from territory. That has led to casualties, wars, and vulnerability. Mr. King is addressing the aggressive and purposeful Arab building to cut off the possibility of Jerusalem expansion and to isolate and render insecure other areas. The reasoning also is that a capital city should not be vulnerable to an enemy state next door.
OBAMA'S MANNER OF REASSURING ISRAELIS DISMAYS THEM After weeks of insulting Israel and its Prime Minister, President Obama telephoned PM Netanyahu with reassurances. But unlike his cold-shouldering of Netanyahu in Washington, Obama warmly welcomed Obama's coalition partner but political rival, visiting Defense Minister Barak, head of the Israeli Labor Party. Barak "told the Labor caucus, 'If it turns out that the government must be expanded, we will have to seriously consider an expansion,' which would mean adding the Kadima party, headed by Tzipi Livni." In other words, Barak used the occasion to weaken Netanyahu politically (Arutz-7, 5/4/10). Since Obama's actions contradict his reassurances, his reassurances are unsettling. Obama has broken U.S. promises to Israel and contradicts himself on many issues. He has maligned or betrayed several allies, and catered to several enemies, leaving him increasingly distrusted. He is both radical and opportunist. The U.S. previously helped overthrow the Netanyahu regime. President Clinton made it clear that he would be easier on Israel if it had a Labor regime. The U.S. interferes in other countries' internal affairs, not always to save them and not always in the U.S. national interest. It is not in the U.S. national interest to betray allies, it is in the interest of Obama's radical ideology.
ABBAS SAYS PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY IS IN NO HURRY TO NEGOTIATE PEACE Palestinian Authority (P.A.) head Abbas has said he is in no hurry to reach an agreement with Israel. He explained that he can wait, because it won't be long before he would be ready to turn to the UN for unilateral recognition of statehood for the P.A. (Arutz-7, 5/4/10). All hell could break loose, as the parties involved vie for pieces of territory and other countries get sucked into combat. After President Obama demanded that Israel not take actions that could impair peace negotiations, one would think he would reprove Abbas for taking a dilatory approach to negotiations. However, consistency requires integrity.
ISRAEL, IRAN, EGYPT LINKAGES IMAGINED OR REAL? First the U.S. tried to link Israel's reaching an agreement with the Palestinian Authority, i.e., by acceding to Arab demands, to any success by U.S. diplomacy in keeping Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Now Egypt and the U.S. are further claiming that if Israel relinquished its nuclear weapons capability, they would be able to get Iran to do so. Egypt is further linking its refusal to sign the chemical weapons treaty unless Israel relinquishes its nuclear weapons capability (Arutz-7, 5/4/10). Apparently the world hinges on Israel. I think the problem of this hysteria originated when New York State Gov. Rockefeller closed many mental institutions, erasing the difference between those inside and those outside. Israel serves as an excuse for much. Over the years, when the Arabs were upset about cooperating with the rest of the world on something, they used to include in their demands an unrelated one about Israel ceding territory. The notion that if Israel relinquished its nuclear weapons capability, so would Iran, is unrealistic. Iran is not proceeding because of Israel. Iran wants regional and global power and prestige. It cannot be relied upon to keep any promises it were to make about this. After all, it has been deceiving the UN for decades. U.S. diplomacy on this sounds absurd but may be sinister. Considering that Egypt made war on Israel a few times, and not the reverse, its claim to be holding chemical weapons only because it is afraid of Israeli nuclear weapons is not valid. Its interest in regional domination and jihad explains its real motive. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
DON'T BE FOOLED BY RONALD OLIVE
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, May 5, 2010. |
|
To mark Jonathan Pollard's 25th year in American captivity — which is also his 25th year of abandonment and betrayal by the government of Israel — J4JP will be reviewing some of the best-written, most informative, and most interesting articles, essays and information written about the case over the last two and a half decades. This is article number 19 of the series and it is written by Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman, Jonathan's devoted pro bono attorneys. It was originally published in "The Jerusalem Post", November 29, 2006, as a "Right of Response column". In the four years that have ensued since then, Ron Olive (who purports to be a " retired" government agent) continues to be in active service as an agent of influence for the American Navy, spewing lies and deliberate smear against Jonathan (and by proxy, against Israel and the Jews) at lectures and book reviews all over the United States. A freedom of information request by Lauer and Semmelman four years ago, requesting a copy of the US Navy Training Video used to indoctrinate new US intelligence recruits (and referenced in Olive's book, Capturing Jonathan Pollard) has never received a response from the American Government. According to Olive, in this training video Pollard is the poster boy for treason for the US Navy — a crime of which Jonathan was never accused, indicted or convicted. This is an evil and absolutely false portrayal of both Pollard and Israel since treason is defined by the US Constitution as aiding an enemy state during time of war. Is Israel an enemy State? Are the US and Israel at war? The US Navy apparently wants all of its new intelligence recruits to think so. |
|
In Ronald Olive's op-ed piece, "I busted Pollard" (Nov. 20), Olive promotes his book, Capturing Jonathan Pollard: How One of the Most Notorious Spies in American History Was Brought to Justice. Olive proclaims that his book "tells the true documented story of Pollard," "set[s] the record straight," and dispels "speculation, rumor, myths and lies surrounding the Pollard case." As pro bono counsel for Jonathan Pollard since 2000, we have comprehensive knowledge of the public court record in Mr. Pollard's case. Olive's book and op-ed piece are fanciful concoctions that are utterly incompatible with the U.S. Government's own carefully-crafted submissions to the court in Mr. Pollard's case. Jonathan Pollard was arrested in 1985. The U.S. Government conducted an overwhelmingly thorough investigation into Mr. Pollard's conduct and character, and into the harm his conduct had caused. Mr. Pollard pleaded guilty in 1986 to a charge of conspiracy to deliver classified information to Israel. He was not charged with intent to harm the U.S., although such a charge existed in the U.S. Code. On March 4, 1987, Mr. Pollard was sentenced to life in prison. Prior to his sentencing, the U.S. Government-the United States Attorney and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger-submitted over 130 pages of pre-sentencing memoranda to the sentencing judge. Those memoranda set forth in detail what the U.S. Government claimed it had uncovered about Mr. Pollard's conduct and character, and about the harm he had caused. Substantial portions of the memoranda were designated "classified" and were placed under seal. No one representing Mr. Pollard, including us-his security-cleared attorneys-has been permitted to see the classified portions of the docket since the sentencing in 1987. In his book, Olive specifically disclaims ever having seen the classified sentencing materials. Yet, he makes allegations against Mr. Pollard that appear nowhere in the unclassified, public portion of the sentencing materials. Since it is fair to assume that neither Olive nor any of his purported "sources" would violate U.S. criminal law and disclose classified information, the inevitable conclusion is that these allegations do not appear anywhere in the Government's pre-sentencing memoranda. For example, Olive claims that Mr. Pollard delivered classified information to Pakistan in the hope that Pakistan would retain him as a paid spy. Undoubtedly, Olive wants to poison the mind of the ordinary Israeli (or Israeli supporter) into believing that Mr. Pollard was a mercenary who would just as readily have spied for Pakistan (not known as a friend of Israel's) as he did for Israel. In assessing the credibility of this allegation, it is important to know that no such allegation appears anywhere in the public record docket materials. And, since we have to assume neither Olive nor any of his "sources" would risk going to prison by disclosing something that appears in the classified docket materials, it is apparent that this allegation is not found anywhere in the U.S. Government's voluminous pre-sentencing memoranda. It therefore has no credibility whatsoever. If the U.S. Government believed this and other allegations made by Olive, it would have included them in the pre-sentencing memoranda. The U.S. Government took an extremely aggressive approach toward Mr. Pollard, and would have relished the opportunity to inform the sentencing judge that Mr. Pollard had violated the law by delivering classified information to Pakistan-and with mercenary motives, to boot. The book and op-ed piece contain numerous accusations that are nowhere to be found in the public sentencing docket, and that could not be disclosed if they were in the classified sentencing docket. They are therefore in neither place, and cannot be considered even remotely reliable. In his book, Olive asserts that Mr. Pollard's conduct caused "irreparable damage" and "incalculable" harm to the U.S. However, the Victim Impact Statement submitted to the court by the Department of Justice in 1987 (and now a matter of public record) portrays a very different effect on the U.S. After preliminarily noting the substantial "breadth and scope" of the information provided, as well as the fact that "thousands of pages" of documents were delivered by Mr. Pollard to Israel, the Victim Impact Statement goes on to describe the actual damage to the U.S. as follows: Mr. Pollard's unauthorized disclosures have threatened the U.S. [sic] relations with numerous Middle East Arab allies, many of whom question the extent to which Mr. Pollard's disclosures of classified information have skewed the balance of power in the Middle East. Moreover, because Mr. Pollard provided the Israelis virtually any classified document requested by Mr. Pollard's coconspirators, the U.S. has been deprived of the quid pro quo routinely received during authorized and official intelligence exchanges with Israel, and Israel has received information classified at a level far in excess of that ever contemplated by the National Security Council. The obvious result of Mr. Pollard's largesse is that U.S. bargaining leverage with the Israeli government in any further intelligence exchanges has been undermined. In short, Mr. Pollard's activities have adversely affected U.S. relations with both its Middle East Arab allies and the government of Israel. While we cannot condone any unauthorized disclosure of classified information, the Government's own words in the Victim Impact Statement, carefully scripted to present the most compelling case for the maximum sentence (life in prison), reflect-at worst-short-term friction between the U.S. and unnamed Arab countries, and temporary reduction in bargaining leverage by the U.S., rather than permanent, irreversible, and overwhelming damage to U.S. national security, as claimed by Olive. Nowhere does Olive see fit even to mention the comparatively modest damage described in the Victim Impact Statement, which is how the U.S. Government itself has chosen to describe the harm caused by Mr. Pollard's conduct, in the court document designed precisely for that purpose. In sum, while Olive describes his book as a "true documented story," it is nothing of the sort. To use Olive's own words, his book is an exercise in "speculation, rumor, myths and lies." # See Also: Hebrew Text (PDF): Don't Be Fooled By Ronald Olive: Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman
*Give Pollard a Chance — Legal Times
Pollard's Unforgivable Sin: IsraelNationalNews (Arutz7)
The Executive Summary of the Pollard Case: Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman
The U.S. Court Case Page (legal filings, documents, articles)
|
|
THE MYTH OF THE 1967 BORDERS
Posted by JCPA, May 5, 2010. |
|
This was written by Dore Gold. and was translated from Yisrael HaYom, April 29, 2010. Ambassador Dore Gold is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He was the eleventh Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations (1997-1999). |
|
In rejecting, the proposal for a Palestinian state with temporary borders, that Haaretz reported last Friday, Abu Mazen insisted that the only basis for any future political arrangements with Israel is "the 1967 borders". He is not the only one today talking about the 1967 lines. President Carter's, national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, just wrote an article in the Washington Post on April 11, along with former congressman Steve Solarz calling for a territorial solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict "based on the 1967 borders." Brzezinski had recently been invited to discuss the Middle East with the President Barack Obama's National Security Adviser Jim Jones. Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to slip by using the same language during a visit to Bahrain on February 4, 2010: "we believe that the 1967 borders, with swaps, should be the focus of the negotiations over borders." That sentence contradicted the formal policy of the Obama administration, that she carefully crafted herself, which said that the U.S. believed that it was possible to reconcile the Palestinian position demanding the 1967 lines with the Israeli position calling for secure boundaries, which took into Israeli security requirements and realities on the ground. Clinton subsequently corrected herself. In short, the 1967 lines are coming back as a common reference point when many officials and commentators talk about a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is increasingly assumed that there was a recognized international border between the West Bank and Israel in 1967 and what is necessary now is to restore it. Yet this entire discussion is based on a completely distorted understanding of the 1967 line, given the fact that in the West Bank it was not an international border at all. Formally, the 1967 line in the West Bank should properly be called the 1949 Armistice Line. Looking back to that period, on the Egyptian and Syrian fronts there had been a history of international boundaries between British Mandate and its neighbors. But along the Jordanian front what created the armistice line was solely where Israeli and Arab forces stopped at the end of the War of Independence, with some added adjustments in certain sectors. As a result, the 1949 line, that came to be known also as the 1967 border, was really only a military line. In fact, Article II of the Armistice with the Jordanians explicitly specified that the agreement did not compromise any future territorial claims of the parties, since it had been "dictated by exclusively by military considerations." In other words, the old Armistice Line was not a recognized international border. It had no finality. As a result, the Jordanians reserved the right after 1949 to demand territories inside Israel, for the Arab side. It was noteworthy that on May 31, 1967, the Jordanian ambassador to the UN made this very point to the UN Security Council just days before the Six-Day War, by stressing that the old armistice agreement "did not fix boundaries". After the Six-Day War, the architects of UN Security Council Resolution 242 insisted that the old armistice line had to be replaced with a new border. Thus Lord Caradon, the British ambassador to the UN admitted at the time: "I know the 1967 border very well. It is not a satisfactory border, it is where the troops had to stop." He concluded: "it is not a permanent border." His U.S. counterpart, Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, added that "historically, there have never been secure or recognized boundaries in the area"; he then added that the armistice lines did not answer that description. For the British and American ambassadors, at the time, Resolution 242, that they drafted involved creating a completely new boundary that could be described as "secure and recognized," instead of going back to the lines from which the conflict erupted. President Lyndon Johnson made this very point in September 1968: "It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of 4 June 1967 will not bring peace. There must be secure and there must be recognized borders." It is for this reason that Resolution 242 did not call for a full withdrawal from all the territories that Israel captured in the Six Day War; the 1949 Armistice lines were no longer to be a reference point for a future peace process. Yet in recent years a reverse process has been underway to re-establish the 1949 Armistice line, calling it the 1967 border and sanctifying it as a legitimate international boundary. This is one of the side effects of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which talks about the 1967 lines. The 2003 Road Map introduced a problematic terminology that a peace settlement "ends the occupation that began in 1967." This was partially offset by the reference to Resolution 242 in the Road Map, as well, with its caveats against a full Israeli withdrawal from the territories and its call for establishing secure boundaries. Under President Obama, the 1967 lines have become a reference point for the peace process again. President Bush made clear in his 2004 letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that "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". But while the Bush letter was approved by massive bipartisan majorities in both houses of the US Congress, the Obama administration has avoided stating that it is legally bound by the contents of the letter. This came out in a long exchange between a Fox News reporter and the State Department's Deputy Spokesman, Robert Wood, on June 1, 2009. At the UN General Assembly in September 2009, Obama used in his address the road-map phrase of "ending the occupation that began in 1967," but he did not refer to Resolution 242 as his predecessors did. Over the last decade, Israel has made repeated mistakes in allowing the restoration of the 1967 lines and the downgrading of Resolution 242. It should have fought harder over the language of the Road Map back in 2003. Israel's right to defensible borders, that must replace the 1967 lines, has a strong foundation in international law and in the past policies of the UN Security Council. It would be a cardinal error to allow these rights to be eroded now, especially if new peace begin and the Palestinians seek to win international support for a Palestinian state next year that will undoubtedly be based on their demand to see Israel pull back to the 1967 lines.
|
|
LEFTIST RACIAL PROFILING
Posted by Truth Provider, May 4, 2010. |
|
Dear friends, There is a sure way to identify a person with extreme liberal-left mind set. If you jumped to conclusion that the Time Square car bomb terrorist was a white right-wing extreme, you are surely a left-wing loon. Unfortunately, many media outlets and some prominent politicians did just that. They proclaimed the terrorist a deranged white right-wing extremist, despite the fact — FACT! — that all the conflicts in the world, except one, involve extreme Islam and all terror attacks in New York City in recent years were perpetrated by Muslims. This is how Hamas and Hezballah are merely "militants," Iran chairs the UN Women Rights Commission, and left-wing organizations demonstrate against Israel and fight for the rights of illegal immigrants. Strange world! This below is an Editorial: "Blame the white man"
by The Washington Times
Your Truth Provider,
|
|
Leftist racial profiling was thwarted again by reality There was no joy in liberal land when the prime suspect in the Times Square bomb plot turned out to be a Pakistani-American. The right-wing terrorist boogeyman vanished. Leftist racial and ethnic profiling failed again. The widely distributed videotape of a lighter-complected suspect near the attack scene — almost universally reported as a "white man" — raised expectations in some quarters that this could be the work of right-wing extremists, maybe even — oh dare it be hoped? — a Tea Party Republican. The right-wing bomber story line quickly established itself in the meme stream. New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, prompted by CBS News reader Katie Couric, speculated that the culprit was "homegrown, maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn't like the health care bill or something." MSNBC's Chris Matthews and NBC News "terrorist analyst" Roger W. Cressey dwelt long on the idea of the bomber being someone with a "right-wing" agenda. Geraldo Rivera seemed fixated on the idea that the bomber was a "white man." Similar unsubstantiated musings and outright accusations were rife in the liberal blogosphere. But then a suspect was apprehended on a Dubai-bound airplane, and his name was Faisal Shahzad. Talk about an inconvenient truth. It would be nice if this were just another opportunity to mock the haplessness of those liberals who are so captive to their agenda that they subordinate reality to their warped worldview. Delusions like this, however, place the country in danger. Whether officials will admit it or not, the United States is at war with a loosely organized sect of Islamic extremists who are attempting to disrupt U.S. interests abroad and create mayhem here at home. Muslim extremists should be considered the default culprits in every random act of terrorism unless compelling evidence exists to the contrary. It's possible that terrorists could be motivated by other orientations — witness Andrew Joseph Stack, who flew a small plane into the Internal Revenue Service offices in Austin, Texas, in February — but such incidents are outliers and, as in the Stack case, tend to be isolated. The Times Square bombing attempt was the kind of terror attack in which al Qaeda, the Taliban and their cohorts are well-schooled, and it's reasonable to assume this was not an isolated incident, given Mr. Shahzad's recent travels to the Pakistani frontier. This was an attack either directly ordered or inspired by our enemies; it was part of their unfolding war plan against the United States. As in the Christmas Day underwear bombing attempt, we are lucky it failed. Blaming the white American man is an ingrained habit, driven by political correctness and unapologetic biases. This is the same knee-jerk response that occurred over the October 2002 D.C. snipers. The prevailing view at the time was that the perpetrator was some kind of white, male, veteran, right-wing, religious nut. Commentators, self-appointed terrorism experts and security officials discussed the profile as though it were incontestable. When the shooters turned out to be two black males under the spell of radical Islam who virtually worshipped Osama bin Laden, the narrative collapsed. But the damage was done; shooters John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo passed a police checkpoint during their killing spree, perhaps because they didn't fit the prevailing profile. Those who style themselves as the intellectual class are so captive to hatred for a particular kind of American citizen that they immediately and without evidence ascribe acts of violence to them. These liberals should reflect on the fact that they've become the most bigoted people in America. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
FORMER US AMBASSADOR JOHN BOLTON: OBAMA DAMAGES ISRAELI SECURITY
Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, May 4, 2010. |
|
John Bolton, former United States ambassador to the United Nations, told Bar Shem-Ur on IDF Army Radio Tuesday morning that "[U.S. President Barack] Obama is harming Israeli security and is playing into the hands of [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad" by agreeing to talk with Egypt about a nuclear-free Middle East. Listen to statements by former US ambassador to UN John Bolton "All of us know this suggestion [of Egypt] relates to one country — Israel," Bolton stated. "The question right now is how much pressure he is prepared to apply to achieve his objective. If I were an Israeli, I would be afraid of the results of these contacts because of the very fact that Obama agrees to talk with Egypt" about its proposal. "It is clear that we are talking about an absurd and very aggravating" action by President Obama, "but this is how it has worked for years since the days of Castro, and the 'shining" period of [Yasser] Arafat," Bolton told Army Radio. He also said he is not surprised that the "head of an enemy state can arrive in the United States, take the podium in the center of New York, castigate the United States and Israel and accuse them of mutual nuclear aid. "This really is not an exceptional step for the U.N. to give the podium to the president of Iran. The best thing I can say about the visit of Ahmadinejad is that his speech was so ridiculous that he actually damages himself more than he does himself any good." Calling the United Nations an organization "empty of all content" that "lost its legitimacy a long time ago," Bolton suggested the establishment of an alternative body comprising only those countries that are democratic. "There needs to be a wide-ranging discussion on the lack of effectiveness of the United Nations in dealing with international challenges," he explained. "In its history, it has failed time after time to deal with global threats. This happened with Communism and today it is happening with worldwide terror." He dismissed the U.N. committee for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons as another "great name of an organization that has no teeth or significance." Bolton, who advised then-President George W. Bush to stop paying dues to the United Nations, quit his U.N. post out of frustration. Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
THE UN CONTINUES TO FAIL GILAD SHALIT
Posted by Takeapen, May 4, 2010. |
|
Join us resisting Hamas' blackmail by death threat to Gilad Shalit. We must Act now! Gilad's father waiting for his son 2010/May/01 — News sources around the world report that Hamas has sunk to new depths with an animated film that shows the kidnapped Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit (Schalit) returned to his mourning father in a casket. AP, Gaza City, writes the Hamas film bears "...a grisly message for Israel: If it doesn't meet the Islamic militant group's demands, (the) Israeli soldier it has held for nearly four years could return home in a coffin..". Most of the International community (including the US and the EU) considers Hamas a terror organization. Their kidnapping of Shalit, depriving him of visits and of other rights, and now blackmailing Israel by a death threat — reinforce this perception. Unfortunately, the UN and its Secretary-General attempt to legitimize Hamas by giving it certain recognition, instead of holding it responsible for its war crimes in general and for its violations of International law and elementary humanitarian conventions in the Gilad Shalit case, in particular. Like Hamas' prevention of Red Cross and family visits to Gilad, withholding information, mocking the prisoner in public and now the blackmailing element in staging his death in this horrific cartoon. All decent people wish and pray for the release of Gilad Schalit, and Israel is united in this wish. However, no Israeli government could surrender to the blackmail and pay the absurd ransom Hamas demands: one or two thousand terrorists to be released, hundreds of them with blood on their hands. We must increase the international pressure on Hamas, for the release of Gilad Shalit and for an immediate change to a more humane captivity. Holding Hamas leaders to account is the appropriate response to this disgusting Hamas animation. 90,000 people from around the world have already signed a petition to the UN "Hamas leaders to trial for war crimes". We have now renewed this petition. Please read it, and if you agree, add Your Signature! And help to distribute this Call. Join our facebook group and share this call with your friends! Contact takeapen.org at www.takeapen.org |
|
FAKE FRIENDS OR ENEMIES?
Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 4, 2010. |
|
Friendly Boycott? PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has publicized a law making it illegal to market goods produced in Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. (Jews must boycott all Arab goods, including OIL! Drive less, walk more — It is good for your health! Not buying vegetables produced by the PA Arabs is a good start.) Well Known 'Revelation'. In spite of the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt secured with an Israeli retreat from Sinai, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Rite said at a press conference held in Beirut that Israel is the enemy. (Egypt has never hidden its relentless animosity toward Israel. It is time for Israel to stop this pretence of the peace and return to Sinai as the best security buffer zone from future attacks by Egypt or Libya.) Two Enemies United by Hate Toward Israel. Syria is tightening its military alliance with Turkey, a NATO member, as it reinforces its recent threat to send Israel back to "the Stone Age" if it attacks Hizbullah. Syrian President Bashar Assad told a Kuwaiti newspaper it has "surprises" in store for Israel. (Turkey and Syria have unresolved disputed territorial issues which are being set aside for 'the common good' — Islamic expansionism!) What are the Rockets for? U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said at the end of his meeting with Defense Minister Ehud Barak in the Pentagon that Syria and Iran are supplying Hezbollah with weapons and that Hezbollah now has more missiles and rockets than most world governments. Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak War against the Judeo-Christian West was declared long ago under the flag of a Wahhabi kingdom, Saudi Arabia! To survive, we must to win it! Arabs used to enslave us forcibly — nowadays they use oil to buy slaves in vast number. Unfortunately, there are too many among us who are willingly selling themselves into slavery! 'Compromise' for the Sake of Fake Talks. Washington sources report that instead of a freeze on all Israeli construction in East Jerusalem, the Obama administration asks Israel to quietly suspend all building licenses and other permits for just four weeks, to give US Middle East envoy George Mitchell a chance to persuade the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to accept US-moderated proximity talks. (How long will the stupidity of the fake peace process continue? The PA is not interested in peace but in the destruction of the Jewish state.) Egyptians Used Chemical Weapon? Egyptian military forces have killed four Palestinians by pumping poisonous gas into a cross-border tunnel. It is alleged that Egyptian security forces have sprayed gas into tunnels before, without killing people. (Symptomatically the world ignores this violation of the Geneva Convention by its silence.) Quote of the Week: "The Christians, the Jews, and the treacherous apostate rulers have pounced on you... you (Muslims) have no other way out from this plight other than to wage Jihad" — Saeed al-Shehri, Yemen-based wing of al-Qaida, a former Saudi inmate at the US prison at Guantanamo Bay — Islamists do not discriminate. They Hate Infidels (Christians) even more than Jews! But "Infidel" countries still support them in their determination to destroy Israel! Ugly Enemy of Humanity. A Palestinian Authority cleric informed his television congregants in Hamas terrorist-controlled Gaza that the active volcano in Iceland was Divinely ignited to punish "infidels and polytheists with fear and terror." The Hamas cleric also mocked the United States: "As Allah lives, dear brothers, America — with its numbers and its equipment, with its might and its sceptre, with its planes and its missiles, with its war ships and with its destroyers — it has no more power against Allah than do spider webs against His power." No Commitment to Betrayal. Despite a 2002 road map commitment by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to then-United States President George W. Bush, Israels government has reportedly been backing away from destroying the 23 Judean and Samarian Jewish villages built after March 2001. One reason government sources have given for this change of attitude is that the pledge to destroy the villages was made while being misled by Bush into believing that America would support Israel retaining control over larger Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. Obama's Wrong Approach: Land First, Peace Later. The US president gives Israel and the Palestinians a four-month time-frame for negotiating his Middle East peace plan whereby Palestinian state borders would enclose 96 percent of the West Bank and 133,000 Israelis evacuated. The 4 percent left with Israel would include Jerusalem. (Why should Israel give up Jewish land to the enemy? The US has no intention to return California, Texas and New Mexico to their friendly neighbour and rightful owner, Mexico!) Hypocrisy in Action: UN to buy 500,000 OLPC laptops for Palestinian children... — Have your kids received free laptops? While many millions of refugees around the world are lacking food and medicine, the UN has been giving privileged treatment and showing unprecedented generosity to these 'professional refugees' just because they are enemies of the Jews! Is Bibi a Useless Poser and Liar? Two Jerusalem officials say Israel has frozen plans for new construction in the city's disputed eastern sector despite Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's declarations to the contrary. (The freeze is just a meaningless appeasement — it will bring no change!) Israel to Help Africa Fight the Desert. Having "conquered the desert" at home, Israel is ready to share technology and skills with African countries struggling to sustain agricultural output due to increasingly unreliable rains Israel's minister of agriculture and rural development, Shalom Simhon, said. Sharing know-how, especially in irrigation and water management, was his focus on a tour of Senegal, Ivory Coast and Gabon. PA Factions say No to Peace Talks. Eight Palestinian Authority factions meeting in Syria have rejected peace talks with Israel based on the "two-state solution". Among the factions were Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The groups called on the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), the umbrella group that created the PA, to immediately stop talks with Israel. (So-called Palestinians have never wanted peace with Israel and have used the peace process to weaken Israel' s position.) Obama's Security Advisor is anti-Jewish Bigot. James Jones, U.S. President Barack Obama's National Security Adviser told an anti-Semitic joke while addressing a conservative think tank in Washington. Jones served as former President George W. Bush's Middle East military envoy and was considered by the IDF to be a "thorn in the side." One think tank member said the joke was "wrong in so many levels," and added, "Can you imagine him telling a black joke at an event of African Americans?" (Will he resign? Bigots' apologies mean absolutely nothing!) Foundation of the US-Israel Alliance.
Israel's status as the US's most vital ally in the Middle East has been so widely recognized for so long that over the years, Israeli and American leaders alike have felt it unnecessary to explain what it is about the alliance that makes it so important for the US. Today, as the Obama administration is openly distancing the US from Israel while giving the impression that Israel is a strategic impediment to the administration's attempts to strengthen its relations with the Arab world... (For the sake of the oil flow, betrayal of Jews is a small price to pay!) Only Israel, where the government reflects the will of the people is a reliable, permanent US ally. America reaps the benefits of its alliance with Israel every day. As the US suffers from chronic intelligence gaps, Israel remains the US's most reliable source for accurate intelligence on the US 's enemies in the region. Israel is the US 's only ally in the Middle East that always fights its own battles. Indeed, Israel has never asked the US for direct military assistance in time of war. Since the US and Israel share the same regional foes, when Israel is called upon to fight its enemies, its successes redound to the US's benefit... Israel provides a reliable regional military base for the US which is available at any time in case of trouble in the Arab world that would put the US national interest, oil supply, in jeopardy! America's three permanent strategic interests in the Middle East are as follows: 1 — Ensuring the smooth flow of affordable petroleum products from the region to global consumers through the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Aden and the Suez Canal. A strong Israel is the best guarantor of all of these interests. Indeed, the stronger Israel is, the more secure these vital American interests are. Three permanent and unique aspects to Israel 's regional position dictate this state of affairs. 1 — As the first target of the most radical regimes and radical sub-state actors in the region, Israel has a permanent, existential interest in preventing these regimes and sub-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm. 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 |
|
IRAQ BOMBING NEAR CHRISTIANS; FINLAND FINANCES ISRAELI LEFT; TWO MONTHS OF ISLAM 'PEACE'
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 4, 2010. |
|
IRAQ BOMBING NEAR CHRISTIANS Two roadside bombs went off in Mosul, Iraq, in short succession near buses carrying Christians to school. One bystander killed and about 100 wounded (Wall St. J, 5/3/10, A16). For hundreds of years, the former Christian majority has been driven out of the Mideast. Roadside bombing is one method. Muslims in Egypt kidnap young Christian women and force them to convert. That is another method. For a third method, the PLO extorted money and property from Christians. Muslims harassed Christians going to church. In Gaza, churches blow up. In Lebanon, the PLO raped Christians. Much of that has been reported piecemeal. As a result, people fail to see the big picture. Among the unending allegations against Israel, so many and so weird and such unlikely fantasy in view of Judaism, Israeli law, and the international spotlight on Israel, that it forced Christians out of its area. No evidence for the accusation has been adduced. It seems that evidence is not required, when the world's scapegoat is involved. One problem with the accusation is that in Israel, the Christian population increased! The related accusation that Israel commits genocide against the Palestinian Arabs collides with the warning that rising Arab populations will swamp Israel. Massacred but rising? The result is indignation without fact or logic. Match the situation in Israel and the Territories with the rest of the Mideast for a better perspective. The Christians are fleeing regardless of Israel. Recently, Palestinian Arab birth rates, once among the highest, have fallen below the Jews' birth rate. The advent of Arab misrule over the Territories has caused many to emigrate. I think that the improved economy that even Israel is helping the Palestinian Authority to develop will stem further emigration.
ISRAELI SECURITY MEASURE WHILE INTEGRATING HIGHWAY One two roads link Jerusalem with the center of the country and with the Territories. Highway 443 is one. Cars with Palestinian license plates were barred from 443, because they committed repeated acts of terrorism against cars with Israeli license plates. Israel's High Court ruled that Israel must stop barring Palestinian Arab traffic from that road. The Court said the IDF would have to figure out how to make the road secure, anyway. No plan was reviewed before the decision was made. The IDF has removed the barriers to traffic from Arab villages, but set up a road block and set up barbed fences to keep terrorists from gaining access to Jewish villages (IMRA, 5/3/10). Will the alternative security measures succeed? How long before the U.S. demands that Israel remove the roadblocks, to make it more convenient for Arabs, even though that includes terrorists? In New York, we just had another terrorist bombing, but shall we have no sympathy for victims of Islamist terrorism abroad?
WHAT WILL "PRELIMINARY' U.S.-ISRAEL-P.A. NEGOTIATIONS INCLUDE? 
Israel's PM Netanyahu agreed to preliminary discussion of core issues that Secretary of State Clinton said would be involved in later, final status negotiations. Is it contradictory or can a line be drawn separating negotiations into two phases? What does "preliminary discussion" mean? One possibility is defining terms, without going on to resolving issues. Defining Jerusalem" and "refugee" would be complicated, time-consuming, and contentious. For example, a refugee usually is someone who had a certain status at a given time and himself left the area at that time. [That is the definition by the regular UN refugee agency. Palestinian Arabs [and the special UN agency for Palestinian Arabs, UNRWA] claim, in effect, that if any of their eight great-grandparents had lived anywhere in Mandatory Palestine for any period under any circumstances, they are refugees. Another possibility is that some unthinking Israeli diplomat would present not definitions but a working paper of solutions. That would open up premature discussion [and U.S. interference in] the core issues. All sorts of alternatives would flood in. (IMRA, 5/2/10). Not much has been discussed about why the U.S. sought separate-room negotiations to start off the process. The last time, separate rooms were not used. Does the State Dept. want it so it can gang up with the Arabs against Israel?
LEFTIST FINED FOR SLANDER ON ISRAELI RADIO PROGRAM One Eli Barak called into Flatto Sharon's radio program in Israel and repeatedly accused, "Nissim Cohen of Bnei Brak is a lazy religious person who never worked a day in his life and did not serve in the army." Actually, Mr. Cohen served in a combat unit and then in its reserves until the age of release. He sued. The "Netanya Magistrates Court ruled that Eli Barak has to send a written apology to right wing activist Nissim Cohen and NIS 40,000 in compensation for defamation of character." (IMRA, 5/3/10.) I have reported several cases of successful slander suits by right-wingers, and recall none by left-wingers.
FINLAND HELPS FINANCE ISRAELI LEFT The Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information scheduled a series of talks on "Rebuilding the Israeli Left." The Center acknowledged, "Afternoons with IPCRI are made possible by the support of the Government of Finland." (IMRA, 5/3/10.) Is building a political movement in a free foreign country a legitimate function of the government of Finland or political interference?
STATE DEPT. HINDERS BREAKING IRAN'S AND CHINA'S INTERNET RESTRICTION For a couple of years, Congress has appropriated funds for volunteers to use to open the Web to dictatorships' subjects. You know that China and Iran restrict access to the Internet, to keep dissidents form informing foreigners and each other of what is happening and form organizing protest. The State Dept. freezes the funds. Apparently it is afraid that China would object to the volunteers, mostly Falun Gong a mild, Chinese religious group. It also seems afraid that this effort is too bold (L. Gordon Krovitz, Wall St. J., 5/4, A19). When Bush was President, the State Dept. froze funds for dissidents in Iran. That freeze may have left us very little time before Iran gets nuclear weapons. The volunteers might be our last chance to change the Iranian regime. The State Dept. is leaving us a choice between a nuclear nightmare and a war. Government fails us at almost every turn, but our politicians rely upon government to solve problems, often problems of government's own creation.
STATE DEPT. HINDERS BREAKING IRAN'S AND CHINA'S INTERNET RESTRICTION For a couple of years, Congress has appropriated funds for volunteers to use to open the Web to dictatorships' subjects. You know that China and Iran restrict access to the Internet, to keep dissidents form informing foreigners and each other of what is happening and form organizing protest. The State Dept. freezes the funds. Apparently it is afraid that China would object to the volunteers, mostly Falun Gong a mild, Chinese religious group. It also seems afraid that this effort is too bold (L. Gordon Krovitz, Wall St. J., 5/4, A19). When Bush was President, the State Dept. froze funds for dissidents in Iran. That freeze may have left us very little time before Iran gets nuclear weapons. The volunteers might be our last chance to change the Iranian regime. The State Dept. is leaving us a choice between a nuclear nightmare and a war. Government fails us at almost every turn, but our politicians rely upon government to solve problems, often problems of government's own creation.
UN VERSUS HIZBULLAH UN envoy to Lebanon, Terje Roed-Larsen, criticized the militias of that country for raising tension. He reminded Lebanon that Security Council Resolution 1559 requires the disbanding of the militias. Lebanon and Hizbullah have been violating that UN Resolution since 2004. Hizbullah denounced the envoy for, in effect, demanding that Lebanese fight each other (IMRA, 5/2/10). Roed-Larsen used to deal with Israel, with which he was highly critical. Readers often comment that Israel is violating UN resolutions, though they do not state which ones and whether they are mandatory. UN Resolution 1701 ending the combat in Lebanon requiring that Hizbullah not build up forces south of the Litani River, has been violated by years. Hizbullah acquired tens of thousands of missiles. No reader has expressed concern about that serious violation. Another double standard?
ISRAEL SUES HEBERON JEWRY FOR COST OF DUBIOUS EXPULSION OF SOME FROM A HOUSE A New York family bought a house in Hebron, dubbed "Peace House," for some Jewish families. After they moved in, the Arab seller denied having sold the house. In court, the purchasers showed a video of him accepting the money for the house. The court did not reach a conclusion, at that time, of who the legal owners are. The High Court ruled that the government does not have to expel the residents until the ownership is adjudicated, but that it may. The Hebron Jewish Community was working with government officials to find a peaceful solution. While they were exchanging proposals, Defense Minister Barak deceived them and expelled the residents by force. Now the government of Israel is suing the Hebron Jewish Community for the cost of the expulsion. But the government did not have to expel anybody at that time. Therefore, it should not demand reimbursement for the cost. The Hebron Jewish Community finds this a case of unequal enforcement of the law, because the government does not do this for expulsion of Arabs' illegal occupation of houses nor for criminals expelled (Hebron Jewish Community, 5/2/10). Since the house was bought by a family, why is the government suing the Community rather than just the purchasers or even the residents? Trying to punish the whole community? Ownership of Peace House still is being adjudicated. The court had no genuine basis for expelling anyone, when it had not officially determined whose house it is. Apparently the government did not state a reasonable explanation. Then what else is it be vindictiveness against religious Zionists? Sincere there is just an undetermined Arab allegation of wrongful possession of the property, and the alleged Jewish buyers have the transaction on videotape, this is not even a case of unequal enforcement of the law. After all, no law is known to have been violated. This is pure discrimination. Let the government explain why this is not a case of "lawfare," the abuse of law to punish and intimidate dissidents? Or perhaps it is a case of Defense Min. Barak, who heads the Labor Party that competes for votes with Kadima Party, trying to gain favor on the Left. There may be a violation by the former Arab owner, in trying to gain unlawful possession of the property and perhaps in defrauding the purchasers. They proved he got the money. He is asking for the property back, but is not offering the money back. If he offered the money back, he would be admitting having sold the property. The historical pattern of false Arab real estate claims, and the pressure of a PLO death penalty for Arabs who are known to have sold property to Jews, such pressure as to cause Arab sellers to renege, are circumstances adverse to the former owner's claim. There may be other logical possibilities. If so, I would like to hear them. Some general allegation of dubious, long past accusations against Zionist treatment of Arabs, which is the way some readers respond, is not pertinent to this house. This house involves an ordinary real estate deal that should be judged on its own merits, but has been swept up in political considerations by the Left and by the Arabs. The Left and the Arab disturb the peace. They cause injustice. And do you think they care about the right of Arabs to sell property when they deem it advantageous?
ISLAMIST ATTACKS IN PAST TWO MONTHS This list came from savarkar_vinayak@yahoo.co.uk through a reliable intermediary. I have not checked, myself. The dates are year, month, and day. The New York attack of this week was not included. I remember some of the other attacks. Note their geographic sweep, wantonness, and cruelty. This is international jihad in perspective, far broader than the Arab-Israel conflict and obviously not caused by Israel. List of Islamic Terror Attacks For the Past 2 Months Date Country City Killed Injured Description 2010.05.02 Iraq Mosul 1 80 One person is killed, and over eighty injured when Islamic bombers target Christian student bus riders. 2010.05.02 Pakistan Swat 1 3 A young woman is killed when religious extremists throw a grenade into her home. 2010.05.01 Pakistan Swat 3 12 Three innocents are incinerated by a suicide bomber at a shop. 2010.05.01 Iraq Mosul 1 0 Sectarian Jihadis gun down a teacher leaving a mosque. 2010.05.01 Iraq Baghdad 3 2 Three Iraqis are killed by a car bomb. 2010.05.01 Somalia Mogadishu 39 70 Forty people die from shrapnel and burn injuries when Islamists bomb a rival mosque. 2010.05.01 Russia Nalchik 1 29 Muslim radicals set off a bomb at a race track, killing an elderly veteran of World War II. 2010.04.30 India Batamaloo 1 0 Angry Muslims stone an innocent civilian to death over the cancellation of a religious march. 2010.04.30 France Strasbourg 0 1 A Jewish man is stabbed in the neck and hit in the face with an iron bar by a Muslim yelling about a Zionist conspiracy. 2010.04.30 Pakistan Karachi 1 5 Islamists murder a civilian with a bomb attached to a motorcycle. 2010.04.30 Pakistan Karam Kot 1 0 The body of a brutally slain intelligence officer is found three weeks after being kidnapped. 2010.04.30 Iraq Garma 3 10 Three patrons are killed when Islamic militants toss a bomb into a marketplace. 2010.04.29 Dagestan Kazbekovsky 2 17 Two local cops are blown to bits by a Fedayeen suicide bomber. 2010.04.29 Iraq Baghdad 1 0 A car bomb at a rival mosque leaves one dead. 2010.04.29 Somalia El Bahay 6 10 Six people are taken out by an al-Shabaab attack on a village. 2010.04.29 Iraq Baghdad 8 20 Suspected fundamentalists bomb a liquor store, killing eight civilians. 2010.04.28 Thailand Pattani 1 2 A 41-year-old female health volunteer is shot in the head by Muslim rebels. 2010.04.28 Yemen Damaj 4 0 Shiite rebels kill four people in two separate attacks. 2010.04.28 Pakistan Quetta 1 0 A Christian man is gunned down by suspected Muslim militants as he is washing a car. 2010.04.28 Iraq Baghdad 6 18 Jihadi bombers manage to take down six Iraqis along a city street. 2010.04.28 Afghanistan Khost 12 0 Islamic hardliners murder a dozen civilians, mostly women and children, with a roadside bomb. 2010.04.28 Pakistan Peshawar 4 15 A Shahid suicide car bomber plows into a group of Pakistanis, killing at least four. 2010.04.27 Somalia Afgoi 0 0 A respected humanitarian worker is shot to death by suspected Hizbul Islam. 2010.04.27 Somalia Mogadishu 2 8 Islamists attack a rival mosque, killing two. 2010.04.27 Iraq Baghdad 2 12 Two local soldiers are killed when Jihadis fire mortars from a residential neighborhood. 2010.04.27 Iraq Kirkuk 1 1 Jihadis take down a student in a drive-by attack. 2010.04.27 Afghanistan Kandahar 3 35 A Fedayeen suicide bomber sends three airport workers to Allah. 2010.04.27 Iraq Baghdad 4 2 A family of four is obliterated by sectarian bombers. 2010.04.26 Afghanistan Kunduz 3 4 Three people die from a Taliban rocket attack. 2010.04.26 India Budgam 1 1 Islamic militants gun down a local cop. 2010.04.26 Iraq Fallujah 3 2 Three Iraqis are taken out by Jihadi bombers. 2010.04.26 Iraq Baqubah 2 7 Two people are murdered in separate Mujahideen bomb blasts. 2010.04.25 Thailand Pattani 1 4 Islamists fire on a garbage truck, killing one worker. 2010.04.25 Afghanistan Zabul 4 12 A suicide bomber detonates at a bazaar, blowing four innocents straight to Allah. 2010.04.24 Pakistan Akwal 3 1 Three guards are gunned down when Taliban terrorists attack NATO tankers. 2010.04.24 Nigeria Jos 5 0 Three Christians stabbed to death and two others hacked to pieces with machetes by a Muslim mob. 2010.04.24 Iraq Baghdad 3 19 Jihadis bomb a marketplace, taking down three Iraqis. 2010.04.24 Iraq Mosul 3 0 Two civilians and one defense volunteer are gunned down by Muslim militants. 2010.04.24 Somalia Mogadishu 2 2 al-Shabaab Islamists kill two government soldiers with a landmine. 2010.04.23 Iraq Baghdad 69 303 Devoted Sunnis slaughter seventy Shiite Iraqis in at least five deadly bomb blasts at mosques, homes and a shopping district. 2010.04.23 Pakistan Datta Khel 7 16 Religious extremists ambush a Pakistani military convoy, killing seven. 2010.04.23 Pakistan Miranshah 4 0 Four captives are butchered by Islamic hardliners, two of whom are beheaded. 2010.04.22 Pakistan Charsadda 4 0 The Taliban spray a car with automatic weapons, slaying the four occupants. 2010.04.22 Iraq Souz 1 3 Terrorists set off a bomb at a home, killing a resident. 2010.04.22 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 A young man is gunned down by Muslim radicals at a nightclub. 2010.04.21 Pakistan Khyber 1 4 A woman is killed, and her four children injured, by mortar shell fired by suspected militants. 2010.04.21 Thailand Pattani 2 52 An Islamic insurgent throws a grenade into a group of policemen. 2010.04.21 Somalia Mogadishu 5 0 Five construction workers are kidnapped and beheaded by Islamic fundamentalists. 2010.04.21 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 Two victims of sectarian violence are found dead. 2010.04.21 India Jammu 1 0 Mujahideen shoot an Indian police officer to death. 2010.04.21 Thailand Pattani 1 0 A 56-year-old man is murdered by Muslim gunmen. 2010.04.21 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 Islamists shoot a 20-year-old man to death in his home. 2010.04.21 Pakistan Sargodha 1 1 Two young Christian brothers (ages 12 and 14) are beaten with an iron rod by a Muslim yelling religious slurs. One dies. 2010.04.21 Iraq Baqubah 3 14 Jihadis bomb a restaurant near a school, a teacher and student are among three who die from shrapnel. 2010.04.20 Dagestan Makhachkala 3 0 Islamic militants ambush two policemen with automatic weapons. 2010.04.20 Iraq Tarmiyah 5 0 Three young children are beheaded along with two women in a home by suspected al-Qaeda. 2010.04.20 Pakistan Hangu 4 12 Four locals are blown to bits by Sunni bombers. 2010.04.20 Iraq Hit 3 0 Three Iraqis are murdered by a roadside bomb. 2010.04.19 Pakistan Peshawar 25 48 About two dozen patrons at a market are sent to Allah by a Holy Warrior in a suicide vest. 2010.04.19 Afghanistan Kandahar 3 4 Three children are brutally killed when Islamists set off a bomb hidden in a donkey cart. 2010.04.19 Pakistan Swat 2 3 Two villagers sitting outside a shop are gunned down by Mujahideen. 2010.04.19 Nigeria Riyom 4 0 Four Christian farmers are murdered in their field by Muslim terrorists. 2010.04.19 Iraq Baqubah 2 2 Jihadi bombers take down two civilians. 2010.04.19 Afghanistan Kandahar 1 0 A popular politician is assassinated by hardliners at a mosque. 2010.04.19 Pakistan Landikotal 1 1 Islamists send a mortar into a school principal's home, killing a woman and injuring her daughter. 2010.04.19 Pakistan Peshawar 1 15 A young boy is killed when a Fedayeen suicide bomber attacks a school. 2010.04.19 Afghanistan Kabul 2 6 A suicide bomber kills two soldiers at their base. 2010.04.18 Iraq Bartala 1 0 A member of the Shabak religious minority is kidnapped and murdered. 2010.04.18 Pakistan Peshawar 7 26 A child is among seven people blown into pieces by a Shahid car bomber. 2010.04.18 Iraq Mosul 4 0 Three women are among four civilians shot to death in their home by Mujahideen. 2010.04.18 Somalia Mogadishu 16 24 Islamists murder sixteen people with a landmine and mortar attack on an airport. 2010.04.18 Iran Urmiye Prison 2 0 The Islamic republic tortures to Kurdish prisoners to death on the same day. 2010.04.17 Iraq Basra 1 2 Islamists gun down a woman and injure her husband and son. 2010.04.17 Pakistan Kohat 41 62 Two suicide bombers, dressed in burqas, blow up forty-one refugees lining up for food at a displaced persons camp. 2010.04.16 Pakistan Quetta 10 35 A suicidal Sunni detonates in a crowd of Shia protesters outside a hospital, sending at least ten to Allah. 2010.04.16 Iraq Baaj 2 0 Islamists kidnap two men and shoot them in the back of the head. 2010.04.15 Afghanistan Kandahar 6 16 A half dozen innocents are sent to Allah by Shahid suicide bomber. 2010.04.15 Iraq Mosul 4 0 Three women are among four civilians shot to death in their own home by Mujahideen. 2010.04.15 Yemen Shabwa 2 1 Separate al-Qaeda bomb blasts leave two people dead. 2010.04.15 Iraq Samarrah 14 0 The bodies of fourteen kidnapping victims of a Sunni terror group are found in a mass grave. 2010.04.15 Thailand Pattani 2 1 Muslim militants shoot three people, including a pork vendor. 2010.04.15 Turkey Istanbul 1 0 An entire family is involved in the 'honor' suffocation of a 2-day-old out-of-wedlock infant. 2010.04.15 Nigeria Boto 2 0 A Christian pastor and his wife are abducted by Muslims and burned to a crisp. 2010.04.15 Pakistan Mingora 2 0 Teenage Talibanis gun down two people in broad daylight. 2010.04.14 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 Islamic radicals murder a village defense volunteer by slashing the back of his head and letting him bleed to death. 2010.04.14 Iraq Baghdad 2 6 A Sunni cleric is cut down by Religion of Peace rivals outside his mosque. 2010.04.14 Iraq Mosul 2 0 A nurse is among two civilians gunned down by Islamic terrorists. 2010.04.14 USA Marquette Park, IL 5 2 After quarrelling with his wife over Islamic dress, a Muslim convert shoots his family members to 'take them back to Allah' and out of the 'world of sinners'. 2010.04.14 Indonesia Jarkata 3 156 Muslims enraged by a rumor of a revered scholar's tomb desecration attack security forces, hacking at least three to death. 2010.04.13 Afghanistan Kandahar 1 0 An 18-year-old woman is brutally shot to death by an Islamic fundamentalist. 2010.04.13 Iraq Baghdad 3 5 Suspected fundamentalists plant a shrapnel bomb at a liquor store shredding three patrons. 2010.04.13 Philippines Isabela 9 7 Abu Sayyaf terrorists disguised as policemen attack a Christian town, shooting and blasting nine people to death and destroying a Catholic church. 2010.04.12 Somalia Mogadishu 6 10 Six Somalis are destroyed by coordinated al-Shabaab bombings. 2010.04.12 Somalia Mogadishu 1 0 A university student is killed when Islamic militia mortar an airport. 2010.04.12 Iraq Mosul 3 15 Three Iraqis are taken out by a Shahid suicide car bomber. 2010.04.12 Iraq Baghdad 5 12 A Fedayeen detonates along a city street, killing five innocents. 2010.04.12 Afghanistan Kabul 3 4 Three women die from trauma suffered during a Sunni mortar attack. 2010.04.12 Afghanistan Faryab 4 2 Four police officers are murdered by Taliban bombers. 2010.04.11 Pakistan Mardan 1 2 A police officer is killed by an Islamist ambush. 2010.04.11 Iraq Udhaim 3 1 Three young brothers are dismembered by a terrorist bomb. 2010.04.10 Afghanistan Kandahar 2 3 A bomb and rocket attack on a home leave two Afghans dead and a mother and two daughters severely injured. 2010.04.10 Afghanistan Herat 3 8 Three civilians are blown to bits by a Taliban bomb. 2010.04.10 Iraq Qayara 3 0 Three Iraqis are taken down by Jihadi bombers. 2010.04.10 Iraq Mosul 2 0 A 10-year-old child is among two people blown apart by Mujahid bombers. 2010.04.10 Russia Nalchik 1 0 Muslim terrorists are suspected in the car bombing death of a police officer. 2010.04.10 Iraq Fallujah 1 4 A woman is the only fatality when an Islamic bomb breaks up a family gathering. 2010.04.09 Ingushetia Ekazhevo 1 0 A female suicide bomber walks up to a group of local cops and detonates, killing at least one of them. 2010.04.09 Iraq Mosul 2 0 Two Iraqis are murdered by Islamic gunmen along a city street. 2010.04.08 Iraq Shabak 1 1 Islamic militants invade the home of a Shabak religious minority member and shoot him to death. 2010.04.08 Nigeria Dakyo 2 0 A teenager is among two Christians stabbed to death by Muslim attackers. 2010.04.08 Iraq Khalis 2 0 Two civilians are shot dead at a marketplace by Mujahideen. 2010.04.07 India Kupwara 1 1 Lashkar-e-Toiba terrorists shoot an Indian soldier to death. 2010.04.07 Afghanistan Jalalabad 1 15 A Shahid suicide bomber murders a civilian. 2010.04.07 Pakistan Hangu 2 0 Two brothers are gunned down in their home by a religious extremist. 2010.04.07 Algeria Boumerdes 1 2 Fundamentalists kill a civilian along a busy street. 2010.04.07 Iraq Mosul 2 4 Two civilians are murdered by Jihadi bombers. 2010.04.06 Iraq Baghdad 50 187 At least fifty Iraqi civilians, including children, are blown to Allah by dedicated Sunni bombers. 2010.04.05 Pakistan Timergarah 55 80 Fifty-five people at a political rally are dismembered by Mujahideen bombers. 2010.04.05 Nigeria Jos 3 12 Three Christians are killed when their peaceful rally is attacked by militant Muslims. 2010.04.05 Iraq al-Shalamija 2 2 Jihadi bombers take down two local cops. 2010.04.05 Pakistan Nasirabad 2 0 A woman and her lover are shot by her brother in an honor killing. 2010.04.05 Ingushetia Karabulak 2 1 Two Russian cops are murdered by a Fedayeen suicide bomber. 2010.04.05 Iraq Baghdad 6 0 Four children, ages 6 to 11, are among a family of six Shia massacred in their home by Sunni gunmen 2010.04.05 Pakistan Peshawar 4 18 Tehreek-e-Taliban attack the US consulate in a coordinated bombing and shooting attack that leaves four dead. 2010.04.04 Pakistan Mohmand 3 0 Three villagers are cut down by a Taliban ambush. 2010.04.04 Iraq Mosul 3 40 Jihadis detonate a car bomb that kills at least three Iraqis. 2010.04.04 Thailand Narathiwat 3 9 Muslim terrorists open fire inside a tea shop, killing at least three civilians. 2010.04.03 Iraq Baghdad 41 237 Three bloody suicide blasts target the Iranian, Egyptian and German embassies, leaving at least forty dead. 2010.04.03 Afghanistan Marja 2 4 Women and children are among the casualties when a loaded tractor runs over a Taliban landmine. 2010.04.03 Dagestan Kizlyar 1 0 A cop is gunned down in an Islamic drive-by. 2010.04.03 Afghanistan Helmand 3 0 Three Afghan cops are taken down by Taliban bombers. 2010.04.03 Algeria Tifra 8 4 Fundamentalists detonate two bombs an hour apart, sending eight souls to Allah. 2010.04.02 Afghanistan Khost 3 0 Three security guards are killed by Sunni hardliners in two bombings. 2010.04.02 Iraq Hor Rajib 25 6 al-Qaeda Islamists roll into a village and tie up 20 men and five women, then shoot some to death and slit the throat of others. 2010.04.02 Iraq Jalawla 2 1 A boy and his father are killed by roadside bombers. The boy's mother is injured. 2010.04.02 Somalia Mogadishu 20 62 At least twenty civilians are killed in a 'relentless' assault by al-Shabaab on government positions. 2010.04.02 India Rajouri 1 0 Lashkar-e-Toiba members draw in and kill a soldier with a phony surrender offer. 2010.04.02 Pakistan Kurram 1 1 Islamic militants fire into a civilian vehicle, killing one occupant. 2010.04.01 Thailand Narathiwat 6 10 Six Buddhist villagers are ambushed and shot to death by Religion of Peace radicals. 2010.04.01 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 A woman and girl are 'slaughtered' by suspected terrorists. 2010.04.01 Pakistan Faisalabad 3 0 Two brothers are among three members of the Ahamdi religious minority brutally gunned down on their way home from work. 2010.03.31 Pakistan Khyber 6 20 Six security personnel are killed in a sustained attack by armed fundamentalists. 2010.03.31 Thailand Pattani 1 0 A 45-year-old civilian is shot twice in the back of the head by Muslim militants. 2010.03.31 Iraq Mosul 2 0 Sunni bombers take out a couple of local cops. 2010.03.31 Dagestan Kizlyar 12 23 Two suicide bombers send twelve innocent souls to Allah, including rescue workers. 2010.03.31 Afghanistan Lashkar Gah 13 43 A dozen people at a wheat market (including eight children) are blown to bits by a Jihad bicycle bomb. 2010.03.31 Thailand Pattani 1 2 Islamic militants shoot one man to death and wound two others as they are watching TV in their home. 2010.03.30 Afghanistan Heart 5 2 The Taliban murder five civilians with a roadside bomb. 2010.03.30 Iraq Mosul 2 0 Two civilians are shot to death by Sunni militants. 2010.03.30 India Hyderabad 1 25 Muslims attack a Hindu festival, burning cows, destroying property and stabbing a 22-year-old to death. 2010.03.29 Pakistan Tank 1 2 A Shahid suicide bomber murders a civilian on his way home from a village defense meeting. 2010.03.29 Pakistan Peshawar 2 3 A teenage suicide bomber sends two Pakistanis to Allah. 2010.03.29 Russia Moscow 38 102 Female suicide bombers massacre about forty subway commuters and leave another one-hundred in agony. 2010.03.29 Iraq Kirkuk 1 0 Terrorists kidnap a police officer and shoot him to death. 2010.03.29 Iraq Karbala 12 74 A triple suicide bombing at a restaurant and an ambulance stand leaves a dozen dead. 2010.03.29 Pakistan Kurram 3 0 The Taliban kidnap and cut the throats of three tribal elders. 2010.03.29 Pakistan Mamoond 2 8 Two people are killed by a Fedayeen suicide bomber. 2010.03.29 Thailand Yala 1 0 A village chief is brutally gunned down at a wedding by Muslim separatists. 2010.03.28 Pakistan Thal 6 0 Six truck drivers bringing supplies to a Shia town are kidnapped and shot dead in captivity by Sunni radicals. 2010.03.28 Iraq Mosul 1 3 A 3-year-old child dies when Mujahideen bombers target a Christian woman and her three daughters in their home. 2010.03.28 Somalia Mogadishu 1 0 A Somali tribal elder is assassinated by suspected Hizbul-Islam militants. 2010.03.28 Iraq Quaim 6 24 Six people at a construction site are killed in a coordinated series of bomb blasts. 2010.03.27 Somalia Mogadishu 4 2 al-Shabaab Islamists kill four people, including a woman, with a roadside bomb. 2010.03.27 Iraq Saadiya 3 1 Islamic terrorists open fire on a group of civilians outside their home, killing three. 2010.03.27 Afghanistan Helmand 1 0 A suicide bomber murders a British soldier clearing mines from a civilian road. 2010.03.27 Afghanistan Kabul 6 7 Children are among the casualties of three bombings that leave six civilians dead around the country. 2010.03.26 Iraq Khalis 53 105 Two massive bomb blasts at a shopping area leave over fifty innocent people dead. 2010.03.26 Israel Gaza Border 2 2 Two Israeli soldiers are killed by Hamas gunfire. 2010.03.26 Afghanistan Khost 1 3 An aid worker is killed when Talibanis fire on a group rebuilding a school. 2010.03.25 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 Suspected al-Qaeda bombers murder a Sunni. 2010.03.25 Iraq Touz Khormato 2 6 Two people are killed by Jihadi bombers. 2010.03.25 Afghanistan Khost 2 4 Two Afghan civilians are killed when Islamic hardliners attack a NATO base. 2010.03.25 Iraq Ramadi 1 8 A Shahid suicide bomber takes out an Iraqi. 2010.03.25 Pakistan Orakzai 2 0 Two tribal elders are abducted and beheaded by Religion of Peace radicals. 2010.03.25 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 A mother and daughter are brutally shot to death in their home by Muslim terrorists. 2010.03.24 Afghanistan Ghazni 3 0 Three local cops are blasted to death by Taliban bombers. 2010.03.24 Afghanistan Kabul 2 1 Islamic militants stop a vehicle with a roadside bomb, then machine-gun the occupants. 2010.03.24 Iraq Hit 3 2 A teenage suicide bomber murders three people in their home. 2010.03.24 Iraq Radwaniya 5 0 Five Iraqi soldiers are shot to death execution style at a checkpoint. 2010.03.24 Afghanistan Uruzgan 2 0 Two men working for a land-mine clearing operation are murdered by Islamists. 2010.03.23 Pakistan Orakzai 1 0 A tribal elder is abducted and executed by religious extremists. 2010.03.23 Somalia Afgoye 1 0 Islamists execute a Christian father of ten children at close range in front of his home. 2010.03.23 Iraq Balad Ruz 1 0 Suspected al-Qaeda bombers take down a Sunni leader. 2010.03.22 Pakistan Rawalpindi 1 1 A Christian dies after being burned alive three days earlier for refusing to embrace Islam. His wife was also raped. 2010.03.22 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 Two city workers are brutally shot to death by Muslim terrorists. 2010.03.22 Iraq Mosul 1 0 An electrician is murdered in front of his home by drive-by Jihadis. 2010.03.22 Iraq Radwaniya 2 0 Islamic 'insurgents' gun down two policemen. 2010.03.21 Afghanistan Khost 3 3 Three young men are killed when Islamists bomb a picnic area. 2010.03.21 Pakistan Quetta 4 5 A suicide bomber on a bicycle pedals to paradise, taking four innocents with him. 2010.03.21 Afghanistan Helmand 10 7 Ten Afghans at a market are blown to bits by a Shahid suicide bomber. 2010.03.21 Iraq Yusufiya 3 5 Three Iraqis are taken down by a roadside bomb. 2010.03.21 Iraq Garma 2 0 A man and wife are shot to death in their home by al-Qaeda. 2010.03.21 Iraq Mosul 1 0 An elderly man is gunned down in his home by Islamic terrorists. 2010.03.21 Pakistan North Waziristan 4 0 Tehreek-e-Taliban hardliners abduct and execute four local tribesmen. 2010.03.20 Pakistan Quetta 4 0 Four Shias are shredded by gunfire in a suspected sectarian attack. 2010.03.20 Pakistan Peshawar 1 0 Hardliners beat a student to death for playing music, which they consider to be against Islamic teaching. 2010.03.20 Somalia Kismayo 1 0 Islamists gun down a rival. 2010.03.20 Pakistan Kurram 1 6 A woman is killed in the crossfire when rival religious groups clash. 2010.03.19 Thailand Pattani 1 0 Muslim radicals gun down an auto parts salesman. 2010.03.19 Pakistan Kurram 2 3 Islamists attack the houses of peace committee members, leaving two dead. 2010.03.19 Iraq Baghdad 4 7 Four Iraqis are blown to bits by Mujahideen bombers. 2010.03.18 Pakistan Mohmand 1 0 A young girl is taken out by a Taliban landmine. 2010.03.18 Pakistan Bajaur 1 0 Islamists gun down an off-duty policeman on his way home. 2010.03.18 Iraq Mosul 2 1 A woman in her home is among two people murdered by Islamic terrorists. 2010.03.18 Iraq Baghdad 1 0 Islamic terrorists murder a woman inside her home. 2010.03.18 Iraq Sherquat 2 0 Two men are abducted and beheaded by suspected al-Qaeda. 2010.03.18 Israel Netiv Haasara 1 0 A 30-year-old farm laborer is killed by a Palestinian rocket fired from Gaza. 2010.03.17 Iraq Mosul 1 0 A 55-year-old Christian father is shot down in cold blood. 2010.03.17 Pakistan Khyber 5 2 Five security personnel are slain by an Islamist attack on a checkpost. 2010.03.17 Thailand Yala 1 2 Muslim militants murder a teenage boy and seriously injure his parents. 2010.03.17 Nigeria Dyie 13 6 Thirteen more Christian villagers are massacred by Muslim raiders in an overnight attack, including a mother and two children burned to death. Victims also had their tongues cut out. 2010.03.16 Pakistan Kurram 3 0 Three local tribesmen are killed in a botched kidnapping attempt by Taliban hardliners. 2010.03.16 Thailand Narathiwat 1 1 Islamic radicals shoot a 43-year-old Buddhist civilian to death. 2010.03.16 Iraq Mosul 2 0 A woman and her daughter are gunned down by Sunni terrorists. 2010.03.16 Thailand Pattani 1 1 Islamists shoot a 38-year old teacher to death in an attack that leaves his 7-year-old son injured. 2010.03.16 Iraq Mussayab 8 11 Jihadis plant two bombs on a bus that leave eight dead and eleven more in agony. 2010.03.16 India Srinagar 4 9 A salesman is among four people murdered in two separate attacks by Islamic snipers. 2010.03.15 Afghanistan Ghazni 3 0 Three civilians are shredded by a Taliban shrapnel bomb. 2010.03.15 Iraq Mosul 3 2 Three police are killed in separate Mujahideen attacks. 2010.03.15 Iraq Khaldiya 1 0 A Sunni cleric is assassinated by Religion of Peace rivals. 2010.03.15 Iraq Fallujah 8 28 A Shahid suicide bomber detonates among a group of laborers, leaving at least eight dead. 2010.03.15 Somalia Mahaday 1 0 The Christian pastor of an underground church is hunted down like an animal by Islamists and shot to death. (He was not a convert to Islam). 2010.03.14 Iraq Mosul 1 0 An imam leaving a mosque is gunned down by Religion of Peace rivals. 2010.03.14 Pakistan Khyber 2 0 An electrician is among two civilians shot to death by Islamic militants. 2010.03.14 Afghanistan Marjah 1 0 A reported beheading of a local civilian by the Taliban is confirmed. 2010.03.14 India Srinagar 1 5 Islamic militants lob a hand grenade at a police vehicle, killing one officer. 2010.03.14 Pakistan Dera Ismail Khan 1 0 Islamic terrorists kill a civilian with a landmine. 2010.03.14 Iraq Mosul 4 2 Four local cops are cut to pieces by Jihadi roadside bombers. 2010.03.13 Afghanistan Kandahar 35 52 About thirty innocent people are incinerated by a series of paradise-seeking suicide bombers 2010.03.13 Pakistan Mohmand 3 0 Three tribal members are machine-gunned to death by Religion of Peace radicals. 2010.03.13 Iraq Baghdad 3 19 Three Iraqis are taken down by a pair of Jihad blasts. 2010.03.13 Pakistan Mingora 17 51 Seventeen people at a courthouse are blown to bits by a Tehreek-e-Taliban suicide bomber pulling a rickshaw. 2010.03.12 Pakistan Lahore 62 85 Over sixty innocents are sent to Allah by two Fedayeen suicide bombers. 2010.03.12 Iraq Karbalah 2 3 A car bomb follows prayers, leaving two dead. 2010.03.12 India Srinagar 1 0 A civilian standing outside a mosque is murdered by a Mujahideen sniper. 2010.03.12 Thailand Yala 2 2 A respected police chief is murdered by Islamic bombers six months short of retirement. 2010.03.12 Iraq Zoubaa 1 1 Freedom fighters kill a young boy outside of a policeman's home. 2010.03.12 Egypt Marsa Matruh 0 23 Twenty-three Christians are injured when a Muslim mob attacks their community after rumors of a church construction. 2010.03.11 Somalia Mogadishu 2 0 Two telecom employees are dragged into the street and beheaded by Religion of Peace extremists. 2010.03.11 Pakistan Karachi 4 0 Four Sunnis are shot to death by Shiites while riding in a car. 2010.03.11 Afghanistan Kapisa 5 3 Four children and one adult are dismembered by a Taliban roadside blast. 2010.03.11 Pakistan Peshawar 4 21 A child is among four people taken down by a suicide bomber. 2010.03.11 Thailand Pattani 3 1 Three telephone company workers are shot by Mujahideen and then set on fire while still alive. 2010.03.11 Pakistan Bajaur 2 0 Two people are killed in a shooting ambush by Islamic militants. 2010.03.11 Afghanistan Paktia 3 1 Three local security personnel are murdered by fundamentalist bombers. 2010.03.11 Thailand Pattani 1 0 Islamists gun down a 61-year-old Buddhist broom salesman. 2010.03.10 Somalia Mogadishu 42 83 At least forty civilians are killed during a sustained assault by al-Shabaab militia. 2010.03.10 Pakistan Oghi 6 0 Six aid workers of a Christian charity are herded out of their office by Muslim gunmen and machine-gunned to death. 2010.03.10 Afghanistan Faryab 2 4 Two children are blown apart by a terrorist landmine. Four others are injured. 2010.03.10 Afghanistan Paktika 5 4 Five security personnel are killed by a Shahid suicide bomber. 2010.03.09 Afghanistan Khost 2 3 A Shahid suicide bomber at a military base kills two soldiers. 2010.03.09 Iraq Mosul 1 0 Sunni terrorists gun down a man at a bus station. 2010.03.09 Lebanon Hakr al-Daheri 1 0 A 24-year-old woman with a boyfriend is shot twice in the head by her brother to 'cleanse the family honor.' 2010.03.09 Somalia Mogadishu 3 0 At least three civilians are killed during an attack by Islamic militia. 2010.03.09 Somalia Mogadishu 1 0 Islamists assassinate a rival in an open-air market. 2010.03.09 Thailand Pattani 1 0 A 45-year-old salesman is shot once in the back of the head, then set on fire by Religion of Peace terrorists. 2010.03.08 Afghanistan Badghis 12 0 Ten civilians and two local cops are dismembered by two Sunni bombs. 2010.03.08 Pakistan Lahore 15 60 Fifteen people are blown to bits by a Fedayeen suicide bomber at an office park. 2010.03.08 Niger Niamey 5 0 Five members of a border patrol lose their lives to an al-Qaeda ambush. 2010.03.08 Pakistan South Waziristan 2 1 Two tribal elders are blown apart by a Taliban roadside bomb. 2010.03.08 Iraq Fallujah 2 1 Two civilians are gunned down by Sunni terrorists. 2010.03.08 Pakistan Lashkar-e-Islam 2 0 Lashkar-e-Islam gunmen take down two people in separate attacks. 2010.03.07 Yemen Sanaa 2 0 Two hospital guards are gunned down by an al-Qaeda terrorist. 2010.03.07 Pakistan Lahore 1 0 A Christian man dies during a home invasion by Muslim gunmen. 2010.03.07 Afghanistan Baghlan 19 0 At least 19 civilians are killed when the Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami fundamentalist terror groups clash. 2010.03.07 Pakistan Orakzai 1 0 The beheaded body of a tribal elder is found a few days after his abduction by the Taliban. 2010.03.07 Iraq Baghdad 51 140 Over fifty Iraqis are taken down in a series of bomb blasts and shootings around the country by Mujahideen intent on disrupting elections. 2010.03.07 India Srinagar 1 0 A 30-year-old shopkeeper is murdered by Islamic gunmen. 2010.03.07 Nigeria Dogo Nahauwa 528 600 Over five-hundred Christians, mostly women and children, are hacked to death by Muslim raiders with machetes in a night-time attack on their village. The killers yelled 'Allah Akbar,' as they chopped. 2010.03.06 Iraq Garma 1 2 A woman is taken out by a Jihadi bomber. 2010.03.06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 A taxi driver dies after a savage machete attack by Muslim separatists. 2010.03.06 Iraq Najaf 4 54 Four Shia pilgrims are killed when Sunni radicals bomb a shrine. 2010.03.05 Iraq Mussayab 1 0 A child is blown apart by Mujahideen bombers. 2010.03.05 Pakistan Hangu 12 35 At least four women are among a dozen dead Shiites after a Sunni suicide bomber detonates near a passenger bus. 2010.03.04 Afghanistan Kandahar 5 0 Five construction workers are shot to pieces at point-blank range by Islamic terrorists. 2010.03.04 Pakistan Chamarkand 1 0 One person is killed when religious extremists attack a security post with rockets. 2010.03.04 Iraq Baghdad 17 61 Three separate Jihad bombings take the lives of seventeen people, including voters waiting in line. 2010.03.03 Somalia Mogadishu 12 49 Children are among those killed during an al-Shabaab assault. 2010.03.03 Iraq Mosul 1 0 An imam is gunned down in his mosque by Religion of Peace rivals. 2010.03.03 Iraq Baquba 33 55 Three Shahid suicide bombers take down more than thirty Iraqis in coordinated attacks. 2010.03.03 Iraq Kirkuk 2 0 Terrorists stab a man and his wife to death inside their home
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
ET TU BRUTUS AND YOU THOMAS FRIEDMAN
Posted by Truth Provider, May 3, 2010. |
|
Unfortunately, like too many liberal left Jews in America (Martin Indyk springs to mind), Thomas Friedman is a Jewish Brutus. He is smug enough and has the chutzpa to sit in NY and pontificate to Israelis for whom they should vote and what they should think and do. No, neither he nor his family live in Kfar Saba, some 3 miles from a proposed "Palestinian" state. Thomas Friedman pushes two agendas, his own and that one of his master — President Obama. An article by Yitzhak Sivosh about Thomas Friedman was published last week in the excellent Hebrew weekly Internet magazine Maraah (Mirror). See link below. Luckily, a translation of the interesting article exists and here it is. Your Truth Provider,
|
|
He knows that PM Netanyahu has made a major shift in ideology and policy and embraced the 'Two States Two Peoples' concept, which has been praised by Secretary Hillary Clinton as a great step towards peace, yet, Friedman claims that Netanyahu is as dangerous to peace and the welfare of his own people as a drunk driver at the wheel. Demonizing leaders of Democratic states is a common practice in Iran or Somalia, but is something which is 'not done' in the western press, much less among allies. But Thomas Friedman is an honorable man. He knows that the US assistance to the IL defense budget is fully paid to American Defense and Aerospace industry which is, as a result, testing & evaluating its products and then promoting them worldwide. He knows this money is spent inside the US as salaries to local employees, yet, he makes a linkage between this aid and US unemployment. But Thomas Friedman is an honorable man. He is aware of all proposals made by Israel ever since 1967 to the Palestinians, sometimes bold enough to raise eyebrows among American policy makers and a pistol by an Israeli assassin, all of which have been rejected, the end of the day, by Palestinian leaders. Now he feels deeply frustrated with the situation for the last 40 years, putting all the blame on Netanyahu. And Thomas Friedman is an honorable man. So, what went wrong? With the two times Pulitzer Prize winner, it's the addiction to power, the ability not only to report and analyze, but the ambition to affect and make news. Addiction to power, as any addiction, is mostly detached from realities, and therefore, the fact that nearly a million Jews must evaporate in order to comply with "Friedman's Solution" of restoring cease-fire border lines from the year 1949 doesn't bother him. Nor the fact that the withdraw of Jews from the Gaza strip "dead or alive" (cemeteries too) implemented by PM Sharon has only strengthened extremists and aggravated the non-stop shelling to the south of Israel. In Michael Cimino's film 'Year of the Dragon' Capt. Stanley White, played by Mickey Rourke, says that 'it's not the booze, nor the drugs that will bring America down on its knees, it's the media..'. Many of the modern prophets of America came from Hollywood, and some of them were indeed, stoned /blacklisted /crucified. It seems that this time they might be right. In one word the problem is addiction. Certainly, complicated situation are too intricate than to be described in one word, yet, system engineers (which is my line of business) try to classify problems and identify where they stem from, in order to be able to explain to managers (sometimes they listen..) what is "Yes, we can", what is "We can, but..", and what "No, we can't". So, let's see. In the case of the Media, the answer is: No we can't. It's unrealistic that people who have been addicted to such power without any responsibility to results, will ever rehabilitate. On the bright side, the public is becoming more immune. Militant Muslims, who have been addicted to Jihad and murder narratives, obsessed with oppressing the weak, whether women children or ethnic minorities may rehabilitate, but this process will take 100 years rather than two. The bright side is, however, Muslims have managed to develop over centuries of ups and downs in history 'Tahdiya' and 'Hudna' mechanisms to deal with superior adversaries and adapt to the realities, without losing face. But there is problem of addiction on behalf of US Defense decision makers: to charts, presentations and paper shuffling, instead of a 'Maximum Effort' in order to make the necessary superiority happen, in a clear cut and swift fashion. As explained by Lara M. Dadkhah on Herald Tribune of Feb. 18th in 'Empty skies over Afghanistan', "Heart and minds" strategy will not work. She warns against folly ideas and strategies and claims that 'it's only a matter of time before the Taliban see flares and flyovers for what they are: empty threats'. This will not result in victory nor a will for 'Hudna'. Blaming Israel for that situation looks like another symptom of an addict. The US as a whole is a sinking ship plagued by addiction to: drugs, short term vision, celebs culture, public relations & media. It's a magnificent ship, unprecedented in terms of beauty, modern culture & ideas, which has spread hope & aid around the globe. Sinking, but she has not gone down yet, and with the right will and command, it may (and hopefully will) recover, not tomorrow, though, and not in a painless rehabilitation process. As for Israel, it has been addicted to the US, which has not come without a price; the American defense aid has distorted priorities, among commanders and politicians alike. It's enough to evaluate achievements during the first 20 years as an independent state, winning decisively three wars of survival, avoiding annihilation, despite American embargo on military exports. Then, a shift in American policy came, together with aid and the resulting "addiction", but not with a better performance, so to speak. This could be averted, and the sooner the better. Yitzhak Sivosh
PS: I wish to thank my friend Adv. Leslie Henan for his comments, for which I am grateful. *Antony's cynical repetitive statement from Julius Caesar, by Shakespeare Originally published in the Israeli Maraah Magazine
Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
US TARGETS ISRAEL AS ANTI-NUKE CONFERENCE BEGINS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 3, 2010. |
|
The United States is working with both Egypt and Russia to rid Israel of its nuclear weapons, as part of a comprehensive plan to neutralize Iran's nuclear power. Reports of this nature are being reported in various news media. The Guardian (London) reports that the US and Russia have drafted an initiative to ban nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East, while the Wall Street Journal says the Obama Administration is considering support for a "nuclear-free Middle East." The Guardian adds that the proposal involves the appointment of a special coordinator to conduct exploratory talks with Israel, Iran and the Arab states, followed by a regional conference. It is to be a central issue at an anti-proliferation United Nations conference beginning Monday in New York. According to the Wall Street Journal report, the US is strongly considering opposing Israeli nuclear weapons more strongly than it ever has before. However, the US government has, at the same time, sent Jerusalem a message designed to calm Israeli anxieties on the matter, stating that the U.S. would not take such a drastic approach before it sees significant progress in the peace process between Israel and the Arab nations. Specifically, Ellen Tauscher, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, said the conditions are not right "unless all members of the region participate, which would be unlikely unless there is a comprehensive peace plan which is accepted." Such a message is actually not very calming, in that it does not state that there must be "peace" before the U.S. would take such a position. Furthermore, it is widely felt in Israel that its nuclear potential is as critical for maintaining peace as it is during times of war. This may not be Israel's official position, however — at least according to the Wall Street Journal. An Israeli source is quoted in the report as saying that Jerusalem's vision is one of a Middle East without weapons of mass destruction, but that this must occur only as the climax of a peace process with all nations of the region. The UN conference, held every five years, is to begin with an address by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose nuclear program and soon-expected capabilities have thrown the region into turmoil. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will also address the conference on Monday. "The last NPT conference in 2005 ended in collapse," the Journal reported, "but U.S. officials said they have been laying the groundwork for this conference for nearly a year." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com). |
|
FROM ISRAEL: A MEASURE OF CONSOLATION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 3, 2010. |
|
My posting yesterday was so grim — and prompted such deservedly pessimistic responses from readers — that I thought it important to share this perspective, newly acquired, that offers a measure of hope. It seems our government, while feeling coerced by direct or implicit pressure to play the diplomatic game of "proximity negotiations," does not intend to do so passively. It seems it's going to come out fighting, within the confines of that game. This can make a huge difference. There are two respects in which I see this happening: First, there is the matter of core issues, which we agreed to discuss in the indirect talks even though we had originally indicated a preference for core issue discussion only face-to-face. Now the question is what "core issue" do the talks begin with. The Palestinian Arabs want it to be the issue of borders. You know, like in: Israel moves back to '67 lines first, and then we can discuss other things. No, no, Netanyahu is saying, we've got to talk about security arrangements in Judea and Samaria, and water rights first. According to Haaretz, Netanyahu recently asked the defense establishment and the National Security Council to further elaborate upon a previous brief that lists Israel's security demands in terms of a permanent status agreement. The original document included conditions regarding Israeli monitoring of Palestinian border terminals, freedom of Israeli aviation in Palestinian airspace, Israeli control of the electromagnetic spectrum and early warning stations in Judea and Samaria. Netanyahu wants to add to this detailed information regarding the demilitarization of any future Palestinian state and the deployment of Israeli forces on its eastern border to prevent weapons smuggling. They're going to love this. ~~~~~~~~~~ I add here that Netanyahu, it is being said, intends to keep the negotiating team small to prevent leaks. ~~~~~~~~~~ Of considerable significance with regard to the talks is a press conference that Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon held this morning with director of the Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), Itamar Marcus. Israel, said Ayalon, had agreed to starting proximity talks with no pre-conditions. But Israel does have "logical and moral demands" concerning the ongoing anti-Israel incitement that is rampant in the PA-controlled areas. It's about time! This is a huge issue that has not been exposed sufficiently. Now, it was announced, PMW will have a new campaign to publicize the PA incitement, which exists in all levels of the Palestinian Arab society. ~~~~~~~~~~ A new TV ad that was produced by PMW and has been shown on CNN and Fox News was screened at the press conference. It makes note of the fact that the Obama administration has condemned glorification of terrorists, and then goes on to show the ways in which the PA continues to glorify them. "If terrorist are glorified," asks the narrator, "how can there be peace?" Said Marcus, "This glorification of terrorists is the ultimate incitement, putting its stamp of approval on these terrorists and telling the children: 'Here are your heroes.' We are now starting this campaign in order that the peace process can be genuine and not go nowhere just because the hatred continues so strongly." Ayalon indicated that the findings of the PMW would be put on the negotiating table. Continued Marcus, "I think it's critical... This will give the Israel government an opportunity to put these issues in front of the Palestinians in a very public way, and hopefully, with the world's attention and that of the U.S. government, the Palestinians will stop this incitement." Stop? I don't know about that. What I do know is that this puts the PA on the defensive, big time. Every single agreement, starting with Oslo called for the complete elimination of incitement. The PA charges us with destroying opportunities for peace because we plan housing, while at the very same time it is inciting its people to acts of violence. This puts the shoe on the other foot. And since many people are not aware of what the PA is doing in this regard, it will affect public opinion as well. ~~~~~~~~~~ A most significant point is this: As Marcus explained, "There cannot be such glorification of terrorists without a large infrastructure of hatred behind it." Israel is being demonized and the right of Israel to exist is being delegitimized. The PA claims that the violence from its people is simply a reaction to the illegitimate presence of Israel, a defensive "resistance." But when it becomes clear that the violence is actually promoted and initiated by the leaders of the PA, this argument is deflected. ~~~~~~~~~~ I would hope, as well, that this might take just a bit of the wind out of Obama's pro-Palestinian stance. All too well do I remember the recent faux hysteria we saw because we announced plans to build in Ramat Shlomo while Biden was here, while at the same time there was American silence while the PA was honoring the worst of terrorists. But it becomes impossible to ignore this incitement once it is exposed publicly in a truly vigorous fashion. Neither can Obama charge Israel with being obstructive within the "peace process" for raising this issue, for it is very much to the point with regard to genuine peace, and something the president is on record as being concerned about. If we play our cards right, this might hold up a good deal. As well it should. Ayalon concluded with, "True peace must be built on a foundation of trust between the parties. The continuation of incitement on the part of the Palestinians will not help build trust and understanding between us. Therefore, before the start of the talks, the PA must decide if it is a partner for true peace and stop the ongoing incitement and boycotts against Israel." This is not a PR gimmick, this is very very real, and very much to the point. Asking us to make peace with an entity that incites against us is ludicrous. ~~~~~~~~~~ About those boycotts referred to by Ayalon: Some months ago the PA made a decision to boycott all goods, agricultural and otherwise, produced in the communities of Judea and Samaria. They also decided to prevent Palestinians Arabs from working on construction in Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria. When this happened, Dr. Aaron Lerner did some research and discovered that this action is in defiance of the Oslo Accords. ANNEX IV Protocol on Economic Relations between the Government of the State of Israel and the P.L.O., representing the Palestinian people Paris, April 29, 1994 of the Gaza Jericho Agreement states: #1. " The agricultural produce of both sides will have free and unrestricted access to each others' markets" #2. "There will be free movement of industrial goods free of any restrictions" #3. As for labor, the agreement enables the PA to independently limit the flow of Israeli workers into the area under the control of the PA but not the flow of Palestinian workers out while calling for the sides to "attempt to maintain the normality of movement of labor." ~~~~~~~~~~ The Knesset Economic Affairs Committee has just held its second hearing on the matter of the boycott. It called for the prime minister to raise the issue immediately when the talks begin. The demand will be that the PA stop the boycott with the initiation of the talks. Said Danny Ayalon, who was at the hearing, "If the boycott continues, it may damage the progress of the talks..." A variety of measures are being considered to combat this boycott, beyond raising the issue at the talks, such as blocking Palestinian use of Israeli ports for importing goods. ~~~~~~~~~~ I can hear Obama mumbling... "Damn, I finally pushed the Palestinians to the talks. And now the Israelis are going to raise all these issues that will put them on the defensive and make it harder to get them to cooperate." ~~~~~~~~~~ Coming soon: The good news about the Second San Remo Conference. ~~~~~~~~~~ I reported yesterday that, while there were rumors that Obama had threatened to stop supporting us via veto of anti-Israeli resolutions at the UN Security Council, a US official had claimed this was not so. Now I have this further clarification: According to two different sources, what the US did to bring the PA on board for negotiations is promise to consider abstaining if there were a resolution brought to the Security Council condemning our building in Ramat Shlomo. But at the same time the US would continue to veto broader condemnations of Israel. This is not good, needless to say. But parenthetically I note that if this is what was promised — that maybe the US wouldn't block a UN condemnation of building in Ramat Shlomo — then perhaps the claim by the PA that the US promised that we would stop building in eastern Jerusalem was, indeed, no more than its own spin. I would guess this to be the case at this point. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ACADEMICS STUCK IN LEFT FIELD
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 3, 2010. |
|
The following was posted by me today to the chat list of Israeli social science professors: |
|
So let us sum up the learned discussion on the list regarding syllabi and related matters to date. The predominant opinion seems to be that course syllabi should be filled with "criticism," but that no one should ever be permitted to criticize academic "critics," because criticizing academic "critics" is McCarthyism and harms academic freedom. Better yet, why not expand the number of courses at Israeli universities that consist entirely of "criticism," and in which "criticism" is mandatory and enforced? Meanwhile, people like the Im Tirtzu students, the Knesset education committee members, or the watchdog groups like NGO Monitor and Isracampus should have no right to criticize "critics." After all, such people are threats to academic freedom and accordingly should be made to wear special stars on their clothing, if not banished outright to critical re-education camps in the Arava with names like Newmangrad. Now one way of dealing with university courses that contain "criticism," including Marxist critique, anti-Zionism and Israel bashing, is to label them with warning labels. That way students will know what they are signing up to get. After all, cigarette packets contain warning labels. So why can't we just have warning labels along the lines such as, "This course contains Marxist indoctrination," or "This course contains postmodernist content that interferes with brain activity" ?? More generally, it should be clear to all that the term "criticism" is commonly misused in academia to refer to Marxist "analysis" and to the "posts." The Marxist component includes things like Foucault, Hobsbawn, Shenhav, Peled, and so on. The "posts" include postmodernism, post-structuralism, post-colonialism, deconstruction, and other things that apparently get their "post" names because they are invented by bored clerks in post offices waiting for people to come in to pick up packages. Curiously, the Social Science list recently carried numerous postings denouncing pornography. But pornography merely demeans the human body. Marxism destroys the human body (the biggest cause of mass starvation in the 20th century was Marxism) as well as the human mind and soul. So just like we would all want a warning label for a university course in which porn is shown to students in massively overflowing lecture halls, should not a course filled with Marxist mandatory criticism also carry a warning label? And speaking of post-colonialist thought and starvation, should not critical Israeli political science courses contain the critical analysis of the great post-colonialist thinker Robert Mugabe? A few years back he seriously proposed putting the absence of food in Zimbabwe to advantage by developing weight-loss tourism. Fat people from the capitalist world would be invited to tour Zimbabwe and not eat. There are so many imaginative ways that the money of the Israeli taxpayer can be put to use in manufacturing criticism!
U.S. RENEWS STATE OF EMERGENCY OVER SYRIA The U.S. has renewed its state of emergency vis-à-vis Syria. Although Syria has improved blockage of fighters crossing from it into Iraq, Syria continues supporting and arming terrorists (IMRA, 5/5/10). The U.S. has been trying to "engage" with Syria. 
TURKEY ON IRAN'S NUCLEAR OF EMERGENY OVER SYRIA 
Turkey's Foreign Minister Davutoglu said that Turkey does not want sanctions placed on Iran, but wants Iran to be transparent with the International Atomic Energy Association and give guarantees that its nuclear facilities are just industrial, not military, so there is no need for sanctions and tension (IMRA, 5/5/10). If Turkey had come up with that a couple of years ago, it could have been most helpful. It may be too late. Iran could just stall in the negotiations over this, just as it has stalled in other negotiations. Iran's bad faith is obvious.
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist,
a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author
of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and
satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic
community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
OBAMA TELLS PALESTINIANS THAT ISRAEL IS TO BLAME
Posted by Chuck Brooks, May 3, 2010. |
|
This was written by Staff, Israel Today, |
|
US President Barack Obama made clear in a recent letter to the Palestinians that he views Israel as the obstacle to peace and will approach further peace efforts from that point of view, according to senior Palestinian Authority officials. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat confirmed for the Bethlehem-based Ma'an news agency that such a letter was sent, and that in it Obama "clarified the US stance on the peace process and Israel's intransigence on the issue of settlements." Erekat said that the letter contained several assurances to the Palestinians, but refused to go into detail. A day earlier, London newspaper The Guardian reported on what one of those assurances may be — a proposal to start backing official UN condemnation of any and all Israeli "settlement activity." Washington has traditionally used its veto power to block any UN resolutions that would put Israel in a difficult position vis-à-vis allowing Jews to build on their ancestral and biblical lands. If the US were to stop vetoing such resolutions, which would likely result in an increase in condemnation, Israel could be forced to implement an unofficial Jewish building freeze across the board and for an unlimited amount of time. That report would seem to fit with the more vague account of assurances another Palestinian official said the letter contained. PA secretary general Tayeb Abdel Rahim on Sunday told reporters that the letter made the usual commitments to an independent Palestinian state with territorial continuity. Rahim also said that Obama promised to start publicly assigning blame to those he sees holding up peace and to force Israel into indefinitely extending its temporary settlement freeze. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implemented the 10-month freeze at the behest of Washington in order to test the Palestinians' readiness to return to the negotiating table. When it was first announced last November, US officials praised Netanyahu for taking "unprecedented" steps for peace. Now that it is clear the Palestinians are not going to respond in kind, the Obama administration appears to be blaming Netanyahu for not having done enough. Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com |
|
REDEEM OUR BROTHER, JONATHAN SON OF THE QUEEN
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, May 3, 2010. |
|
This was written by Rabbi Shmuel Yaniv a well-known Torah scholar,
author, poet and expert on Torah Codes. He is the chief Rabbi of Givat
Shmuel. His talent as a writer and poet are readily evident in the
original Hebrew version of the letter that he recently wrote to
Jonathan Pollard:
|
|
To our dear brother Jonathan Pollard, shlita "Then David lamented...over Jonathan...the pride of Israel...how the heroes have fallen in battle!" (2 Samuel Ch:1) How apt are the words of King David, the sweet singer of Israel, to describe your valor, Jonathan, comparable to the glory of days of old. You, Jonathan, son of the Queen (ben Malka) have comported yourself with the same fearless devotion to your People as your namesake, Jonathan, son of King Saul. The Bible tells us of the first battle waged by King Saul: "The Philistines gathered to wage war against Israel with thirty thousand chariots...cavalry and foot soldiers as numerous as the sand of the seashore." When the Israelites saw the might of their enemy, they fled the killing field: "They hid in caves and in fortresses and in rocks and in towers and in pits." (I Samuel 13:6) When the Nation of Israel fled the field of battle field in despair, only Jonathan did not fear. Jonathan alone went out to fight the Philistines, who at that time were the rulers of The Land. Valiantly, he stood alone against a vast and mighty nation. With awesome might and Heavenly salvation, he miraculously vanquished the enemy. In return, his reward and recompense from the Kingdom he served was to have a death sentence decreed upon him! Unbeknownst to Jonathan, who had gone out to do battle on his own, his father, King Saul, had ordered the Israelites — on pain of death — "not to eat food until the evening" (I Samuel 14:24). Jonathan did not hear the King's command and innocently ate some honey in the forest. When it became known, King Saul was forced to declare, albeit with a heavy heart, that "Jonathan must be put to death" (I Samuel 14:42 to end of chapter). But the Nation arose in Jonathan's defense and cried out against the decree. "The People said to Saul, 'Shall Jonathan, who has wrought this great salvation in Israel, die? Heaven forbid! As the Lord lives, not a hair of his head shall be harmed, for he has acted for God's sake this day!" "And the People redeemed Jonathan and he did not die." (I Samuel 14:45). Our own beloved Jonathan also acted alone to save the nation of Israel from a holocaust which was plotted by Saddam Hussein. The devilish despot of Baghdad planned to wipe the Jewish State off the face of the earth using unconventional weapons of war. You, Jonathan, averted the disaster by sacrificing your own promising future and supplied us with intelligence information, with a sincere and pure heart, so that we could avert impending doom. But instead of bestowing the Nobel Peace Prize on you, or at least the Israel Prize, the Powers-that-Be demand your head, and afflict you within an inch of your life, keeping you endlessly buried alive in a prison. Between you Jonathan son of the Queen, and Jonathan son of King Saul, only one difference remains: you still have not been redeemed by your nation. The Heavenly indictment against us hovers as a terrible sin upon our heads, for our callousness and our indifference to your plight — so as not to annoy the foreign "Rulers of the Land" across the ocean. Jonathan son of King Saul chose to safeguard the welfare of the People of Israel, even at his own expense, even at the expense of his father's house. He therefore relinquished his right to inherit the crown of his father, King Saul, and transferred the kingship to David who he knew was worthy of being anointed King over Israel, and for this Jonathan was pursued.. You too, righteous Jonathan, saved Israel at your own expense. Your pure soul would not allow you to repeat the crime of silence perpetrated by the American Jewish leaders, throughout the Second World War. They held their peace and not a single airplane was ever sent to bomb the railroad tracks to the death camps in Europe — millions of Jews who went to their deaths might otherwise have been saved. The most phenomenally impressive thing about you, Jonathan, is how — despite all you did to save the life of the Nation and all you received in return was our ingratitude — yet you continue to judge us favorably and you still plead our cause. Even more amazing is the selflessness you demonstrate, refusing to accept your freedom, if the price for it is the release of the terrorist mastermind, Barghouti. For all of these things, the Jewish Nation will yet sing songs of praise to you, noble spirit that you are, and harbinger of our eternal redemption. I must also direct my words to all our dear brethren: Let our hearts overflow with compassion for our remarkable brother, Jonathan son of the Queen. Let us accept responsibility to take action: with our prayers, our pocketbooks, with our letters, our demonstrations and our protests. We must not rest! The Jewish people must find a way to redeem Jonathan! With love and admiration,
Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at their website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org |
|
PERSIA/SYRIA VS ARABS/US; NGO DISQUALIFICATIONS; JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS: OIL PURCHASES AND TERRORISM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 3, 2010. |
|
OBAMA UNDERMINES DEMOCRATS' SUPPORT AGAINST IRAN AND FOR ISRAEL American support for Israel had always been bipartisan. Since Obama became influential, that support has been declining among Democrats and growing among independents and Republicans. Overall, Americans' support for Israel is growing, as their support for Democrats is shrinking. Congress used to pass resolutions supporting Israel by large numbers. Now, many Democrats do not sponsor or vote for them. AIPAC long has emphasized the bi-partisan nature of U.S. support for Israel. It is slow to recognize the uncomfortable new situation, now that President Obama has been campaigning against Israel and instituting policies against it. Most AIPAC leaders are themselves Democrats. To the extent that AIPAC recognizes the new situation, it urges Republicans to tone down the resolutions they sponsor, so as to garner more support for them. More numerical support for lower quality of resolutions. Another effect of Obama's incumbency showed up when he asked Democrats in Congress to water down a bill authorizing sanctions. By lowering the quality of sanctions, insufficient to do the job, Obama has made a farce of the sanction effort. [He had said that sanctions were really the only way to halt Iranian nuclear weapons development]. Some Republicans are making a campaign issue of Obama's withdrawal of support from Israel and his favoring the Arabs. Other Republicans follow AIPAC's reluctance to expose the falling off of Democratic support for Israel. Actually, if Republicans challenged Democrats to support strong resolutions, many would. Then, when Republicans make major mid-term electoral gains, if they have gotten Congressional Democrats to criticize Obama on his Israeli policy, Obama would be less able to wreak serious damage. In this way, Republicans could encourage Democrats back to sensible strategic positions. The answer is to play to strength, not to appeasement. [Obama is too radical for soft treatment to keep him more moderate. He plays rough. So should his critics.] For example, let Congressional candidates announce that if the P.A. declares unilateral statehood, they would cut off U.S. aid to the P.A. and would not authorize a U.S. embassy for it. They would be in a position to keep Obama, if he chooses to do so, from cutting off arms to Israel that would be needed against Israel. Obama has not only cold-shouldered America's Israeli ally, but also betrayed or offended Colombia, Honduras, Britain, Poland, the Czech Republic, Japan, South Korea, and others. If Congress helps keep American faith with Israel, America's other allies will not be so dismayed (Caroline Glick in (IMRA, 5/1/10). Obama explains his watering down of proposed sanctions as the only way to get Russia and China to go along with them. There is no indication that they would go along with them anyway. If the diluted sanctions cannot work, they have no value. Perhaps Obama is wiling to let Iran get nuclear weapons. His array of weak policies, procrastination, anti-American apologies without gaining foreign support, etc., support this theory. INTERNATIONAL SOCCER ASSOCIATION RESCINDS BAN ON ISLAMIC DRESS 
FIFA, the Federation Internationale de Football Association rescinded its ban on Muslim female wearing of Islamic dress during official competition, as violating official rules (IMRA, 5/1/10). The reversal was worded vaguely. Don't want to be too clear about eating crow? The reason for the reversal was not clear, but there had been objection. Do readers think the rules of sports dress serve a purpose and make sense, or that religious observance deserves top priority? 
Iran called "extremist" and uninformed Arab leaders attempting to change the long-used name of the Gulf from Persian to Arab. The government of Iran called those Arabs jealous because Iran never fell under colonial rule. The government asserted that the Persian nation never gives in to foreign demands. Syria condemned the U.S. for accepting false Israeli claims that Syria is supplying Hizbullah with Scud missiles. The government of Syria interprets U.S. acceptance as preparation for a war on Syria like the war on Iraq. The U.S., it claims, over-supplies Israel with weapons (IMRA, 5/1/10). The Arabs do try to change names and meanings of words and history (such as "terrorism," "non-violent" rock-throwing and fire-bombing), but the Iranian reaction seems melodramatic, not quite sober. The U.S. gives and sells arms like any arms dealer, without much scruple. What about the annual U.S. $2 billion subsidy of Egypt's military and its military aid to the Lebanese Army and Fatah forces? Syria should not object, not while it violates with profligacy the UN Security Council ban on rearming Hizbullah. The U.S. has not accepted Israel's claim and often does not, but it is concerned about the possibility of destabilizing Scuds being delivered. The U.S. does not want another war to start. Perhaps Syria has not noticed, but the U.S. is trying to "engage" with it and is trying to disengage from the two wars it is waging. Will Obama ever realize that Syria jilted this engagement?
EGYPT CRACKING DOWN ON SMUGGLERS' TUNNELS? Egypt declared a state of emergency at the Sinai-Gaza border, after receiving reports that Arabs in Hamas plan to break through it. Egypt recently blew up a couple of tunnels from Sinai to Gaza. Medics claimed that Egypt also pumped gas into one of the tunnels. Egypt denies it. Smugglers complain that Egypt regularly destroys tunnels, these days (IMRA, 5/1/10). Egypt has been concerned that once Palestinian Arab terrorists got into Sinai, they would plan operations against Egypt. Terrorists have attacked Egypt. Egypt's concerned is complicated by the traditional Bedouin role of smuggling. The Bedouin defend themselves forcefully against police efforts to stop them. My source about the tunnels, IMRA, long has been skeptical of Egyptian claims to be cracking down. Egypt could do so simply, but partly because of Bedouin opposition, has not. Instead, it has claimed to do so. IMRA explained that Egypt would destroy a couple of tunnels in a photo-op, claim to be cracking down, but leave hundreds of other tunnels operational. Is this a real crackdown?
DISQUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS OF UN COMMITTEES MOCK UN Here are the UN committees and their member' disqualifications taken from the State Dep[t. survey of 2009. UN Committee On NGOS This committee determines which NGOs get UN passes and may participate in UN meetings. Sudan expelled 13 foreign humanitarian NGOs and shut 3 domestic ones. The government arrested, harassed, and accused of crimes officials of NGOs. Cuba prohibits domestic NGOs and denies Red Cross access to political prisoners. China does not permit domestic NGOs to comment on humanitarian conditions. It restricts NGOs advocating for women, the disabled, and minorities. NGOs are required to find a government sponsor, to register. Pakistan denied visas to international staff of humanitarian organizations. Terrorists murdered seven staff members and threatened others. UN Commission On Social Development The commission fosters full, decent employment, integrates social and economic policy, and makes public sector more efficient. Egypt is a source and destination for trafficking in women and children in forced labor. Strikes are prohibited; employers abuse, overwork, and endanger children and undocumented domestics and other workers. Zimbabwe exploits girls sexually, lets children work without safety measures, and forcibly evicts people from businesses. Cuba bans free unions, bars dissidents from work, and imprisons people who refuse mandatory work assignments. UN Commission On The Status Of Women Democratic Republic of the Congo troops rape about a thousand women a month. Their families rarely protest, lest it dishonor them. If victims are married, their husbands desert them. If not, their families may make them marry the rapists. Iran is known to be no champion of women. UN Commission For Sustainable Development Angola arrests NGO workers, traffics in people, and discriminates against indigenous people and the disabled. Espousal abuse common. Prison guards regularly rape female prisoners. Child labor common, including in drug trafficking. Lebanon denies descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees citizenship. Employers abuse servants, husbands abuse wives, children engage in forced labor, white slavery common, homosexuals discriminated against, and "honor killings" receive lesser punishment. Saudi Arabia ethnic, religious, and national prejudice common. Women restricted in whether they can leave the house, where they may go, and in inheritance and weight to their testimony. Millions of foreign workers are unprotected and many are abused. UN Human Settlements Program Iran ransacks houses and offices of reformist journalists, confiscates Bahai religious material and real estate, and discriminates against women's property rights (IMRA, 5/2/10 from EYEontheUN). Some of these conditions exist in countries that the State Dept. would consider civilized. But they are not condoned or widespread.
TIMES SQ., NEW YORK BOMB ATTEMPT The car bomb fizzled, but it could have been lethal. Noticing smoke coming from an SUV parked in Times Square, whose flashers were on, vendors called police. The New York bomb squad disabled the device. A couple of hundred pounds of explosives wired to clocks and detonators were set to kill, but fortunately for us New Yorkers, the perpetrator lacked the skill to make it work. Police are tracing the car, the materiel, and people shown in surveillance cameras. They are concerned that terrorists are switching to smaller-scale attacks, whose plots and preparation are less detectable and preventable. The crime was attempted on Saturday night at that "crossroads of the world," where my friends' 11-year-old granddaughter, Alexandra, as fine a child as one could wish for, was walking. A Manhattan resident commented, this is what terrorists do, destroy, not create. Popular discussion shows a sense of relief at New Yorkers' good fortune since 9/11 in having skilled police and in the difficulties of bomb-making, mixed with a sense of foreboding that time is running out (New York Times and Wall St. J., 5/3). What cause would justify the blind murder of Alexandra? How long will it be before Americans get fed up with the ideological and religious support for international terrorism against innocent people in order to intimidate resistance to the Islamists' 7h century social repression? Will political correctness and radical multi-culturalism hold American outrage at bay forever? Possibly. Publishers and speakers at colleges are being intimidated from criticizing the terrorists' ideology, while organizations the promote it enjoy free speech. Of course, in a few cases, and this incident may be such a one, the terrorist may be unhinged individuals. But most terrorist attacks nowadays are by radical Muslims who have an international support network of an ideology seeded by their religion, radicalized by jihadist recruiters, financed by terrorist fronts to which ordinary Muslims donate, and advised and trained by experts in foreign havens. Our government takes some steps to disrupt the network. The effort seems insufficiently intense and thwarted by lack of a comprehensive strategy and a legal framework. Our enemies make fools of us over our tolerant and democratic ways. We have our own fools — a President and Attorney-General, who intended to spend a couple of hundred millions dollars a year trying terrorists in New York, giving them the publicity they crave.
NEW U.S. NUCLEAR PLAN FOR MIDEAST The new U.S. policy ostensibly against a Mideast nuclear arms race is becoming clearer. The U.S. finds that the anti-proliferation treaty is a dyke with a big hole. "Cheating, though, has proved difficult to detect and almost impossible to punish. What has provoked demands for Iran to halt enrichment — along with three rounds of UN sanctions and the threat of another — is its history of deception and continuing refusal to answer central questions about its nuclear program." Iran's march to the nuclear weapons "club" deceives no one but diehard supporters of Iran's clerical regime. Every Arab state has begun nuclear development of its own, all professing the same non-military intent. They do have a reasonable argument to preserve scarce oil for revenue, and to use their revenue before that resource depletes. The U.S. is trying to head off the military application of nuclear technology. The new policy is to sell these countries the nuclear fuel their power plants need, cheaper than those countries could prepare the fuel from ore, themselves. The less the countries process fuel, the less they could convert it into military grade. The United Arab Emirates already agreed to the plan. An unspoken argument for the plan is that three clandestine nuclear weapons plants in the Mideast have been bombed. Iraq bombed Iran's, in Saddam's time. Saddam's and Assad's were bombed by Israel. [On the other hand, Iran's new facility, Pakistan's and North Koreas' were not.] Turkey has just signed deals with Russia and South Korea to evaluate sites for nuclear reactors. Jordan is taking bids for a reactor. Saudi Arabia announced plans for a "nuclear city." Egypt plans several reactors. Egypt is trying to extend the U.S. policy into one of rolling back Israel's nuclear facilities (William J. Broad, David E. Sanger, NY Times, 5/4/10, A4). Read between the lines and one finds that Egypt is piggybacking on this issue to remove Israel's deterrent. The Arabs are not worried about Israel's nuclear capability, so long as they do not try to conquer Israel. The Arabs do consider Iran's nuclear capability an offensive one. Therefore, the Obama administration claim that it needs to resolve the Arab-Israel conflict in order to rally the Arabs to back sanctions against Iran is specious. The claim is undermined by the Administration's own muting of proposed sanctions because it knows that strong sanctions cannot pass in the Security Council. If Iran is not to be prevented from developing nuclear weapons, how can the U.S. expect there not to be a nuclear arms race? The U.S. offers the Mideast the same nuclear umbrella it offered Europe. Now that the Obama administration has rebuffed or betrayed a number of allies, and has wooed and appeased a number of enemies, how can foreign countries let themselves become dependent upon the U.S.. To be fair, the "pax Americana" has kept the world from deteriorating into the open, global warfare of my childhood. It is time for more foreign countries to rise to the occasion and share in this responsibility. The development of long-range missiles makes a regional plan too limited.
U.S. ENTERS RAW MATERIALS RACE WITH CHINA AND OTHERS Years ago, the Pentagon had large stockpiles of strategic raw materials. It sold much of that off as no longer vital. It lacks authority to secure certain other materials needed for the foreseeable future. It requests such authority. It takes a couple of years for such a program to get going. Other countries have been stockpiling or securing access to strategic raw materials. Rare earths originate mostly in China. The Pentagon finally woke up to the fact that the planet's resources are limited and more countries can afford to contract for them (Liam Pleven, Wall St. J., 5/4/10, A3). For years, China has been shutting the U.S. and other countries out of raw materials by a combination of outright purchase, political support for unsavory regimes, and self-serving foreign aid. As the long-term oil contracts multiplied, the effect of having a free market diminished. I was wondering when the U.S. would wake up. Why does it take the U.S. two years minimum, to launch a vital program? Government takes long for everything, these days. The laws are long, detailed, confusing, and require much coordination. The laws usually call for even lengthier regulations to be proposed and reviewed. Then organizations that do not like aspects of the laws and regulations sue. Specifications for contracts go into tiny detail, making it take years for certain construction in New York city. The idea is not to have to make decisions and not to allow the kind of discretion that permits corruption of power or for money. One result is greater discretion and corruption, as well as greater expense. Despite much hiring for these programs, the staff cannot enforce it all and must choose what to enforce. Officials also have discretion in determining what the complex regulations mean. They become afraid to make decisions on the basis of judgment, they stick to the letter of the regulations, however inadvisable. Such laws fail to serve their purpose. This is a serious problem degrading our economy and our national security.
JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS LINK OIL PURCHASES TO TERRORISM Representing many New York-based, U.S. Jewish organizations, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs took out a full-page ad in the New York Times. The ad urges Americans to develop a comprehensive energy strategy. Such a strategy, the ad states, would: (1) End U.S. dependence upon foreign oil; (2) Reduce pollution; (3) Retard climate change; (4) Save us money by reducing demand nearer to supply; and (5) Stop financing governments that foster terrorism. Sales of oil by Iran earn it about $100 million a day. The claims for the strategy are "based on an economic analysis by the MIT program on the science and policy of global change, April 2007." Logos in the ad were from American Israel Public Affairs Committee, American Jewish Committee, American Jewish Congress, Anti-Defamation League, B'nai B'rith International, Coalition for the Environment and Jewish Life, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Hadasah, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Jewish Federations, Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, National Council of Jewish Women, Orthodox Union, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, Union for Reform Judaism, and Women's League for Conservative Judaism (4/30/10, A11). I followed up on Monday with Steve Gutow of the Council. This was a one-time ad in New York City only. The Council did not ask non-Jewish environmental or other organizations to participate in the ad, because the ad was to display the Jewish community's concern. That is why the ad did not go beyond general statement of the principles to problems of overcoming vested interests opposed to those principles.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
EVEN IF IT WERE A JOKE, IT WOULDN'T BE FUNNY
Posted by Gadi Adelman, May 3, 2010. |
|
In October, 1997, the United Nations published a report titled "SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN." Within this report was the following: "Paragraph 21 — In his last interim report to the General Assembly (A/52/742, paras. 31-34), the Special Representative focused on the use of stoning in the Islamic Republic. Since then, it has been brought to his attention that, based on press accounts, the figures used by the Special Representative in that earlier report understate the real number of deaths and secondly, that many of the stonings have in fact taken place in larger cities including Tehran, Hamedan, Isfahan and Kermanshah. It is also asserted that all such punishments have to be endorsed by the Supreme Court and that, accordingly, the incidents concerned are not random acts of excess. The Special Representative declares his condemnation of such punishment." The UN has issued several resolutions expressing concern at the violations of human rights by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, including resolution 50/188. So, how is it that, Iran, a theocratic state in which stoning is law and lashings are required for women judged "immodest", has now been elected to the UN's Commission on the Status of Women, giving them a four-year seat on the influential human rights body? According to a report by Joseph Abrams of FOX News, "Iran, along with representatives from 10 other nations, was "elected by acclamation," meaning that no open vote was requested or required by any member states — including the United States." Interestingly, also according to the report, "The U.S. Mission to the U.N. did not return requests for comment on whether it actively opposed elevating Iran to the women's commission." 
The pictures above are before and after photos of Neda Agha-Soltan. For those who may not know or remember, she was murdered at the age of 27 by Iranian Government forces on June 20, 2009, during the 2009 Iranian election protests. Her death drew international attention and was captured on video by bystanders and then broadcast over the Internet. Unlike the "mainstream media" which chose never to show the video in its entirety, I have linked it here so you can see what the UN has allowed on the "Commission on the Status of Women" human rights board. Let's just look at some facts about the treatment of women by Iran, the newest member of the Commission on the Status of Women, according to the Iran-e Azad website. "Women's rights advocates have been beaten, harassed and persecuted for exercising their right to assembly, association and expression: for peaceful demonstrations; for collecting signatures on behalf of the "Million Signatures Campaign" to remove legal discrimination against women in Iran's legal codes and system; for writing and publishing articles; for convening meetings; and for traveling for the purpose of having contact with their peers abroad. "These groups found common cause advocating for changes in a legal system in which discrimination against women is deeply embedded. They began to campaign for equal rights between women and men in marriage; equal compensation for injuries and accidental death; equal inheritance rights; for prosecuting perpetrators of honor killings; for equal access to and treatment in courts of law; and against death sentences by stoning in cases of adultery." People involved in the One Million Signatures Campaign are subject to:
One might stop and ask why the women in Iran attempted to put together a petition to stop Iran from becoming part of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. This effort, of course, went nowhere since they were all either arrested or threatened with arrest for protesting Iran's diabolical appointment. Iranian women are outraged over this: does this not say something to the obtuse elites at the UN? Just this past Thursday, the Tehran chief of police Brig. Gen. Hossien Sajedinia warned that all women having a tan will be arrested and imprisoned because this violates the "spirit of Islamic law." He said that the "Iranian public expects the police to act firmly and swiftly to any social misbehavior caused by women, and men, particularly those who defy the Islamic values." He cited some areas in northern Tehran where suntanned women and young girls look like walking mannequins. "We are not going to tolerate this situation and will first warn those found in this manner and then arrest and imprison them," Sajedinia said. This grotesque abuse of human rights is what is being allowed to have a seat on a commission for women's rights at the U.N. According to the home page of the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women website, "The Commission on the Status of Women is dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women." Really? Where would that be? Because it certainly does not reside in Iran. The legal age a female must be to marry in Iran is nine. That's nine years old, as in pre-teen. When Iran passed Islamic Sharia law, the first country in the world to conform to it, the U.S. and the rest of the world sat back and said nothing. Why should we care, after all, they said without qualms, it's just Iran. Once again, I have to ask, where are all the women's rights groups? As I explained in my article "Call PETA, No One Else is Doing Anything!" Sharia law allows the following:
There is no lack of reports on the way Iran mistreats women. Just this past Tuesday, Foreign Policy Magazine published an article in which three prominent democracy and human rights activists wrote, "In the past year, it has arrested and jailed mothers of peaceful civil rights protesters. It has charged women who were seeking equality in the social sphere — as wives, daughters and mothers — with threatening national security, subjecting many to hours of harrowing interrogation. Its prison guards have beaten, tortured, sexually assaulted and raped female and male civil rights protesters." The U.S. pays for 26 percent of the United Nations budget, more than any other member nation. The UN budget for 2010 is close to $15 billion. But of course paying more than any other nation, the U.S. did not even utter a word in condemnation to this abomination. There are no words in the English language to adequately describe the stupidity and cowardice of this situation. The UN has always been doing things that I found to be deplorable. While growing up in Israel we used to joke that the UN stood for "Unreliable." I remember all too well in November, 1975, the U.N. voted on and passed Resolution 3379 that declared Zionism to be the same as Racism, yet it was after an anti-UN rally I attended in Jerusalem that I survived a terrorist bombing. I guess it should come as no surprise that such a sham organization as this would embrace the Islamic Republic of Iran as a member of the Commission on the Status of Women. Maybe next year President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will receive the Nobel Peace Prize after being elected by acclamation at the UN as King of the World. All this, while our administration sits idly by.
Gadi Adelman is a freelance writer and lecturer on the history of
terrorism and counterterrorism. He grew up in Israel, studying
terrorism and Islam for 35 years after surviving a terrorist bomb in
Jerusalem in which 7 children were killed. Since returning to the U.
S., Gadi teaches and lectures to law enforcement agencies as well as
high schools and colleges. He is currently writing his first book,
"Terrorism; Understanding the Threat". He can be reached through his
website
This was published today in Family Security Matters (FSM).
Contact them at
|
|
GOLDSTONE IS POLITICIZING GRANDSON'S BAR MITZVAH
Posted by Alan Dershowitz, May 3, 2010. |
|
This was written by Alan Dershowitz of the Harvard Law School faculty. |
|
So now it turns out to be Richard Goldstone — author of the notorious Goldstone Report — who is politicizing his grandson's bar mitzvah. Jewish authorities in South Africa didn't "ban" Goldstone from the synagogue at which his grandson was being bar mitzvahed, as Goldstone and his supporters had alleged. A small group of protestors had said they would exercise their right of expression to picket Goldstone. Though they clearly had the right to do so, most Jews in South Africa and elsewhere — including me — were uncomfortable with the idea of picketing a grandfather attending his grandson's bar mitzvah. It was Goldstone who decided not to attend and instead to publicize the matter. The South Africa Board of Deputies have now persuaded the protestors to pick a different time and place to show their disdain for Goldstone. The matter should have been put to rest, with Goldstone quietly attending the bar mitzvah. But Goldstone won't let it go. He has attacked the Chief Rabbi of South Africa, who was instrumental in working out a compromise where the protests would be called off and Goldstone would agree to meet with Jewish leaders. Goldstone escalated the dispute by writing a letter to the local newspaper complaining that "the Chief Rabbi would so brazenly politicize the occasion of my 13-year-old grandson's bar mitzvah to engage in further personal attacks on me." But it was Goldstone who brazenly politicized the bar mitzvah by mischaracterizing the Chief Rabbi's statement and using it as an excuse to continue the controversy about the bar mitzvah. The alleged "personal attack" by the Chief Rabbi consisted of a statement that every synagogue "should welcome in a tolerant and nonjudgmental way all who seek to enter and join in our service and pray to God." The Chief Rabbi also exercised his own freedom of speech to express his opinion — an entirely accurate one — that the Goldstone report "has unfairly done enormous damage to the reputation and safety of the State of Israel and her citizens." Was the Chief Rabbi obligated to remain silent about the report until after the bar mitzvah? It would have been irresponsible of Rabbi Goldstein to say nothing in the face of the evil represented by the Goldstone report and its biased authors. Is it not enough that he curbed those who wanted to protest in front of the synagogue? It is Goldstone who is using his grandson's bar mitzvah as a shield against legitimate criticism, just as he has used his "jewishness" as a shield against criticism of the Goldstone report. Goldstone has not complained about another group of rabbis who have politicized his grandson's bar mitzvah in an effort to support the Goldstone report and its mendacious conclusions. A group of rabbis, many of whom have long records of anti-Israel activism, authored a "Rabbinic letter" to Goldstone congratulating him on his grandson's bar mitzvah and using the occasion to make virulently anti-Israel claims, including the blood libel that Israel deliberately targeted innocent Palestinian civilians without any military purpose. These ignorant rabbis, most of whom I am sure never read the 500-page report, went out of their way to "affirm" the "findings" of the Goldstone report, despite the fact that virtually every credible academic who has studied the report has determined its findings to be unfounded and false. These bigoted rabbis, who have no expertise in military matters, are prepared to contradict the military expertise of one of the world's most experienced counter-insurgency military experts, Colonel Richard Kemp, who said, "I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when an army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF [did] in Gaza." Goldstone of course refused to consider Kemp's testimony and has characterized it as irrelevant to the report's findings. These "rabbis for Hamas" have no shame and no credibility. They exploit their rabbinical status to support any conclusion that undercuts self defense Israeli actions without regard to the evidence and without regard to the truth. Not surprisingly, the worst of these rabbis (and that's saying a lot), Michael Lerner, after attempting to politicize the bar mitzvah by offering his anti-Israel synagogue for the event, has decided to honor Richard Goldstone with Tikkun Magazine's "Ethics Award." I guess all it takes to be honored by Tikkun is to pass Lerner's litmus test of lying about Israel. That's Lerner's definition of "ethics." There are some good people on the advisory board of Tikkun Magazine. They now have an obligation to reconsider their membership unless they wish to be associated with a rabbi who is prepared to accuse Israel, in the absence of any evidence, of deliberately setting out to murder Palestinian civilians without any military purpose. Let Richard Goldstone enjoy his grandson's bar mitzvah without anyone politicizing it, but let every thoughtful person study the Goldstone report and refuse to remain silent about its bias, its lies, its damage to the peace process and its dangers to Israel's security. Richard Goldstone should not use his grandson's bar mitzvah to selectively silence rabbis who disagree with his report, while encouraging rabbis who agree with it to use the bar mitzvah as a sword against the report's critics and as a shield against legitimate criticism. His grandson deserves better. Contact Israel BenAmi at farmer@012.net.il |
|
DOES JERUSALEM GET IT?
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 3, 2010. |
|
The assumption that Israel is facing an imperial and an omnipotent American president, who supposedly benefits from a health reform-driven political tailwind, is refuted by the April 21-22, 2010 Quinnipiac University Polling Institute findings. The Institute is quoted often by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and FOX. The poll findings document an all time low approval rating of President Obama (45% compared with 65% in January, 2009), while support for Israel is very high, especially among secular and religious Christians. American voters view the Jewish State as a positive domestic — and not only international — issue, which is more popular than the President. The poll results confirm that the political dividend from the healthcare reform dissipated. Voters do not trust Obama (40%:55%) in handling health and the economy. They accord Congress, which is controlled by Democrats, a 20%:70% disapproval rating. Other polls indicate that independent and middle class voters — who were critical during the November 2008 Obama and Democratic victories — are deserting Obama. The strongly-supportive Obama voting bloc shrank to 30% from 40% in January 2009, while the strongly-opposing Obama voting bloc expanded to 40% from 14%. Charlie Cook, the leading Washington political consultant, joins most pollsters, projecting a devastating Democratic defeat in the November 2010 Congressional election. Democratic legislators are aware that their life expectancy (running every 2 or 6 years) is different from the President's own life expectancy (running every 4 years). They are not willing to sacrifice their own political future on the altar of President Obama's agenda. They are concerned that the transformation of Obama from a "Coattail President" to an "Anchor Chained President" could demote them, in November 2010, from the majority to a minority status on Capitol Hill. Therefore, some of them announced retirement, some contemplate retirement, some urge the President to refrain from visiting their districts and states and some express reservations about Obama's legislative initiatives. Slackened Congressional support could transform Obama into a lame duck President. In contrast to the Israeli and European political systems, US Presidents constitute only one third of the US government, alongside the other two thirds: the Legislature and the Judiciary. American presidents do not control Congress. In fact, they are severely constrained by an elaborate system of "checks and balances" and "separation of powers" (which do not exist in other democracies), by a relatively short-term DC residency (4 or 8 years), compared with the relatively long-term DC residency of the 800 pound Congressional gorillas (20, 30 and 40 years) and by the "Power of the Purse," which is vested in Congress. According to the Quinnipiac April 22, 2010 poll, American voters support President Obama's national security policy (although with a slim majority), but for one issue: Israel! Overall foreign policy gets a 48%:42% support, the war in Afghanistan — 49%:39% support, counter-terrorism — 49%:41% support, nuclear disarmament — 48%:37% support and Iran — 44%:43% support. However, 44%:35% oppose Obama's policy on Israel and the Palestinians, 57%:13% support Israel over the Palestinians and 66%:19% expect the President to demonstrate strong support of Israel. The February 19, 2010 Gallup poll documents a higher level of support for Israel, in spite of White House policy, "Elite" media critical coverage, university campuses' hostility and the UN and European double standard and anti-Semitism. The foundations of American support for the Jewish State date back to the 17th century (there are more sites bearing Biblical names in the USA than in Israel!). This support is based are on shared values, joint interests and mutual threats. Most Americans appreciate patriotism, tradition, Judeo-Christian values (the Bible), defiance of nature and human odds, counter-terrorism and democracy. The Jewish State is perceived as a role-model of such values. Moreover, public support for the Jewish State constitutes one of the few consensus issues in the increasingly polarized American society. US legislators are aware of the world view and sentiments of their constituents, who constitute the major axis of US democracy. Therefore, House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer, co-sponsored a letter, which rebuked the President's attitude toward Israel and earned signatures of 75% of House Members. Therefore, the senior Democratic senator from New York, Chuck Schumer, is urging President Obama, to improve his policy toward Israel, lest he be challenged by Senate Democrats. And, therefore, the Chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Howard Berman, suggested that the President refrain from highlighting Jerusalem and the settlements. The closer the November 2010 Congressional election, the lower the Presidential approval rating, the harsher the public criticism of Obama, the more vulnerable the incumbents, the more independent (of the President and of their party) grow the legislators and the more defiant they will be of the President (while complying with their constituents), especially on the issue of the Jewish State. For most voters and legislators the Jewish State is a "Motherhood, apple pie and the flag" issue. It was Congress — in defiance of the Administration — which terminated US military involvement in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola and Nicaragua and provided Israel with a generous package of mutually-beneficial cooperation following the 1991 First Gulf War. It is Congress which is capable of producing a change in the current Administration policy toward the Jewish State and force it to synch with the American People. Does Jerusalem get it? Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as
well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for
Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to
Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul
General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of
Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem
Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il
This article was published in Ynet News
|
|
URGENT: TEMPLE MOUNT PETITION — SIGN NOW AND FORWARD!!
Posted by John J. Facino, Jr., May 2, 2010. | |
|
This comes from Yosef Rabin: A meeting is coming up between Temple Mount Activists and Knesset Members regarding the Temple Mount and the National Heritage List! The activists need as much support as possible going into this meeting. Please sign and forward this petition and urge that everyone do the same. Please Stress the urgency of this matter! The Temple Mount is the holiest place in the world; yet Jews and all non-Muslims are denied the right to pray in groups, and even as individuals; this refusal is accompanied by their constant degradation, and they are granted no opportunity for any religious expression whatsoever on the Temple Mount. The Prime Minister of Israel has failed to include the Temple Mount in his own "Heritage Plan," among those sites of historical, cultural and religious significance to the Jewish people, to receive enhanced government budgeting for the improvement of access, upkeep, and beautification of the sites. Please sign the Petition, which is here. | |
|
Please sign the Petition, which is
here.
Contact John J. Facino, Sr. at jjfacinosr@comcast.com
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: NOTHING GOOD TO SPEAK OF
Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 2, 2010. |
|
So much is opaque these day — with diverse news reports often contradicting each other, and a great deal that remains hidden under the surface. PA president Abbas stated in an interview last week that there are no plans to declare Palestinian statehood unilaterally. His statement was seen as countering an interview given to Haaretz by Fayyad earlier in April in which he hinted at the possibility of a unilateral declaration. But other reports indicate that Israel is worried that Abbas indeed might move unilaterally. A lead article on Friday in the JPost written jointly by David Horovitz, editor, and Khaled Abu Toameh declared that "concern is growing among some in the Israeli government that the PA is planning to marginalize the diplomatic process... "There is a rising conviction among some in the Netanyahu government...that the PA is aiming to secure a new UN Security Council Resolution, updating 1967's Resolution 242, providing for the establishment of Palestine and fudging the refugee issue." This Palestinian state, some believe, would not be established to make peace with Israel, but, rather, to continue the conflict from a place of greater strength. ~~~~~~~~~~ But wait! What is clear to most top level decision-makers in our government is that Abbas is not prepared to negotiate "viable" terms for peace with Israel. It is what makes the very notion of "peace negotiations" a joke. Thus, embracing Abbas's willingness to negotiate — which is supposed to be a "relief" for us — at one level constitutes a farce, no more than a game that the world is willing to go along with. If, indeed, Abbas is planning on a unilateral declaration, he would do it in any event after these negotiations "failed," with a preface about how he tried, but how Israeli intransigence requires him to resort to other means. I will return to this in a bit. ~~~~~~~~~~ The statement by Abbas contradicting the Fayyad position on a unilateral declaration is just one indication that tensions between Abbas — along with his Fatah party — and Fayyad have increased. Fayyad is the independent, the darling of the West, who holds the position he does not because of a solid political base, but because Western funds would dry up if he were not in that position. But Fatah — which has been glad for the funding and the favor that Fayyad has accrued in the West for the PA — has begun to become restive about this situation: Fayyad is now seen as a threat to Fatah control of the PA. And so reports surfaced recently of a demand by the Fatah Revolutionary Council that the portfolios for interior, finance and foreign affairs, currently held by Fayyad loyalists, be turned over to Fatah members. Additionally there is unease within Fatah because of indications that Abbas is suffering health problems; the party is demanding that Abbas appoint a deputy president to prevent a power vacuum should he be unable to carry out his duties. According to Abu Toameh, "Many Fatah officials see Fayyad as a major threat to their faction's status, and some are convinced that he has his eyes set on the presidency. "'Only Fatah will decide who the next president is,' a member of the Revolutionary Council said, 'We won't allow the Americans or the Europeans or the Israelis to choose our president.'" ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas, for his part, has now secured the approval of the Arab League to begin those "proximity talks," and Mitchell will be coming to the area very soon to do the shuttling back and forth. Perhaps I didn't lead off with this news because I am decidedly unenthusiastic about it. I see no good coming of this in any event. In his Friday column, David Horovitz outlined the issues that were holding up these talks. There was more at stake than the hullabaloo about the Ramat Shlomo housing start, even though the impression was commonly given that this was at the heart of the matter. Reports have surfaced regarding a dispute between Israel and the PA regarding the nature of these talks — with Israel having assumed that they would be brief and lead quickly to face-to-face talks, and the PA expecting them to continue in this mode for some months. (Undoubtedly the working assumption of the PA is that the longer the US mediates, the more they can rely on the Americans to pressure Israel.) Additionally there was the question of core issues and whether they would be discussed in indirect talks, with Israel maintaining these difficult issues could only be dealt with face-to-face. ~~~~~~~~~~ OK, so now Abbas, having relinquished his right and responsibility as "leader" of the PA to make independent decisions regarding negotiations, has gotten the go-ahead for indirect talks from the obstructionist Arab League. (One commentator noted that it was the League that originally founded the PLO back in 1964, so that this represents a step backward.) What are we going to see happen as talks are set to begin? Indications are that there have been concessions on the part of our government. One Israeli official was quoted as saying, "We are willing to discuss the core issues in the framework of the proximity talks, but it has to be only a preliminary discussion of the core issues." Oh, I see... The "core issues" routinely alluded to are Jerusalem, refugees and borders. This official added a demilitarized state and recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. As to timing, Israel expresses hope that the movement to direct talks can take place fairly quickly, but it is being acknowledged that this process may proceed for some months. ~~~~~~~~~~ And what of the issue: the demand that we do no building in eastern Jerusalem? Our government is still saying that we will be building. And it has been announced that the Jerusalem District Planning and Construction Committee will be convening this week to discuss a "limited number of housing starts" in eastern Jerusalem, although details on where and for whom these houses would be has not been announced. So, perhaps it indeed is true that we have not frozen all construction for Jewish housing in eastern Jerusalem. Indeed, Horovitz, in his column, acknowledges — as have other analysts — that the US may have accepted the fact that this is Netanyahu's red line and persuaded the PA to enter the talks anyway. (A possibility I advanced recently.) However, there is a great deal that is still very obscure. A letter of some sort was sent by Obama to Abbas providing, it is said, certain assurances that made it possible for Abbas to move ahead. The US government will not discuss the contents of this letter. What the PA claims it addresses, including assurances on a construction freeze, is meaningless — in the absence of an American statement they can say what they wish to cover themselves. Left hanging in the air is the Abbas insistence, even now, that these talks will proceed only if there is no building in eastern Jerusalem. Stay tuned. ~~~~~~~~~~ A few observations with regard to this "peace process" and our prime minister's role in it: He professes pleasure in the fact that it's "moving ahead" and expresses an eagerness to be part of it, all of which is heartburn-inducing. But what's crystal clear is that he knows that no "two state solution" is going to result, with peace breaking out. My perception is that all of this is part of his diplomatic style of playing the game, on the precipice of that slippery slope. He wants to be able to say, "See, we did our part, to the utmost, and failure to reach peaceful resolutions must be laid at the door of the PA leaders." He's watching over his shoulder — watching Obama and the Quartet, the UN and the EU. In particular, I would say, he wants this as a foil against possible PA plans for a unilateral announcement. He is attempting to garner sufficient US approval so that it would veto a Palestinian state in the Security Council. In addition to this, there is the hope that, even if nothing ultimately results, the negotiations will force the PA leaders to focus their energies on this rather than the UN — in essence taking the wind out of their sails. I — going way out on a limb — cannot help but ponder what would happen if we played it the other way. If we refused to negotiate because the PA is blatantly inciteful, still supports terrorists, etc. etc. And then, if the PA unilaterally declared a state and used it as a base to attack us, we informed the world of the fact that this was illegal according to the Oslo agreement that created the PA, and then went to war and finished it clean. This, however, will never be Netanyahu's style. ~~~~~~~~~~ Here I refer to a recent piece by Daniel Pipes. He has a peace plan, he says. "It's simple: Israel defeats its enemies. "Victory uniquely creates circumstances conducive to peace. Wars end, the historical record confirms, when one side concedes defeat and the other wins." It should only be!
~~~~~~~~~~ I call your attention, as well, to an opinion piece by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, "Real peace cannot be imposed," which appeared in the JPost on Friday. Is he a loose canon, as some suggest? Or, as seems to me more likely, does he speak with sanction from the prime minister? States Lieberman, "The Great British statesman Edmund Burke once said, 'Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intending to go beyond promise, it costs nothing.' The Palestinians and Syrians are being taught by the international community that their hypocrisy and inflexibility is costing them absolutely nothing. They reject every gesture and demand ever more concessions." After cataloguing failings of the PA that I addressed above, in terms of continued PA glorification of terrorism, he moves to a history lesson on the sacrifice of Czechoslovakia: "ISRAEL WILL not become another Czechoslovakia and will not succumb to international pressure to compromise its vital interests." Ariel Sharon said something similar. Let this government mean it.
~~~~~~~~~~ The Obama administration this past week has been courting the Jewish community with all sorts of declarations of respect for and devotion to Israel's wellbeing. There are those, of course, who see in this good things and evidence of a genuine shift in the president's approach. Our defense minister, just returning from Washington, is one of them. But I don't trust Obama even as far as I could throw him. As far as I am concerned, he is responding disingenuously to pressure put upon him, notably by AJC's Ron Lauder and ADL's Abe Foxman. The lesson for the American Jewish community is that political pressure works on the president and should be increased. ~~~~~~~~~~ Here, at last, I provide the link to the Horovitz piece that I've referred to in the course of this posting. For he addresses this issue as well, and lays out the continuing failure of the Netanyahu and Obama administrations to see eye-to-eye on important matters regarding "peace": "..the plain, unfortunate fact remains that not only are Israel and the Palestinians deeply and predictably at odds, so are Israel and the Obama administration. ~~~~~~~~~~ The New York Times reported recently that Obama had suggested the US, if displeased with us, might no longer exercise its veto in the Security Council against anti-Israel resolutions. However, a senior administration official who spoke to the pan-Arab paper Al-Sharq il-Awsat has denied this. He says the US will continue to defend Israel's right to self-defense and will continue to stand against selective criticism targeting Israel. While good to learn, this, of course, tells us nothing about a veto of a resolution for a Palestinian state. With this I end a lengthy posting, mindful that there is a great deal more to explore, and that tomorrow is another day. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
LAG BAOMER AT THE TOMB OF SHIMON HATZADDIK
Posted by Hana Levi Julian, May 2, 2010. |
|
Thousands were on hand Saturday night to join the celebration of Lag BaOmer as Rabbi Yaakov Yosef lit the traditional bonfire at the Tomb of Shimon HaTzaddik (Simon the Just) in the northeastern Jerusalem neighborhood named for the sage. (All Israel news photos: courtesy of Yossi Fuchs/News 24. See today's Arutz-7 for additional photos.) 
Jewish families returned to live full-time in the neighborhood about a year ago, after many years of coming in and out of the neighborhood to pray at the grave site of the sage for whom the area is named. The neighborhood, known to Arabs as Sheikh Jarrah, is closer to the center of capital than Ramot or Har Homa, is close to a government complex on one side and not far from the Regency Hotel on the other. Despite numerous struggles with Arab squatters over the years, Jewish groups have worked hard to restore its Jewish nature; at least one property has been owned by a Sephardic Jewish organization for more than 120 years. Shimon HaTzaddik is mentioned in Pikei Avot (Chapters of the Fathers, 1:2) as "among the last of the Great Assembly." He is also known as the author of the famous dictum, "The world stands on three pillars: the study of Torah, the service of G-d, and on the performance of kind deeds." One famous story about the sage, who was the "Kohen Gadol" — the High Priest — in the Second Temple period for 40 years, involves an encounter he had with the world-conquering Macedonian Emperor, Alexander the Great. Alexander came to Jerusalem with the intention of destroying it. But when he met Shimon HaTzaddik, he suddenly realized that this was the same individual he had encountered in his dreams each night, and who had advised him on the tactics to be used in the next day's battle. The advice never had never failed him. Instead, the High Priest took Alexander on a tour of the Temple, and though he refused the great conquerer's request to place a marble image of himself within the Temple courtyard, he offered to name each male child that year after Alexander. The emperor accepted Shimon HaTzaddik's offer, and that is how "Alexander" became a Jewish name.
Hana Levi Julian writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.
|
|
SAUDIS TO POSE NUCLEAR THREAT TO ISRAEL
Posted by David Bedein, May 2, 2010. |
|
Saudi Arabia, the only Arab nation contiguous to Israel which remains in a total state of war with Israel since 1948, has taken a step towards posing a nuclear threat against Jerusalem. This past week, The Tel Aviv based Institute of National Security Studies issued a report which confirms the ata that Riyad has been working to prepare a nuclear infrastructure. That report can be found at:
The report, entitled "The Saudi Nuclear Option", authored by a senior intelligence analyst, Yoel Guzansky, asserts that Pakistan will be the most likely developer of a Saudi nuclear option The report said that a key Saudi option involved the Saudi alliance with Pakistan, which has received billions of dollars from the Gulf Cooperation Council kingdom for strategic programs. In the words of the report..."Should Saudi Arabia find itself in a sensitive security situation, it may well be that it would seek to capitalize on its investment in the Pakistani program." The report went in to say that "Despite Saudi Arabia's relative transparency and cooperation with the international community on nuclear issues, there are more than a few doubts as to its credibility, given that in the past it had very close relations with Pakistan," the report said. "More than once the claim has been made that Saudi Arabia was in fact behind the financing of Pakistan's nuclear and missile programs. After the Islamic revolution and throughout the 1980s Pakistan stationed military forces in Saudi Arabia and the two nations cooperated in assisting the Afghani mujahadeen." The report also stated that Pakistan wields the manpower and technology for the nuclear weapons program for Saudi Arabia. In the 1980s, Saudi Arabia procured the Chinese-origin CSS-2 surface-to-surface missiles from Pakistan. The CSS-2, although not regarded as accurate, was designed to contain a nuclear warhead. "Various developments therefore may lead Saudi Arabia to accelerate its timetable, and along with or instead of developing independent nuclear infrastructures, it is not inconceivable that it would prefer buying turnkey components, enter into a military treaty with Pakistan, and in certain scenarios, even deploy Pakistani nuclear forces on Saudi soil because of the urgency and its lack of appropriate infrastructures," the report said. This seminal study has hardly been reported in Israel — because INSS couched Saudi's nuclear option only as a response to a possible Iranian threat against Saudi Arabia. Yet Saudi Arabia is not in a state of war with Iran. Saudi Arabia is in a state of war with Israel, expressed in terms of consistent Saudi aid to Palestinian terrorist organizations, and Saudi funding for middle east studies programs on Unversity campuses around the world which prepare the next geneation of intellectuals to carry on the war with Israel and with Zionism. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il |
|
IRAN/SYRIA PROPOSE MEDIA BLOC;
HAMAS POLICEMAN GIVEN ARAB'S HOUSE;
MUSLIM APARTHEID
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 2, 2010. |
|
IRAN AND SYRIA PROPOSE REGIONAL MEDIA BLOC Iran and Syria propose a regional media bloc, with Turkey, as the bloc's core for more openness of the media. The bloc would combat Western "unilateral information." They also want to form a regional economic bloc (IMRA, 4/30/10). Iran and Syria do not have freedom of the press. When they call for coordination of the media in order to have more openness, they mean in order to have more governmental coordination of their ideological stance. What Western "unilateral information?" The West has moderate freedom of the press. [Some European countries, particularly France, control some of their media. Israel controls its broadcasting industry. More important, Western media largely is biased against Israel, not sufficiently frank and informative in general, and the traditional media is crumbling while much of the Internet has no standards.
ARAB HOUSE IN GAZA TURNED OVER TO HAMAS POLICEMAN A'lyia Aweida and immediate family temporarily moved in with her father, afflicted with advanced cancer, to take care of him. Periodically, she returned to her own house, in a high-end part of Gaza City, to get some of their things. One time she found a police officer and his wife living in her house and using her things. Months before, the Hamas regime had asked her whether her house belonged to her or to the Palestinian Authority. She showed the official her husband's deeds to the house. She thought that ended the matter. When she found squatters in her house, however, she visited the Ministry of the Interior. She was told that the house was confiscated because of an embezzlement charge against her husband. Checking revealed there was no such charge. Mrs. Aweida appealed to the Ministry's General Comptroller. He strongly sympathized with them, and mentioned an absentee owners law. Even that law, he said, requires that the property be returned to its owner. A cousin found no court documents on the house. He is suing in behalf of the family. The case was postponed to September 5. The cousin considers that an indication of a problem (IMRA, 4/30/10). The owners' hope must be to get Hamas to consider the case an individual one of a personal mistake or corruption, not general policy. The PFLP indicated it was general policy. Years ago, I reported Arafat's seizure of a monastery, of part of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and of his police demanding that a number of Christians sign over property to them. Israel has dispossessed some Arabs, either for harboring terrorists or, with lengthy notice and opportunities for appeal, for squatting or living in a house illegally built.
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: PART 4. THE 'PALESTINIANS' NEED OWN STATE Without checking the ideology and the polls of Palestinian Arabs, U.S. officials and media often state what they suppose Palestinian Arabs want and need. The officials and journalists usually mean what they would like the Arabs to get from Israel. U.S. presidents have spoken of Palestinian Arab "aspirations," as if it were imperative upon America to fulfill them. Ironically, those Arabs basically are anti-American, favoring jihad. The Jewish people's aspirations, only partly fulfilled, and that part being under siege, rarely are considered. It's the old double standard, often unconscious, against the Jewish people. Anyway, aspiration is not necessarily need, and need is not necessarily entitlement. According to the Palestinian Arab ideology, leaders' statements to their people, indoctrination of the people, and polls, their main aspiration is to conquer Israel, expel most of the Jews, even murder them. What an aspiration! The Arabs in general aspire for their religion to dominate, if not eliminate, the rest. A particular Islamic doctrine holds that any area once having been conquered by Islam, but now independent of it, must be returned to Islam. Its independence is an affront to Islam and thought of as an improper reversal of Islam's historical march to world conquest. Other cultures' aspirations may not necessarily carry moral or legal weight in ours. We wish to be tolerant, but defeat tolerance when we coddle the intolerant. And that is an old Jewish doctrine. The intolerant Islamic doctrine, together with jealousy of Israeli success, fear of Israel's relative freedom becoming an example to their own people, and the need for a scapegoat, make the Arab-Israel conflict a part of global jihad. Calling it the "Palestinian-Israeli conflict" is part of the propaganda effort to make the Arab side seem the underdog, as if only the Palestinian Arabs are in conflict with Israel. Israel has been invaded or attacked repeatedly by various Arab states. Should there be another Arab state? Look back at the dismantling of the Turkish Empire. The allies allotted at least 99% of the Mideast, except Iran, to the Arabs. The allies allotted less than 1% to the Jews, to rectify the historical injustice of the Jewish people native to the area having mostly been forced out of their homeland but not accepted anywhere else, including the million or so living in Arab states. There came to be about 20 Arab states. Room there for Palestinian Arabs. First, Britain decided to "give" an emirate to all the sons of the Arab Emir Feisal (who, at a peace conference, welcomed the Jews' Zionist return). Britain barred Jewish national development in 78% of the Palestine Mandate for a Jewish national home (see the Mandate document), and that 78% became Jordan. In other words, Jordan is a Palestinian Arab state. Then, again, what's the problem for Palestinian Arabs? Backing up a little, where did the name, "Palestine" come from? Was there a Palestinian people? No. Before ancient Rome put down a Jewish rebellion, the country was named Judea, meaning country of the Jews or of the main tribe of Judah, Rome renamed Judea "Palestine," making it a province of Rome. Where did the new name come from? It came from the Philistines, formerly Judea's worse enemies, a non-Semitic-speaking people extinct for 400 years. Rome chose that name in order to de-Judaize the country, as part of a plan to overcome Jewish nationalism. The Arabs, however, later and for some time called Palestine the land of the Jews. They never established it as a separate state. Similar re-naming was done by Jordan, when its army of aggression illegally conquered Judea and Samaria, to call them "West Bank," as if tying them to Jordan. The term, "West Bank," is an informal one but it is in popular usage. Terminology has become an adjunct of propaganda. In popular Western parlance, "Palestine" was the country of the Jews. Arabs did not move in until the 7th century C.E.. They did not turn Palestine into a country. The terms for parts of it, Judea and Samaria, remained. Within a couple of hundred years, Turks conquered the area. They also did not make a country out of Palestine. They, too, dealt with it as various districts, overlapping with districts now part of other countries. The area fell into ruin. Population declined to negligible levels. Sultans brought in other nationalities, to replace losses. Gradually the non-Jews there came to be Arabized. Being in a pre-nationalist stage of development, the Arabs thought of themselves as Muslims and villagers. By the time they were organized to oppose the Mandate, they thought of themselves as southern Syrians. They had no separate language, religion, or culture. During the Mandate, the world referred to the Jews there as "Palestinian." Arabs took offense at being called "Palestinian." So much for their allegedly long history as "Palestinians!" About the 1960s, they realized that if they called themselves "Palestinians," people would think the area named after them, rather than the reverse. It made good propaganda for them to claim the need for a separate state. It also took advantage of most people's unawareness that not every nationality is entitled to break off from every state. Self-determination can be carried to an extreme. There is no greater difference between the Arabs on both sides of the Jordan River than there is between the people of Vermont and New Hampshire on both sides of the Connecticut River. As bigoted religious aggressors, western Palestinian Arabs are not entitled to another state. Do they want a state? They may say they want a separate state, but do they? Why are they demanding one now and not earlier, when ruled by Jordan and Egypt? The demand is tactical. Arafat and other Arab leaders devised a tactical plan, the Phased Plan for the Conquest of Israel. The Plan calls for them to use any area relinquished by Israel as a base for conquering the rest, including Israel. They don't want a state, "side-by-side" with Israel. They want a state only in order to help conquer Israel. That is their "aspiration" that Pres. Bush mentioned as if it were valid. Giving the western Palestinian Arabs a state at the expense of secure borders for Israel not only would deprive Israel of the core of its homeland but also render it indefensible. There is a limit to how tiny a state can be and defend itself from such hostile neighbors. Statehood for those Arabs means war and probably genocide.
ICELAND: MORE What was El Al's risk in flying in Europe, while other airlines were grounded, and why did El Al risk it? I consulted an Israeli scientist. Some time ago, an airplane did fly through a volcanic plume. It was like flying through a sandstorm. All the paint was sanded off, all the windows scraped. Noxious fumes penetrated the cabin. All four motors were clogged with congealed lava, and conked out. The pilot managed to restart the engines and put out enough heat to melt what was clotted on the engines. They were fortunate to have escaped. El Al avoided airports where the plume was thickest. Its planes operated in the peripheral areas (4/30/10/). El Al probably draws more on experienced Air Force pilots than most countries.
U.S. STARTING ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY NEGOTIATIONS 
The U.S. has gotten the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to assent to a form of negotiation, after telling it that if Israel actually builds the project that it announced in an annexed part of Jerusalem, the U.S. would not veto a Security Council resolution condemning it. The U.S. claims that Netanyahu agreed not to actually build, though he tells his public he is not freezing construction in any part of Jerusalem. Alas, there is mutual suspicion between the U.S. and Israel! A further problem with negotiations, according to Daniel Levy of the New America Foundation, is that Israel is strong and the P.A. is week and divided. The negotiations would be like this: In one room, Arabs will talk with U.S. diplomats. In another room, Israelis will talk with U.S. diplomats. In a third room, the U.S. diplomats from the other two rooms will exchange notes and return to the first two rooms with the notes. Former ambassador Martin Indyk admits that eventually the American diplomats will advance their own agenda (Mark Landler, NY Times, 5/1, A7). What do they mean, Israel is strong and the P.A. is weak and divided? Israel has a weak and divided leadership. It hardly makes a Jewish case or pursues Israeli interests, and does not think ahead. The P.A. is united in wanting to destroy Israel, differing in its two main faction only in whether to do so only by military means or also by diplomatic means. The P.A. has on its side the whole Muslim world, i.e., the 50-member Organization of Islamic Conference, the Quartet (U.S., Russia, EU, UN), China, and the dictatorships of Latin America, among others. Israel has...? The purpose of the negotiations is to detach sufficient territory from Israel, and give it to the Arabs, with the result that Israel retains a huge Arab fifth column but retreats from secure borders (affording tank barriers, early warning, room for assembling army corps, and strategic depth), much of its water supply, its holiest sites, and even room for its vaunted Air Force to maneuver over its narrow waist. Combine that with President Obama's wish to get Israel to give up any nuclear weapons, while Muslim states such as Iran and Syria would continue to cheat on the nuclear anti-proliferation treaty. Would the negotiation arrangement bring peace with countries of proven aggression, whose ideology remains bent on religious conquest? Of course not! A weakened Israel would tempt invasion. For jihadists, that is the approved purpose of negotiation. Is it any wonder there is mutual suspicion, when the U.S. bullies Israel on matters of Israeli national security while pretending to be a friend, and although it has a pro-Arab agenda, is expected to inject its own ideas into the negotiations while claiming to be an honest broker? Could anything be sillier than negotiating in separate rooms? Can Israel make peace with belligerent Arabs who consider Israelis so much beneath them that they won't negotiate face-to-face? Obviously the whole exercise is a ploy, whereby the Arabs do not negotiate, they let the U.S. negotiate for them. The Arabs refuse any compromise and keep asking the U.S. to impose their demands upon Israel. Now that the U.S. has an anti-Israel President in synch with the traditionally anti-Zionist State Dept., negotiations involving the U.S. are a trap for Israel. The NY Times, in that report, follows its practice of consulting primarily experts who feed back to it the opinions that coincide with Times views. This time, the opinions were entirely one-sided. The Times consulted two of "Baker's Jews," David Aaron Miller and Martin Indyk, known for carrying out Baker's anti-Israel diplomacy. Unaware readers are told of the consultants' credentials but not of their biases.
NY Times Op.-Ed. on Jerusalem The son of a U.S. diplomat, Kai Bird, was a boy living in Jerusalem from 1956-1958. He does not indicate whether he was of an age to have grasped political matters. In the New York Times, he presents details of alleged injustices by Israel against Arabs there. He writes that although the city was divided, he was able to enter both sectors and see both sides. Then why does he omit the Israeli view? He does not indicate whether he took Arabs' word for their complaints or verified them. Perhaps his book on the subject explains. Mr. Bird ends by reiterating the Arab view that Israel is an occupier of the Territories and annexed parts of Jerusalem. He lived in Jerusalem when it was under rule of the Jordanian invader-conquerors, but does not object to that as an occupation. Inconsistent. His attempt to make his proposal as a moral issue is pierced by his inconsistency. He alleges that the Territories are occupied by Israelis, whose homeland this was, as recognized in the Palestine Mandate. He concludes that the Territories should be turned over to Palestinian Arabs, who did not have title to them. Why to them? People say it is because Palestinian Arabs do not have a country, by Palestinian Arabs have a country in the biggest part of the former Palestine Mandate, called Jordan. Why should Palestinian Arabs have a country, when they are not a separate nationality from the other Arabs? This whole concept is one of the misconceptions my series on misconceptions is taking up. Mr. Bird is aware of inconsistency. He draw one between Israelis having old property deeds and getting courts to recognize their ownership, and Arabs alleging old property deeds and not getting their claims recognized. On such issues, a layman should be careful. A history book on pre-statehood real estate found that almost all Arab land claims against Jews, brought to British Mandatory courts sympathetic to the Arabs, found the Arab claims fraudulent. Arabs would sell land, pocket the money, and then produce old ownership documents, with which they tried to get the land back, without giving money back. Jews paid owners and tenants for property, and then more Arabs came to claim a share. Some of those Arabs had never been to the area. Somewhat extenuating is that land records were not always accurate. On the other hand, they may not have been accurate because Arabs did not register proper ownership, so they could evade real estate taxes. The same kind of fraud, by Arabs, continues, with a worse aspect. Like Jordan, the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) prohibits Arab sale of real estate to Jews. Incidentally, I have never heard any of those who make adrenalin-stimulated denunciation of Israel as apartheid and discriminatory denounce Jordan and the P.A. for their actual apartheid. Under risk of being murdered, some Arabs, whose sale gets known, renege. They claim they did not sell. They produce old ownership records. And they get support, even from Israeli courts, whose judges usually are leftist. There may have been some individual cases of Israeli injustice in Jerusalem. They should be rectified. But the author, Kai Bird, generalizes from them. Is it true in general? Looking at the issue in general, Mr. Bird's comparisons are somewhat non-parallel. The Arab population of the Mandate was, by and large, part of a concerted Arab attempt to destroy Israel and perhaps to exterminate its people. Most Arabs fled voluntarily or at the command of invading Arab generals. The invaders expelled what Israelis they could. They have not changed their ideology of conquest, because it is based on their interpretation of their religion, which endures. Israel expelled a small number of Arabs for border or other matters of security. To let them return would be suicidal (though Israel did let many stay and many return, and now suffers a radicalizing fifth column). Bird fails to recognize that. If Bird wants to draw an analogy, let him recall that the peace treaty with Britain ending the American Revolution stipulated that all the Loyalists who opposed the Revolution must depart. They did. The city remains divided de facto, Bird states. Jews avoid the Arab areas and Arabs avoid the Jewish areas [except for Jews who move into Arab areas]. Why is this so and what does it mean? Nothing stops Arabs from mingling in Jewish areas, and they do in many parts of Israel. If Jews enter many Arab areas, they are liable to be lynched. Tax collectors and even police are afraid to enter certain Arab towns. The same thing happens in France and India, in Muslim areas. I used to stay in a hotel near the Old City, and liked walking through Independence Park, then was warned that the Park is dangerous. Bird should have explained the Muslim Arab proclivity to violence. The last paragraph makes an assertion unsupported by the preceding paragraphs. Bird suggests that if Israel wants to remain largely Jewish and democratic, it should withdraw from the areas immediately claimed by the P.A.. [He ignores the fact that the P.A. claims all of Israel, and its covenant states Arafat's dictum, to use whatever territory the Arabs get from Israel to fight to get the rest.] What does that suggestion mean? First, Israel should cede territory and bring Jews from it into the State of Israel, because Jews are not allowed in the P.A. or would be murdered if they stay under P.A. authority. Murder is not peace. The implication here is that an agreement to withdraw is not an agreement for peace. Second, Israel should let the million Arabs stay in Israel. Another hypocrisy. In coming days, we are likely to get specific reports on the veracity of the Op.-Ed., as its details are checked, if they can be checked. The piece is excellent propaganda. Now will the Times feature a piece stating the far worse Arab depredations against the Jews, with at least equal indignation?
JIHADISTS EXECUTE PAKISTANI EX-SPY 
A new group of jihadists, calling themselves Asian Tigers, claims to have murdered a Pakistani it believed was working for the CIA in North Waziristan (Zahid Hussain, Wall St. J., 5/1, A7). One can imagine what kind of a trial he enjoyed. The story is murky. I usually omit stories while their facts are unclear. What makes this story interesting is its mention of a new terrorist organization. Perhaps it is a new one. But be cautious about believing that. Existing terrorist organizations have had a practice of ducking responsibility by attributing their terrorist acts to non-existing, "new" organizations. The most notorious example was the PLO murder of people, including Americans, in the name of, if I recall correctly, "Black September." Those crimes were ordered by Arafat, who pretended innocence. He was called "peace partner" while he encouraged terrorism. Like Abbas and Fayyad.
NEW U.S-EGYPT. PLAN LINKS IRANIAN AND ISRAELI NUCLEAR ARMS 
The U.S. is trying to impose sanctions against Iran for violating its nuclear arms treaty, particularly by illicitly developing nuclear arms. Ignoring the fact of its violation, Iran argues that this is a double standard, because Israel [why not also mention Pakistan and India] has nuclear arms capability. The Obama administration's answer is a nuclear conference in which Israel relinquishes its facilities and joins the treaty. Egypt is working with the U.S. on this, but demands more of Israel. The U.S. suggests that first there be major advances in peace negotiations between the Arabs and Israel. [This supposedly should reassure Israel that it can join the treaty without risking national security.] Israel takes a similar approach, but wants not "major advances" but full peace. The Administration proposes that sanctions be imposed on countries that withdraw from the treaty and that they not be allowed to withdraw from inspections. The U.S. also suggests more power for UN inspectors and more backing for multinational facilities to help countries develop nuclear energy for industry (Jonathan Weisman, Jay Solomon, Joe Lauria, Wall St. Journal, 5/1, A7). The treaty is a weak one, easily violated. Imagine forcing countries to join it before it is made effective! It may never be made effective. The U.S. often states desired principles that it drops along the way. For Israel, that means disarming without protection. The way to answer Iran is to expose the sophistry of its simplistic logic. Israel is not violating the treaty, Iran is. Therefore, there is no Western double standard, and the violator has some temerity to complain. Again, Iran threatens the world and Israel does not. Therefore, Iran is the one with the double standard. A major fallacy in the U.S. approach is to treat nuclear weapons as separate from the whole military arsenal. Other weapons of mass-destruction would remain. This is the one that Israel has, Syria has others. Removing Israel's would leave Israel subject to attack by other weapons of mass-destruction. Considering how easily countries evade inspection, and how little stomach countries have for enforcement, removing any Israeli weapons would leave Israel wondering when the scofflaws would a-bomb it. Suppose all weapons of mass-destruction were eradicated. Israel's enemies have a preponderance of conventional forces. Israel no longer would have a nuclear deterrent. Combine that policy with the U.S. effort to detach so much territory from Israel that it would have insecure borders. Thus the U.S. would deliver a one-two knockout punch to Israel: (1) Remove its deterrent; and (2) Make it easy to invade Israel. Egypt and the U.S. have been working toward this end for decades. One may be sure that Egypt understands what it is doing. Do you think the U.S. does not? The U.S. plan to spread knowledge about nuclear industry means spreading half the knowledge needed to develop nuclear weapons. This is how some of the scofflaws gained the ability to develop nuclear arms. It means technical proliferation while mankind remains primitive in social conduct. The U.S. purports to be doing all this, which would enable and tempt war, in the name of preventing war, especially by Iran. Since all earlier efforts to disarm Iran were anemic, why would this work? And by the time it might work, Iran already would have nuclear weapons ready for use. It all seems like an exercise in rationalization, whose real purpose is to get Israel. Skeptics of the Administration warned that it would come up with such a plan. People scoffed. The skeptics were thought too suspicious. But here the plan is. The skeptics are more often prescient than Establishment media. What about Israel's statement that it would accept regional nuclear disarmament after peace were arranged with its enemies. Does Israel mean that? Perhaps it supposes that peace never would be arranged, because the Muslims who favor jihad will not reform. If that is what PM Netanyahu believes, he had better be careful. The U.S. confuses peace agreements, which the Arabs violate, with peace. So the U.S. would claim to have brought about peace, when it merely would have brought about signatures.
PRO-ARAB DEMONSTRATORS ASSAULT ISRAELI DIPLOMAT IN BRITAIN Israel's Deputy Ambassador to Britain, Talya Lador-Fesher, was unable to give a scheduled lecture at Manchester University. The reason was that more than 300 Action Palestine demonstrators scuffled with Jewish students and with police. She was invited back, and the university took more security measures. This time she completed her address. But when she was ready to leave, she couldn't, because about 40 waiting protesters ran to wards her. The security guards hustled her back inside, then out the rear exit and into a security vehicle. The protesters were there, too, screaming and shouting. Two of them were on the hood of the car, trying to break the windshield. The guards had to bring her back into the security office until her embassy driver came for her (StandWithUs, 4/30 from Jewish Chronicle) Where was British democracy and freedom of speech? The situation is similar in the U.S. and Canada. What are the universities and governments going to do about this undemocratic and criminal attempt to repress free speech and to attack individuals because of the country they come from? What kind of country do the attackers come from? Isn't it obvious that the universities and governments need to toughen measures of crowd control, arrest for violence, university discipline and admission, and immigration? Will the Left stand on the failing principle of its extreme version of multi-culturalism and political correctness, until democracy has fallen? The Right often calls for law-and-order. Well?
APARTHEID PRACTICED BY MUSLIMS StandWithUs has a computerized booklet that first defines South African apartheid and then discusses equivalent apartheid by the Palestinian Arab Muslim and Muslims elsewhere. Blacks are caught and enslaved by Arabs in Sudan. [Those that are not dispossessed or murdered, that is.] Under the heading of "gender apartheid" are honor killings of females and Iran's execution of thousands of homosexuals. But the government's borrow from the South African practice of enforcing the various types of Muslim Arab apartheid by brutal force. Saudi Arabia flogged Christians for practicing their religion publicly. Christianity is discouraged but allowed if kept apart from the rest of society. North African Arab states practice discrimination against native Berbers, though they are Muslim. [Saddam attempted genocide against the native Kurds of Iraq, though they are Muslims, too]. Then there is the Muslim Arab notion of Jews being inferior beings [like Nazi racism], leading to persecution of them [and expulsion of about 850,000]. Arab states exclude Palestinian Arab refuges from citizenship. Lebanon bars them from many occupations. They have been segregated. Muslims in Egypt sometimes kidnap Christian children [and women] and forcibly convert them. As for the Arabs in the Territories, they rule themselves. Israel does not rule them (StandWithUs) The booklet mentioned Arab states expelling Palestinian Arabs, but that wasn't segregation, that was self-defense. The Palestinian Arabs tried to overthrow or help Saddam overthrow their host country. Isn't it interesting that one does not hear protest over that real expulsion of Palestinian Arabs done by Arabs. One only hears protest over the non-expulsion of Palestinian Arab refugees from Israel. Such a selective ethical code does not seem ethical at all. It is a pretext. Among the photographs were those of women murdered by Muslim relatives, even in the U.S., for being too Western or dating non-Muslims. It was pathetic, even heart-breaking, not just illegal.
ISRAELIS NOW CAN SEE THROUGH WALLS An Israeli company has developed a camera the size and eight of a laptop that can show pretty clearly what is on the other side of a wall. It is intended for use by law enforcement and the military. The device already has saved lives. A girl was held by kidnappers. With the Israeli-made camera, police officers were able to see when the kidnappers left the room. The officers broke in and rescued the girl without risk that the kidnappers would execute her as they were doing it (IMRA, 5/1/10). Very useful. Terrorists should be more easily captured with less firing into houses, but less and less is our privacy secure. This is more of a concern for innocent people than supposed, because of the way news is distorted these days to make people look bad. When I was a boy, only Superman could see through buildings, but now Israelis and their customers can.
U.S. ALLOWS MOST FINANCING OF TALIBAN
er>
The U.S. had tried to eradicate narcotic cultivation in Afghanistan, but failed. Now it permits it, but tries to eradicate drug dealers with ties to the Taliban. The trade continues, financing the terrorists and greatly corrupting Afghanistan and its government. Terrorists and other criminals get three-fourths of the profits and tax the smaller portion left to farmers. The answer is to renew funding for research to find the beset mycoherbicide. Mycoherbicides can be engineered to prevent a targeted crop from growing without harming other species cultivated or causing other environmental harm. Narcotics cultivation could be thwarted in several countries, and farmers compensated with subsidies. The total cost would be less than that of the war, and eventually the war would be won. The U.S. should spend more on preventing Americans from using drugs (Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of the New York-based Economic Warfare Institute, and Aylana Meisel, its legal fellow) This may be worth trying before trying legalization plus an attempt
to reduce demand.
U.S. LEARNS FROM ISRAEL-HIZBULLAH WAR The U.S. finds it has to fight the same kinds of enemies waging the same kinds of warfare, as does Israel. Therefore the U.S. studied the Israel-Hizbullah war of 2006, to learn for its own benefit. Israeli military doctrine thought that the age of major wars had ended. It had reduced its military budget. When it had to fight Hizbullah, its military wanted to depend on the Air Force. The enemy uses a mixture of weapons and tactics, and may fight from among civilians. Therefore, the Air Force alone cannot do enough. Hizbullah was able to fight against Israeli forces while also launching rockets every day. The solution is a combination of conventional forces, especially infantry, armor, and air. Would Israel have to handle Hamas and Hizbullah differently? Yes. Hizbullah is better trained, has better weaponry, and has hilly terrain for concealment. Hamas has flat land but human shields. Human shields make airplanes less useful, when the IDF strives to minimize civilian casualties. Hamas retreated more than did Hizbullah (Israel Resource News Agency, 5/2 from) Hamas may not have retreated out of inferiority, but to conserve its forces for when it wishes to attack. Since Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia maintain large conventional sources and/or numbers of weapons, Israel should be prepared to wage large-scale conventional war.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
Mr Shulman invites you subscribe on his website, so you can follow the same issues, get a deeper insight into them, and see an accumulation of documentation.
|
|
ENDING TERRORISM PEACEFULLY — PERESTROIKA 2
Posted by Salah El din Mohssein, May 1, 2010. |
|
A futuristic scenario in 8 chapters |
|
Chapter 1 Nowadays all the Western media are playing, almost, the same tunes and Some believe it is a campaign with a purpose. The whole symphony is about the return to the talk about and the praise of the conciliation between the Vatican on one side and science and scientist on the other, by apologizing to Galileo after 500 years of his death for persecuting him because of his theory that the earth is orbiting the sun not the other way around which the church considered heresy then; and later it was proved that he was right and the church was wrong. And the apology by the crusaders to the Arabs for what they did to them and the apology by Germany to the Jews for what the Nazi did to them and the compensation it is paying them. And the pressure applied on Turkey to apologize to the Armenians for what it did to them. And the praise by the western media for these brave steps which it believes will heal historical wounds and help extinguish fires of hatred that is still lingering in the hearts and that will prevent them, the fires, from erupting again causing mayhem to communities and peoples for old hostilities they were never a party to and which they inherited. Continuing in this scenario, some voices of scholars, intellectuals and thinkers in Spain are rising up asking for Arab apology for what they did to the Spaniards for 7 centuries. Some of them think apology is not enough and compensation is also due and some politicians join these voices. The idea catches on in Mauritania who does not stop at asking for apology for what the Arabs did to it but demand financial compensation. Voices of Arab extremists and Arab Nationalists, politicians, journalists, and businessmen are mocking Mauritania's request. They attribute that to its financial and economic crisis, describing Mauritania as someone who went bankrupt and is starting to search for any excuse to get some money, pointing to the economic conditions of Mauritania saying that it was the reason that Mauritania started diplomatic relations with Israel. Which came in the hope that it, Israel, will help them break out of their crisis after they lost hope the wealthy Arabs will help them. The echoes of those claims are increasing; many more are entering into this arena of claims. In Egypt, many voices have been raised demanding an apology to the Egyptians for what the Arabs did to them. They showed from the history books all the crimes, massacres, looting, pillage and rape that were committed by Amr Bin Al-Aas when the Arabs conquered Egypt. They considered the Arabian conquest of Egypt as an invasion not liberation, and calling it liberation is deception and betrayal to the Egyptian history. They referred to the most important historians of that era like 'Bin Abdel-Hakim' (Muslim) and an Egyptian historian 'Youhana El-Nakiossi, (A Copt), and other foreign researcher and historians. These articles in the Egyptian media caused an intellectual debate; A war of views in the Egyptian newspapers, in the Television and radio programs. The debate was divided between two groups, supporters who denounce the Arabs who occupied Egypt under the leadership of Amr Bin Al-Aas, considering them colonists like any other colonist. The second group is the defendants of the Arabs, considering them noble liberators, so they should be thanked for that not condemned. The debate between the two groups had escalated. First group insisted that the Arabs were just colonialists who looted, ransacked, persecuted, and raped and they presented the evidence and documentations. The second group saw that the Arabs were preachers of a tolerant religion that is calling for mercy and humanism, and they presented rhetoric, few evidence and weak proves. The debate continued to escalate and the two groups accused each other of treason. One accuses the other of being stooges to the west and the hostility towards the faith and Arab Nationalism and the other is accusing them of being stooges to what they called Arab Nazism /Wahabism stemming from Arabian Peninsula. The accusation of apostasy, against the first group, was raised and calls for exacting the death penalty on them according to sharia. Members of Islamic radical groups in Egypt killed a free thinker. And even before the intellectuals and free thinkers recover from their shock and sadness, another free thinker was killed the very next day. At noon of that day a third secular journalist had been kidnapped and killed at the hands of the same radical Islamic groups. The Egyptian media was filled with the anger of the intellectuals, and they received support from their counterparts outside Egypt. And the condemnations for these crimes came from everywhere in the world. As a result, the Egyptian government launched a broad campaign to round up members of the radical groups. From Iran, came official statements condemning the attack on Islam and the Arab history. These statements described the Arabs, the founders of Islam 1400 years ago, as the bearers of heavenly message of mercy and peace. In reaction to these statements, rallies and conferences were held in Tunisia, Egypt, France, and London revealing from historical documents the reality of the crimes that had been committed by the Arabs in many countries they occupied. These historical documents showed how the Arabs imposed their faith and language on the occupied people at the point of sword. They erased their identities by oppression and coercion. They dominated their cultures, some remnants of these cultures are still there and it shows what happened. Like the Amazigh in Morocco, Copts in Egypt, the Nubian in South Egypt, the Assyrians in Iraq, and the Syrians in Syria. The campaign is escalating, as well as the counter campaign. Alazhar issued a statement condemning the West and accusing it of seeking to offend Islam and calling its first generation, unjustly-according to Alazhar-, colonists. The Islamic Jihad group, other radical Islamic groups, and representatives of the Muslims Brotherhood met in Turkey and warned the Muslims that Islam is facing new crusades. They opened the door for volunteers for Jihad to defend Islam. Rumors spread about pressure applied on the rulers of Saudi Arabia to apologize for the crimes that the earlier Arab Muslims had committed against other nations when they invaded them, and especially to the Spanish people. Saudi officials denied that they were under pressure to apologize, but they were promising to examine the situation with courage, transparency and honesty. The European Union denied the news that it warned the Saudi Royal family that it does not guarantee their survival, unless they correct the history of Islam, and integrate into the modern secular system of governing. Dismantle its Islamic structure just as Gorbachev did in the former Soviet Union. To admit the historical mistakes Islam had done since its inception and its bad effects on the human civilization. Wash their hands from the Sharia (Islamic Laws) and govern by the modern civil laws as it is in the Western civilized countries. The warning included that if something happened to the Royal family regime, the European Union will not grant asylum to any of its members. Saudi Arabia confirmed this denial, and also it denied that it had been subjected to any pressure of this type. It emphasized the good and secure relations with the European Union, and it does not accept any interference in the internal affairs of the kingdom. A major Arabic newspaper published in London confirmed the news of the pressures exercised by the European Union on the Saudi kingdom and the royal family to change its system of ruling and to repudiate the Islamic Sharia (Islamic Law). The newspaper avers that this pressure has happened and is happening, but in the form of advice to the Saudi officials from European diplomats who have friendly relations with the Saudi regime and the royal family. Some of those diplomats are double agents to the Saudi intelligence and the European's at the same time. They deliver these massages to Saudi Arabia either in the form of advice or as the secrets of what is happening in the political kitchen of the European Union. An Arabian Gulf TV channel held an interview with a Saudi official, asking him about the truth of the European pressure on the Saudi royal family to dismantle Islam as the communist regime in Russia. Then the interviewer asked whether this pressure will stop at the limits of diplomacy, or it may escalate to the degree of taking political actions, or perhaps economic action? It can be economic sanctions on Saudi Arabia as was the case with Libya that lead to forcing her to pay compensations, apologize and change its old ways. The Saudi official denied that. But the TV interviewer returned and asked him, about the possibility of freezing the Saudi funds and especially the funds of the royal family in the western banks as means to meet the European demands. The official, "I do not expect that, I would rule it out" The interviewer, "Well, if the Saudi Authorities and the royal family members feel that this can happen, and danger is eminent, do you think that there is a sister country or an Islamic country that the Saudis trust to deposit their savings in its banks? The official, "The reputation of the Western banks is above all doubts and its credibility has a long history". The interviewer, "Assuming that the Saudis see that it is necessary to change the banks they're using, which Arabic or Islamic sister countries can be a candidate for that?" The Saudi official, (looked to the right and to the left while thinking, he smiled with puzzlement and hesitation, and did not respond). The interviewer, "Should we assume that the Western countries and its banks are irreplaceable in its honesty and security by any of the Eastern States?" The Saudi official, "We hope that the Eastern countries, especially the Islamic ones, can be elevated to the level of the Western countries' banks in terms of trust and credibility." The interviewer, "Do you believe in the existence of a good religion whose followers do not trust each other, while they trust the strangers more?" The Saudi official's face turned red and angrily said, "This is not the fault of the religion!" The interviewer, "So whose fault is it in your opinion?" The Saudi official, "It is the people's fault." The interviewer, "Well Sir, and do you think that there is a good religion whose followers behave this way?" The Saudi official, fixing his head cover and said, "That is enough." The program stopped, music and natural sceneries appeared on the screen. Ambiguous situation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia ... Borders, airports and seaports were closed. There are speculations of a coup. Some alleged that the coup is from within the royal family itself like what happened with the former King "Saud" by his brother King Faisal, who removed him from power and took his place. News of shooting occurred near the Royal Palace in Riyadh, and other news denies it. The Saudi Radio and TV broadcast only Koran without any comment or statement. The Saudi Radio and TV broadcast a statement to reassure the citizens and demand calm from them, it stated that everything is just fine and there is no reason for panic. And an important statement will be broadcasted shortly. The Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia appeared on TV calm and confident saying" Oh, beloved sons of our nation, we are approaching a completely new era. This will be a new phase of our country's history since 1400 years. We have to face this with courage and bravery and accept it willingly. As you know life has changed greatly from what it was 14 centuries ago, the era of camel and sword. Our nation and the world live now in the era of airplanes, atomic bomb and intercontinental missiles. Nations' cultures have changed. The modern science is the master; there is no longer charlatanry and superstition. With the invention of the Internet all secrets and mysteries have became like the wheat grains in the fields; the birds pick it up and fly in the air here and there and no one can catch them. Nothing can be concealed any more. We even know the gender of the embryos in the mother's womb. From here we see that any nation lived an historic lie, no matter how long, deceived itself, or deceived other nations, will be exposed in the era of transparency and the discovery of what is hidden beneath the surface of the earth at an altitude of several kilometers in the sky. So each nation had forged a lie or a historical charlatanry and enjoyed living in it for a long time should know that there is no longer place for lying or charlatanry to the other nations and people. It is the time now for this nation to stop lying to itself, before it is exposed by others. Oh beloved people, we are heading towards a new life, a new battle that we cannot avoid. The whole world has become like small village. Nothing is happening here that can't be known immediately in America, Japan, Holland or South Africa. Now there is no way to hide any fact. Therefore we are about to enter a new era and a new approach to meet with the nations and people of the earth. We are in front of two choices, either to live with science like all the other nations and to be..., or to stick to the old superstitions and charlatanry and vanish. We have no third choice or a middle ground. Oh our beloved people, we are about to have a significant, modern, and courageous changes. We ask you to help us with courage and firmness, because we no longer accept to have the appearance of the civilization but the spirit of ignorance. Our hope is great that you will stand with us strongly and firmly. May God grant us success, His Majesty; King of the country. Chapter 2 An uproar in many Islamic countries; and accusations to the Saudi regime of acquiescence to the Western pressure abandon Islam and selling out the Islamic faith and religion for its survival. Saudi Arabia declares suspending Hajj and Umra (pilgrimage; major and minor) visas for a year because of expansions and renovations in Al-Haram Mosque. Libya condemns Saudi's position for disrupting the Hajj ritual. Libya announced its willingness to accept pilgrims to its land considering Hajj is for Muslims to gather; and says that Muslims'' annual gathering shouldn't be suspended. This will last till the situation of Hajj ritual returns to normalcy, based on the rule "Necessities permit such actions" Iran accuses Libya of opportunism, and that it is seeking to change the kebla (direction of prayer) from the East to the West. Iran announced, if Hajj is about Muslims getting together and hence can take place outside Makah then, Iran is more worthy of that; because the prophet Mohammad households have a favorite place in the Iranians hearts. Demonstrations are held in Cairo, Al-Azhar mosque, against the Saudi decision to postpone the Hajji and Umrah for a year. Saudi television presents an external view of Kaaba and Prophet Mohammad tomb, Al-Haram mosque, saying that it shows the renovation and expansion operations but no details are seen, except curtains, and nothing was heard except heavy machinery noise. The Libyan press agency confirms that what is happening to Al-Kaaba, Prophet Muhammad tomb, and Al-Haram mosque nothing but a project of demolishing the Holy sites and transforming the place into a big international park, like "Hyde Park" in London. The Iranian News Agency confirms what the Libyan News Agency announced The Saudi ministry of culture announced that it is holding a festival and cultural festival in commemoration of Ibn Rushd philosopher. The agenda for Ibn Rushd festival started with focusing on the issue of creating the Koran. Ibn Rushd was one of the most famous who argued in favour of that issue (that Quran is created not eternal). It has been noticed that the participants in the festival were keen to clarify the meaning of the creation of Koran. It means that the Koran is not a heavenly book, but simply it was written by Muhammad, presenting the evidence and proofs to support that claim from various Islamic countries, and in unprecedented elaboration. The observers have commented that this is a cultural and intellectual resurrection that is in harmony with our times. The international media observers and the Saudi Press notice the disappearance of "The promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice" committee. They considered that this is a step towards the modernization and departure from Bedouin era. A Saudi royal decree issued in Riyadh. It is providing a royal constitution for the country similar to the Magna Carta in Britain and the constitution in Denmark and Sweden. That is to rule by the modern laws. Referendum shall be put to the people. Once the people agreed on it and passed, it will be applied. A demonstration in Riyadh is denouncing the new Saudi policy considering it an abolition of Mohammedan Sharia. The demonstration was characterized by discipline and nonviolence. The security forces was monitoring, and announcing over speakers that they would not interfere and will not prevent the demonstrators from expressing their opinion as long as they are not violent. The demonstrators have complied, and the demonstration ended after two hours. Chapter 3 Newspapers of the world are talking about the new project in Saudi Arabia, which will repeal the application of the Mohammedan Shariat from its roots and that is in its original country. It is questioning the future of the Shariat as a whole after that in the other countries. The liberal parties in the entire Arabic speaker countries welcome the new constitution draft in Saudi Arabia, describing it as a cultural leap, and a courageous step. Western countries praise the new political developments in Saudi Arabia. The Islamic communities in America and some Western countries demonstrated with chants and signs describing Saudi authorities as conspiring against Islam. In Riyadh, the authorities arrested an armed group of 80 people who were carrying explosives and had prepared to blow up many of the public facilities and some of the royal family properties. Ibin Rushd cultural festival is continues, its discussions about progressive ideas are broadcasted on wide spread TV and cultural forums. The Saudi newspapers and magazines have published with great interest about the life of Ibin Rushd with direct and simplified details about his views on Koran. They emphasize on his great influence as the only philosopher in the history of the written Arabic intellectual history. Also they demonstrate the values of his work through a comparison with modern liberal thinkers and orientalists, by pointing to samples of the contradictions in Koran, eloquence flaws, the linguistic and grammatical mistakes, historical errors and the abundance of the scientific mistakes. Many sites on the Internet welcomed Saudi Arabia's move, describing it as a move towards reform and modernization, and an exit from the caves of ancient history. Other sites condemned the Saudi authorities accusing it of betrayal of the principals of religion and of selling it out to the West. An Islamic organization from Iran declares Jihad to protect the holy sites in Saudi Arabia, opening the door to volunteers from all the Islamic States to liberate the holy lands. In Egypt, the authorities deny the news about its intention to close Al-Azhar University and Al-Azhar institutions, saying that there is only a project of developing the education in the line and the spirit of modern time. The development will even include the modernization of the students' and teachers' uniform. The foreign students of the educational missions in Al-Azhar who came from Islamic countries are leaving Cairo to return to their countries. And the city of the Islamic missions has closed. The Egyptian authorities declared that in the current economic circumstances of the country it can no longer afford such a burden. The primary education in Egypt needs substantial support from the State To improve the level of graduates, which has declined in recent years. And the Egyptian students are more worthy of such expenditures. On the other hand, Egypt will compensate the countries of those students, whom their Al-Azhar missions have been cancelled. This compensation will be by the cooperation in the areas that are more productive, such as scientific research, agriculture and irrigation...etc. Suppressing a demonstration in Cairo that was intended to condemn the closure of the city of the Islamic missions and changing education curricula of Al-Azhar University to be confined to only the scientific curricula. Demonstrations in Pakistan denounce what is happening in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and condemn the closure of the city of Islamic missions. The Egyptian papers applaud the closure of the city of Islamic missions in favour of supporting the civil education and improving it. News about arresting A number of mosques preachers who demonstrated condemning the policy of the State towards " Al-Azhar " University and the city of Islamic missions. Saudi Arabia foils an attempt to infiltrate its borders of a large number of Yemenis and seizes a large stock of weapons and a large amount of explosives which were prepared for destruction and violence within the country. Yemen announces that it will stress on border control and tracking extremists. Iran calls on Muslims throughout the world to liberate the holy lands, and formally open the door for volunteers for that purpose. Chapter 4 Mauritania abolishes Sharia law and Islamists there condemn the government and accuse it of bowing to foreign pressures. The Muslim Brotherhood Groups in Jordan and Syria denounce the changes in Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt describes it as a conspiracy against Islam. A number of the leaders of the Muslims Brotherhood in Syria and Jordan are arrested for planning to carry out demonstrations in front of the embassy of Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Embassy in London was attacked and one of the guards was injured. In Sudan, El-Turabi is preparing a Sudanese-Egyptian army in collusion with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to invade Saudi Arabia and liberate the Holy Land. Clashes in Darfur and the government forces are trying to repel attacks against its troops in western Sudan in Darfur. The Sudan Liberation Army in the South is said to be heading towards the capital city, Khartoum. The government accuses western and Saudi Arabian groups of funding and inciting. Kazakhstan/Turkistan announce that they will welcome Muslims from around the world to perform the Hajj, pilgrimage, on its territory "Hajj minor" Where there is the "Mecca II", that was known to the Turkish-speaking people 600 years ago. They used to go for pilgrimage there instead of Mecca, because traveling then was difficult and expensive for the Moslems. So they built another Ka'aba there 6 centuries ago for anybody at any time to go to Kazakhstan/Turkistan and get the blessing of El sheik Ahmad El-Yassawi and perform the Hajj minor. Representatives from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Syria, Sudan, Jordan and Palestine, which is represented by Hamas Organization meet in London and denounce and condemn the invitation of Kazakhstan to the Muslims to changing the Kebla (direction of prayer) from Mecca to Turkistan. They issue a statement calling the Muslims of the world to Jihad and to volunteer to liberate the holy sites in Mecca and Medina, launching from Jordan, Iraq and Sudan. America, European Union, Canada and Australia declare, in the foreign Ministers conference, their support for the democratic reforms that are being carried out by the Saudi authorities. They pledge to support the Saudi regime against any external risks that the country may face. Saudi Arabia strengthens the control over its borders check points, in all of its seaports and airports. They're also scrutinizing visa requests and are searching passengers passing through the borders. Saudi Arabia announced the date of the plebiscite on the new constitution, which stipulates the separation of religion from the state and secularism. The constitution provides that Saudi Arabia will follow Britain and the rest of the Royal regimes in Europe; the royal family to be sovereign but not govern. People are to choose the Prime minister by election, in accordance with the new Constitution. This should happen as political parties' are formed which did not exist before. There are questions in political and diplomatic circles about the future of the other royal and sheikhdom regimes in the area; the Royal regimes in Jordan, Bahrain, the Sultanate of Oman and United Arab Emirates. King of Jordan hints that it is possible that his country will follow Saudi Arabia's steps. But the authorities in Bahrain, Sultanate of Oman and the UAE refused to comment on the recent developments in Saudi Arabia. Chapter 5 Egypt announces that it will follow the steps of Saudi Arabia in secularizing the constitution, separate religion from the State. Choosing the prime minister will be through directs elections, where he or she will be the head of the executive branch. Prime ministers will not be allowed to serve more than two terms of five years each. Both the Prime Minister and the President of the Republic must be civilians, and they shouldn't have any previous affiliations with the religious extremists, and particularly with the radical and prohibited groups. They should be chosen from professional politicians who had not been in the army, police or special agencies for a period not less than 10 years; they also mustn't have any radical religious activities or affiliations which contradict secularism. The secular opposition parties welcome the initiative of the Egyptian government while the semi-religious parties are complaining, and the prohibited religious parties condemning the decision. These banned parties, which practically exist on the political scene under the banner of newspapers and magazines. The Egyptian homeland security arrests hundreds of members of the banned Muslim Brotherhood for inciting and attempting to overthrow the government to prevent the secularization of the constitution and the government in the country. A military coup has been foiled In Saudi Arabia. Using the army weapons, this coup was very close to overthrowing the government there. The plot was to arrest the Royal family members, and confiscate all their properties. There are news that America got involved in foiling the coup using air force launched from Bahrain, Iraq, and Kuwait, which bombed the rebel's bases. It is also said that ships from the French and British navies which were close to the Saudi shores in the international waters of the red sea, had participated in foiling the failed coup. The Yemeni security forces arrested 200 Islamist gunmen of different nationalities, Arabs and non-Arabs, who tried to infiltrate Saudi Arabia carrying large amount of weapons and explosives. A French navy worship catches a ship carrying 150 people from Egypt, Sudan and Morocco equipped with weapons and ammunitions before landing on the Saudi shores for jihad against the regime there. Divisions between members of the royal family in Saudi Arabia surfaces because of the differences of their views on the new policy. The opposing team attempting to suspend the Constitution and to restore the situation to what it was. New leaderships have been appointed in the Saudi army and the police. There is news about number of the princes of the royal family have left the country choosing the optional exile. These were among the opposing people to the new constitution and regime, after they have pledged not to engage in the politics outside the country, and on the other hand the king and crown prince have pledged to consistently grant them their annual allocations as it was. Algerian government agreed on Constitution amendment to provide that the Al-Amazigia is the original nationalism of Algeria. And it is important to use the Amazigian language in education to revive the original language of the country. Chapter 6 Saudi television interrupts its regular programming to broadcast a statement from the Crown Prince which reads as follows: Our beloved people, now is the time for a great historic transition. Now is the time for our people to integrate with the times we live in and in which haven't entered yet, although we have all its tools and equipments, inside and outside our homes and factories, so now it is the time to enter the era of the computer, satellites, freedom, democracy, and also human rights. Those things cannot be separated from each others. As you know, we have taken, a courageous decision to secularize the Constitution, as well as the way of ruling. This means separating religion from the state as it is the way in the civilized world; also the Prime Minister will be chosen by free election. To achieve that, there were bold steps to follow that caused problems and were faced with obstacles. But with help from God and his grace, your support and the support of our people to our steps and historic bold decisions we will go ahead with this. The great support of our people have proved their willing to integrate with modern and civilized way of life and exiting from the ancestors' cave and the ancient fundamentalism. But ... but our people, this is not enough for the civilized society to accept us as members in the club of civilized nations. We should take other steps to demonstrate our seriousness about change; and to prove that we have broken our relation with the ages of barbarianism. Therefore it is our duty to follow the path of those who have apologized for the crimes of their uncivilized past. We must understand the nature ourselves which the rest of the world understands and to face it with candour and courage. We have to realize that it is not true that we, the Arabs are the best nation!! They said that without any evidence or proof. This is not true, but the truth is that we "Arabs" are a nation like all the other nations; we are neither better, nor worse. We can rise to the level of the civilized nations, and find a seat among them, only if we follow the modern science. That is the truth. On what basis did our ancestors say that, believed themselves, and we believed them? in the past, we have forced that on many other nations, weak nation how could we, Arabs be the best nation?! On what basis? Would be on the basis of occupying other countries under the pretence of spread the faith?! And a false claim of duty that was but an excuse for colonizing other just like any other imperialist throughout history; they did what any other imperialist did, atrocities and crimes against humanity. In the past, oppressing other people by the sword and nations occupying other nations was not a great deed that brings greatness to its perpetrators except for only during those times.; times where savagery and the law of the jungles ruled, even though it hid behind religious, ethnic or any other excuses. And just like our forefathers occupied many nations from far Asia to the end of North Africa and South West Europe, So did the Persian Empire in its colonial waves, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Assyrians, ancient Iraqis, the ancient Egyptians who extended their Empire from Iraq to Libya to the depth of Africa. And so did Mongols, Tatars as well as the Turkish Ottomans. We shouldn't forget, that many foreign colonists had occupied our countries and they also oppressed and humiliated our forefathers. They tasted the same medicine that they had given others. The nations and people of the civilized world of today are no longer proud of their colonial history, but considering it as a shameful, primitive and savage that they should apologize for it and not be proud of it. The crusaders apologized to the nations they had invaded and oppressed. The Turks apologized to the Armenians for persecuting them during the Ottoman Turkish Empire's time. Germans apologized to the Jews and compensated them. The Vatican apologized to scientists, to Galileo personally, who has been persecuted by the Church four centuries ago. So each civilized and modernized person lives in the age of the space, electronics, democracy and human rights has to enter into the modern era, the era of science and freedom. This should be coupled with disowning the mistakes of past, the past that is marred by the law of the jungle and ignorance, and apologizing for it. My beloved people, it is no more a secret that all the nations of the civilized world do not like neither the image, nor the reputation, nor the history of the Arabs. All those civilized people deal with us with suspicion and caution when we are in their countries as if we've just came from the jungle. Actually these civilized people are fair enough in their position toward us, Arabs. They know the facts about our unclean history; that our Muslim ancestors had written it by blood, murder, robbery, looting, coercion and rape. All the nations of the world know these facts about our history very well while we insist on denying it when we face ourselves and in front of other poor and backward nations, nations that are still mired in the swamp of our Arab/ Muslim ancestors, just as we are. They had committed all of the above crimes under the pretence of spreading a faith and the claim of carrying values they attributed to heaven, while heaven and earth both have nothing to do with any of these acts. It has nothing to do with all that our ancestors did, said and wrote in their books, it was all falsehood imposed on others at the point of sword. This has been expressed by the great poet and philosopher Abu Al-alaa Al-ma"ary, "They shined the sword, spoke the false Said this is the truth, we said yes it is" Our beloved people, after we have amended the constitution, going forward in Democracy and the human rights, taking the modern science and putting aside all kinds of superstitions, allowing the formation of political parties, and stressing on the political resolutions, nothing is left to change the ugly image of the Arabian man in the mind of the civilized people to pure and clear image, but to apologize for all the crimes that our Arab Moslems forefathers had committed. They have committed awful deeds and war crimes against the nations they'd occupied. These facts are well known and monitored by history and the honest historians, but it had been concealed by the traitor historians and the people who had mutual benefits with the rulers. They hid these crimes with many of the fig leaves, but whatever they have done, the truth is still obvious to the intellectuals of every civilized nation. These intellectuals are considered the mind and conscience of their nations. They are very well knowledgeable about the crimes that our Arab Muslims forefathers had committed against the nations they occupied and colonized. Sometimes they called it invasions, and other times they called it "openings" to cover the horrors they had done. But there is no way that the true history could be hidden. That is also well known to our Arab intellectuals in our country, but they couldn't reveal it before. My beloved people, in my name and on his Majesty's behalf, in your name, and on behalf of our government, we, the Arabs, announce our apology for what our Arab Muslim forefathers had committed against the following nations: Iraq and its people, Syria and its people. We apologize for the grievances that the first Arab aggressors and colonists had committed against these people, Khalid Bin Al-walid, Abi UbaydaIbn Al-garah, and many others. We apologize to Egypt and its people for what they suffered from Amr Ibn Al-Ass. Also we apologize to Persian country, Turkey, Sudan, people of central Asia, the Nubian Kingdom, which they had destroyed. North Africa, and Spain, in these countries Tariq bin Ziyad and other military colonists who followed him had committed the most heinous crimes against its people. We apologize to all those people, and condemn what has happened and accept the payment of compensation if it is requested from us. By this we would close our ugly history book in front of us and in front of the world. With our new clear image we can get the membership of the civilized nations club. My beloved people, let us put our hands together, go forward together, and upon God is the success. Saudi television programme: "History of conscience" presented a dialogue between four intellectuals and thinkers from Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan on one side, and four others from Saudi Arabia on the other side. The Jordanian and Syrian representatives spoke about the grievances that the first Arab Muslims had committed when they invaded their countries. They referred to reliable historical accounts and it is very well known to the intellectuals and thinkers. They narrated some awful stories, for example, how Khalid Bin Wald raped a female captive. She was the wife of Malik Bin Al-Nouwara, Khalid's soldiers took her just after killing her husband in front of her eyes and gave her to their leader. He closed the tent door and raped her while the battle was still there outside. The Saudi intellectuals and tinkers confirmed this story historically. They alluded to the references and books that mentioned this story, like The Genius of Al Sadiq by Al Aqad. They added another crime, that crime had been committed by Sieff Allah (God's sword), Bin Al Walid's uncle. An interruption, but Sieff Al Shaitan, (devil's sword), this is not the only crime of that kind, but he committed such heinous act several times! A Saudi intellectual smiling with sadness sorrow saying, "And Khalid was giving excuses, to him the poor capture was the one that gave herself to him, and he married her!!" Another Saudi thinker commented on that saying, "Does the prisoner HAVE anything to give?!" The Saudi intellectual answered, "The prisoner did not own even herself." Another intellectual," Well, how did she give him herself while she did not own it? How did she give herself to the killer of her husband and relatives?" A Saudi thinker, "These are lies, fraud, and idiocy." After a long debate the interview was ended by apologizing from the four Saudi intellectuals and thinkers to the Syrian and Jordanian thinkers for the crimes that their forefathers, the first Muslims had committed against their people. They expressed their sorrow saying that the Syrian people have the right to claim compensation, if the apology from the two Saudi intellectual representatives is not enough, and also if the apology from the Saudi authorities publicly on television is not enough. Chapter 7 The group of thinkers and intellectuals from Syria and Saudi Arabia reviewed the concealed recorded history books mentioning some crimes that the first Muslim Arabs had committed when they entered and occupied Syria under the name of opening. They claimed that this was for the sack of God. After that the program explored the public opinion on the street about what they have heard. A Saudi woman named Hessa Bint Muzahim, was shaking and crying "Do not remind me, I did not know that these awful heinous crimes have been committed!! God! How did they hide these facts from us for that long, 1400 years!" Another man, Agfan Bin Hamedan, his face was showed anger and sorrow saying, "I couldn't sleep last night after I heard what was mentioned. I imagined this woman that was raped by this Khalid Bin Al Walid in the battlefield. I imagined that she is my sister or my daughter!! Oh brother; how come they were calling him Seif Allah, (The sword of God) God damn on this Seif Allah. Why they did not teach us these facts in school to enlighten us with the truth? Oh my God, after I watched this program I realized the Europeans and Americans hate us and looking down on us when we go to their countries. That is because they know the reality of the first Muslim Arab ancestors of ours, which we did not know before watching this program. Now, my brother, I believe what our forefathers have done to other countries was neither opening, nor invasion, but it was raping, robbery, and looting. This is exactly like the Mongols and Tatars had done. They say that it was for the sack of spreading the message of god and belief in him! But this is false, fraud, and criminality. It is good that the Saudi TV told us the truth, to know why the foreigners in the West hate us and look down on us. Yes, because they know that we are the descendants of the Arabian Tatar, truly this is the act of Tatars!! We must know our true history, to correct our image, and to apologize to the people for what had been committed against them in the past so that the civilized world would accept us and would know that we are civilized people who condemned the bloody past and renounced it. It is good what his Highness the Crown Prince has done by apologizing in public to the people who our ancestors oppressed, and the willingness of the Kingdom to compensate those who request that, may other nation forgive our ancestors' sins. Now we are awake at last and recognize the lie that lasted for 1400 years. Lying has no roots, one day the truth always prevail. The host: "Thank you for your opinion." The citizen: "Thank you, for giving me the opportunity to express what is inside me; for I couldn't sleep last night because of the grief and shame from our bloody history which we ought to have known, faced, and treated long time ago. Now I feel better; by talking with you I said what is inside me and I hope to sleep well tonight. Oh brother, I did not sleep last night at all." A Saudi Royal decree to defer the acceptance of applications for Hajj and Uumra visas for another year, until the completion of the renovation of the holy places was announced. The Organization of the Islamic States issued a statement in Khartoum under the chairmanship of Sheikh al-Turabi. It denounced the extension of delaying Hajj and Uumra visas for another year by the Saudi authorities, allegedly for the purpose of completing the renovation of the holy places. It accuses them of conspiring with the west to eliminate the religion and dismantle it. The conference formed a committee to investigate what is happening inside the holy places. Because they suspect that what is happening there is not renovation, but unknown suspicious creepy activities. This might confirms that the Saudi authorities will turn the holy places into International Park like the Hyde Park in London. The Saudi authorities issued a Statement denouncing the meeting of Khartoum and the statement of the organization. And it warned Sudan of the consequences of interfering in its (Saudi) affairs. Also it warned whoever gives a chance to anyone seeking to interfere in the internal affairs of the Kingdom, undermine or discredit it. The Saudi television continues to show meetings with the thinkers and intellectuals liberals from Saudi Arabia and the countries that were affected by the invasion of first Muslim Arabs. In a seminar with Egyptian liberal intellectuals and thinkers they presented the crimes that were committed by the first Arab Muslims the Egyptians. They started from Amr Bin Al-Aass, the killings and violations that were committed by him and his soldiers; the high and the unfair taxes that were imposed on the Copts and oppressing them in their own country. They mentioned the story of the Muslim Khalifa Al-Ma'moun, who came to Egypt heading an army of 80 thousand to extinguish El-Bashmouneen revolution, province of Damiett today. He killed all the men of the region and took the women and children prisoners walking to Baghdad where they were sold as slaves in the slave market. The Saudi intellectuals who participated in this seminar confirmed this event historically; they mentioned number of references supporting that and gave the printing dates, the writers, and the pages' numbers. On the following day of this seminar with the Egyptian intellectuals and thinkers the Television interviewed Saudi citizens on the streets to know their opinions and reactions. Musaab, a Saudi youth said with emotion and grief, "How all these crimes that were committed by the first Arab Muslims were hidden from the people? I am embarrassed to say that these are my grandfathers. Now I understand the secret behind the sharp and unflattering looks we get from the Europeans. When I visited London and America with my uncle I was surprised and I asked myself, "Why these people are giving us these dirty looks? And why they hate us? Is it for our Arabian clothes or for our beards? Or what is it? Now, after I watched this program, I know the reason. It is the bloody, brutal, barbarian, Tatary, and inhuman history of our forefathers, shame on them. Haifa, a Saudi woman, 40 years (with shaky tone and tears in her eyes) said: "I cried a lot when I heard and knew the horrors of the first Arab Muslims. I do not say my grandfathers. No, I can't and do not like the sound of the word grandfathers in my mouth." She was overwhelmed by crying. The broadcaster: "Thanks to you and to the guests who expressed their opinions. Thanks to the people who proved that the modern Arab person is a civilized one. He refuses the barbarous of the past by whomever it had been committed, even if they were his grandfathers. In courage, he criticizes and condemns all the acts that they had committed in the past. Also we thank the thinkers and intellectuals who spoke and enlightened us with the truth." His voice shaking and he, too, was close to crying, but he was able to control himself and continued his presentation saying, "Thank you to His Majesty the King and the Crown Prince for this historical and civilized revolution which is adequate to correct our image in front of the world. We thank you all, dear viewers. So long until we meet again in a new program. Several warships from the three fleets, American, British, and French located in the international waters near the Saudi coast foiled an infiltration attempt on the Saudi coast. This operation was planned to be done by a vessel equipped with rubber boats coming from Sudan and carrying armed men of various nationalities, Egyptian, Pakistanis, Sudanese, Chechens, Moroccan, Tunisian, Algerians and Jordanians. The collation forces arrested the vessel crew and the armed men. They sent them to a base for investigation. Jordan arrested a number of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood leaders while they were overseeing the training and arming elements from Syria and Lebanon. They were preparing for sending them to the Saudi territory to commit violent acts to undermine the security there, and help overthrow the ruling regime in Saudi Arabia. Iraq announced it is preparing a draft for a new constitution that provides the consideration of the Iraqi and Assyrian heritage, to revive Iraq's original language which was engraved by the nailing letters, and to consider the English language as the second language of the country hence it is one of the dominant languages. Chapter 8 Lebanon: There are several voices in the Lebanese parliament requesting the return to the Phoenician identity and nationalism, considering it the only civilized and historical nationalism that is worthy to be in Lebanon, and the one which was not forced from a foreign occupier. The government promised to study this matter, to discuss the idea of the country new constitution, and to reconsider the identity of Lebanon. The Egyptian television showed the episodes where the Egyptian and Saudi liberal intellectuals and thinkers and others from Syria and Iraq talked about the crimes and horrors that the first Arab Muslims had committed when they invaded the countries, the so called opening/liberation. The Egyptian television repeated broadcasting the same episodes after it has left severe dramatic echo among all levels of the Egyptian people. There was a general sense of disappointment for having lived in a historical lie for 14 centuries. Questions started to come up, sometimes they were asked with anger, and others with loud voices, "Who is responsible for putting Egypt and the Egyptians in this fast sleeping for almost 1500 years?" It is surprising that they lived in this historical and national lie for all these years without waking up; Egypt has woken up only when its occupiers who put her in a long sleep woke her up Some of the leaders of "Egypt the Mother" party, still under formation, appeared on the Egyptian TV for several times in a few days, explaining the program they have to restore Egypt to its real Egyptian identity and to revive its original language, the language of the civilized Egypt. The Saudi TV program "From the Conscience of History" hosted a number of the liberal Jewish intellectuals and thinkers of Yemen in a free and open dialogue. The broadcaster, addressing the Jewish Yemeni intellectuals saying, "You are in Yemen, a country that is adjacent to the country of Islam." In your opinion, why your ancestors did not enter Islam? The intellectual Jewish Yemeni, smiling, speaks softly, "We have heard that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has adopted the path of democracy, freedom, and science; now can we really speak freely and frankly? The broadcaster answers with assuring and firm, yes, didn't you watch previous seminars on our program? The intellectual Yemeni, "Well, yes we have seen and heard." The broadcaster, "So you can speak freely. As you have seen and heard, the system in the Kingdom is covered by the freedom and democracy umbrella. The intellectual Yemeni, "Well, Well ... I say to you that our ancestors did not believe in Islam, because they did not find any authenticity or credibility in the message of the prophet of the Arabs. The broadcaster: How? Can you explain and illustrate what you are saying? The intellectual Yemeni, the first Muslims imposed such ransom on the Jews of El-Medina. It was like what the gangs' leaders impose. They called it "Gezia", and said that it was the order of God. That was like many things and many inappropriate actions, which they said, "It had been God's order." Then the Jews of El-Medina were coerced to enter in to several wars. The Muslims had besieged them inside their homes; until they were very close to perish. The Muslims made a covenant with them, their security in returns of exiting their homes and leaving everything behind. When around 350 men exited, Mohammad and his men tied their hands and legs then slaughtered them. Muhammad and his friends, or in other words his gang, took their money and took their women. Muhammad chose to himself the most beautiful and youngest woman. He took her away, and inside his tent he raped her. She was married and her husband had just been killed at the hands of Muhammad and his gang. The sands hadn't absorbed yet his blood and all the other men. Muhammad said that he married her! How he married her without waiting for the three menstrual periods? She was married and her husband was with her just one night before?! How was it a marriage, and not rape, while the alleged groom had killed the bride's people, slaughtering them, just a few hours before the marriage? how was it a marriage? And there were no drum beating heard? Beating the drums was a mandatory condition for marriage as Muhammad himself ordered. But there was only the beatings on the bride's cheeks for mourning her husband and the other relatives that were slaughtered by this alleged groom?!! This happened several times and not once, once with Sophia, and the other was with Barah Bint El-Haress. Is this a prophet that we can have faith in?! And is this religion that can we believe in!! The broadcaster: seems surprised and horrified, looking to the Saudi intellectuals and thinkers asking, "Are these allegations true? Is that in the records of history? Saudi thinkers: Yes, yes, unfortunately, all that is mentioned in the most credible Islamic references itself. Yes, unfortunately many references mention that, like El-Sera "Biography" by Bin Quatiba, El-sera by Bin Hisham, and the women of the Prophet by Bint El-satee, Dr. Esha Abdel Rahman, and many others. The broadcaster horrified trembling asking another one of the Saudi intellectual, "Is this true?" He answered, "Yes, yes many references mentioned that, but in a soft manner that makes the crime looks as if it were simple and no big deal. Sometimes the Islamic books mentioned the stories of the most heinous crimes, as if they were the ultimate form of compassion and humanity, but whoever examines it with reason after stripping the holiness would know the truth of how heinous of a crime it was. There are many intellectuals and writers who attempted to shed light on those crimes, but they were dim lights that would not show the ugly face of those atrocities except for to a few bright intellectuals. There are a few other thinkers who mentioned those crimes overtly as mentioned by our brother (referring the Yemeni intellectual). Some faced allot of trouble due to their courage, and paid dearly, years of their life behind bars in many countries and some paid the ultimate price, their life ...! The broadcaster, held his head and closed his eyes for moments, it seemed that he was dizzy, and then he lifted his head to speak, "dear viewer we will have to end the program now. Thanks to our guests, thanks to you all," then he pulled out a handkerchief to wipe the tears in his eyes. There are many signs hanging in the streets of Riyadh and many other Saudi cities with slogans supporting the reforms; "Welcome to the new constitution", "Welcome to the new era", "Welcome to the reconciliation with history", "Greeting to the cultural openness", "We support freedom and democracy", and "We welcome the openness to civilization". The King and the Crown Prince received many supporting messages. People of the Kingdom have published advertisements in the Saudi newspapers congratulating the King and the Crown Prince for the joining of their Kingdom to the civilized nations club, and catching up to the twenty first century. Contact Salah El din Mohssein by email at salahmohssein@hotmail.com. This article is archived at http://www.ahewar.org/eng/show.art.asp?aid=885 |
|
WHO OWNS JERUSALEM
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 1, 2010. |
|
Many nations invaded and conquered Jerusalem but, in time, all were eradicated or made so lowly that they lived in poverty — even to this day. Israel's enemies wanted not the loot the golden holy serving pieces in the Jewish Temple as their primary goal. Rather they aimed to capture the One G-d of the Jews to add to their own panoply of pagan gods. They often succeeded in capturing the stones and mortar of Jerusalem — after slaughtering, raping and enslaving the Jewish people living there. But, they never could find the G-d of the Jews. Granted, all Jerusalem conquerors evolved fantasies about how the Jews had abandoned our Covenant with G-d and, therefore, both Christian and Islam claim that only they are the chosen, proper servant of G-d on earth. So now, despite all claimants vanishing, we now have Hussein Barack Obama speaking for America and, in partnership with Islam and the Church of Rome, claiming Jerusalem — along with all her adjoining territories. Perhaps it is not so strange to see America, well on its way to bankruptcy, oil wells bursting forth with the likelihood that the fishing and shellfish industries of the Gulf of Mexico will be decimated and the shores of four American states will be coated with thick oil for years. Whatever Obama touches while driving his assault on Jerusalem and Israel has resulted in a catastrophe for America. Is the great nation of America to disappear, alongside with the presumptuous conquerors of the past? Below are two articles: (1) Dr. Jacques Gauthier & (2) "Jerusalem Legally Belongs to the Jews" by Ted Belman |
|
(1) "Jerusalem legally belongs to the Jews"
I urge you to watch this video interview of Dr Jacques Gauthier in Nov '09 in which he explains that Jerusalem belongs to the Jews. As it happens I know him from Toronto. He gave me a copy of his thesis. On April 24 and 25th he is participating in the Second San Remo Conference to commemorate the ninetieth anniversary of the decision granting Palestine to the Jews. It is taking place in San Remo. (2)
I attended a lecture tonight by Jacques Gauthier, a Canadian Lawyer who just received his PhD after twenty years of research on the legal status of Jerusalem and the writing of a dissertation of some 1300 pages with 3000 footnotes. He had to present his thesis to a panel of two leading international lawyers and one world famous Jewish historian. The reason for so many footnotes was to enable him to defend his thesis from intense attack by one of the lawyers who happened to be Jewish anti-Zionist and who had represented the PA on numerous occasions. Gauthier is not Jewish. Here's what he said in point form, 1. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 started the whole process but it didn't create international legal rights. 2. The San Remo decision made on 25 April 1920, incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917[2] and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. It was the basic decision upon which the Mandate for Palestine was constructed. While the decision made at San Remo created the Palestine Mandate de-facto, the mandate document signed by Great Britain as the Mandatory and the League of Nations made it de-jure. It thus became a binding treaty in international law. The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. He pointed out that the Arabs weren't even mentioned but that civil and religious rights only were accorded other inhabitants. This thereby excludes political rights. 3. Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations provides for the creation of mandates. To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant. The legal significance here is that "the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation". The Mandatory Power was the trustee of that trust. 4 The Palestine Mandate of the League of Nations, included the following significant recital, "Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; This had never happened before in history. Palestine was to be held for the Jewish people wherever they lived. No such recognition had ever been according to anyone else, anywhere, ever. ART. 2. The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. Thus the operative clause specifically referred to the preamble and reiterated that there were no political rights for other inhabitants. ART. 5. The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power. 5. The United Nations took over from the failed League of Nations in 1945 and its Charter included Article: 80 .. nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties. Thus the Palestine Mandate continued without change. 6. In 1947, the General Assembly of the UN passed Res 181 which became known as the Partition Plan pursuant to which both Jews and Arabs could announce their state. First it must be noted that the Charter of the UN specifically gave no power to the General Assembly because that would infringe on the sovereign power of individual members. So the GA could recommend only. Secondly, this recommendation was in violation of the terms of the Mandate. See Art 5 above. This resolution also provided for a Special Regime for Jerusalem which had the following defined boundaries, A. SPECIAL REGIME The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations. The Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations. But this regime was to be limited in time. It was not to be an "international city " for all time as we have been lead to believe. The Statute elaborated by the Trusteeship Council the aforementioned principles shall come into force not later than 1 October 1948. It shall remain in force in the first instance for a period of ten years, unless the Trusteeship Council finds it necessary to undertake a re-examination of these provisions at an earlier date. After the expiration of this period the whole scheme shall be subject to examination by the Trusteeship Council in the light of experience acquired with its functioning. The residents the City shall be then free to express by means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of regime of the City. This provision for a referendum was of critical importance to the acceptance of Res 181 by Ben Gurion. He knew that the Jews were in a majority within these boundaries and would be in 10 years when the referendum was to be held. Thus he was confidant that Jerusalem would return to Jewish hands. Keep in mind that the disposition of this area was to be determined not by Israel but by the residents of Jerusalem so defined. Currently the Jews have a 2:1 majority there. Needless to say that after the Armistice Agreement of '49 the Jordanians who were in control of Jerusalem violated every provision of this resolution calling for among other things respect for holy places. The referendum never took place. After the '67 war in which Israel regained the land to the Jordan including Jerusalem, Res 242 of the Security Council was passed authorizing Israel to remain in possession of all the land until they had "secure and recognized boundaries". It did not require Israel to withdraw from all of the territories and it was silent on Jerusalem. Also it "Affirms further the necessity for achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem". There was no reference to Res 181 nor was there a distinction made between Jewish and Arab refugees. HTTP://WWW.ISRAPUNDIT.COM/2008/? P=22328#MORE-22328
Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
GREEN PLANT. RED AND GREEN PETALS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 1, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://freddebby.blogspot.com/ to see more of his graphic art. |
|
ABBAS CHIDES FAYYED ON POLICY; JERUSLM MAYOR IN DC RE HOUSING; BRITISH ELECTION AND ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 1, 2010. |
|
ABBAS PUTS FAYYED DOWN OVER POLICY AND RIVALRY 
Palestinian Authority (P.A.) Prime Minister Fayyad and President Abbas long have been rivals. Until now they have managed to work together. Lately, Fayyad has been campaigning as if for the Presidency and has been acting independently in favor of independence for the P.A.. Abbas brought Fayyad up short by reminding him that the Prime Minister does not make policy, the PLO does. Whereas Fayyad set a date for unilateral declaration of statehood, Abbas said such a declaration would ill serve the P.A.. Abbas does not want a state until he can negotiate the inclusion of more territory in it, including Jerusalem (IMRA, 4/28/10). Neither official has a political following, but Abbas is head of Fatah, to which Fayyad does not belong.
IRAN CONCERNED ABOUT TERRORISM AND WESTERN DOUBLE STANDARD ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS A spokesman for Iran's foreign Ministry expressed concern that terrorist organizations might gain access to nuclear weapons. The Iranian also denounced what he called a double standard, whereby the West helps some countries acquire nuclear weapons, despite the West's professed opposition to nuclear proliferation, and forbids other countries from acquiring nuclear technology for industrial purposes. He implied that the West gave Israel nuclear warheads. Recently, Obama threatened Iran and North Korea with a nuclear attack. Revising American policy, Obama said that the U.S. would not use nuclear weapons against countries adhering to the non-proliferation treaty, but would use them against those that signed it but do not adhere to it. He cited Iran and N. Korea as states that signed and violated. For that, Iran's President Ahmadinejad called Obama a "cowboy." (IMRA, 4/28/10). Don't insult cowboys! Obama's threat makes a distinction that he failed to relate to national security. He sounds dangerous. Otherwise, there is no Western double standard on nuclear arms. The West generally opposes proliferation, except that companies have sold the technology for civilian industry that purchasers learn from in order to make weapons. Countries that violate the nuclear proliferation treaty, such as Iran and North Korea, invite sanctions. Countries that threaten to use nuclear arms, such as Iran and North Korea, also cause Western concern. Israel acquired nuclear technology long ago without participation in the treaty and without threatening other countries. Comparing it to Iran and North Korea is a false, over-simplification. Islamists often argue by simplistic comparison. The countries that complain most about Israel's nuclear knowledge are the ones that pursue it themselves and that have attacked Israel repeatedly or that, like Iran, sponsor terrorist proxies that do. How they would love to have Israel's nuclear facility dismantled, so that their superiority in other weapons of mass-destruction and in conventional weapons, and their surreptitious development of nuclear weapons, would enable them to succeed in jihad against Israel!
MAJOR MIDEAST MISCONCEPTIONS: ISRAEL 'OCCUPIES' JUDEA-SAMARIA. PART 2 The prior article, about "Occupies," showed that the term is misunderstood, and this continuation explains that this term, as are others, often is misused deliberately. The Arabs have found that certain, loaded terms, inflame Western sentiment against Israel. Some of these terms are "occupies," "illegal," "settlement," and "violate UN Resolutions." The Arabs sling those terms at Israel on every occasion. They don't apply, but the mud sticks. Mud sticks when the biased world refuses to wash it off. First the Arabs and Israeli leftists called certain Jewish houses and communities "illegal," though they really were in various stages of legal approval which the government delayed and then claimed were illegal. Then the Arabs and their friend in the White House claimed that all the Jewish settlements are illegal. Then some call the non-occupation "illegal." Finally, someone ahead of the pack wrote to me and called Israel "illegal." The term is a weapon. The Arabs fling it like one of their rocks flung at Israeli motorists. Arab build settlements, too. They built thousands of houses in
Israel and in Israeli-administered areas of the Territories on land
the Arabs do not own and very often without building permits and in
defiance of legitimate town planning. When Israel correctly calls them
illegal, the world denounces Israel. Sec. of State Clinton demanded
that Israel not demolish them, only Jewish "outposts." I would be
suspicious of a Secretary of State having that double standard and of
a President who, like the Arabs, calls something illegal
inappropriately and without explanation. It is just name-calling.
RAISING AN ISRAELI TO BE DEDICATED 
David Bedein runs the Israel Resource News Agency, that I draw upon. The questions he asks politicians are some of the most profound and challenging, difficult for them to evade or to rationalize. They are brief, but cause one to think. We met a couple of decades ago at the offices of Pro Israel, where I had volunteered to set up their articles and documents library. The plan was for me to use it to answer people's questions about Zionism. After spending two years categorizing and filing a few hundred thousand pages, all of which I speed-read, I started answering questions with or without perusing references. A shortage of funds for new acquisitions ended that enjoyable work. But now I had the basis for correcting mis impressions left by standard journalism, which is how I see my reporting. On a visit to Jerusalem, I arranged an interview with David, already poking through superficial news to deeper meaning and explanation. Unable to find his office, I asked the first person I encountered. It was David. I recall a photograph of his family on his counter. They all were blond and all lovely looking. Recently my report about El Al rescuing stranded Israelis from Europe was taken from a story by Noam Bedein. I asked David if Noam were his son. Yes, the eldest of six, Noram is in his mid-twenties, one of those little ones in the photograph. Noam has been working for three years at the Sderot Media Center www.SderotMedia.org.il. Sderot, right by the Gaza Strip, has been struck the most by terrorist rocket crews who deliberately fire at civilians and who complain, along with the UN, if Israel fires back at their military facilities. Noam guides tours there, to explain the situation far more cogently and detailed than does the media. He wants people to really understand. (One of my Israeli associates gave me the information for articles appearing here about Sderot and Noam.) Noam's singular dedication to present the human face of the people there under siege has launched his young career. But he was steered into it by events on which his father worked and which influenced him from childhood on. When the boy was five years old, his father opened his press office, in 1987. The next year, the boy had many questions about the Intifada, then in full force. A defining event event for Noam was the fire-bombing of a bus near Jericho, in October 1988. A solider on the bus, David Delaroza, rushed back into the burning bus, try to save Rachel Weiss and her three children, who were screaming from the flames that consumed their lives. The smoke suffocated the would-be rescuer. He died six weeks later on an operating table in London. In an interview that Mr. Bedein arranged for NBC-TV, the soldier's mother showed Bedein the charred tephillan and siddur. Bedein recalls, "In that Sidur, David had inscribed a personal commitment and blessing, that he would take upon himself the mitzvah of THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF. I told that to young Noam. It has stayed with Noam through life. At six, Noam would not stop talking about David Delaroza's bravery." Noam is named in memory of Noam Yehudah, a neighbor in Tzfat, killed in action on June 10, 1982 in Lebanon at age 19. Not long before, Noam Yehudah wrote an impassioned letter to Israel's Chief of Staff, Raphael Eitan, objecting to the task of carrying a wounded soldier on a stretcher being consider punishment, during basic training. "Noam Yehudah wrote to Gen. Eitan that carrying a wounded soldier on a stretcher should be an honor, not a punishment. Impressed by the letter, Gen. Eitan wrote back to the young private that he was changing the standing order. Noam Bedein has quite a legacy to follow. And so father and son have dedicated themselves to piercing the veil of indifference to real suffering and to bringing out the hidden story in behalf of their people and of the whole truth. (With facts from David Bedein, 4/29/10) Many Israeli writers and academics sell out their people, to make much more money providing the slander about Israel that foreign media and lecture bureaus welcome without close scrutiny. They know audiences assume that if Israelis make damaging statements about Israel, it must be so. It ain't necessarily so.
Houses for all ethnic groups. He told Members of Congress that this is Jerusalem's right and the national government of the country has no legal right to bar construction there. He explained that the City will continue approving construction without bringing the Prime Minister in on it. Barkat denied that there is a freeze there now, although he admitted that there was a temporary lull, as a gesture of respect for the U.S.. Construction is resuming, he said. House Republican Whip Eric Cantor "backed Barkat's statement that Jerusalem will remain Israel's united capital, and said that both Democrats and Republicans back that view, despite the position taken by Obama and his staff." (Arutz-7, 4/30/10). Having reunited the city by liberation in self-defense, Israel makes no official distinction between its sections. On the other hand, sometimes Prime Ministers under pressure seem to have been less active in the Arab areas, including at times condoning Palestinian Authority interference.
BEHIND ISRAELI REFUSAL TO SELL TURKEY ADVANCED WEAPONS We had reported an Israeli refusal to sell Turkey certain weapons. More has come out about that. A recently reject Turkish bid was for an advanced naval interceptor developed jointly by Israel and India. The weapon provides "360-degree protection from missile or air attack." Both Israel and India suspect that Turkey would share the technology with Iran, and that Iran, in turn, would share it with Pakistan. Pakistan could pay Iran in nuclear technology. Would Turkey? The Islamist regime of Turkey has made statements aligning itself with Iran and Syria against Israel and denouncing Israel. Last November, DEBKAfile reported that Turkey promised Iran its support if Israel attacked Iranian nuclear sites. Turkey promised Iran any intelligence about an Israeli or U.S. preparation for such a strike (Arutz-7, 4/30/10). If that DEBKAfile report be true, then the U.S. should stop supporting Turkey's bid to join the EU and should reconsider military cooperation with Turkey, a NATO member. NATO should not have members that spy for enemies, if such be the case. The government of Turkey tries to have it both ways. It is anti-Israel but offers to mediate for Israel. It is in NATO, but supports enemies of the West. Is it still possible for Turkey to recover its secularist orientation, whereby it was a force against aggression rather than become a religiously-oriented force in favor of aggressors?
NETANYAHU STAVES OFF CHALLENGE TO HIS LEADERSHIP OF PARTY PM Netanyahu won a Likud Central Committee vote by more than the required two-thirds, to defer a Party primary for another 20 months. He was opposed by Moshe Feiglin's national religious bloc. Feiglin's argument was that by holding primaries that could boost his faction, he could keep Netanyahu from a suspected inclination to give up part of Jerusalem. Netanyahu's vote was questioned by some who said the Party administration barred poll watchers and access to registration rolls. Netanyahu acted high-handedly before, changing a quota system, so as to keep Feiglin out of the Knesset. A National Union Party official urged Feiglin to return to National
Union, asserting that Likud Party hacks never would let Feiglin
succeed there. Feiglin believes that he must succeed there, because
only a major party can make policy (Arutz-7, 4/30/10).
ISRAELI 'SETTLERS' URGE COUNTER-BOYCOTT OF PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY Danny Dayan, head of the Yesha Council, representing the Jews of Judea-Samaria, reacted to Palestinian Authority (P.A.) destruction of tons of goods purchased from them, by urging counter-measures. He said that Israel should stop its "far-reaching gestures" to the P.A., all rebuffed and met with incitement to violence against Israel and now with this boycott. Mr. Dayan suggested that Israel deduct the cost of lost sales from excise taxes that Israel collects for the P.A., as the P.A. boycotts good from the Territories and eastern Jerusalem. Pointing out that tens of thousands of P.A. Arabs, amounting to 10% of the P.A. work force, is employed by Israelis, National Union MK Uri Ariel had urged that Israelis fire them and cease purchasing from Arabs in the P.A. (Arutz-7, 4/30/10). After such rebuff and terrorism, does Israel's policy of building up the P.A. work for peace? Does P.A. behavior indicate to the government of Israel that that the P.A. is a peace partner or a jihadist enemy seeking the destruction of Israel? The West has a theory that countries act largely according to their economic interests. The theory is too ethno-centric. It does not apply as much to jihadists, who act largely according to their religious imperatives. The theory further holds that economic ties bind both sides, alleviating the temptation to commit aggression. Not if the aggressor side feels it is a matter of religious honor. Thus the P.A. refuses most economic cooperation with Israel, just begs harder from international donors. On the other hand, being more normal, Israel probably does not want to jeopardize its sizable sales to the P.A.. Thus it is Israel that gets bound by such normalization as exists. A related theory is to expect peace from negotiations. However, democracies become too impatient to bargain well with dictators. They also feel ashamed to admit to voters that negotiations are failing, so they make more concessions. If the other side is fanatical, like the Nazis and Communists, agreements are not kept and peace does not result.
BRITISH ELECTION EFFECT ON ISRAEL 
The growing popularity of Nick Clegg, head of Britain's third party, Liberal Democrats, may enable that party to enter the government in a coalition. Clegg may gain a decisive role in determining which of the other two parties forms a coalition with it. He could become Foreign Minister or even Prime Minister. According to Israeli journalist, Yaakov Achimeir, "When Clegg was told that Netanyahu insists on Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State, Clegg questioned the very idea of a Jewish country." Delivering a lecture at the European Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism in Westminster last June, Clegg said "he did not believe he had ever heard an Israeli prime minister refer to Israel in such a way before. 'Is the idea of Israel as a Jewish state something new?'" Jewish Board of Deputies' senior vice-president Jonathan Arkush replied, "The idea that Israel is a Jewish nation state is certainly not new at all. There are over 70 states with an explicit Islamic character and countries such as Britain, which is definitively Christian. Is there not room for one country with a Jewish character?" [50 states belong to the Organization of Islamic Conference.] Four months ago, Clegg blamed Israel for a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. He urged EU pressure on Israel and Egypt to lift the partial embargo on Gaza. In January, 2009, Clegg urged an EU boycott and other sanctions against Israel (Arutz-7, 4/30/10). Clegg delivers lectures on antisemitism? He needs to be delivered a lecture on it. He aspires to the seats of PM Lloyd George and Lord Balfour, without knowing of their setting in motion the reconstitution of the Jewish national state? There long have been different ethnic groups, but ancient Israel was one of the first nations. There is a peculiar, contemporary double standard, antisemitic or thoughtless, that disapproves of religious manifestation by Israel but not by Islam, that denounces nationalism by Jews but not by Arabs, and that objects to Israel being a Jewish state (that allows non-Jews to become citizens) but ignores the dozens of states that have nationalist and religious requirements for citizenship. Except under Israeli administration, Gaza has been poor. But no evidence made the newspapers that it has a humanitarian crisis. The claim of a crisis seems propagandistic, especially since the blockade is only partial and smuggling brings in many goods. Demands to punish those who impose the partial blockade would be more credible if those same critics first demanded to punish those who invoked the blockade by their terrorism against civilians. Those critics would reward terrorists. Whom do they think jihad would target next, if it conquered Israel? This world has witnessed genocides and Holocaust. Nevertheless, it pursues policies that invite or condone more of them. There is too much hypocrisy about these matters. Where were these critics of Israel when a U.S. company connected to U.S. Cabinet members was found to have built a poison gas factory in Iraq, gas that Saddam used against enemies?
HIZBULLAH OBJECTS TO U.S. INSPECTION OF LEBANON BORDER Some U.S. security officers inspected the Lebanese border at Masnaa and Anjar, asking people what they might do to make the border more secure. Hizbullah representatives objected to the inspection as a violation of national security and of the UN resolution. They called it injurious to Lebanon, insisting that whatever the U.S. learns, it would pass on to Israel (IMRA, 4/30/10). The U.S. has given aid to the Lebanese Army. The supposition that the U.S. would pass on any intelligence gained to Israel is based on the myth, directed against both the U.S. and Israel, that the U.S. gives unstinting support for Israel. What is Hizbullah's real views about borders? Radical Muslims like those in Hizbullah do not believe in borders. Hizbullah triggered a war when, after having fired over the border, its men also crossed the border to kidnap and kill some Israeli soldiers.
ORDER EVACUATION OF JEWS' ILLEGAL HOUSE IN JERUSALEM 
Although the State's attorney opposed the suit, he said that when the high court rules, the State must move swiftly to implement. The law is the law. Jerusalem Mayor Barkat is working on a plan that would remove the top two stories, to bring the building in compliance, and also legalize the Arab buildings that are not in compliance. Objecting to the State's haste, Jerusalem Mayor Barkat remarked that for the same, mostly Arab neighborhood, there are 115 orders for demolition. The Mayor asked why the hurry for the one and not the other 114 (IMRA, 4/30/10). The answer is that there is a double standard against Jews even in the Jewish state. Meretz is anti-Zionist, so is the Court, and, to a lesser extent, so is the Netanyahu regime whose leftist Defense Minister has control over housing permits in the Territories. There may be a logical flaw in the Mayor's plan. The building involved in the suit can be pared down to fit the zoning code, but the illegal Arab buildings, built without permits and on land designated for parks, land that the Arabs do not own, cannot be made to fit the zoning code and property rights. The mayor's solution would overrule zoning and property rights to suit the violators and is another lopsided deal like Israel's prisoner exchanges.
U.S. ACCUSED AT UCLA OF CHILLING MUSLIM CHARITY The eight-hour conference at UCLA was co-sponsored by the UCLA International Institute, the Critical Race Studies Program, and the UCLA Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law. There were speakers from UCLA's Center for Near Eastern Studies (CNES). The gist of the conference is that U.S. counter-terrorism inhibits the Islamic religious duty of donating to charity. The conference failed to note that most of the charities indicted for supporting terrorism with those donations were convicted of it. Those charities were not victims, they were making other people victims. One speaker, Jennifer Turner of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Human Rights Program, stated that the case against the Holyland Foundation used faulty evidence. She did not identify any faults. She cited personal research concluding that the U.S. government keeps Muslims from donating to charity. She had interviewed 120 Muslim Americans in Michigan and Texas. She said they told her they had stopped giving to charity or were unable to donate out of fear of being deported or being denied citizenship. [Americans have citizenship and do not get deported.] What was her study methodology? Did she verify their claims, check their tax returns? No. Apparently she accepted whatever they told her. A University of Michigan, Dearborn professor, Sally Howell, reached other conclusions. She said, "Since 2001, there have been 14 new mosques, and 17 mosques have doubled in size. This is proof that people are not donating overseas." It is? Also, "The Arab charity LIFE [Life for Relief and Development] had their board resign one year after Israel invaded Lebanon." Connection? And yet again, "'As a result of restrictive policies, a board member of another charity, embezzled $10,000." Implication: federal monitoring forced him to steal from the charity. Reality check? "Does government get to decide what is good Islam and what is bad Islam?" she asked. Actual answer, the government prosecutes funding terrorism, and does not stop Muslims from donating to legitimate charities. But she impugned the government's cases by mentioning that FBI funding depends on getting results. [Isn't that true of both sides in all trials?] McGill University political science and Islamic studies professor Khalid Medani stated, "Somalia is a place where Islamic terrorism is not possible because they are not organized." [Terrorists have taken over much of the country, partly because they are well organized. Somebody should inform the Islamic studies professor.] During a break, CNES director and anthropology professor Susan Slyomovics told colleagues, "If Jews can get reparations from Germany, then Palestinians should get reparations from Israel. After all, what the Germans supposedly did to the Jews[emphasis added] is what Israel is doing to the people of Palestine." (Eric Golub, publisher of the Tygrrrr Express blog. He wrote this article for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.) Prof. Slyomovics thus doubts if not denies the Holocaust, which I remember, and implies that Israel is exterminating the Palestinian Arabs, whose casualties are far below their birth rate. Apparently the professor does not understand that terrorists are the aggressors and the Arabs attempted genocide to prevent Jewish statehood and then to destroy it. This conference shows that a pro-Islamist, anti-American, and anti-Israel bias has a foothold in the ACLU and in American universities. No matter how nonsensical or false a notion, these biased people believe it. Those professors could serve a useful purpose by investigating why many Muslims donate to terrorist fronts, instead of to bona fide charities. Do they do so, knowingly? Would they like help in avoiding terrorist fronts? Why aren't their organizations working with the government and with them on this? Perhaps their major organizations are aligned with terrorism, as alleged and as many of their leaders have been shown to be? Those organizations oppose every defense against terrorism and do not help oppose it. Is that good for our country?
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
CLOUD DESIGN
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 1, 2010. |
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://freddebby.blogspot.com/ to see more of his graphic art. |
|
LEARNING FROM PREVIOUS MISTAKES
Posted by Daily Alert, May 1, 2010. |
|
This was written by Khaled Abu Toameh, a writer for Jerusalem Post. This article appeared in the Hudson Institute dNew York website. It is entitled "The Palestinians: The Result of No Demands." |
|
United States-led sanctions on the Gaza Strip have thus far played into the hands of Hamas, earning it more sympathy among radicalized and disillusioned Palestinians. Because of these mistakes, the Gaza Strip is now swarming with scores of Islamic fundamentalist groups who are leading the Palestinians toward the abyss. If Israel repeats the same mistake and withdraws from any territory unilaterally, Hamas, the Iranians and Al-Qaeda-inspired groups will be sitting also in the suburbs of Jerusalem and on hilltops overlooking Tel Aviv beaches. The last time Abbas received control of an area, in 2005, he ran away, handing it over to Hamas and its allies. Hamas's rise to power may be attributed to a series of mistakes that were committed by the former US Administration, which insisted on holding a free and democratic election for the Palestinians, ignoring warnings that the Islamist movement could win. Even worse, the former US Administration allowed Hamas to participate in the election unconditionally. Washington should at least have demanded that Hamas recognize the Oslo Accords and the two-state solution, given the fact that the vote was being held under the umbrella of the peace process. The US finally did demand something from Hamas, but only after the movement had won the election. Yet the biggest mistake Washington made was after the election, when it supported the guys who lost the election in their attempts to bring down the Hamas government. When Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2005, there was a lot of talk about turning the area into the Middle East's Hong Kong or Singapore. But five years later, the Gaza Strip has been transformed into a center for radical Islamic groups that are funded by Iran and backed by Syria, Sudan, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Muslim Brotherhood and probably Al-Qaeda-linked terror cells. Back then, everyone — Israelis, Arabs and Europeans — said they would help the 1.3 million Palestinians living there build new housing units, schools, universities, hospitals and industrial zones. But five years later, the Gaza Strip has been transformed into a center for radical Islamic groups that are funded by Iran and backed by Syria, Sudan, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Muslim Brotherhood and probably Al-Qaeda-linked terror cells. After Hamas came to power, the Americans started providing Fatah with weapons and money with the hope that the faction would be able to overthrow the Hamas regime. These attempts backfired and strengthened Hamas to a point where it finally managed to drive Abbas's loyalists out of the Gaza Strip. Israel's unilateral withdrawal sent the wrong message to the Palestinians — namely that the Jews ran away because of the suicide bombings and rockets. Many Palestinians gave Hamas credit for driving Israel out of the Gaza Strip through violence. This was why it was no surprise that a few months later, in January 2006, Hamas won the parliamentary election held in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority had warned Washington against holding such elections, to no avail. Hamas boycotted the first parliamentary election in 1996 because it was being held under the umbrella of the Oslo Accords. The movement was afraid that its participation would be interpreted as recognition of the two-state solution. Ten years later, Hamas ran in the same election — under the umbrella of the Oslo Accords — without having to make any political concessions. The biggest mistake Israel made was that it refused to coordinate its pullout with anyone and insisted on carrying it out unilaterally. Israel just woke up one morning and left, leaving the entire Gaza Strip in the hands of Mahmoud Abbas and his weak, corruption-riddled Palestinian Authority. One hopes the U.S. will learn from it's mistakes.
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 |
|
READER-SELECTED VIDEOS
Posted by Various Readers, May, 2010. |
|
Videos of today's tragic incident off the coast of Israel From Naomi Ragen (31may10) From my friend Tom Gross.
Israeli naval patrol boats intercepted eight blockade-running vessels overnight. The boarding turned violent on one of the boats, when pro-Hamas activists attacked the Israelis with long metal bars, knives and hammers. Some reportedly managed to seize weapons from the Israeli sailors and turned on them with live fire, prompting Israel to open fire in response. On a personal note, to state the obvious, any loss of life including those who lost their lives last night, is deeply regrettable, but it is important to be properly informed of the context in which this incident occurred in order to decide where the blame ultimately lies. CONTENTS 1. Videos of today's incident off the coast of Israel
THROWING AN ISRAELI OFF THE TOP DECK OF THE BOAT Below is aerial footage showing the misnamed "peace" activists
throwing an Israeli soldier off the top deck of the boat, and beating
up other soldiers with iron bars:
Using firebombs and metal pipes against Israeli soldiers. --------------------------------------------------------------- THE CHANTING OF ANTI-SEMITIC SLOGANS Before they set sail from Turkey, I published this video footage, showing participants on board one of the ships chanting violent anti-Jewish slogans. To watch it, please scroll down to the end of section 4 titled "An industry of lies" here: What the media won't report about Gaza. --------------------------------------------------------------- WHO ARE THESE PEACE ACTIVISTS? This research by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (an organization which I am well acquainted with and is very reliable) outlines who the IHH (the group involved in the violence aboard the boat, which the BBC and others are uncritically calling "Turkish peace activists") really are: This research from the Danish Institute for International Studies details the part played by the IHH in Islamist terror in Afghanistan and elsewhere and their links to al-Qaeda: www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/WP2006/DIIS%20WP%202006-7.web.pdf --------------------------------------------------------------- NETANYAHU FLIES HOME Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has decided to cut short his visit to Canada and return to Israel. He also spoke by phone with U.S. President Barack Obama and apologized that he would not be able to come to Washington tomorrow as scheduled. Netanyahu and Obama have decided to set a new meeting at a later date. --------------------------------------------------------------- SIX TURKISH SOLDIERS DIE IN PKK ATTACK Kurdish fighters fired a rocket into a Turkish army base on the Mediterranean Sea killing six soldiers on Sunday. The base at Iskenderum was hit by a rocket fired from a road overlooking the port where the base is located. The Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) which has been fighting for autonomy for twenty-five years. The international media doesn't appear to be interested in reporting about these particular dead Turks in the way it is covering the ones on the boast off Gaza. Hamas refuses to allow in Flotilla supplies! From Naomi Ragen (31may10) You are not going to believe this, so look at it with your own eyes. The poor Arabs in Gaza desperately need those Flotilla medical supplies, right? Then why are they piled up in Israel because Hamas refuses to accept them? My goodness, it just couldn't be, could it, that the humanitarian motive for the Flotilla was just propaganda that everyone has just...gulp... swallowed? Duh. Please watch and forward: Masque at Ground Zero. From Robin Ticker (31may10) Close-Up Footage of Mavi Marmara Passengers Attacking IDF Soldiers From Robin Ticker (31may10) Mavi Marmara passengers attacking IDF soldiers Suicide Activists on the Gaza Flotilla From Honest Reporting (31may10) Join HonestReporting's former Senior Editor Shraga Simmons, author of a forthcoming book on media bias as seen by HonestReporting, on location in Ashdod to find out. Suicide activists on the flotilla Gaza jihad flotilla participants chanted Islamic battle cry From Yaacov Levi (31may10) Crocodile Tears From (31may10) Israel had been warning the organizers of the "peace" flotilla for weeks not to attempt to break the blocade of Gaza. Several boats with some 600 pro-"Palestinian" sympathizers ignored the warnings this morning and tried to do just that. In addition to the "peacenicks," we already know that the boats were loaded with forbidden supplies such as cement. The boats are being searched as these lines are written. Israel had two choices (1) ignore the violation of her territorial waters and allow the flotilla though without checking who are the passengers and what they were carrying. (2) Peacefully board the vessels and check the people's identities and the cargo. Every country in the world would prevent such flagrant violations of its territorial water in time of war (do not forget, Iran controlled Hamas is at war with Israel). This morning, as the flotilla was approaching Gaza, the Israeli navy issued a clear warning, offering a reasonable peaceful solution. The warning by an Israeli naval officed was released by the IDF. When the flotilla refused to listen and continued to ignore the warning, Israeli comandos, armed only with pistols boarded the boats and were met by the "peace seeking" militants with extreme violence. Several Israeli soldiers were immediately wounded some severely and only then were forced to protect themselves by opening fire. If you are a supporter of Iran controlled terrorist organization Hamas, who against all internatonal law have been holding an Israeli soldier hostage for over 4 years, not allowing even once a visitation by the Red Cross, nothing will persuade you. If you are a true seeker of peace and justice, you should be outraged by the latest Hamas provocation and praise the action by Israel who is alone standing against a hostile Muslim world and 190 Arab petrol thirsty nations in the UN. Expect floods of crocodile tears from the media for the poor "Palestinians." This is so far. More no doubt will follow. Deputy FM Ayalon From Susana K-M (31may10) Please, watch the video. Transcription is below the video. FM Ayalon on Gaza flotilla seizure Radio Exchange between Israeli Navy and Flotilla Ship From Fred Reifenberg (31may10) The IDF (Israeli Defense Force or Israeli Army) has a video on U Tube explaining what's going on but U Tube wants to remove it by using the excuse as not too many people are logging in. Please forward this email, so many people will log in and the IDF will be able to have its voice heard. Thanks New details about the Gaza Flotilla Incident From Joel Block (31may10) Hey, here are a few more background details AND VIDEO I've been able to pull together. The video is STRIKING, must see TV. As you may have heard, Israeli soldiers boarded the flotilla ships after the terrrorist-linked (see previous email) groups charged forward refusing to heed calls to stop and refused to have their cargo off loaded in Ashdod to be sent to Gaza peacefully. No surprise, since the spokesperson for the groups said ""this mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking Israel's siege.'" (Greta Berlin, AFP, 27May10). In a peaceful attempt to stop the ships, Israeli soldiers repelled onto the ships armed with PAINT BALLS. They were assaulted immediately. Here a "peace activist" stabs a soldier.
Here is overhead footage of the FIRST SOLDIER deployed immediately
being assaulted and injured by the "peace activists."
According to reports the terrorists on board tried connecting the steel cables from the overhead helicopters to the boat's antenna, in order to cause the helicopters to crash. Only when the "peace activists" severely beat the soldiers with iron rods, stab them with knives, and tried to lynch them, did the soldiers respond in self-defense. IDF soldiers were pushed down stairs, thrown overboard, and shot at.
On Strong Leaders From Yuval Zaliouf (30may10) The American political situation has so much to do with the Middle East conflict. The person who occupies the White House can make or break Israel. If Israel is pressured by the US President to make concessions, Israelis must be confident that the President understand what he/she is doing, and has Israel's interests at heart not his own political vulnerabilities. Please watch these clips and ask yourself Would I entrust my own family, Israel and her people depicted in the first video clip in the hands of the person in the second clip? You see, despite the revival and renewal of the Jewish people through the rebuilding of the State of Israel, Jews still suffer from a "diaspora syndrome." They still need a patron to tell them what to do. In view of the current occupant in the White House, Israel, more than ever, needs the strongest leader. We all should pray that the choice of Benjamin Netanyahu was correct. We must all strengthen his hands! James David Manning on the BP oil spill Ray Stevens new song on illegal immigration From Fred Reifenberg (29may10) The Fox and the Grapes From Boris Celser (27may10) In it, Lula says, receiving the visit of Turkey's PM:
Well, compared to Obama who got a Nobel Prize lined up before taking office, he deserves his award, too. So it looks like Israel is safe from nuclear attack, thanks to him.
Well, well, well, apparently Israel is safe from nuclear attack, thanks to him.
Critical Security Needs of Israel for a Viable Peace From Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) (27may10) In light of the upcoming Obama-Netanyahu meeting at the White House next week, this video details Israel's critical security need for defensible borders to prevent threats to its existence - a defense policy rooted in a broad consensus that spans both past and present Israeli governments. BILL GATES FUNDS 'GULEN' ISLAMIST MOVEMENT' From K_Hallal (26may10) "I am certain that Bill Gates actually believes his money is going to help poor and starving children.Poor Bill! He knows computer software but know nothing about the bloody history of Islam and the threat to freedoms in the world. He should be educated by someone who knows and has contact with him.
A lesson in Democracy for president Obama from Jack Webb From Arny Barnie (26may10) UK immigration song From Boris Celser (25may10) Fun. From Yaacov Levi (25may10) From Australia - coming soon to America From Susana K-M (23may10) Muslim Welfare Scandal in Australia "REFUGEE CAMP" IN GAZA From Ben Ami (23may10) See the poor starving refugees Items on the Bill Handel show From Yaacov Levi (23may10) We know about the amazing technology coming from Israel but this video is particularly good. From Fred Reifenberg (21may10) Despite the attacks by the Arab League nations, the P.L.O.,, Fatah, Hezbollah, Hamas, and criticism by the U.N. and the United States of America, the world is benefitting from many of Israel's 21st century accomplishments. Israel: a technological start-up nation INFO ON ARIZONA BORDER From Yaacov Levi (21may10) According to the Border Patrol the public is being mislead as to WHO is coming into the US from Mexico. This IS THE TRUTH as reported by WSBTV in Atlanta. People from Egypt, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq are sneaking across the border Confronting Holocaust Denial From Yael from Road 90 (21may10) Tel Aviv Chef Roshfeld Puts Israel on the Culinary Map Confronting Holocaust Denial: A Strategy Lag BaOmer Day in Meron 5770 - 2010 Palestinian Authority denies Israel's right to exist Top Obama Officials Now Calling Jerusalem "Al-Quds" From Boris Celser (20may10) John Brennan talks about his love for "al-Quds." This is also available at
unbelievable - personal vehicle by Honda !!! From Fred Reifenberg (19may10) U3-X Personal Mobility Prototype A POWERFUL FILM From Ben Ami (17may10) Virtual cinema of the Steven Spielberg Jewish Film Archive Pat Condell: Is Satan A Catholic? From Boris Celser(17may10) Learn Simple Truths about Jerusalem From Susana K-M (16may10) On sweden - socialism, really ? From Boris Celser (15may10) Andreas Bergh on Capitalist Welfare State Stupidest Caller Ever From Boris Celser (13may10) Listen to this radio caller from Florida to the Michael Savage show. A new meaning to Stupidity... Hard to believe people like her exist. ROPE DANCE: THIS IS AWESOME! - GOT TO BE YOUNG FOR THIS From C Pocerl(13may10) THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE. THESE YOUNG GIRLS WERE PHENOMENAL! Watch as the reaction of the guys in the audience escalates. In the beginning, they were just OK, but as the girls performed.....the audience went WILD with cheers. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. Halftime show at this year's Army-Navy basketball Game - Only the young could do this. Muslim Students Association (MSA) member: Kill All Jews From Doc Milt Fried (13may10) Richard Thompson writes: Please watch the entire 3.5 minutes of this chilling video! On John Cleese From Boris Celser (12may10) A vote for Nick Clegg is a vote for John Cleese The truth about Israel and Islam From Yaacov Levi (12may10) Please disseminate on behalf of Jerusalem Day.
Why is there such an obsession with Israel that real crimes by Islam
are ignored?
seen on the tail gate of a pickup truck at a NASCAR Race: Islam and 9/11 From Yaacov Levi(12may10) Every once in awhile we should be reminded of what we face. I don't usually do this, but open up the attached photo taken at a NASCAR race. A good friend here in Florida sent this. It sends an important message... 
UCSD -MSA-student-confesses-she-wants-a-second-holocaust/ From LS (12may10) This must-see brief video was taken at a talk at (UCSD) University of California San Diego during its Israel Apartheid week. This video demonstrates the state of our unsafe campuses today. Student money via the students governing body went to support the msa activities in maligning Israel -- approximately $20,000.00 or more of student money was given. "During the Question and Answer period Horowitz had a chilling exchange with a member of the MSA in which he prodded her to reveal the depraved depths of her Jew-hatred. What’s shocking is not so much that she holds such views, but rather that she was willing to admit it:" UC student confesses she wants a second holocaust Mock debate about Jewish rights to the land of Israel From Jewish Activist Network (12may10) We explore various arguments in defense of Jewish rights to the land of Israel together with Ariel Kaplan a student at the University of California (UC) Berkeley and Marina Shmidt, a student at YU. Both Ariel and Marina joined us before on the Jewish Activist Nework. The Arabs have no claim to Israel whatsoever The term 'Palestinian' is a misnomer; there is no Palestinian people - only an Arab people. Those in Israel are the same Arab people as those who live in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and the other Arab countries - they all speak Arabic and consider themselves Arab. [See 'Palestinian' covenant Article 12-15 ] Also find out about upcoming programs.
Quite a video re diversity From LS (11may10) Obama is Proud to be Muslim From Yaacov Levi (11may10) Obama admitting he is a proud Muslim and supports their causes, sings their praises, etc. Muslim Life From Susana K-M (10may10) How would you like to live under Sharia law? Newspapers from all over the world with a click! From Buddy Macy (1may10) This is one of the most interesting sites I have ever seen. Just put your mouse on a city anywhere in the world and the newspaper headlines pop up... Double click, and the page gets larger... Also, if you look at the European papers, the far left side of Germany will pop up as The Stars & Stripes (European Edition, of course). And, this site changes everyday with the publication of new editions of the paper. Hope you enjoy this... Former US General Warns of Chemical Attacks against Israel/3505 From Fred Reifenberg (9may10) Potential Hezbollah offensive includes chemically armed SCUD missiles with a 450 km range, preemptive strikes on air fields, and a wave of tunnel attacks that cross from Lebanon into Israel. US General Paul Valleley (Ret.) warns of attacks on Israel It's also available at:
THE WESTERN WALL IN 360 DEGREES From C Pocerl (8may10) This is amazing..hold your cursor and you can move to any location, then change pictures and do the same. It scrolls up down, left right and gives you the feeling that you are right at the wall. Building inspectors and police destroying homes in Judea and Samaria From Robin Ticker (6may10) This comes from Matot Arim - Shavei Shomron youtube. Building inspectors and police destroying homes in Judea and Samaria and beating up anyone who stands in their way: The reason why this is not happening EVERY DAY, CONSTANTLY, is that there are not enough building inspectors to police against 300,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria. And brave Knesset Members in the Knesset Finance Committee are trying to block the money required to hire more inspectors. MORE Knesset members of conscience are needed in the Finance Committee, in order to prevent terrible destruction coming to Judea and Samaria. The Committee can quite simply prevent budget being allocated to hiring new inspectors! Write to the relevant Knesset Members: ddanon@knesset.gov.il; hkatz@knesset.gov.il; zpinian@knesset.gov.il; mregev@knesset.gov.il; zelkin@knesset.gov.il; uria@knesset.gov.il; fkirshenbaum@knesset.gov.il; mgafni@knesset.gov.il; uorbach@KNESSET.GOV.IL; yvaknin@knesset.gov.il; eyishay@knesset.gov.il; amncohen@knesset.gov.il; izchakec@knesset.gov.il For example (or make up a letter of your own!!): Brave Uri Ariel, Uri Orbach, Miri Regev, Dany Danon, Alex Miller and Fanny Kirshenbaum are standing up for the Jews of Judea and Samaria! They need MORE help to keep terrible oppression away from these Jews. Please let me know whether you will be joining the above brave, patriotic legislators in voting AGAINST Obama inspectors to stop the Jews from building for their families? As you know, it will be entirely legal if the Finance Committee members all vote AGAINST budget for these inspectors -- Israeli law allows Finance Committee members to vote however they wish. So, I look forward to hearing how you intend to vote! I hope that you will not disappoint any of us, nor will you embarrass history. Sincerely, (name) Fax Numbers
Cell phone numbers
Stop them from destroying jewish homes. Early Israel in color! From Fred Reifenberg (4may10) Here is a treasure for you. It turns out that a Bostonian named Fred Monosson, came to Israel beginning in 1947 with the latest model COLOR movie camera. His son recently discovered reel upon reel of film stored in an attic and was about to throw it away when he happened to mention it to an Israeli ... film director. The trove was saved. No other color film of this era is known to exist. A report by Israel Channel 2, Friday News Magazine about the documentary: "I was there in color," that which was aired on Channel 1, Israel Public Television 11/1/2009. Monosson color shots of Israel. JUST 2 MINUTES TO GRASP JERUSALEM From Tayar Yehudit (3may10) I hope you will want to see this 2 min clip on Jerusalem . It is food for thought and thought may be useful in your efforts for Israel, Best wishes, anita How you can help free the Captive Soldier: Gilad Shalit From Miki and Herb Sunshine (1may10) Noam Shalit (Gilad's father) made a video clip on the occasion of Yom Ha'atzmaut which has only had only a few thousand hits so far. This must be disheartening for the Shalits. I encourage everyone to watch the video and to send the link on to family, friends and wider lists.. For bloggers on the list - please help spread the word.
Noam Shalit on Israel's 62nd Independence Day THE U.N. From Fred Reifenberg (1may10) In case you haven't seen, heard this yet ... This is how the United Nation's works. Take the time to listen to the end. Listen to this, and forward it to all your friends and family & wait until you hear the response in the end... The inadmissible speech…It must reach every planet, every corner, every enlightened person. It is very important to spread on!!! It is also available at
|
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |