| HOME | Featured Stories | September 2006 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
18 WAYS YOU CAN HELP ISRAEL!
Posted by Larry Heyman, September 10, 2006. |
|
Here are 18 different ways you can help Israel and make yourself feel good too!. Take at least 5 minutes from your schedule and devote it to Israel. Here is an opportunity for you to get involved and assist Israel in their effort to protect our Jewish homeland.
In addition to doing the physical mitzvot of attending a rally, writing a letter, and giving charity, Judaism has a strong spiritual connection to fighting a war. Historically, not only were Jews on the battleground, but there were Jews who prayed for our survival. It must have worked since we are still here and our previous enemies have disappeared. There is no logical or rational explanation to explain our survival so there must be a spiritual connection. Select something that you can do spiritually to help.
PLEASE ACT NOW! And Please make a donation to the Friends of the Israeli Defense
Forces -- go to http://www.fidf.org/
Larry Heyman is Publisher of Innovative Marketing. Contact him at
www.FloridaJewish.com or by email at emailme@imarket.bz
|
|
THE CORONATION OF KOFI
Posted by Women in Green, September 10, 2006. |
|
This article was written by Caroline Glick and appeared September 8, 2006 in the Jerusalem Post. |
|
This week we witnessed one of the greatest perfidies in Israel's media history. Channel 10's decision to broadcast both Hizbullah's 18-year-old film of missing IAF navigator Ron Arad, who was taken hostage by Shi'ites in Lebanon in 1986, and Hizbullah's video of its abduction of IDF soldiers Benny Avraham, Adi Avitan and Omar Suwaid in October 2000 constituted nothing less than direct collaboration between Channel 10 and Hizbullah. Hizbullah clearly released the films now to sow the seeds of defeatism and powerlessness among Israelis. The films are a part of its blackmail campaign to coerce Israel into releasing hundreds of terrorist murderers from our jails in return for IDF hostages Ehud Goldwasser, Eldad Regev and Gilad Shalit. That Channel 10 agreed to participate in this psychological warfare operation against its country is a disgrace to the profession of journalism. Yet at the end of the day, Channel 10 is a private business. It ran the films to make a buck. More disturbing than its treachery is the Olmert government's mismanagement of the hostage issue. Thursday, Yediot Aharonot reported an unbelievable exchange between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Elipaz Bluah, whose son Nadav fell in battle in Lebanon. Responding to Bluah's criticism of his decision to accept a cease-fire without first bringing about the soldiers' release, Olmert said, "From the beginning I knew we would have to negotiate to secure the release of the hostages. In order to rescue them we would have to pay a very heavy price. How many more children would you want to die like your son died in order to rescue them? Did anyone seriously think that I would get to some place, that I don't know where it is, and would try to rescue them?" We should recall that Olmert stated at the outset of the war that Israel's goals were to secure Regev and Goldwasser's unconditional release, disarm Hizbullah, and remove its fighters from the border. The nation fully supported all of these goals - none of which was achieved. No one questioned Olmert's assertion that Israel cannot negotiate the release of our soldiers. Every family in Israel understands that when Israel releases terrorists from its prisons in exchange for its abducted soldiers and citizens, it ensures that more Israelis will be kidnapped in the future. By going to war, Israel placed the initiative for freeing the soldiers in its own hands. By agreeing to the cease-fire without first securing their release, Olmert effectively handed the power to determine their fate to Hizbullah. But rather than acknowledge his failure, Olmert attacks the public for having believed him. Today the only way to prevent other Israelis from sharing the fate of the captives and their families is for the government to wait patiently until the IDF receives actionable intelligence that will enable our forces to rescue them. But instead of acting responsibly and owning up to its failures, the government compounds them by meekly conducting negotiations with Hizbullah and the Palestinians. The government's dereliction of duty regarding the IDF captives is of course but one component of its overall failure in managing the war and the cease-fire in Lebanon. Other components are the result of the government's capitulation to all UN and European demands and positions. These include Israel's acceptance of the participation of soldiers from hostile states in the UNIFIL force, and its resignation to the assertion that UNIFIL forces will not disarm Hizbullah, will not patrol the Lebanon-Syria border to enforce an arms embargo against Hizbullah, and will not force Hizbullah fighters to abandon their positions in southern Lebanon. The government's failure is caused by its refusal to accept the simple fact that Israel's national security interests are best safeguarded by Israel. Rather than keeping as many cards in its hand as possible, the government has surrendered card after card, option after option to the UN, the EU, Egypt, Mahmoud Abbas and the Bush administration. The most extreme example of this cognitive confusion by the Olmert government is its complete abrogation of responsibility for contending with the greatest single threat to Israel's existence - Iran's nuclear weapons program - to the US. Disturbingly, the Bush administration's handling of Iran's nuclear program is all too similar to the Olmert government's handling of Iran's proxy, Hizbullah. Much as Olmert's strong rhetoric during the war bore little to no resemblance to his war policies, the Bush administration's rhetoric on Iran's nuclear weapons program is disconnected from its policies for handling the issue. President George W. Bush's speech to the Military Officers Association of America Tuesday was a case in point. While Bush eloquently declared that the US will not permit Iran to achieve nuclear capabilities, the course of action he prescribed for contending with Iran has no chance of preventing it from achieving nuclear capabilities. Bush said, "The world is working together to prevent Iran's regime from acquiring the tools of mass murder. The international community has made a reasonable proposal to Iran's leaders, and given them the opportunity to set their nation on a better course. So far, Iran's leaders have rejected this offer... It's time for Iran's leader to make a different choice. And we've made our choice. We'll continue to work closely with our allies to find a diplomatic solution. The world's free nations will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon." On Tuesday, when Bush committed the US to pursuing diplomacy, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had already rejected the UN Security Council's demand that Iran cease all its uranium enrichment activities by August 31. Bush spoke after UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana declared their desire to continue negotiating with Iran rather than imposing sanction on the genocidal regime. That is, Bush made this statement after it was already clear that America's "allies" have no intention of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and as a result, there is no way for the US to both prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and stay faithful to its strictly diplomatic course. THE SELF-DEFEATING nature of the Israeli and American policies is due to both governments' preference for process over content. During the war, the Olmert government said Israel was fighting in order to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1559 which calls for Hizbullah's dismantlement. Yet that was not what Israel was fighting for. Israel fought to secure the release of the hostages and to dismantle Hizbullah. Whether or not Israel's actions brought about the implementation of a UN resolution was beside the point. Yet, by framing the war in the context of UN resolutions, Israel gave undeserved legitimacy and power to the UN in adjudicating the war and so paved the way for the cease-fire resolution which secured none of Israel's actual goals or interests while vastly upgrading the UN's position. By the same token, the US goal is to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear capabilities. Yet America too has fallen into the UN trap. Like Israel, the Bush administration has confused process with content by deciding it is more important to receive UN and French backing for its policies than to adopt policies that have the possibility of preventing Iran from achieving nuclear capabilities. In so doing it has weakened itself and empowered Annan and his European friends. There are two possible explanations for this counterproductive behavior. First, as the US did before its invasion of Iraq in 2003, Israel and the US may have turned to the UN to prove the organization's fecklessness and so build cases for operating independently. Second, the Bush administration and the Olmert government may believe that the UN-led international community will save them. It is hard to know which explanation is more obtuse. What is clear enough, however, is that with the Israeli government authorizing the UN to "solve" its problems in Lebanon, and the Bush administration authorizing the UN to "solve" the Iranian nuclear crisis, the Israeli people find ourselves in unprecedented peril. We face existential threats without leaders willing to do what is necessary to protect us. It is little wonder that the hostages were abandoned. *CLARIFICATION* I feel it is necessary to respond to my colleague Larry Derfner's column, "Shimshon Cytryn and other 'innocents'" which he wrote in response to my Tuesday column "Shimshon Cytryn and Aharon Barak." It is odd to have my reporting questioned in my own newspaper. To set the record straight, the fighting between Israelis and Palestinians on the Mowassi from 26-28 June 2005 was instigated by Mowassi resident Halil Mejeida. Mejeida organized a group of Palestinian youths to attack a group of Israeli youths who had squatted in an Arab house on the Mowassi. Contrary to Derfner's claim that the Israelis "chased the [Palestinian] family out [of the house] and took it over," the structure had been long abandoned. The youths who squatted in the structure were engaged in refurbishing it. Both the residents of Shirat Hayam and the guests in the hotel in Neveh Dekalim nearby repeatedly beseeched the IDF to intervene as the Palestinian attacks involved rock-throwing against both the youths in the abandoned home and all Israelis who walked on the coastal road joining Shirat Hayam and the hotel. The IDF refused to intervene. On June 28, the day Mejeida was supposedly "lynched," the Israeli and Palestinian youths had been throwing rocks at one another for the third day in a row. The IDF finally responded to the pleas of the residents of Shirat Hayam and the hotel and intervened to end the attacks. In the days following the fight, Mejeida told Israel Radio that he received a head wound when he was hit by a soldier with an M-16 rifle butt as the soldier tried to restrain him. He further stated that his wound was not caused by "the settlers." There is no doubt that there was a prolonged fight between the Palestinians and the Israeli youths in the abandoned house in which both sides pelted one another with rocks. There is also no doubt that Mejeida did not suffer any serious wounds from the fighting. There is certainly no doubt that there was no attempt to murder Mejeida on the part of the Israeli youths. Derfner wrote, "I'm writing about this because I was one of the reporters on the Moassi beachfront on that June 28." Yet separately he acknowledged, "I got to the beachfront a little after the incident for which Cytryn is standing trial, so I didn't see it with my own eyes." Derfner has a right to speculate regarding the thoughts and desires of the youths who participated in the rock fight. He is free to believe that they wished to kill one another. Yet, there is no evidence from the events of the day that would support the charge of attempted murder for which Cytryn was indicted, and Derfner offers none.C.B.G. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
RESUSCITATING THE ROAD MAP; KILLING ISRAEL
Posted by Professor Eugene E. Narrett, September 10, 2006. |
|
Once the shooting phase of operation "creating Lebanon" subsided, a remarkably varied, noxious and alarming cast of characters began descending upon Israel and America to accelerate the next phase of operation "crush the Jews." A main feature of these surgical strikes is to create another jihadist state next to the Jewish ghetto demarked by the Road Map and its "security fence." The big wheels keep on turning... Read on and we will briefly examine the assault. Mr. Mohammed Khatami, former President of Iran has been touring America and saying things meant to sound wonderful to most news grazers. Two days after applying for his visa he was here deploring 9/11. "It was a crime because civilians were killed and because it was done in the name of Islam," he said. Those who struck the WTC, he asserted, "are not Muslims and will not go to heaven." We can assume this visit was choreographed with the State Department. Whoever is casting these characters wants to brighten the image called "Iran" for presentation to the world community. As for the specifics of Khatami's remarks, President Bush himself said (June 2003) that "Islam is a religion of peace," so there. This bit of theatrics has two important purposes: More... Khatami, first, Khatami, a head of Shiite nation has intensified the already fierce war of invective and blood between the Sunni (al Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad) and Shiite (Iran-Hizballah) branches of Islamic world conquest. The 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by Al Qaeda (with close links to the House of Saud, Taliban, Pakistan, and the CIA via its Inter-Service Intelligence Agency); denouncing them as infidels and terrorists kills several Sunni birds with one rhetorical stone. Khatami vilifies and isolates al Qaeda and the Saudis, thus boosting his own nation's intra-Islamic standing. He rehabilitates Iran in America and the West and strengthens his credentials as a "moderate" that duly will be hailed by the western media. And the State Department and NSC show the Saudis that they have many ways to whittle down their influence and the stability of their kingdom. The fact that Khatami superintended the Iranian long range missile and uranium enrichment programs has been hushed to a few statements by marginal groups including, at this point, President Bush's spokesman Scott McClellan. In America the State Department and its CIA agents rule... Anyone who deals with America should remember this. Iran is "a great country" after all, just like the French PM says, and "a great force for stability in the region." Complaints about current President Ahmadinejad's reiterated calls to obliterate Israel were submerged by Khatami decrying the holocaust as "the crime of Nazism" and "an undoubted historical fact." Thanks. He thus again outflanked the Saudis and deflected attention from Iran's unchanged genocidal intentions toward Israel. Other recent moves in the grand game suggest that Iran's rage for Armageddon reflects not only the hard-wired ethos of Islam but a factor in the plans of both the Vatican-EU and the Anglo-American blocks to crush Israel into complete vassalage. As such Iran's vehemence can and is modulated to suit the larger purpose: alienation of the Jewish heart land and holy sites. To wit: several days ago, Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein and the Irish Republican Army, long time allies of the PLO descended upon Arab-occupied central Israel declaring that it was "essential to expedite the Road Map." This process, also known as Oslo, known earlier as the "Palestine Interim Self-Government Agreement" hatched by the Vatican with the help of traitors in Israel's Foreign Ministry requires the retreat of Israel to the 1949 armistice borders, the division of Jerusalem and its policing by UN forces. Like Khatami, Mr. Adams continues to rehabilitate himself as a letter-carrier for the "A" team. Sure enough, at week's end, like a hound following the stink of a fox, British PM Tony Blair arrived with the same message. Collaborating wholly with the team, PM Olmert asserted, "I am ready to work closely with the Chairman of the PA, [Mahmoud] Abbas to implement the Road Map..." After his Lebanon debacle Olmert had been repeating that his "convergence" (a.k.a. "realignment") plan, code for the Road Map "was not relevant at this time." I warned that he would change his mind once he was pressed or when a semblance of Israel's deterrence was restored. Both are in the works and the main game is back on its tracks. In May 2005, President Bush lauded Abbas as a "moderate" and "a man of courage." For forty years Abbas- Abu Mazen was right-hand man to Arafat and the organizer of the murder of hundreds of Israeli children and adult civilians, for example at the school in Ma'alot. Perhaps, for the record, Mr. Khatami would condemn him, too; a pity no one asked him. As for the arm-twisting of puppet Olmert, various indictments are hovering, for cronyism and for accepting fountain pens from various foreign businessmen and politicians. Nearly every Cabinet Minister in the Knesset, nay, in most parliaments, is guilty of cronyism. As for the pens, this is a classic instance of trivial matters distracting attention from grave ones. Rather than oust Olmert for serving foreign powers, for bungling a war, accepting a lethal ceasefire, or for the assault he ordered on Jews at Amona he is threatened with indictments for handsomely profiting on the sale of an apartment and for accepting pens. Indict, convict and remove him by all means, after citing and charging him for treason. But we are dreaming. The reason the judicial establishment is nipping him, probably at the instigation of Shimon Peres, creator and perennial master of Israel's Foreign Ministry and true power, in Israel, behind Labor, Kadima and Oslo, is to ensure that he continues to toe the Road Map line; the same methods were applied, successfully to Ariel Sharon. Like the State Department in the US, the Israeli Foreign Ministry is a profoundly cancerous organ. Yediot Achronot's ynetnews.com reported that early in the conflict with Iran-Hizballah, a Syrian agent in Romania offered himself to the Mossad in exchange for extradition to Israel. Omer Haitim, jailed for various offenses in Romania had data on Syria and Hizballah so this should have been a major asset. But the Foreign Ministry, who fielded the offer from Haitim's attorney, refused to pass his offer to Mossad. For the record, the Mossad is outraged and the Foreign Ministry "vexed," but it's too late. The scandals of the Amona-Hizballah administration are numerous and varied enough to immobilize critics. With the help of the media they probably will succeed. The rebuilding of Olmert's face and of the image of Israel's deterrence is being done partly through the Asad family that runs "Syria." As Adams and Blair pounced and Khatami flounced around America, Bashir Asad stopped talking about a "Syrian Hizballah" to re-take the Golan and compliantly agreed to accept UN forces on the "border" between his artificial state and the artificial state of "Lebanon." Since the UN "interim [sic] force in Lebanon" is twenty-five years interim and counting, has permitted smuggling of thousands of rockets and mountains of other munitions from Syria, has videotaped and then suppressed information about the abduction of Israeli soldiers we should understand the feed-the-media and gull-the-public aspect of this bloody farce. At the same time, Israeli government forces are talking about the need to fight Syria. The comments are hollow: they should have attacked and destroyed the "Syrian" armed forces early in the Hizballah conflict but did not. But the talk proceeds because the Olmert-Kadima image must be rebuilt so they can continue with "the Road Map" to a Judenrein Judea and Samaria. That leads to Col. Yuval Bazak, commander of the Shomron Brigade of the IDF. In a highly publicized interview, this hack nattered about things obvious, horrific and misleading. He explained at great length the obvious fact that an enemy cannot be fought by standing guard duty in front of him but that the terrain must be invested in depth and from many angles; precisely what Israel did not do in the conflict. We already know why: Major General Yaakov Amidror, Deputy Chief of IDF Intelligence announced six weeks ago that it was "political arrangements with the international communit" that "let Hizballah strike first." But the implications of that fact are drifting away as apparently is the fact that the Olmert-Peres-Peretz team hamstrung the IDF when it sought to act in the nation's interest. Bazak added that it was foolish to treat Hizballah as if Israel had signed a treaty with it. This seeming banality actually is a warning about him: if Israel had a treaty with Hizballah, as they have so many agreements with the PLO, he implied that it would be okay to face them with border guards alone. Be warned of the next stage of the "phased plan" to destroy Israel. This fellow's mug is that of a fifth-rate apparatchik and that's precisely why he's being highlighted as a new "reformist" addition to the General Staff. He's a fraud. In similar spirit he declared that the IDF's main error "was to be friendly with the [Jewish] settlers." Be warned. This comment is the essence of Oslo, post-Zionism and epitomizes the Labor Party's death grip on the nation. Bazak echoes Olmert who a few months ago was openly asserting that the Jews in Judea and Samaria were Israel's main enemy, more than Hizballah, more than Hamas who dominates the "government" headed by Mr. Abbas-Mazen with whom Olmert is "eager to work closely to implement the Road Map..." Games, games: "fraud and violence..." This is what the moshiach will suppress (psalm 72, the last prayer of David). Two items conclude this overview of the current maneuvering of Israel into the New Middle East over which Oceania, the Holy Roman Empire and Jihad will fight to their never-ending profit, the impoverishment of their inhabitants and the burying of Jews and Judaism..." Al Qaeda has a recent item on one of its web sites quoting sura 5:20 of the Koran in which Mahomet orders, "Jews, settle your land as Allah [sic] commanded you." AQ explains that it attacks the Jews because they have rejected Allah's gift to them of the land. This is an interesting lesson for all concerned: Labor "Zionists" have many times rejected their birthright and defined the truest and bravest of Jews as the enemy. So by its own logic, Al Qaeda should join the settlers in destroying the perennial leftwing elites of Israel. Support for this could be found in the Koran. But don't hold your breath: politics will trump Scripture though there is a small opening here. Both the Shiite and Sunni camps have given the Jews some tactical opportunities: be sure that Peres-Kadima will shut the door on them like the Giant Warden in Kafka's "Parable of the Law." Lastly, an addendum to our essays on the Torah and topography of the Promised Land and to the piece on earthquakes and the shattering of klippot: at 7:58 on the morning of Shabbat (Elul 16; September 09) the earth quaked beneath central Israel. At 4.4 on the Richter scale, it was the largest in the series that began August 20, the date of the ceasefire-surrender. It was centered near Shechem -- Elon Moreh where Avraham built the first altar to the Creator (Genesis 12:7) and where Joseph and Joshua are buried. Tremors were felt throughout central Israel, from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv on the coast. The previous quake nearest this in magnitude (4.0) was on Rosh Hashanah last year (2005) after the expulsion of Jews from Gush Katif and northern Shomron. This is pertinent: Rosh Hashanah is inaugurated with shofar blasts and the call to Israel to return to the Eternal One Who chose them in an everlasting covenant, and Who vowed that He would never forgive those who scattered them or divided up their land... (Joel 3). Every item described above is a shofar cry... The prophetic reading (haftora) for the Torah portion on the day of the recent quake is chapter 60 of Isaiah that calls Israel to "arise! Shine! Although darkness may cover the earth, and dense cloud the kingdoms upon you Hashem will shine and His glory will be seen upon you. Nations will walk by your light and kings by the brilliance of your radiance...in its time, I will hasten it." "In its time" (in due course, slowly) means Gerry Adams, Tony Blair, Olmert and Abu Mazen. A hastened redemption will sweep such characters from the stage. As always, the Torah seems to have been written just minutes ago for it is the eternal present of the One Who "put His words in every Jewish mouth." The nations are running and pushing into deeper darkness, thrilled by the road they see as their grand entrance to the throne of the end-times. It's always darkest before dawn and Zechariah, speaking of the last battle tells us that "it will be a unique day neither day nor night but towards evening, there will be light." Light is urgently needed amid the gathering darkness of the malicious and foolish games that target Israel. If only the Jewish people, the nation of Israel would awaken. "Five of them would pursue a hundred, and one hundred of them would cause ten thousand to flee..." A generation ago it happened; it needs to happen again. |
|
I'M TIRED ...!
Posted by Sanda Abramovici, September 10, 2006. |
|
The attached was sent to many news organizations including, CNN, AP, CBS, New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Chicago Suntimes, Fox News. It was written by Nancy Jacobson who lives in Chicago. |
|
I'm tired of the world. I'm tired of the news. I'm tired of news commentators. I'm tired of editorials. I used to hate CNN, BBC, Public Radio, Associated Press, now I I'm just tired of them. I no longer look for fair news coverage of any subject relating to Israel. I'm tired of looking for it. I'm tired of the United Nations. I'm actually disgusted with the United Nations. They are simply a joke. I'm tired of the international community walking on eggshells as the President of Iran states openly his goal to destroy Israel, and almost no one responds... The world just shruggs. I'm tired of a world that has grown comfortable with watching Jews die. The world watched as Jews were destroyed in Nazi death camps. Now, it seems that the world has grown complacent with deaths of Jews. The world isn't shocked or horrified by a world leader calling for death to Jews. The world doesn't punish that leader, we all just watch and wait to see what he does next. I'm tired of a world that speaks of "moral equivalency" and "measured response". Please, if Detroit or Atlanta were being bombed, would we call for a "measured response"? I don't care what the European Union has to say about Israel. I don't care what Vladimir Putin has to say about Israel. And France? Please, don't get me started on France. I no longer travel to Europe. I don't buy European wine. I don't support their economies. I just don't care about Europe anymore. I'm tired of news reporters who speak to "pained" Arabs who say "All we want is Peace" through their sobs of pain. Please, these "skilled" reporters never ask if peace means living side by side with Israel. I'm not sure why they don't ask this simple question, but I'm tired of waiting for them to ask... I'm tired of words like, "Combatants and Militants" instead of accurate terms such as "terrorists, murderers, soldiers". I'm tired of the world's condemnation of Israel for whatever she does. I'm tired of "double speak" and "political correctness". I'm tired of Muslims. I'm tired of their extremists. I'm tired of their silent "majority". I'm tired of terrorism that is growing throughout the world, and world leaders who are afraid to act against it. I only care about one thing; Israel's survival. I care that another Holocaust will never happen. I care about Israeli's pain and Israel's success. Israel must live. Contact Sanda Abramovici at sab@telefonica.net.pe |
|
GENERAL GERSHON HACOHEN ON THE GAZA EXPULSION
Posted by Steven Plaut, September 10, 2006. |
|
General Gershon Hacohen is head of all army training colleges and was personally in charge of the expulsion of Jews from the Gaza Strip. He appeared on Channel 10 a few days ago and said this: "What happened a year ago (the Gush Katif expulsion) was a crime, and I was unfortunately a part of that crime against the Jewish people. What is happening here now, the second Lebanese War, is the collective punishment we have received for what happened a year ago in Gaza. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
KADIMA'S BROKEN PROMISES
Posted by Paula Stern, September 10, 2006. |
|
When several major media organizations refer to recent demonstrations calling for a state inquiry into the government's handling of the War in Lebanon (Part II), they chose the word "mismanagement." Did Ehud Olmert mismanage the government's stated mission and the internal functioning of the home front protection? Did Amir Peretz and Dan Chalutz mismanage the performance of the IDF? "Mismanage" is a politician's word used to cover what really happened and luckily, the Israeli public is smart enough to know better. More appropriate words can be found to describe how the Olmert government acted before, during and after this 34 day period and only a state inquiry can research and expose the government's real performance and decision-making processes. What occurred was nothing short of "gross incompetence." At the highest levels and to the highest degrees, the government bungled the situation at home and dangerously miscalculated the war in Lebanon. At home, people were left to evacuate (or not) on their own for much of the war. Thousands booked themselves into vacation resorts further south to escape and it was out of the goodness of the Israeli heart that most hotels and hostels lowered the prices for them. This voluntary evacuation of over 400,000 people saved countless lives but should have been an organized and funded operation of the government so that the elderly, the sick and the poor were not abandoned. Instead, it was left to those like Arkady Gaidamak, the Moskowitz family in the US, and thousands of Israelis to donate millions of shekels to evacuate and house refugees and to buy critical supplies for the army. As generous as these donations were, they should not have been necessary because the government should have assessed the danger to the population and either evacuated or protected them adequately. But again, this is the government that failed to properly meet the needs generated by the planned creation of 9,000 Gush Katif refugees, so why should anyone be surprised that Olmert couldn't even fathom the need to see to 400,000 sudden refugees? Where was the Kadima government? The government should have known what the army needed before it sent it to war, not after. If the only answer was the evacuation of the north, than all residents, not just those with the ability to leave, should have been removed. If critical military equipment had been relocated to the Gaza front, it should have been brought north before ground forces were sent in. Instead, money and food was made possible by banks who chose extraordinary methods to get cash to the effected areas and to hundreds of thousands of volunteers who baked or bought, packed and shipped off tons and tons of food to these areas. Again, but for the heart of the Israeli, northern conditions would have been much worse. And again, where was the Olmert government? Kadima into chaos. On the war front, soldiers went into battle missing important equipment. Our own synagogue helped spearhead a project that brought more than $140,000 of personal items such as socks, underwear, shampoo, etc. right to the border, under fire, to supply these items to soldiers as they headed into war. Where was the Olmert government? Incompetence was the name of this war at the start. The kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, one might argue, took the army by surprise (though there were warnings in effect suggesting that Hamas was going to try this very thing). But how is it possible that only two weeks after Hamas succeeded in invading Israeli territory murdering several and kidnapping one soldier, Hizbollah attempted and succeeded in doing the same thing, this time kidnapping two soldiers? Why was the elevated state of alert on the northern border lowered? This is incompetence, not mismanagement. What occurred was nothing short of betrayal, not mismanagement. Starting with the Shalit, Goldwasser and Regev families, who were told that their sons were the important purpose behind decisions made by the Olmert government, time after time, the great military mantra of not leaving a soldier behind was expressed by government and army personnel. We went to war because we are a nation that is one with our army. These are our sons that were taken when our land was invaded. Where are Gilad, Ehud and Eldad today? The Olmert government betrayed those living in the north as they have betrayed those living in Sderot and Ashkelon, and as they betrayed the people living in Gush Katif for years. Of all the nations in the world, only the Israeli government allows its people to be attacked and shelled with impunity. From the twisted policies of the Sharon government that was elected on a platform of peace and security (and delivered neither), to the current Kadima government that thinks surrender and convergence is the roadmap to peace, our government continues to abandon large areas of our country to the fortunes of the wind and the grace of God. This is betrayal. And finally, the Chief of Staff has every legal right (and no moral right) to sell his personal stock hours after learning that our soldiers had been kidnapped. The ramifications are clear to everyone. Israel was a nation about to go to war. Dan Chalutz, above all others, knew that Israel would not, could not stand by for yet another kidnapping and the fact that it occurred only two weeks after a previous kidnapping only a short while after he had ordered the lowering of the alert status in the north, does not let speak well for his actions. So, in the hours after the kidnapping, as the army was frantically preparing for war, where was his mind? What did he think about? His personal stock. This is betrayal, not "mismanagement." Cowardice in the face of the enemy, rather than mismanagement was also seen in this war. The Olmert government failed to live up to its commitments and turned its words into lies so many times, it is hard to keep track. To avoid Goldwasser and Regev sharing the same fate as Ron Arad, the soldiers must be kept in Lebanon and not be transferred to Iran or another hostile location with its own political agenda. The naval blockade of Lebanon was created for this purpose, and yet today, Lebanon's territorial waters are open to all, as is the border with Syria. Arms are being smuggled in, rockets being restocked and the fate of the two soldiers is anyone's guess. Olmert's patronizing comment that the families have every right to their anger merely shows his lack of sensitivity, but his real crime is one of perfidy and cowardice, not mismanagement. And finally and most likely worst of all, what occurred is that troops were sent unprepared and ill-advised into battle, leading to their deaths. In any other language besides politician-ese, this would be called murder. Israel has some of the finest, most modern and technically advanced weaponry in the world. How is it possible that our boys were sent into Lebanon lacking body armor, helmets, and even food and water? That Israeli citizens had to drive into a war zone to bring necessary personal items is distressing. That soldiers were sent into battle without the required equipment is not mismanagement. For the crimes of incompetence, betrayal, sheer stupidity, cowardice, and ultimately causing the deaths of its soldiers due to negligence, the government must answer. A state inquiry is the start; resignation and new elections must be the only true roadmap in store for the Olmert government. Contact Paula Stern at paula@writepoint.com |
|
TURF WARS AND FANATICAL ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, September 10, 2006. |
|
It's all about control of land. Gang mentality turf wars have afflicted every region of this dysfunctional evolving planet throughout the course of human history. At this point in spacetime, however, an explosion of homicidal/suicidal behavior, ignited by faith-based programming, based on martyr-driven twisted Koranic verse, spewed by murderous twisted Islamic minds, exacerbates that territorial instinct. Today's most infected regions, Iraq and Afghanistan, rage out of control. Israel, a tiny beleaguered cerebral nation, yearning for peace, located in the midst of a geographic inferno-in-progress, presciently has reduced the numbers of exploding Islamic lunatics on its terrain by building a "wall of life", such strategy bizarrely condemned from afar by non-Muslim pompous asses, as well as manning check points utilizing techniques such as behavioral profiling, also bizarrely condemned by those same distant non-Muslim pompous asses. Perhaps an, "it could never happen here (again)" delusional mind-set afflicts those who would condemn Israel for employing strategies that increase the odds of survival and enhance the lives of its citizens. Still, how many more skyscraper, subway, resort, or other venue massacres by fanatical Muslims, obsessed with infecting the entire surface of this planet with their mutated anti-secular misogynist philosophy, will it take before ignorant but truly imperiled twenty-first century pie-in-the-sky apologists realize they are indeed in trouble and attempt to do something sensible about it? Gang mentality turf wars intertwined with a willingness to detonate and destroy human life, so devalued as to circumvent any natural humane instinct etched within the genes of this embattled species, is an untenable state of affairs so egregious, movers and shakers worldwide must develop a plan of attack to counteract such mutated behavior without delay. Alas, the recent exponential increase in homicide/suicide bombings on Afghanistan's tortured turf, for one, does not rate an ort of space within the collective star-struck sports-minded consciousness of entertainment groupie populations, arguably overworked in need of some respite, inhabiting first world nations. However, there is absolutely no excuse for democratically elected political leaders, paid to pursue policies insuring the safety of such constituents, not to coordinate efforts more vigorously in defusing the ever growing probability of one Dr Strangelove-in-turban scenario or many, orchestrated in one urban enclave or many, by one diabolically deranged Muslim grim reaper strapped to a nuke or many. Might a concerted effort be forthcoming by such leaders of secular industrial nations to shut down all human bomb factories a/k/a madrassas, especially in Pakistan, most of which are financed by that despicable oil rich House of Saud? Might a concerted effort be forthcoming by such leaders of oil-addicted secular industrial nations to begin seriously searching for and developing on a massive scale fossil fuel alternatives, thus reduce revenues to those Sauds, Iran, Syria, Sudan, and all other oil-pushing underwriters of terrorist groups utilizing homicide/suicide bombers as their weapons of choice? All combined turf wars over two violent millenniums will be dwarfed by but one out of control jihad initiated worldwide nuclear Armageddon, in the vernacular of mentally challenged Muslim lunatics "God willing" to fully annihilate the "infidel", setting a consequential radioactive stage and glowing tribute to the expectant Imam from Allahland chanting "God is Great" and Islam uber alas. What could be scarier? Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
TERRORISTS THRIVE ON THE INDULGENCE OF A WEAK SOCIETY
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, September 10, 2006. |
|
Terrorist thrive on the indulgence of a weak society. Criminals, corrupt politicians, generals have avoided the purpose of combat to save their own nation because they have been indulged by the people. Nations live or die by choices they make and those choices are usually made by politicians who have claimed leadership and the benefits it will personally bring them. The nation of Israel and her people are suffering terribly - often to the point that their nation is lost to an adversary who wants it more than the ruling elite which demonstrated their weakness when put to the test. Sometimes we wait for G-d to come along to save our country or simply strike dead those who are corrupt, malicious and without a sense of honor. But, most often we must ourselves push our nation into the right position to administer justice. G-d will arrive in His time. Granted false leaders speak honor but there is not a scintilla of honor within their hearts, motives or souls. Some of these leaders may actually be selling out the country. Better they are dead, maimed or struck dumb and blind - not unlike some of the young soldiers they have put into harm's way - never intending for them to finally win the battle. Let these nation-killers lie in bed, totally immobile but, able to hear the results of the evil they have brought upon their nation. Perhaps even the worst can do Tshuva (repent) before they lie in a hospital bed unable to move but thinking about what they have done with no chance to redeem themselves. We see honorable people work diligently for the nation as patriots who really care. But, along came Politicians and a Corrupt Elite who haven't helped to build the nation but, only fed on what the real patriots had done. The kibbutzniks settled the Land, planted the orchards and turned the rocky, barren fields into fertile gardens and farms. It took years of sweat and desperation but, they succeeded until the politicians came along who built nothing but they (wrongfully) claim ownership of the Land and the right to give it away. Then there are the settlers who were at the forefront of the many wars which had to be fought when the surrounding Arab countries repeatedly attacked. They are the true heroes but, they didn't seek glory and privilege. There were always those who did little for the country, but who jumped into the vacuum to claim privilege and become the Prime Ministers or rise to other high posts of power. The strength of the nation was dangerously in the hands of those who were closer to the desires and demands of Israel's enemies. They proved their poor leadership time and again by inviting the enemy to kill their own people - by bringing them closer to their own population centers. Many Jewish men, women and children died needlessly because of the faulty, weak policies of politicians who had the quaint idea that one could "pet the cobra" and not be bitten. Of course, these politicians also expected rewards from other nations who were friends of the oil laden Arab Muslim countries, even as they betrayed their own nation. Again and again these politicians and their duped followers demonstrate that they believe only the Jews must surrender and put their lives into the hands of a self-declared deadly enemy. This enemy tried to kill Jews and claim our nation for Islam at every opportunity. Jewish leadership whined and wrung their collective hands - always ready to sacrifice the Jewish people but - never themselves. These are the nation killers which every great civilization has known well. All fell, led by pall-bearers called politicians or whatever nom de guerre they choose to go by. No matter since, in the end, they were all nation killers who died with their victims. Their job was to weaken the society from the inside while convincing their people how much was really being done for them "behind the scenes" on their behalf. The politicians all needed spokes-people to carry the word to the crowds. In times past it was the town crier; sometimes an accommodating churchman linked to the aristocracy - or today we call it "The Media". Not all the media are the spokesmen for the corrupt leadership. Some report the truth but not many in Israel. It takes a long time for the mob to get control of a city and even longer for a nation to reach that low level where they are now on the brink of total failure. Since Israel became a nation fighting for her very life against surrounding Arab Muslims and also those who live inside Israel, she also became a political target for Jewish politicians whose only goal was control and power. They succeeded beyond their wildest imagination. There was very little that the Army of the Left didn't control. Naturally, every job in the Prime Minister's office belongs to the gang or the reigning political mafia which controls all the other things which buy power. But, these corrupt men never thought of themselves as nation builders and never apologized for not trying. The true nation builders failed in part of their job because they were always willing to forgive and forget. They let the parasites feed on their work to the point that the people became enslaved to the ambitions of the ruling party. In Israel high ranking politicians are never indicted or go to jail simply because they hold the reins of power, assisted by the |activist" Courts. The saying that they "got away with murder" is more than a saying. The IDF (Israel Defense Forces) was used ruthlessly as an incubator for politically accommodating officers to be given political jobs after their time of army service was up. Even the mafia could have learned new techniques from Israel's power brokers. The recent Lebanon debacle should have immediately put Olmert, Peretz, Peres, Halutz, Gen. Beni Gantz among all the other failures out on the street fleeing the righteous anger of the people. But, Olmert and his Gang - including the Media - are fighting hard to keep their jobs with their privileges and perks while maintaining a choke-hold on the people. Why give up such a cozy well-paid arrangement if a campaign of disinformation is launched proving we won the Lebanon War? If ever there was a time for the people to revolt against a dishonest government, this is that time. After all, they have the newspapers ready to lie and absolve them to the public of their malfeasance in office. They have some high ranking officers ready to proclaim their innocence and blame others. But, they don't have the majority of the Israeli Army. More and more of them are joining in the "Reservists Protest" against the way Olmert ran the 34 day war and now its aftermath. The entire Olmert gang of Kadimites are making enough speeches as if the government were really falling and they were running for office. (Let's hope they are.) Israel is fighting for her life not only against the surrounding hostile Arab Muslim countries but also against a gang of political Jews who would and have sold us out for a "Cheeseburger" (Not Kosher)!? Remember, terrorists thrive on the indulgence of a weak society. Israel may be on her way back but NOT with the Mafia that today has their hands in everyone's pocket. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
ARE YOU READY TO CONVERT TO ISLAM?
Posted by Steven Shamrak, September 10, 2006. |
|
In a recently aired video, Al Qaida's second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri introduced a speaker, Azzam the American, who invited all non-Muslims, especially in the United States, to convert to Islam and to abandon their 'misguided' ways or suffer the consequences. He called for "...repent and enter into the light of Islam and turn their swords against the enemies of God?" Not long ago Abu Bakar Bashir, the spiritual leader of Indonesia based Jamal Islamia, also called on Bush and Prime Minister of Australia John Howard to convert to Islam, saying it was "the only way to save their souls". I appreciate their concern for my soul, but they forgot to give us the
specific instructions: What brand of Islam are we supposed to convert
to? Do we put on suicide belts immediately after conversion or wait
for an order? If I become a Sunni Muslim, when and how many Shiites,
Infidels and Crusaders do I have to kill to secure my seat at the
table with Allah in the Haven? And what about female genital
mutilation, breaking the arms of the children for stealing a loaf of
bread, keeping girls in a burning school because they had no head
covering, etc? These are only few questions of many I would like to
hear answered to before I make such a life-defining decision. I think
we need clear explanations and specific instructions!
Global Islamic terrorism is not confined to a few Islamic terrorist
groups only. It has infested all the levels of society in most of the
Muslim countries, as well as communities in the Western countries. For
example: MUSLIM leaders, instead of condemning terrorism, have lashed
out in one voice at Peter Costello, the Australian Treasurer, after he
called on them to condemn terrorism "unequivocally" and speak out
plainly and clearly against radicals in their community. They did not
express themselves with such unequivocal clarity after 9/11, Bali,
London and Madrid bombings, so why has the call for clear condemnation
of islamic terror bring such an outburst from the Muslim leaders in
Australia? Why are they looking for any excuse or justification for
Islamic terrorism and then blame the West for their own ugliness?
PS: The Al Qaida speaker has been identified as Adam Yehiye Gadahn, an
American from California with Jewish ancestry. He was born Adam
Pearlman on September 1, 1978, the grandson of a prominent Jewish
surgeon and the son of musician Phil Pearlman, who converted to
Christianity and changed his named to Gadahn. This is only one example
of how the Jewish self-hate, apathy, lack of leadership and absence of
direction can manifest itself.
Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and
participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last
3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the
Arab-Israeli conflict - independently, not as a member of any
organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at
StevenShamrak@gmail.com
|
|
UN NEEDS SOME SELF-EXAMINATION
Posted by Gary Fitleberg, September 10, 2006. |
|
The United Nations Human Rights Committee is in dire need of some self-examination. The membership, once chaired by Libya, includes a cast of characters such as China, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Sudan. This alleged "human rights" committee recently appointed individuals to investigate Israel's war conduct. Among the appointees are a Brazilian diplomat, a Greek professor and a Tanzanian judge. The president of the Human Rights Council, Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba, announced the appointment of Clemente Baena Soares (Brazil), Stelios Perrakis (Greece) and Mohamed Chande Othman (Tanzania) as members of the High-Level Commission of Inquiry into the situation in Lebanon. This so-called "human rights" commission was created to find Israel guilty of "war crimes" for defending itself against an aggressive attack and the kidnapping of its soldiers within its sovereign borders, in clear violation of international law. Under the inquiry, the three panelists are charged to investigate the "systematic targeting and killing of civilians by Israel." The commission will also examine the types of weapons Israel used and their conformity with international law. This committee clearly serves as a distraction from Hizbullah's practice of targeting innocent citizens on both sides of the border. The organization launched a total of nearly 4,000 rockets on civilian population centers within Israel daily, including on Israel's third largest city of Haifa. Hizbullah also used civilians as human shields for the rocket launchers. The Hizbullah fighters themselves wore civilian clothing, to make themselves hard to distinguish in unconventional warfare against a clearly uniformed army. Thus, Hizbullah's premeditated murder of civilians became propaganda for its own public relations campaign in the battle for public perception. It was as far from the facts, reality and truth as can be. The mandate of the UN Human Rights Commission clearly sets forth, The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), a department of the United Nations Secretariat, is mandated to promote and protect the enjoyment and full realization, by all people, of all rights established in the Charter of the United Nations and in international human rights laws and treaties. The mandate includes preventing human rights violations, securing respect for all human rights, promoting international cooperation to protect human rights, coordinating related activities throughout the United Nations, and strengthening and streamlining the United Nations system in the field of human rights. In addition to its mandated responsibilities, the Office leads efforts to integrate a human rights approach within all work carried out by United Nations agencies. The use of Lebanese children, women and men as human shields should be the real focus of the UN Commission on Human Rights' investigation. Additionally, Hizbullah receives the blessing and protection of the Lebanese government, which has not only failed to disarm the terrorist group, but has let it stockpile a known quantity of over 15,000 deadly missiles, rockets and weapons of mass destruction. The group has also been integrated into the norms of the Lebanese culture, economy and politics. Hizbullah has been democratically elected by the Lebanese population and has been politically active, infiltrating Lebanon's cabinet and legislature. Israel has not "occupied" Lebanon, as did Syria, for the last six years and has complied with the UN Resolution to leave the recognized Lebanese borders. The UN, on the other hand, gives legitimization to a rogue state-within-a-state of terrorists. With its human rights inquiry, the UN countenances Hizbullah warfare, while denigrating the right of any sovereign state to defend itself and protect its citizens. One wonders. Why not investigate Hizbullah, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran? It comes as no surprise. Almost all of the UN Human Rights Committee resolutions have focused on Israel, the only democracy and freedom-loving nation in the Medieval Middle East - a very bad neighborhood of some of the worst corrupt dictatorships, extremist fanatical fundamentalists, human rights violators, rogue nations, state supporters of terrorism and tyrannies in the history of mankind. Why not put all these on trial for real human rights violations and war crimes? The United Nations "Human Rights" Committee needs recrimination and self-examination before it can accuse and blame Israel for any abuse in its war activities. It acts as a kangaroo court, holding Israel guilty of "war crimes" for defending itself against aggressive attackers whose only aim is to annihilate it from the face of the earth. Gary Fitleberg is a Political Analyst specializing in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs. Contact him at gary@gary.com This was an Op-Ed piece in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
ISLAM AND THE MEDIA
Posted by American Congress for Truth, September 10, 2006. |
|
Did you see that video of the two Fox journalists announcing they'd converted to Islam? The larger problem, it seems to me, is that much of the rest of the Western media have also converted to Islam, and there seems to be no way to get them to convert back to journalism. Consider, for example, the bizarre behavior of Reuters, the once globally respected news agency now reduced to putting out laughably inept terrorist propaganda. A few days ago, it made a big hoo-ha about the Israelis intentionally firing a missile at its press vehicle and wounding its cameraman Fadel Shana. Shana was posed in an artful sprawl in a blood-spattered shirt. But it had ridden up and underneath his undershirt was spotlessly white, like a summer-stock Julius Caesar revealing the boxers under his toga. What's stunning is not that almost all Western media organizations reporting from the Middle East are reliant on local staff overwhelmingly sympathetic to one side in the conflict -- that's been known for some time -- but the amateurish level of fakery that head office is willing to go along with. Down at the other end of the news business, meanwhile, one finds items like this snippet from the Sydney Morning Herald: "A 16-year-old girl was tailed by a car full of men before being dragged inside and assaulted in Sydney's west last night, police say ... "The three men involved in the attack were described to police as having dark 'mullet-style' haircuts." Three men with "mullet-style" hair, huh? Not much to go on there. Bit of a head scratcher. But, as it turned out, the indefatigable Sydney Morning Herald typist had faithfully copied out every salient detail of the police report except one. Here's the statement the coppers themselves issued: "Police are seeking three men described as being of Middle Eastern/Mediterranean appearance, with dark 'mullet-style' hair cuts." That additional detail narrows it down a bit, wouldn't you say? The only reason I know that is because the Aussie Internet maestro Tim Blair grew curious about the epidemic of incidents committed by men of no known appearance and decided to look into it. One can understand the agonies the politically correct multicultural journalist must go through, distressed at the thought that an infelicitous phrasing might perpetuate unfortunate stereotypes of young Muslim males. But, even so, it's quite a leap to omit the most pertinent fact and leave the impression the Sydney constabulary are combing the city for mullets. The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby wrote the other day about how American children's books are "sacrificing truth on the altar of political correctness." But there seems to be quite a lot of that in the grown-up comics, too. And, as I've said before, it's never a good idea to put reality up for grabs. There may come a time when you need it. It's striking how, for all this alleged multiculti sensitivity, we're mostly entirely insensitive to other cultures: We find it all but impossible to imagine how differently they view the world. Go back to that video in which Fox's Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig announced their conversion to Islam. The moment the men were released, the Western media and their colleagues wrote off the scene as a stunt, a cunning ruse, of no more consequence than yelling "Behind you! He's got a gun!" and then kicking your distracted kidnapper in the teeth. Indeed, a few Web sites seemed to see the Islamic conversion routine as a useful get-out-of-jail-free card. Don't bet on it. In my forthcoming book, I devote a few pages to a thriller I read as a boy -- an old potboiler by Sherlock Holmes' creator, Arthur Conan Doyle. In 1895 Sir Arthur had taken his sick wife to Egypt for her health, and, not wishing to waste the local color, produced a slim novel called The Tragedy of the Korosko, about a party of Anglo-American-French tourists taken hostage by the Mahdists, the jihadi of the day. Much of the story finds the characters in the same predicament as Centanni and Wiig: The kidnappers are offering them a choice between Islam or death. Conan Doyle's Britons and Americans and Europeans were men and women of the modern world even then: "None of them, except perhaps Miss Adams and Mrs. Belmont, had any deep religious convictions. All of them were children of this world, and some of them disagreed with everything which that symbol upon the earth represented." "That symbol" is the cross. Yet in the end, even as men with no religious convictions, they cannot bring themselves to submit to Islam, for they understand it to be not just a denial of Christ but in some sense a denial of themselves, too. So they stall and delay and bog down the imam in a lot of technical questions until eventually he wises up and they're condemned to death. One hundred ten years later, for the Fox journalists and the Western media who reported their release, what's the big deal? Wear robes, change your name to Khaled, go on camera and drop Allah's name hither and yon: If that's your ticket out, seize it. Everyone'll know it's just a sham. But that's not how the al-Jazeera audience sees it. If you're a Muslim, the video is anything but meaningless. Not even the dumbest jihadist believes these infidels are suddenly true believers. Rather, it confirms the central truth Osama and the mullahs have been peddling -- that the West is weak, that there's nothing -- no core, no bedrock -- nothing it's not willing to trade. In his new book The Conservative Soul, attempting to reconcile his sexual temperament and his alleged political one, Time magazine's gay Tory Andrew Sullivan enthuses, "By letting go, we become. By giving up, we gain. And we learn how to live -- now, which is the only time that matters." That's almost a literal restatement of Faust's bargain with the devil: "When to the moment I shall say
In other words, if Faust becomes so enthralled by "the moment" that he wants to live in it forever, the devil will have him for all eternity. In the Muslim world, they watch the Centanni/Wiig video and see men so in love with the present, the now, that they will do or say anything to live in the moment. And they draw their own conclusions -- that these men are easier to force into the car than that 16-year-old girl in Sydney was. It doesn't matter how "understandable" Centanni and Wiig's actions are to us, what the target audience understands is quite different: that there is nothing we're willing to die for. And, to the Islamist mind, a society with nothing to die for is already dead. Contact American Congress for Truth at info@americancongressfortruth.com |
|
IS HE TOO EXTREME OR ON TARGET?
Posted by Walter Soles, September 9, 2006. |
| This was written by Michael Coren and it appeared September 2, 2006 in the Sun News. |
|
It is surely obvious now to anybody with even a basic understanding of history, politics and the nature of fascism that something revolutionary has to be done within months -- if not weeks -- if we are to preserve world peace. Put boldly and simply, we have to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran. Not, of course, the unleashing of full-scale thermo-nuclear war on the Persian people, but a limited and tactical use of nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's military facilities and its potential nuclear arsenal. It is, sadly, the only response that this repugnant and acutely dangerous political entity will understand. The tragedy is that innocent people will die. But not many. Iran's missiles and rockets of mass destruction are guarded and maintained by men with the highest of security clearance and thus supportive of the Tehran regime. They are dedicated to war and, thus, will die in war. Frankly, it would be churlish of the civilized world to deny martyrdom to those who seem so intent on its pursuance. Most important, a limited nuclear attack on Iran will save thousands if not millions of lives. The spasm of reaction from many will be that this is barbaric and unacceptable. Yet a better response would be to ask if there is any sensible alternative. Diplomacy, kindness and compromise have failed and the Iranian leadership is still obsessed with all-out war against anybody it considers an enemy. Its motives are beyond question, its capability equally so. It is spending billions of dollars on a whole range of anti-ship, anti- aircraft and anti-personnel missiles, rockets and ballistic weapons: The Shahab 3ER missile, with a range of more than 2,000 km, and the BM25 and accompanying launchers, which are so powerful that they can hit targets in Europe. Raad missiles with a range of 350km. The Misaq anti-aircraft missile, which can be fired from the shoulder. The Fajar 3 radar-evading missile and the Ajdar underwater missile, which travels at an extraordinarily high speed and is almost impossible to intercept. The Zaltal and the Fatah 110 rocket, the Scud B and Scud C and the BM25 with a range of 3,500 kms. Iran is also developing enormous propellant ballistic missiles and began a space program almost a decade ago that will enable it to bomb the United States. It is also assumed in intelligence circles that Tehran has Russian Kh55 cruise missiles stolen from Ukraine which are now being copied in large numbers by Iranian scientists. Comparisons to the Nazis in the 1930s are unfair -- to the Nazis. Hitler had the French army, the largest in Europe, on his border and millions of Soviet infantry just a few hours march away. Iran has no aggressive enemies in the region. Its fanatical leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, controls a brutal police state, finances international terror and provokes bloody wars in foreign countries. It is unimaginably wealthy because of its oil revenues and is committed, in its leader's words, to "rolling back 300 years of Western ascendancy" and wiping another nation, Israel, from the face of the earth. A conventional attack would be insufficient because Iran and its allies seem only to listen to power and threat. Better limited pain now than universal suffering in five years. The usual suspects will complain. The post-Christian churches, the Marxists, the fellow travelers and fifth columnists. But then, the same sort of people moaned and condemned in 1938. They were clearly wrong then. They would be just as wrong now. Contact Walter Soles at walter@soles.ca |
|
THE SEVEN UNIVERSAL LAWS: LAWS FOR HUMANITY
Posted by Tsila, September 9, 2006. |
|
Consider joining the http://7lawsofnoah.tblog.com/ email list. |
|
THE SEVEN UNIVERSAL LAWS-LAWS FOR HUMANITY 1. One G-d - Do not worship false gods or idols 2. Do not blaspheme - Do not take Him or use His name in vain 3. Do not murder - His gift of life is precious 4. Do not steal - Respect others - Do not take what is not yours 5. Do not commit sexually immoral acts 6. Set up righteous and honest courts - Uphold these laws and enforce them 7. Do not eat from any body part of a live animal - Avoid cruelty to animals Over the last two thousand years since the expulsion of the Jewish people from the land of Israel adherents to the Noachide laws have been sparse if non-existent. With the regathering of the Jewish people to their land it has been possible for people to once again observe the Noachide Laws. Today a modern movement of adherents of the Noachide law exists; calling themselves B'nei Noah or Noahides in honor of Noah their ancestor who received these laws from God. Along with the promise of new life God reestablished the six laws originally given to Adam in the garden (prohibition against idolatry, blasphemy, theft, murder, illicit sex and the command to establish courts of justice) and added a new law, the prohibition of eating the limb of a living animal. A relatively a new movement, B'nei Noah has already made serious strides in developing their emerging community. Noachides recognize the impact of Noahide Laws on America. Former President Ronald Regan also officially recognized the roots of American government in the Noahide Laws.
JOIN THE BNAI NOACH MOVEMENT/COMMUNITY AND KEEP
THE LAWS Please consider joining this group and learning more about the laws that were given to Humanity. "MORALITY: THE 7 LAWS OF THE CHILDREN OF NOAH"
Applicability of the Seven Laws, permission to observe other laws of the Torah, permission and prohibition to learn Torah; proper intention concerning performance of Seven Laws; honoring parents; charity; interbreeding animals; grafting plants; circumcision; creating religions or new religious ritual observance; having children; burial The Path of the Righteous Gentile The Path of the Righteous Gentile is an original treatise on the Seven Laws of Noah. Within its pages the reader will find a clear and faithful rendering of these earliest teachings of God, a spiritual treasure which remains ever-new and dynamic and largely still unknown except to a few Jewish scholars. 1. With respect to God's commandments, all of humanity is divided into two general classifications: the Children of Israel and the Children of Noah. 2. The Children of Israel are the Jews, the descendants of the Patriarch Jacob. They are commanded to fulfill the 613 Commandments of the Torah. 3. The Children of Noah comprise the seventy original nations of the world and their branches. They are commanded concerning the Seven Universal Laws, also known as the Seven Laws of the Children of Noah or the Seven Noahide Laws.[1] These Seven Universal Laws pertain to idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual relations, eating the limb of a living animal, and establishing courts of law. 4. All Seven Universal Laws are prohibitions. Do not wonder at this. Negative commandments are of a higher order than positive commandments, and their fulfillment, which takes more effort than positive commandments, earns a greater reward. 5. Men and women are equal in their responsibility to observe the seven commandments.[2] 6. It is a matter of dispute as to when a person becomes responsible for his or her actions under these laws. One opinion holds that it depends on the intellectual development of the individual.[3] According to this opinion, as soon as a child has attained the maturity to understand the meaning and significance of the Seven Universal Laws, he is obligated to the fullest extent of the law. The other opinion is that a boy reaches the age of legal responsibility at his thirteenth birthday and a girl at her twelfth birthday.[4] 7. The Children of Noah are permanently warned concerning the Seven Universal Laws. This means that ignorance of the law is not a valid defense. One cannot claim, for example, that he did not know that idolatry was one of the seven commandments. Nor can he claim that he did not know that bowing down to an idol constitutes idolatry. (He can, however, claim that he did not know that such-and-such was an idol, for this is not ignorance of the law.) Therefore, one is duty bound to study the Seven Universal Laws to the best of one's ability and to teach the knowledge of them to one's children. 8. When one of the Children of Noah resolves to fulfill the Seven Universal Commandments, his or her soul is elevated. This person becomes one of the Chasidei Umot ha'Olam, the Pious Ones of the Nations, and receives a share of the Eternal World.[5] The Holy Scriptures call one who accepts the yoke of fulfilling the Seven Universal Laws a ger toshav, a proselyte of the gate. This person is permitted to live in the Land of Israel and to enter the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and to offer sacrifices to the God of Israel.[6] 9. Although the Children of Noah are commanded only concerning the Seven Universal Commandments, they are permitted to observe any of the 613 Commandments of the Torah for the sake of receiving divine reward.[7] The exceptions to this are:[8] a. Observing the Sabbath in the manner of the Jews (resting from the actions that were needed for the building of the Tabernacle during the Exodus from Egypt) (Note: A prime purpose of the Seven Universal Laws is to teach the Children of Noah about the Oneness of God, and therefore those parts of Torah that pertain to this knowledge are permissible for him to study. This includes the entirety of the twenty-four books of the Hebrew Scriptures. Also, the study of any part of the Torah that brings one to greater knowledge concerning the performance of the Seven Noahide Commandments is permissible. But Talmudic or Halakhic study of subjects that pertain exclusively to the Jew's service of God is forbidden. The Noahide who studies portions of the Torah that do not pertain to him damages his soul.[9]) 10. If a Noahide is striving in the learning of Torah or keeping the Sabbath in the manner of Jews or reveals new aspects of Torah, he may be physically restrained and informed that he is liable for capital punishment, but is not put to death. (Note: The action taken against him is only meant to dissuade him from doing forbidden acts. If the court that is established in consonance with the Seven Universal Laws gives the death penalty to a Noahide, the execution is an atonement for this person's transgression, and consequently one who transgresses and is punished by the court can merit a portion in the World to Come.[10] Furthermore, the Noahide must experience reincarnation to be able to atone for transgressions he had done.) 11. The responsibility of The Seven Noahide Laws is a yoke of faith in God. This means that the laws must be observed solely because God commanded them. If the Children of Noah observe these Seven Universal Laws for any reason or intention other than to fulfill God's will, the performance is invalid and no divine reward is received. This means that if one of the Children of Noah says, "These laws seem sensible and beneficial, therefore I will observe them," his actions accomplish nothing and he receives no reward.[11] 12. When one of the Children of Noah engages in the study of the Seven Universal Laws, he is able to attain a spiritual level higher than the High Priest of the Jews, who alone has the sanctity to enter the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. [12] 13. If one of the Children of Noah wishes to accept the full responsibility of the Torah and the 613 Commandments, he or she can convert and become a Jew in every respect. One who elects to do this is called a ger tzedek, a righteous proselyte. [13] It is a principle of Judaism, however, not to seek converts, and one who requests conversion is generally discouraged. Should the person persist in the desire to convert, counsel should be taken only with an Orthodox rabbi or scholar, for conversion not in accord with Halakha, Torah Law, is no conversion at all, and conversion supervised and bestowed by rabbis who themselves do not follow the laws of the Torah are null and void, neither recognized in heaven nor by any God-fearing Jew. 14. It is incorrect to think that since the Children of Israel have 613 Commandments and the Children of Noah have seven commandments, the ratio of spiritual worth is proportionally 613 to seven. The truth is that the Seven Universal Laws are general commandments, each containing many parts and details, whereas the 613 Commandments of the Torah are specific, each relating to one basic detail of the Divine Law. Therefore, the numerical disparity in no way reflects the relative spiritual worth of the two systems of commandments. [14] The prime difference in the service of the Israelite and that of the Noahide is that the Noahide sees the existence of existence, that is, he refines the world, whereas the Israelite sees the non-existence of existence, that is, he reveals the Godliness in the world. Of course, refining the world reveals its inherent Godliness and revealing Godliness automatically refines the world. 15. The statutory punishment for transgressing any one of the Seven Laws of Noah is capital punishment. [15] According to some, punishment is the same whether one transgresses with knowledge of the law or is ignorant of the law. [16] According to others, a transgressor of the Noahide Law who is ignorant of the law receives the death penalty only in the case of murder. [17] 16. If the courts cannot punish an individual for lack of witnesses or any other reason (see the chapter on Courts of Law), the transgressor will be punished by Divine Decree. [18] 17. Besides the Seven Universal Commandments, the Children of Noah have traditionally taken it upon themselves to fulfill the commandment of honoring father and mother. [19] (see the chapter on Honoring Father and Mother). 18. Some authorities are of the opinion that the Children of Noah are obligated to fulfill the commandment of giving charity. [20] Others state that it is proper and meritorious for the Children of Noah to give charity but that it is not actually commanded of them. [21] 19. If a Noahide who follows the Seven Universal Laws gives charity, the Israelites accept it from him and give it to the poor of Israel, since through the merit of giving charity to the poor among the Jewish people one is given life by God and saved from death. But a Noahide who does not accept the yoke of the Seven Noahide Laws and gives charity is not permitted to give it to the needy of Israel. His charity may be given to poor Noahides only. 20. If one of the Children of Noah arises and performs a miracle and says that God sent him, then instructs others to add to or subtract from any of the Seven Universal Laws or explains them in a way not heard at Mount Sinai, or claims that the 613 Commandments given to the Jews are not eternal, but limited to a fixed period of time, this person is deemed a false prophet and incurs the death penalty.[22] 21. There is an oral tradition that the Children of Noah are forbidden to interbreed animals of different species or to graft trees of different kinds,[23] although some authorities hold that they are permitted to do either.[24] However, they may wear shaatnez (clothing containing both wool and linen) and they may plant different seeds such as grape and wheat in the same field, which are acts forbidden to Jews. [25] Forbidden interbreeding and grafting are not punishable in courts of law. 22. The Sages of Israel state that Children of Ketura (the sons of Abraham's concubine, Hagar) who were born after Ishmael and Isaac must by law be circumcised. Since today the descendants of Ishmael are intermixed with the descendants of the other sons of Hagar, all are obligated to be circumcised on the eighth day after they are born. Those transgressing this are not liable for the death penalty.[26] This law applies only to Semitic peoples, although all other nations are allowed to circumcise if they desire. 23. One opinion holds that only the six sons of Hagar and not their descendants were obligated to be circumcised.[27] 24. In accord with the Seven Universal Commandments, man is enjoined against creating any religion based on his own intellect. He either develops religion based on these Divine Laws or becomes a righteous proselyte, a Jew, and accepts all 613 commandments of the Torah.[28] (Note: Concerning making holidays for themselves, Noahides may participate in the celebration of certain Jewish holidays, such as Shavuot, celebrating the Giving of the Torah, since the Children of Noah received their commandments at the same time, or Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year and Day of Judgment, since all mankind is judged by God on that day, so it should therefore be important to the Noahide as well as the Israelite. Rosh Hashanah is also the day that Adam, the First Man, was created by God, and all mankind is descended from Adam just as it is from Noah.[29] Even these, however, the Noahide celebrates only in order to bring additional merit and reward to himself, and he may not rest in the manner of the Jews. Moreover, the Noahide is strictly forbidden to create a new holiday that has religious significance and claim that it is part of his own religion, even if the religion is the observance of the Seven Noahide Laws. For example, it would be forbidden to make a holiday celebrating the subsiding of the waters of the Flood of Noah or anything of the like. And, all the more so, it would be forbidden to institute holidays that ascribe religious significance to events outside the purview of the Seven Noahide Commandments. Celebrating secular activities and commemorating historical events, even if they involve a festive meal, are permissible.) 25. The nations of the world acknowledge the existence of God and they do not transgress the will of God. Their failing is an inability to be nullified to God, and they deny His Oneness by thinking that they themselves are separate entities, calling Him the God of gods. Therefore, we find that when they transgress the Seven Noahide Commandments, it is only because the spirit of folly enters them and covers the truth, concealing it from them.[30] But from their essential being, they are not able to transgress the Will of God. Therefore, even Balaam, the wicked prophet who had sexual relations with an animal, his ass, which is a clear transgression of the Seven Noahide Laws, said, "I am not able to transgress the word of God" (Num. 22:18). 26. The commandment to be fruitful and multiply was given to Noah, but inasmuch as it was not repeated at Mount Sinai, this commandment is not considered part of the Seven Universal Laws.[31] However, the Children of Noah have the obligation to make the whole earth a dwelling place for mankind.[32] This is minimally achieved by every couple giving birth to a male and a female child who are in turn capable of reproduction.[33] Moreover, the couple that bears more children is credited with bringing more spiritual goodness into the world, assuming that these children are reared in an environment of morality by fulfilling the Seven Universal Laws. 27. A Noahide who strikes an Israelite causing even a slight wound, though he is theoretically condemned for this, does not receive the death penalty.[34] 28. When a Noahide dies, he is to be buried in the earth, "for out of it were you taken; for you are dust and unto dust you shall return" (Gen. 3:19). This does not mean that the Children of Noah transgress one of the Seven Commandments by utilizing another process such as cremation or cryogenic preservation, but they will lack the atonement that burial in the earth accomplishes.[35] 29. By observing the Seven Universal Laws, mankind is given the means by which it can perfect itself. The individual, through these laws, has the power to refine his essential being, and can reach higher and higher without limit. For it is written, "I call heaven and earth to bear witness, that any individual, man or woman, Jew or Gentile, freeman or slave, can have the Holy Spirit bestowed upon him. It all depends on his deeds."[36] And it is also written, "Ultimately, all is understood: fear God and observe His commandments, for this is the completion of man" (Eccles. 12:13). Footnotes [1] Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 56a
Contact the Tsila Group at tsilagroup@yahoo.com |
|
WITNESS TO TERROR: WATCHING WTC IMPLODE, AND REACTION IN ISRAEL AND
IN THE P.A.
Posted by David Bedein, September 9, 2006. |
|
Terror at the Twin Towers caught this reporter in Lower Manhattan, preparing to give a talk in a week long lecture series on how the PLO, the seemingly legitimate peace partner with Israel, had incorporated Islamic terrorist organizations and Islamic philosophy within the PLO's Palestinian Authority, in its school books, media, maps, and evolving legal system. The specific topics addressed in these lectures were: *The new constitution of the Palestinian Authority, prepared as a framework for a new state, excludes any juridical status for Judaism or for Christianity within the new state, while including the borders of the state as all of Palestine The lecture on the subject of the PA's absorption of Islamic extremism scheduled for the morning of September 11th, in a law office on the 24th floor at 401 Broadway in Lower Manhattan. The first e-mail received that morning: which visual aids would be required for the next discussion? Well, the most horrific visual aid appeared outside the window outside facing east: The towering inferno on top of the Twin Tower closest to us, while WINS News broadcast the news that the PFLP faction of the PLO immediately took responsibility for causing the towering inferno. WINS reported that PFLP story for the next two days Quickly grabbing a camera, the lens caught pictures of the WTC on fire, and then its sudden implosion. While taking the pictures, this reporter called the news line of The Voice of Israel radio station and reported a 10 minute live report, in real time, of the collapse of the twin towers as I witnessed it. Throughout the next 12 hours, this reporter contacted security sources in Israel to hear their perspective of what had transpired. Their feedback: Look beyond Bin Laden to determine who was responsible for this horrendous crime. One source at the Israeli prime minister's office noted that Israel was warning the US to examine the cooperation of several governments, NOT individuals, in the perpetration of the act: Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran, coordinated with Syria and the PLO. Meanwhile, veteran Jerusalem investigative reporter Dennis Eisenberg interviewed former advisor on terrorism to Israeli Prime Minister's Office, Mr. Rafi Eitan, who said that that all signs pointed to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein as the leading perpetrator of the act. Yet another Israeli intelligence expert remarked that the Israeli government had warned that US airlines may have been infiltrated by Moslem personnel who could have been activated to carry out such attacks. On the Palestinian side, conversations with Palestinian reporters made it quite clear that the demonstrations of joy that occurred immediately following the attacks in the cities under the Arafat's control could not have been organized without the direct approval of Yassir Arafat. The Middle East Newsline reported that Arafat's personnel were in the forefront of the Palestinian street demonstrations that lauded the Twin Tower attacks. It was the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Information that alerted and invited AP, Reuters, BBC, CNN and NBC to film the Palestinian demos of support for the terror attacks in the US. And since September 11th marked the eve of Arafat's first diplomatic visit to Damascus in a generation, it seemed that the PLO chieftan wanted to let the Arab world know that his people supported terrorism against ALL targets in the US, civilian and military. Yet 12 hours after the attacks, AFTER demos of joy took place, Arafat condemned the attacks, and therefore benefited from both worlds with two dissonant messages: Arafat conveyed to the west that he condemned the action and simultaneously conveyed to his own people that they should express their support for such attacks. Message Arafat's PBC Radio Newsreel Conveyed at the time of the Terror Attacks US The Palestinian Authority conveyed a strong undercurrent of vitriolic anti-American rhetoric before, during and after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Only two weeks before, the US government had ordered its delegation to walk out on the UN international forum on human rights in Durban, South Africa after the Palestinian delegation had engineered a series of tendentious anti-Israel events. The Mufti of the Palestinian Authority, Sheikh Ikrem al-Sabry had been explicitly threatening the US and Britain in his Friday mosque sermons broadcast on V.O.P. and telecast on PBC. On August 24th, 2001, at about 12:30 p.m. he preached: "O Allah, destroy America and its agents and its abettors.
Elsewhere in the Khutba (Mosque sermon), Sheikh al-Sabry called on all Muslims to unite to follow the path of Sallah al-Din (Salladin, who repelled the Crusaders): "O Allah, prepare and unite them (the Muslims) and guide them in the path of Salah al-Din." Throughout the speech, the sheikh called on Muslims to follow the path of Jihad, holy war. "If American does not restrict Israel, then there will be a regional, even a global calamity. If the United States does not stop Israel's aggression, then it, too (the US) will suffer a great disaster." On the morning after the bombings, on September 12th, Voice of Palestine Radio opened its morning drive-time news show thus: (Nizar al-Ghul.announcing): "Tanks in Jenin, and the Resistance Continues
On September 14, Sahir Habash, a senior member of the Fatah leadership, said: "We have to stand firm in these difficult days until the Americans understand that most of the catastrophes that befell them or are likely to befall them are due to their own one-sided-ness and their participation in aggression against the Palestinian people." Less than one month after the 9/11 attacks, during the week of Oct.5th- October 11), the Voice of Palestine has relayed daily reports which claimed Israeli Mossad involvement in the World Trade Center attacks, with the complicity of American citizens, with no mention of any Arab involvement. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il or go to www.ibtn.co.il |
|
CHRISTIAN ZIONISM, A BRIEF DEFINITION
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 9, 2006. |
|
This is for anyone interested in a brief definition of Christian Zionism. Recall that Hamas' Isma'il Haniyeh declared that Christian Zionists are the enemy of Islam. It is good, in my opinion, for those of us who support Israel and speak out on her behalf, to recognize an honest ally and stand up in support of that ally, just as we stand up in support of Israel. Dhimmi Christian leaders in the Middle East (such as the Latin Patriarch in Jerusalem) under threat from their Moslem overlords, and what I call semi-Dhimmi semi-Christian leaders in Europe under threat from their Moslem partners in Eurabia, are vitriolically anti-Israel. Some Mainline Christian leaders in the USA are also vociferously anti-Israel, but laboring under the vestigial political correctness of our post-World War 2 and post-Holocaust society, they tone down their anti-Israel rancor and couch it in faux terms of "peace and justice" or "responsible use of Church resources" (aka: divestment). So, I suggest that where we have allies in the Christian world, we support them, and thank them for their support, and work with them to support Israel. This article is called "A Defense of Christian Zionism: In Response to the Bishops' Declaration Joint Response" by Bridges for Peace, Christian Friends of Israel and The International Christian Embassy Jerusalem. It is signed by Rebecca Brimmer - International President, Bridges For Peace; Ray Sanders - Executive Director, Christian Friends of Israel; Malcolm Hedding - Executive Director, International Christians. |
|
It is with concern that we note the negative opinions about Christian Zionism voiced by certain church clerics in Jerusalem in a recent statement entitled, "The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism". Using inflammatory language they have expressed views that are far from the truth. The truth is: 1. Christian Zionism is a theological position that sees a future destiny for Israel in the land of her forefathers. A Christian Zionist believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible and rejects replacement theology that definitely played a pivotal role in the persecution of Jews through the centuries, and under girded the Holocaust. Christian Zionism is not heretical; in fact, Christians from all traditional backgrounds have held such a view for two thousand years. Simply put, a Christian Zionist is one who believes that God, by a sovereign choice, gave the Land of Canaan as an everlasting possession to the Jewish people, for His kingdom purposes. (Genesis 17:7-8) 2. Christian Zionists believe that while God loves all people equally, He has chosen the Jewish people to bring redemption to mankind. Our Messiah and King, Jesus Christ, was born of Jewish parents, into a Jewish society, thus making the Jewish people our 'royal family', to be honored because the King was born to them. Christian Zionists reject hatred of any people group. 3. Christian Zionists do not base their theological position on end-time prophecy, but on the faithful covenant promises of God given to Abraham some four thousand years ago. They do not have a "thirst for Armageddon," and do not claim to know the sequence of events that will lead to it. 4. Christian Zionists recognize that Israel has a right to exist in peace and security. Moreover, there are biblical considerations that regulate Israel's national existence and these have to do with the issues of justice and righteousness and her treatment of the stranger within her midst. Christian Zionists fully recognize this and stand for these. 5. Christian Zionism is not a threat to anybody, but instead seeks to be a blessing. The Christian Zionist organizations in Israel have given millions of dollars of aid and care to all the population groups in the land, including Israeli and Palestinian Arabs, Druse and others. We pray for peace. But we note with sadness that the present Palestinian Government is totally dedicated to the destruction of Israel and its charter declares it. So, the problem in the region is not as simple as the Jerusalem Declaration makes out! 6. Sadly there have been no meetings between the Jerusalem clerics and their Christian Zionist counterparts. We invite such a dialogue and consider it a biblical prerequisite. We are distressed that a public denunciation has occurred first. We feel that we have been treated with disrespect and disdain, and attacked by the issuing of these public declarations. They present themselves as lovers of justice, mercy, truth and peace! This public attack seems lacking in these qualities. We find the paper unbalanced and notably one-sided. It totally ignores the jihadist goals of the Hamas government and turns a blind eye to terrorism perpetrated by this regime. Everything is attributed to "occupation and militarism", meaning Israel is the only problem. We think not! This one-sided unbalanced view of the conflict is in fact unhelpful to the peace process and contributing to its failure! So, in closing, we Christian Zionists call upon Christians and Churches everywhere not to remain silent, but to break their silence and speak for reconciliation with justice in the Holy Land. To pray for the peace of Jerusalem, to affirm Israel's right to live in peace and security, free from the threat of liquidation by Islamic Jihadists who definitely seek to 'colonize' the Jewish State by bringing it into the Empire of Islam. We reject all forms of discrimination. 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 |
|
A FEW QUESTIONS FOR KHATAMI...
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, September 9, 2006. |
|
Former Iranian president and alleged moderate, Mohammad Khatami, is spending much of September visiting the United States where he'll be making the rounds to various Islamic conferences, universities, and other public forums. One of his main messages is that American policies spawn Islamic terrorism. He's correct. Islam has long seen the political and religious realms as but different sides of the same coin. Whether enforced conquest and dominance were enhanced in the name of an imperialist Islam or via various imperialist ethnic/national movements acting under its umbrella, the expectations were basically the same...All would yield in their respective wakes. If one consented, peace was possible. Yet, in a nationalist era, this too would become far more complicated. While native Jews and Christians were simply expected to accept their dhimmi status and all the subjugation and such that went along with it, fellow Muslim but different ethnic groups seeking their own political self-expression would also soon find themselves victimized by the more dominant national group. The plight of black Africans in the Sudan, Berbers in North Africa, and Kurds in Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq are but a few examples. Resistance to this Islamic and/or Arab and/or Turkish and/or Iranian (and so forth) subjugation and dominance was tantamount to being the enemy. Darfur, Halabja, and such were the consequences. And anyone who dared challenge this mindset was the enemy as well. So America helps create Islamic terrorism because it dares to suggest that others in the region besides Muslims--or the dominant Muslim ethnic group, be they Arabs or whomever--are entitled to their share of political rights as well in a nationalist age. Let's not stretch this. America has still not called for a roadmap for Kurdistan, for example. And the bloodshed and genocide in the Sudan continues with the world--including America--still looking on, virtually helpless. There will be no trials in Geneva over this. Those are reserved for the Jews building a fence to keep Arabs from blowing apart their kids. Yet America has taken steps in the right direction. And this has been enough to make it the Great Satan in many a Muslim Arab, Muslim Iranian, and so forth's eyes. Just supporting the rights of Jews, for example--half of whom were refugees from the so-called Arab/Islamic world--to a resurrected state on less than one half of one percent of the real estate in the region has challenged the basic Dar ul-Islam vs. Dar al-Harb mentality uniting the dominant religion and politics of the Middle East and North Africa (and fast spreading elsewhere). Steps taken if not to support, at least not to actively oppose a decentralized, federalized Iraq with a thriving, autonomous Kurdish area in the north are seen by Arabs, Iranians, and Turks alike as hostile acts for reasons described above. Thirty million Kurds are simply expected to remain stateless, politically deprived, and culturally subjugated by others who have conquered and incorporated their lands over the ages. And the birth of a free Kurdistan has been declared by Arabs to be the equivalent of that of another Israel. So, America indeed encourages the terrorism of those who believe that they have a monopoly on religious truth and political rights by simply opposing those views and supporting a wider concept of justice in the region. Thus, a 22nd Arab state should not be created on the ashes of the Jews' sole one. And a state for tens of millions of stateless Kurds willing to live in peace with their neighbors should be placed on the agenda far ahead of an additional Arab one which envisions itself taking the place of--not living side by side with--Israel. Endorsing such things make one an enemy of the dominant Islamic world outlook and those who use it to further their own nationalist causes. And while there may be other reasons as well (i.e. the historical clash of non-native imperialisms with the various local varieties), this is by far the main reason America is now hated and victimized by the jihadists. Which brings me back to Khatami's current visit. He's scheduled for a presentation at one of the world's most prestigious universities -- Harvard. Since much of academia, the United Nations, media folks, and such treat visiting Israelis far differently than they do representatives from Muslim countries, I have some concerns. Whether the Israeli is from the far left or the right, he or she can expect a non-stop grilling at such visits. At times, they have indeed been prevented from even speaking. Too often those who confront the Jew of the Nations about every and all of its alleged sins, cower at any semblance of this when interviewing the Muslim world's counterparts. So, permit me to propose a few questions to Khatami that I fear won't be raised by others. I hope I'm wrong. Why is it that Iran can demand a second state for Arabs in "Palestine" (Arabs historically never had one there, and purely Arab Jordan was created from some 80% of the original 1920 Mandate's borders), support groups like Hamas and Hizbullah which aim to destroy Israel (with Iran stating this as a goal itself--again, the Dar ul-Islam vs, Dar al-Harb thing), yet millions of Arabs, in what Iran calls (oil rich) Khuzestan but which for centuries has been known as Arabistan because of the Arabs who have lived and at times ruled there, remain suppressed and certainly deprived of such aspirations? Not long ago, a neighboring Arab Saddam fought a bloody war with Iran over this. Why are the rights of Arabs to that additional state in Palestine more important than those of millions of Kurds whose historic lands you acquired over the millennia via your own pre-and post-Islam imperialist actions? And ditto for how you deal with Azeris, Baluchis, and all others you came to dominate in a pre-nationalist age but who now have aspirations of their own as well? These folks make up at least half of your own alleged nation. What makes Iranian national rights more valid than those of others seeking their own small share of justice and fair play in the modern age... especially since they have not been permitted this within your own domain? Why Palestine but not Arabistan? Or Kurdistan? Or Baluchistan? Yet you'll call an Israel less than the size of New Jersey expansionist because it refuses to return to its suicidal, 1949 armistice line-imposed, nine-mile wide, rump state status. In short, Mr. Khatami, when will you and your country drop the hypocrisy and double standards which characterize your foreign and domestic policies? The day that you grant independence to Arabistan or Kurdistan and such will be the day you gain the right to lecture and accuse Israel. Unlike Iran, which had plans to even outlaw the Arab language over its own "Arab problem," Israel made Arabic the second official language of its state. Until that time, you're a pathetic joke. Unfortunately, your many accomplices across the world will continue to play deaf, dumb, and blind on your behalf, allowing you to sit on your moral high horse while butchering and suppressing the rights of millions within your own borders. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
ISRAEL MUST MARKET ITS CASE TO THE WORLD
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, September 8, 2006. |
|
Israel must aggressively market its case to a worldwide anti-Israel audience, as movers and shakers, for the stipulated sake of Middle East stability, will soon attempt to coerce the Jewish State into squatting yet again on the hot seat of a tilted bargaining table with so-called Palestinians, where the former will truly be expected to give up everything and the latter nothing. Indeed, virtually all of Judea, Samaria, and east Jerusalem-including proximate suburbs like Ma'ale Adumim-would be morphed to Arab toast, in the mind's-eye of Road Map groupies, expecting in return only a promise of peace from perhaps the business suit "smoothie", erstwhile Holocaust trivializer Abu Mazen, a commitment in fact less substantial than the wings of a butterfly. If such a traitorous event were to occur, how many days would pass before deadly Katyusha rockets (or worse) would again rain down on all of what is left of an amputated Israel, the only question being would those Muslim missile showers wreck havoc before or right after the first of many post "day of infamy" homicide/suicide martyring lunatics attempt to cross into Israel and blow up Jews? With Hamas, Hizbullah, and so many kindred spirit low life jihadists, including modern day nuclear-emerging Persia's pontificating perverted president AhMADinejad afflicted with a "wipe Israel off the map" obsession, snorting and slopping about their respective troughs located within the most dysfunctional region of the planet, any Israeli leader with authority exhibiting signs of caving in to the aforementioned land grab should forthwith be impeached, then given an ever-needed check up from the neck up. Preempting this nightmarish scenario from ever rearing its ugly head must be a priority of the first order, thus a cerebrally crafted public relations coup is essential! Might one strategy astutely focus on convincing a misguided non-Muslim world, replete with accusatory popinjays condemning Israel for merely existing, it too remains in the crosshairs of Islamic terrorists? Indeed, fulminating fanatics mesmerized by skewed Koranic verse, in the final analysis, do not distinguish between "The Jew" and all other "infidels" not enthralled by prophet Mohammed's warrior mentality and a misogynist sharia code of behavior befitting dull-witted troglodytes. Indeed, all such infidels, in the putrefied brain mush of jihad junkies, deserve death sentences. Furthermore, any land ceded by Israel to Arabs during any negotiation process would soon become a base for terrorist operations. Gaza, involuntarily abandoned by Israeli citizens and troops under orders, at the behest of a stupidly conceived policy by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, today convulses in chaos, likely ripening into such a Hamas controlled base. Indeed, Gaza's strategic location, along the Mediterranean coast, threatens European shipping lanes, this military base-to-be in the not to distant future armed with Iranian missiles perilously aimed at oil tankers destined for Western ports, freshly supplied with fossil fuel flowing through newly constructed pipeline from the Black Sea already on the drawing board. Should terrorist operations be further expanded to include a "West Bank" despising Western ideals, no longer monitored by Israel? Does the world wish to create an opportunity for a ground breaking ceremony in Ramallah, commemorating the construction of a jihadist headquarters, annexed to a Frankenstein-in-turban research center, intent on producing infidel-vanquishing weaponry, including a state of the art "Martyrs-R-Us" human bomb factory, specializing in fitting techno-human hybrid madrassa-programmed virgin-craving Muslim youths with de rigueur suicide belts? Thus exacerbating Israel's fight to repel Islamic enemies, in any prescient analysis, is no different than jeopardizing the security of all civilized twenty-first century secular nations. Convincing a non-Muslim anti-Israel audience, that should know better, of all this would be a daunting challenge, yet would be quite possible if enough shekels were to be allocated by an enlightened Knesset to Israeli psychologists, public relations experts, and communication engineers devoted to the task. In fact, such an allotment should be at the top of a short list of budget items. Is there a better way for Israel, and the world, to insure a prosperous future? Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
THE SCORECARD: FIVE YEARS LATER
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 8, 2006. |
|
Friends,
I came across one of Alon Ben-Meir's articles a while back. He since sends me directly his issues. I thought you would be interested in this article, especially in light of our 5-years 9/11 memorial day.
Like Newt Gingrich advocacy, Mr. Ben-Meir believes that America will
not be safer tomorrow, or the day after, or the day after -- UNLESS the
disastrous "staying the course" policy gives way to an enlightened
policy that sees things the way they really are and responds with the
necessary vision and courage to do something about them. We Americans
must vigorously help along so the necessary steps are taken and at
once!
Alon Ben-Meir is professor of international relations at the Center for global Affair at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiations and Middle Eastern studies. Contact him at alon@alonben-meir.com or go to his website: www.alonben-meir.com |
|
I'm writing this column from Cairo while on an extensive visit to the Middle East. If there's a more appropriate place from where to assess the implications and repercussions of the events of 9/11 and the success or the failure of the Bush administration's so-called war on terrorism, I don't know of one. If success or failure is judged by the number of subsequent attacks on the United States, it might be said that President Bush's strategy in combating terrorism is a success. But who can say that the purpose of Al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups is merely to strike repeatedly inside the United States to achieve their core objectives? From the time that the world first learned about Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin-Laden made it clear that he wanted to free the Arab world from the "tutelage" of the West and its destructive influence on Arab society. Viewing America as the main culprit using and exploiting Arab resources, he was determined to embroil it in a continuing struggle with the Arab and Muslim world until the Middle East became "free of American exploitation and the abuse of power." The Iraq war was a heaven-sent opportunity for Al-Qaeda to confront the United States on the organization's own terms mainly because the Bush administration made the war and the occupation central to its battle against terrorism. Judging from the situation in Iraq today, it is hardly plausible for the Bush administration to claim even relative success, let alone victory. American casualties are rapidly approaching 3,000, with more than 20,000 troops injured and close to $400 billion spent: by all estimates, even if the war ended today, its long-term cost for the United States will exceed $1 trillion. And as the slaughter continues, the Arab and Muslim world are increasingly enraged over the plight of the Iraqi people, with hatred toward the United States reaching new heights. Over 100 thousand Iraqis have died and nearly 200 are dying daily in a raging sectarian civil war. More than 130,000 American troops are fighting an insurgency that appears to have inexhaustible resources and unlimited recruits. To be sure, America finds itself in a quagmire in Iraq, embroiled in a civil war that seems to eat away at both the Iraqi social fabric and American resources with no way out in sight. Try as it may to put the best face on it, the Bush administration has failed miserably in Iraq, and in the process damaged greatly America's global standing while inflicting a disaster of historical magnitude on the Iraqi people. But this is not the whole story. Five years after 9/11, the Middle East finds itself in greater turmoil than in more than a decade. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become, if possible, more inflamed, with daily violence and destruction destroying the last vestiges of civility and humanity between the two sides. In defiance of the West, especially the United States, Iran is racing toward the development of nuclear weapons. All moderate Sunni Arab states, especially Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan, are extremely anxious about the expansion of the Shiite crescent, fearful of Iran's ambitions to become the regional hegemon with a nuclear arsenal at its disposal. In Afghanistan, the Taliban are on the march again, posing a serious threat to the regime in Kabul. Lebanon is half destroyed. Islamic militancy is on the rise everywhere, with significant gains in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and Iraq. In the midst of this, the administration's program for democracy and political reform is in tatters, all the while causing more upheaval than stability and peace. Al Qaeda does not need to attack the United States again to advertise its continued viability or the degree of damage it's capable of inflicting. By itself the administration has wounded the United States more than Bin-Laden could have ever done. Yes, President Bush may boast that America is safer today than before 9/11, but six years of misguided policy has not only brought greater damage to America than the attacks on that date. In the Middle East, the administration has lit the fuse, igniting regional turmoil of unprecedented proportion. The war in Iraq has pitted the Sunnis against Shiite communities beyond the Iraqi borders in a new struggle, the consequences of which are hard to fathom. The war has alienated the Arab masses to the utter detriment of East-West relations. It has given rise to Islamic militancy that endangers the existing order in most Arab states without setting a viable political alternative in place. Finally, it has neglected the Arab-Israeli conflict, precipitating more violence, even to the point of war. Surveys almost universally report that 9 out of 10 ordinary people in the Arab streets share this grim assessment of the overall state of affairs. During the fifth anniversary of 9/11, Americans may once again be reminded of that day's horror and horrific consequences. But what has happened in the past five years has already exacted far worse consequences. America will not be safer tomorrow unless the disastrous policy of "staying the course" gives way to an enlightened policy that sees things the way they really are and responds with the necessary vision and courage to do something about them. Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
TIME TO DEAL WITH THE REAL ROOT CAUSE OF TERRORISM
Posted by Alex Epstein, September 8, 2006. |
|
Five years after September 11, with Islamic terrorism flourishing while America's military efforts are floundering, many recognize that we still have not identified--and dealt with--the root cause of the terrorist threat. The most popular theory about the root cause of terrorism is that terrorism is caused by poverty. The United Nations and our European and Arab "allies" repeatedly tell us to minimize our military operations and instead dole out more foreign aid to poor countries--to put down our guns and pick up our checkbook. Only by fighting poverty, the refrain goes, can we address the root cause of terrorism. The pernicious idea that poverty causes terrorism has been a popular claim since the attacks of Sept. 11. U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan has repeatedly asked wealthy nations to double their foreign aid, naming as a cause of terrorism "that far too many people are condemned to lives of extreme poverty and degradation." Former Secretary of State Colin Powell agrees: "We have to put hope back in the hearts of people. We have to show people who might move in the direction of terrorism that there is a better way." Businessman Ted Turner also concurs: "The reason that the World Trade Center got hit is because there are a lot of people living in abject poverty out there who don't have any hope for a better life." Indeed, the argument that poverty causes terrorism has been central to America's botched war in Iraq--which has focused, not on quickly ending any threat the country posed and moving on to other crucial targets, but on bringing the good life to the Iraqi people. Eliminating the root of terrorism is indeed a valid goal--but properly targeted military action, not welfare handouts, is the means of doing so. Terrorism is not caused by poverty. The terrorists of Sept. 11 did not attack America in order to make the Middle East richer. To the contrary, their stated goal was to repel any penetration of the prosperous culture of the industrialized "infidels" into their world. The wealthy Osama bin Laden was not using his millions to build electric power plants or irrigation canals. If he and his terrorist minions wanted prosperity, they would seek to emulate the United States--not to destroy it. More fundamental, poverty as such cannot determine anyone's code of morality. It is the ideas that individuals choose to adopt which make them pursue certain goals and values. A desire to destroy wealth and to slaughter innocent, productive human beings cannot be explained by a lack of money or a poor quality of life--only by anti-wealth, anti-life ideas. These terrorists are motivated by the ideology of Islamic Fundamentalism. This other-worldly, authoritarian doctrine views America's freedom, prosperity, and pursuit of worldly pleasures as the height of depravity. Its adherents resent America's success and the appeal our culture has to many Middle Eastern youths. To the fundamentalists, Americans are "infidels" who should be killed. As a former Taliban official said, "The Americans are fighting so they can live and enjoy the material things in life. But we are fighting so we can die in the cause of God." The terrorists hate us because of their ideology--a fact that filling up the coffers of Third World governments will do nothing to change. What, then, can our government do? It cannot directly eradicate the deepest, philosophical roots of terrorism; but by using military force, it can eliminate the only "root cause" relevant in a political context: state sponsorship of terrorism. The fundamentalists' hostility toward America can translate into international terrorism only via the governments that employ, finance, train, and provide refuge to terrorist networks. Such assistance is the cause of the terrorist threat--and America has the military might to remove that cause. It is precisely in the name of fighting terrorism at its root that America must extend its fist, not its hand. Whatever other areas of the world may require U.S. troops to stop terrorist operations, we must above all go after the single main source of the threat--Iran. This theocratic nation is both the birthplace of the Islamic Fundamentalist revolution and, as a consequence, a leading sponsor of terrorism. Removing that government from power would be a potent blow against Islamic terrorism. It would destroy the political embodiment of the terrorists' cause. It would declare America's intolerance of support for terrorists. It would be an unequivocal lesson, showing what will happen to other countries if they fail to crack down on terrorists within their borders. And it would acknowledge the fact that dropping bombs, not food packages, is the only way for our government to attack terrorism at its root. Alex Epstein is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, CA. The Institute promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand--best-selling author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" and originator of the philosophy of Objectivism. |
|
REPORT: RELEASED PRISONERS LATER CARRIED OUT FATAL ATTACKS
Posted by Ezra HaLevi, September 8, 2006. |
|
A terror victims group published a report Thursday on Arab security prisoners "without blood on their hands," who were released by Israel and returned to prison with "much blood on their hands." The report, by the Almagor Terror Victims Association, demonstrates that at least 14 of the major terrorist attacks in recent years were carried out by terrorists released from prison in the context of various "good will gestures" and Israeli prisoner deals. All of them were released with assurances to the public that they did not have "blood on their hands," -- a euphemism for those prisoners whose deadly attacks failed to prove fatal. Between the years 1993-1999, in the context of "confidence building measures" and prisoner deals, Israel released 6,912 terrorists. 854 of them (14%) were arrested subsequently for murder, attempted or otherwise. There are no statistics available for those who returned to non-fatal terrorist activities, instruction or logistical support. "The mass killing due to these attacks included 123 murdered Israeli citizens, a huge number of victims with disabilities due to the attack and many other victims," the report concludes. "In all the previous death-bargains, the overwhelming majority of those released returned to terrorist activities, at the cost of a huge destruction of life." A sampling of the report: Karim Ratteb Younis Awis -- released in the context of a "good will gesture": * November 27, 2001: Carried out shooting attack near Afula, murdering Michal Mor and Noam Guzofsky. Nasser Abu Hamiyad -- released as part of the Oslo Accords: * Took part in Ramallah lynch, mutilating bodies of IDF reservists Vadim Norzitz and Yossi Avrahami Abbas ibn Muhammad Alsayd -- released in 1996; had a part in three Netanya attacks: * March 4, 2001: Dispatched Herzl street suicide bombing, murdering Naftali Din, Shlomit Ziv, Yvgeni Malkin and wounding 56. Ramez Sali Abu Salim -- released February 20, 2003: * Just seven months after release, on September 9: Blew himself up at Jerusalem's Café Hillel, murdering David Shimon Avizdris, Yehiel Emil Toubol, Shafik Karem, Alon Mizrachi, Gila Moshe, Dr. David Yaakov Appelbaum and his daughter Nava -- one the eve of her wedding. Fuad Kawasme -- released December 2002: *Less than half a year later, on May 18, 2003, shot Kiryat Arba residents Gadi and Dina Levi to death near Gross Square in Hevron. Jihad Alamrin -- released as part of the Jibril deal in 1985: * Founded the Al Aksa Brigades terror group in Gaza Salah Shahadeh -- released in 2000: * January 9, 2002: Oversaw infiltration into IDF's Africa Lookout, killing four soldiers. Iyad Sawalha -- released as part of the Wye Agreement in 1998: * June 5, 2002: Responsible for bus bombing at Megiddo Junction, murdering 17 and wounding 42. Khalil Hamza Abu Roub -- released the final time in 1996: * September 18, 2002: Organized Umm El Fahm Junction bombing, murdering officer Yossi Ajami and wounding one seriously. Mahmoud Hamdan -- released after serving just 14 months of a lengthy sentence in July 2003: * September 26, 2003: Two months after his release, he infiltrated the Hevron Hills town of Negohot, murdering Ayal Yaverboim and slaying a baby, Shaked Avraham. Nidal Salameh -- released during Israel-PA talks in 1999: * Following his release he took leadership role in PFLP terrorist group -- responsible for southern Gaza. Oversaw dozens of attacks Louei Raad Barghouti -- released August 2003 as "good-will gesture" to Mahmoud Abbas: * Planned and oversaw attack at Tzrifin IDF base bus stop, murdering eight. Morad Kawasme -- released January 29, 2004 in return for kidnapped Israeli Elchanan Tenenbaum and the bodies of three missing soldiers: * Became senior Hamas commander in Hevron and shot at soldiers who came to arrest him after he oversaw several attacks. The report was dispatched to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz, Chief of Staff Dan Halutz and interim Justice Minister Meir Sheetrit. The umbrella organization is made up of families of slain terror victims and others affected personally by Islamic terrorism in Israel. They are issuing a call to the government to refuse to release terrorists in return for the three IDF soldiers being held by Hamas and Hizbullah. Ezra HaLevi writes for Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). |
|
UNDERSTANDING SHIITE VS. SUNNI
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, September 8, 2006. |
|
This was written by Donald R. Sands and it appeared August 28, 2006 in the Washington Times. |
|
The world's Shi'ite Muslims, traditionally second-class citizens in the Islamic world, may be having their day. The strong performance by fighters of Lebanon's radical Shi'ite Hezbollah movement in the five-week war with Israel is just the latest sign of resurgence for the branch of Islam that has long been dominated militarily and economically by the more numerous Sunni Muslims. But the Shi'ite revival also poses major problems for the Bush administration and for Sunni Arab dominated regimes such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, while presenting a strategic opportunity for the world's most-populous Shi'ite state Iran. Vail Nasr, Middle East scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of a new book, The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future said the popular perception across the Islamic world of Hezbollah's success was a blow to the Sunni regimes and could force even moderate Shi'ite leaders to take a more radical stance against Israel and US interests. "The Shi'ites can say, 'We performed better than the Sunnis in standing up for our interests,'" he said. "Hezbollah defended the little villages in southern Lebanon better than Saddam Hussein defended Baghdad." Even before the Lebanon clash, events across the Muslim world had inspired debate over a new "Shi'ite Crescent." Following U.S.-backed elections, Iraq's Shi'ite majority dominates the government in Baghdad for the first time in a millennium, while Shi'ite militia's battle largely Sunni insurgents for control of the country. Iran's Shi'ite Islamic Republic has seen two regional rivals -- the Sunni fundamentalist Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam's Sunni-dominated secular dictatorship in Iraq -- crushed by U.S.-led military campaigns, while its Hezbollah ally is the strongest and best-armed force in Lebanon. "Freed from the menace of the 'Taliban in Afghanistan and of Saddam in Iraq', Iran is riding the crest of the wave of Shi'ite revival," according to Mr. Nasr, "aggressively pursuing nuclear power and demanding international recognition of its interests." Shi'ite Muslim communities in Sunni-dominated Arab states such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain -- which has a Shi'ite majority population -- have recently begun to demand greater rights and economic opportunity. The world's 120 million Shi'ites represent about 10 percent of Muslims worldwide, and are a majority of the population in just a hand-full of countries, including Iran (90 percent), Iraq (60 percent), Azerbaijan (75 percent) and Bahrain (75 percent). Shi'ites make up an estimated 45 percent of Lebanon's population and are smaller but still significant minorities in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf states. Shi'ite Muslims, with a religious tradition that did not focus on state power, have long complained of marginalization at the hands of Sunnis, even in countries such as Iraq, where Sunni Muslims were a minority. Some of the most open fears of rising Shi'ite power, often linked to a rising of Iran, have come from the Arab world's Sunni leaders. In December 2004, Jordan's King Abdullah II warned of rising Iranian influence on Iraq's Shi'ite Muslims, referring explicitly to a "Shi'ite crescent" stretching from Lebanon to Iran that could de-stabilize existing governments and challenge US interests. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek in April accused Shi'ite radicals such as Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah of putting religious ties -- in particular allegiance to Iran -- above national interests "Shi'ites are mostly always loyal to Iran and not to the countries where they live," he said. But some regional commentators say such comments inflate the danger of a pan-regional Shi'ite alliance and reflect the Sunni leaders fears of Iran and of the impact events such as the Lebanese war could have on their populations at home. "Clearly throughout the Gulf and beyond, there is an effort on the part of Arab regimes to use this specter of a Shia crescent for their own purposes," said Council on Foreign Relations Middle East scholar Steven A Cook at a council symposium in June on the Shi'ite resurgence. Islam scholars say the Shi'ite-Sunni clash is a complex mix of religion, politics and class issues, and that the schism has never been fixed or permanent in Islam's 1400-year history but the sectarian fighting in Iraq and the Hezbollah war in Lebanon have forced ordinary Muslims to choose sides. Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org). |
|
RESERVISTS DEMAND CHANGE
Posted by Ezra HaLevi, September 8, 2006. |
|
IDF reservists who were called up to fight in Lebanon last month are camping out in front of the Knesset to protest the government and military echelons mismanagement of the war. The protest began with less than fifty soldiers fresh off the battlefield. They were outraged at what they saw to be indecisiveness emanating from the government echelons, orders they say left them stranded and endangered in the field. The reservists set up tents the day after the cease-fire took effect, on August 21st, in the Jerusalem Rose Garden opposite the Prime Ministers Office and the Knesset. They shared stories of preparing for battle only to be repeatedly told to stand down, and of orders from the upper echelons that left them stranded in hostile territory without permission to go on the offensive. An open letter that an entire brigade sent to Chief of Staff Dan Halutz, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert outlined their demands. The reservists said that they and their comrades had lefts families and jobs, with attendance complete in all battalions. as we were signing for our battle equipment and weapons, we knew that we were signing for much more. We left behind wives and children, girlfriends and families. We put aside our jobs and our livelihoods; we were prepared to carry out our mission under the most difficult of conditions - in heat, thirst or hunger. At the back of his mind, each and every one of us knew that for the just cause of protecting the citizens of Israel, we would even put our lives on the line. but there was one thing we were not and would not be willing to accept: We were unwilling to accept indecisiveness. The war's aim, which was not defined clearly, was even changed in the course of the fighting. The indecisiveness manifested itself in canceling all the missions we were given during the fighting, leading to prolonged stays in hostile territory, without an operational purpose and out of unprofessional considerations, without seeking to engage in combat with the enemy. 120 cardboard cutouts of soldiers placed in formation opposite the
prime minister's office. Banner reads, "You too command - take
responsibility."
[Editor's Note: Sunday, September 10, 2006:
"It is unacceptable that those under investigation appoint the investigators," Arens told the crowd. "Only a state commission of inquiry will examine in a thorough manner the decision of the government in the last war in Lebanon. Never have there been such confusing and contradictory orders issued in the handling of a war." "If we continue to remain silent -- we will be hit with another bomb," Movement For Quality Government spokesman Shuki Levanon said. He added that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had been invited to the protest, "to declare from this podium that he has heard the will of the people and will establish a state commission -- but the rabbit didn't even answer."] Ezra HaLevi writes for Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). |
|
ANTI-JUDAISM
Posted by Steven Plaut, September 7, 2006. |
|
This was written by William Kristol and it appeared today on |
|
"How odd / Of God / To choose / The Jews." Thus the British journalist (and communist) William Norman Ewer, in the early part of the last century. The reply came from Cecil Browne: "But not so odd / As those who choose / A Jewish God / But spurn the Jews." Browne's riposte may have won the poetic exchange. But Ewer's anti-Judaism prevailed in the next decades in Europe. Buried there after World War II, hatred of the Jews flourished for the rest of the 20th century in the Middle East. Is anti-Judaism now enjoying a broader revival? It would seem so. University of Chicago political science professor John Mearsheimer came to Washington late last month along with his sidekick, Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Speaking to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, they attacked the "Israel Lobby" (of which they claim I am a part) for its pernicious deeds, and singled out several Jews who served or serve in the Bush administration. These Jews, they explained, have special "attachments" in the Middle East. The attachment' Their religious belief -- Judaism. Bigotry now has an academic cachet. Some of the activists at Moveon.org, the political organization that raises millions for Democratic candidates and generates support for left-wing policies, had a curious reason for cheering the Democratic primary defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman. As Robert Goldberg reported in the Washington Times, after one Moveon member celebrated the defeat of "Jew Lieberman," 95% of those who responded to the post on the Moveon Web site expressed their approval. Meanwhile, over in Europe, Norwegian writer Jostein Gaarder, author of "Sophie's World," announced in Norway's leading newspaper, the Aftenposten, the end of Israel: "There is no turning back. It is time to learn a new lesson: We do no longer recognize the state of Israel... We must now get used to the idea: The state of Israel in its current form is history ... Fear not! The time of trouble shall soon be over. The state of Israel has seen its Soweto ... May spirit and word sweep away the apartheid walls of Israel. The state of Israel does not exist. It is now without defense, without skin. May the world therefore have mercy on the civilian population." Mr. Gaarder's distaste for Israel seemed to be based on his dislike of Israel's policies, his revulsion against the God of Israel ("an insatiable sadist"), and his anger that, "for two thousand years, we have rehearsed the syllabus of humanism, but Israel does not listen." It's not clear who that "we" has been for 2,000 years. But since Israel has only existed since 1948, it is presumably the Jews, not merely, Israel, who have not listened. (It was, however, generous of Mr. Gaarder to call for mercy for the Jewish civilian population.) And then there's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- bidding fair to be the most powerful leader in the Islamic world. Mr. Ahmadinejad has called, of course, for the "the elimination of the Zionist regime" and "the destruction of Israel." He wants Israel eliminated because he wants Judaism eliminated (Christianity will take longer). Javier Solana of the EU and Kofi Annan of the U.N. are eagerly paying him court. Will Mr. Solana or Mr. Annan stand up in the presence of Mr. Ahmadinejad and denounce Jew-hatred' No. Jews are under attack. And no one seems very concerned. Liberal Jews are more concerned about Mel Gibson than Mr. Ahmadinejad. The mainstream Jewish organizations have played the "anti-Semitism" card so often that it has been devalued. Much of the world is in denial about the jihadist threat. No one wants to be alarmist. This is, in a way, understandable. There are two large Jewish communities in the world. The Jews of America prosper in comfort and security. The Jews of Israel have been able to defend themselves. It's not 1938 again. But the jihadists are on the move. Recently in Gaza, kidnapped journalists Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig were forced to "convert" to Islam before being released. What would have happened to them if they had been Jewish? And, incidentally -- if they had refused to "convert," as some Jews and Christians have in the past -- what would have happened then? Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
HOW ISRAEL CAUSES MIDEAST CONFLICT
Posted by Women in Green, September 8, 2006. |
|
This article was written by Joseph Farah, publisher of World Net Daily (www.WND.com). It appeared September 5, 2006 |
|
Many have suggested Israel is the root cause of conflict in the Middle East. In the past I have defended the Jewish state from this charge. I have made the case that, if anything, Israel has bent over backward to make peace. But in doing so, could Israel actually be making things worse? I believe so. The truth is that Israel has compromised too much. It has not retaliated strongly enough. And its Arab population is the freest in the Arab world. Ironically, I'm not the only one who believes this. Israel's most ardent adversaries -- the very people who want to destroy the Jewish state at any cost -- agree with me. And I can prove it to you. Who would you say is Israel's most implacable foe? Would you agree that it is al-Qaida -- the terrorist group that attacked the U.S. Sept. 11, 2001, and is now openly organizing in Gaza? What would you say if I told you al-Qaida believes God gave the Jewish people an eternal covenant with the "Promised Land"? Would you say I was nuts? How about if I told you al-Qaida believes this contract between God and the Jewish people has been abrogated only because Israel has not been determined enough to defeat its enemies in obedience to God? Would it change your opinion of the Middle East dynamic if you learned that al-Qaida believes Israel's compromises with and concessions to its enemies persuades al-Qaida that it is unworthy of fulfilling God's covenant with the Jews? I'm not going to give you my opinion about this. I'm going to give you al-Qaida's verbatim analysis. But before I do, let me summarize it for you: Israel's "sin" is in not fearing God. Israel lacks the faith to fight for the land God bequeathed it. The Jews are willing to compromise with God's promise by giving up the land of Israel piece by piece. That's what al-Qaida believes, according to a report it issued just over a year ago. Here are translated excerpts from that Arabic-language al-Qaida report from July 2005 threatening imminent attacks on the Jewish state:
Zerwat al Sanam In the Internet magazine Zerwat al Sanam, meaning "Tip of the Camel's Hump," the al-Qaida author of this screed, Abu Zubeida al-Baghdadi, concludes that Israel's willingness to compromise with its enemies gives the Arabs an opportunity to be God's vehicle to destroy the Jews. The report goes on to suggest the best timing to launch attacks against Israel to fulfill God's will. It also makes clear that the real enemy, beyond the Jews, is the West. This analysis is wholly in line with the Quran, which states in the Table, Sura 5:20: "Bear in mind the words of Moses to his People. He said: 'Remember, my People, the favor which God has bestowed upon you. He has raised up prophets among you, made you kings, and has given you that which He has given to no other nation. Enter, my People, the holy land which God has assigned for you. Do not turn back, and thus lose all." The voices of international appeasement continue to advise Israel to accommodate the enemies who seek to destroy the Jews and Western civilization. It has not worked and it will not work. In fact, as al-Qaida's warped theologians illustrate, it will have just the opposite of the intended effect. Compromise will always convince Israel's enemies that it is weak, disobedient to God, unworthy of His promises and ripe for destruction. And that's why I, too, believe Israel remains its own worst enemy. That is how Israel continues to worsen conflict in the Middle East, to make escalating violence inevitable, to engender more contempt and hate from its enemies. How? By not obeying God -- by not believing in the Divine promises that made it a nation and by putting its faith in man rather than the Creator of the universe. If Israel truly wants to understand its enemies, if it truly wants their respect, it is pushing all the wrong buttons. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
BOMB TEHRAN TODAY OR BE BOMBED TOMORROW?--TO BE OR NOT TO BE?
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 7, 2006. |
|
Friends, To avoid disaster, history has taught us that we must take proactive and preemptive actions not reactive. When it comes to Iran, the clear signs are calling for action; signs could not be any clearer. Ahmedinejad has long declared his intent to wipe Israel off the map and then move to fight the USA and all the infidels. Until now, he has ignored all diplomatic efforts and has been thumbing and making mockery of the entire free world. The U.N. demand for Iran to suspend production of weapons grade uranium fell on deaf ears. Ahmedinejad subscribes to the need for an Apocalypse in order to create the climate for the 12th Imam, so he is working diligently to bring about the Apocalypse. If we wait until this crazy man to actually strikes us with the first nuclear bomb he puts his hand on, he will be laughing at us even further and we will be crying, this is we are alive. But then it will be too late to fight the war over there on his turf; it will come to us, here at home, with a fierce vengeance like we never fathomed. Surprising to learn that Iran attacked Iraq's Osirak reactor in September 1980 and the following year, Israel finished the job. This was written by Bennett Ramberg and it appeared September 6, 2006 in San Francisco Chronicle (www.SFGate.com). It is archived at (www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file= /chronicle/archive/2006/09/06/EDGK1KT7CP1.DTL) Bennett Ramberg served in the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs in the administration of George H. W. Bush. He is the author of three books on international security and the editor of three others. E-mail: bennettramberg@aol.com |
|
Now that Iran has scorned diplomatic and economic overtures and the U.N. Security Council's demand that it halt nuclear fuel-cycle activity, has the time come to apply force to stem its suspect weapons program? True, U.N. sanctions may be in the offing. But proposed penalties are unlikely to move the revolutionary regime. The alternative -- concede Tehran's nuclear weapons future -- faces unalterable opposition from Washington and Jerusalem. In nuclear history, the "nonproliferation conundrum" -- use force or concede if diplomacy fails -- is not new. In fact, policymakers in different times and places have faced the dilemma often, and, more often than not, eschewed the military solution to stop The Bomb's spread. And while the past can provide context to guide the future, wrinkles in the current situation add an ominous portent: Given the hostility between Israel and Iran, only American military action to halt Tehran in the near term may prevent a regional nuclear war in the long term. History records only four applications of military force to thwart nuclear proliferation. To beat Hitler, the United States and Britain not only bombed a nuclear-related heavy-water plant in German-occupied Norway but determined to destroy or capture all elements of the atomic enterprise in the defeat and occupation of the Third Reich. Nearly four decades later, Iran would take a page from the Allies' playbook when its air force attacked Iraq's Osirak reactor in September 1980. The following year, Israel finished the job, setting back Baghdad's nuclear program by a decade. Then there was Washington's 2003 foray into Iraq. Premised on eliminating Saddam Hussein's weapons-of-mass-destruction capacity, it put a stake into a nuclear cadaver that had succumbed years earlier, the result of the search-and-destroy activities of international inspectors following the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Shrouded by this evident history were numerous contemplated military strikes. The Truman, Kennedy and Clinton administrations, however, went no further than gaming attacks against the budding Soviet, Chinese and North Korean nuclear programs. Likewise, Moscow refrained from hitting China and South Africa. India and Egypt also resisted attacking Pakistan and Israel, respectively. In all cases, the potential target got The Bomb. While many factors contributed to the decision not to strike -- logistics, political costs, the lack of support of others, radiological risks, the ability of the targeted state to regenerate its nuclear program -- one determinant persistently stood out: the ability of the targeted nation to strike back. To restrain Washington, Western Europe provided Moscow a hostage. China warned the Soviet Union that it would face a "peoples war." India feared that Pakistan would retaliate against its nuclear power plants while the United States recognized that an attack on North Korea could re-ignite the Korean war, placing millions of South Koreans at risk. Finally, Gamal Abdel Nasser's Egypt was not willing to risk a retalitory strike on Cairo for a strike on Israel's Dimona nuclear-weapons complex. By contrast, geographic separation coupled to Iraq's paltry retaliatory capacity made the strikes by Washington and Jerusalem against Baghdad a safe bet. The Iranian nuclear ambition, however, poses challenges unseen in other historical circumstance. True, the mullahs cannot strike the United States militarily. Against Israel, they have only a limited capability -- at this time -- given geographic separation. In addition, the recent Lebanon war established that Iran's Hezbollah surrogate can bruise, but not seriously wound, the Jewish state. But there remain other vital targets, notably Middle Eastern petroleum production and distribution. Iran also could aggravate America's Iraq quagmire. Then there are suicide bombers, which the mullahs reportedly have greenlighted to retaliate across the region and around the globe. But these risks pale by comparison to what could occur were the revolutionary regime to get The Bomb. Arguably, the United States and Israel could apply Cold War deterrence strategies. But here comes the wrinkle: the strategic/psychological sensitivities of the Jewish and Persian adversaries. The coupling of Tehran's implacable messianic hostility with Jerusalem's "never again" mentality generates a "use it or lose it" pre-emptive incentive. While Israel could inflict second-strike devastation from its nuclear cruise missile-armed submarines -- thereby sustaining deterrence -- its survival instinct will never leave its fate in the hands of a nation that calls for its extinction and has the capacity to launch an atomic first strike. Jerusalem could find its atomic arsenal the effective weapon of choice to suppress the risk because its conventional airpower and cruise and ballistic missile capacities lack the ability to destroy suspect sites and because nuclear weapons would have the best chance to eliminate Iran's hardened nuclear capacity and its leadership. This portent leaves the United States, the most capable country to contest Iran, with its own stark choice in the event it or others cannot resurrect effective diplomacy: destroy Tehran's nuclear capacity today with conventional air strikes, accepting the probability of significant oil market and terrorist disruption, or assume the risk of a regional nuclear holocaust resulting in far more dramatic energy and Middle East political turmoil tomorrow. Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: THERE IS AN ISLAM IN ISLAMOFASCISM
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 7, 2006. |
|
The following 6 articles all appeared over the last few days, and all focus on the same issue.....the role of Islam in the current Islamofascist war against the West. Since most of these articles will never appear in major mainstream media publications, I am putting them all together for y'all, so you can enjoy the clarity that these articles offer for an understanding of the threat that we in the West, and Israel, are facing. 1. WSJ: Islamic extremists stifle free speech in Europe, in the name of Islam. These articles all address the same phenomenon, albeit different aspects of that phenomenon: Islam as a religion is the well-spring and ideological launching pad: for the doctrines of terrorism that fuel thousands of terror attacks against western countries,
.........and for the clearly fascist characteristics of the Moslem societies in Moslem countries, and of some parts of the Moslem societies in the Moslem communities of Europe and the UK. In short.....horrific as it may appear, and unpleasant and politically incorrect as it may sound, it is indeed the Islam in Islamofascism that is in large part at cause for the current international terror war that is being waged against us by Islamofascist terrorists. this inconvenient truth is the reason why, while not all Moslems are terrorists, almost all terrorists in the world today are Moslem. There is a problem with Islam. Many, Moslems and others, jump to the defense of Islam and point out that while the above is true, it does not reflect "true Islam". They teach us that Islam is a religion of peace, a religion that respects other religions, a religion that contributes to the betterment of the world through its teachings of kindness and understanding......... ......and they may be right (I am not an expert on Islamic theology)........ .....BUT.....their defense is completely irrelevant; because the Moslem terrorists do not see it that way....nor have the military and religious leaders of Islam for the past 1,300 years. For more than a millenium of Moslem leaders world-wide, and for the Moslem terrorists today, the Islam of Jihad and "Islam uber alles" and "fight against the non-believers until there are no non-believers" -- that is the true Islam. That is the Islam to which they bend their will, expend their resources, wage their war, take the lives of countless innocents, and for which they willingly and happily die.....taking as many non-believers with them as possible. And what is most troubling about this defense of Islam is that the defenders of Islam who seem to be convinced, and seek to convince us, that Islam is not at cause for Islamofascist terrorism, do not take their own correct interpretation of "true Islam" to the terrorists..... they do not seek out the leaders of El-Qaeda or Ansar-el-Islam or Hizb-ut-tahrir or al-Jama'a al-Islamieyeh or Hamas or Hezbollah or Fatah or Palestinian Islamic Jihad or any of the other scores of Moslem terror groups in order to disabuse them of their theolgoical error...... they do not try to convince the practitioners of Islamofascist terrorism that these misguided Moslem terrorists have mis-understood Islam and are practising a mis-interpretation of the "radiant face of Islam"...... they do not even publish any critiques of what they consider horrid mis-interpretations and senseless transmogrifications of the "true Islam", nor any condemnations of the Moslem terrorists who make a mockery of the "radiant face of Islam", in the hope that at least some Moslem terrorists would read their fatwas and hukums and critiques of Islamofascist ideology and be turned from their theologically incorrect ways......... No. They preach to us. That seems to me to be just a tad dis-ingenuous. The first four articles mentioned are reviewed below. |
|
1.)DOW JONES REPRINTS
Europe is home to a new class of dissidents. In this era, their oppressor is not the Soviets, but radical Islam. Meet Seyran Ates. On Saturday, the well-known German lawyer of Turkish descent closed her practice in Berlin following threats to her life. Ms. Ates fought against forced marriages and so-called honor killings and beatings of Muslim women and girls. She was also outspoken about the real causes of terrorism. After the London bombings last year, Ms. Ates said the terrorists of the future will be third- and fourth-generation Muslim immigrants who "under the eyes of well-meaning politicians have been raised to hate Western society from birth." In explaining her decision to close her practice, she wrote on her Web site: "Due to an acute threat situation, I was made aware again how dangerous my work as a lawyer is and how little I was and am being protected." Speaking out about Islam can carry mortal risks, as was brought home in late 2004 by the gruesome murder on an Amsterdam street of Theo van Gogh. Van Gogh had made a film about Islam's treatment of women together with Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali. In May the Somali-born Ms. Ali left the Netherlands for the U.S., citing safety concerns. Less well known outside Holland is the plight of another member of the Dutch parliament, Geert Wilders. Like Ms. Ali, Mr. Wilders went into hiding in army barracks and prisons before settling in a government-provided safe house, following death threats. In a conversation with us yesterday, he marveled that he now lived under such conditions though he "didn't do anything against the law." His crime was criticizing radical Islam and calling for a five-year moratorium on non-Western immigration. Freedom of speech can't be taken for granted in Europe anymore. Take Necla Kelek, another prominent Turkish-born woman in Germany who has written about forced marriages and honor killings. She can speak in public only with police protection. Last May, Roger Köppel, the then editor of the German of the German daily Die Welt, may have escaped an attempt on his life when a Pakistani student, armed with a knife, tried to enter his office building. Mr. Köppel's crime was to republish the Danish Muhammad cartoons, which have brought riots across the Middle East and death threats to publishers around Europe. The cartoonists who originally produced the Muhammad caricatures for the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, still don't dare appear in public. Flemming Rose, the paper's cultural editor, told us that he usually receives police protection when he speaks in public. He finds the lack of solidarity with the victims of radical Islam "pretty scary." There is "too little outrage on behalf of the cartoonists," he says. The new dissidents are the outgrowth of the rise of political -- and extreme -- Islam in Europe. But more worrying for them, and for all citizens of free societies, is the seeming public indifference to their plight. If that passes for "normal" these days, then the gradual erosion of Europe's democratic fabric will be hard to stop. 2.)Jewish World Review Sept. 7, 2006 / 14 Elul, 5766
George Bush recently declared that we are at war with "Islamic fascism." Muslim-American groups were quick to express furor at the expression. Middle Eastern autocracies complained that it was provocative and insensitive. Critics of the term chosen by the president, however, should remember what al-Qaida, the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas and other extremist Muslim groups have said and done. Like the fascists of the 1930s, the leaders of these groups are authoritarians who brook no dissent in their efforts to impose a comprehensive system of submission upon the unwilling. Osama bin Laden urged Muslims to kill any American they could find, and then tried to fulfill that vow on Sept. 11. Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah bragged that "the Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them" -- and then started a war. Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, promises to "wipe out" Israel, and is seeking the nuclear means to do so. Sharia law and dreams of pan-Islamic global rule fuel their ambitions. Once again, they seek to fool Western liberals through voicing a litany of perpetual hurts. Like the Nazis who whined about the Versailles Treaty that ended World War I, and alleged maltreatment of Germans in the Sudetenland, for years Islamists harped about American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, the U.N. embargo of Iraq and the occupation of Gaza and Lebanon. But when each complaint was settled, another louder one sprung up; these grievances, it turned out, were pretexts for a larger sense of victimhood, jealousy and lost pride. And appeasement -- treating the first World Trade Center bombing as a mere criminal justice matter or virtually ignoring the attack on the USS Cole -- only spurred on further aggression. Islamic fascism is also anti-democratic and characteristically reactionary. It conjures up a past of Islamic influence that existed before the supposed corruption of modernism. Like Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo, who sought to recapture lost mythical Aryan, Roman or samurai purity, so Islamic fascists talk in romantic terms of the ancient caliphate. Anti-Semitism is a tenet of fascism, then and now. But so is a generic hatred for unbelievers, homosexuals and blacks. The latter are slurred in the Arab media, while homosexuals were rounded up under the Taliban and the Iranian mullacracy. "Mein Kampf" sells well under its translated title "Jihadi." President Ahmadinejad recently suggested in a sympathetic letter to the German chancellor that the Holocaust was little more than an "alibi" used by the victors of World War II to keep the defeated down. Even now, it is hard to distinguish the slurs against Jews ("pigs and apes") used in the Middle Eastern media from the venom of Joseph Goebbels' propaganda. Goose-stepping and stiff-armed salutes at Iranian and Hezbollah parades are conscious imitations of past fascist armies. Some object that the term "Islamic fascism" is too vague to encompass the differing agendas of diverse groups such as the Wahhabis, al-Qaida and Hezbollah. But just as racist German Nazis found common ground with Asian supremacists in Japan, so too the shared hatred of the West trumps the internecine rivalries of present-day Islamists. The common denominators are extremist views of the Koran (thus the term Islamic), and the goal of seeing authoritarianism imposed at the state level by force (thus the notion of fascism). The pairing of the two words conveys a precise message: the old fascism is back, but now driven by a radical fundamentalist creed of Islam. Others object that fascism conjures up images of past huge armies, and thus exaggerates only a moderate threat from today's ragtag jihadists. But Iran is seeking a bomb far more powerful than anything Hitler had at his disposal. About 2,400 Nazi V-1 buzz bombs in World War II reached their London targets. Nearly 4,000 Katyushas hit tiny Israel in about a month. And the petroleum of the Middle East is the lever by which the Islamic fascists hope to overturn an oil-hungry world. In contrast, the fuzzy "war on terror" is the real inexact usage. The United States has never fought against an enemy's tools -- such as German submarines or the Soviet KG -- but only against those who employ them. Other groups today use terror -- like narco-dealers and Basque separatists -- but this war at this time is not against them. The real problem is not that "Islamic fascism" is inaccurate or mean-spirited, but that this identification earns such vehement disdain in Europe and the United States. That hysteria may tell us as much about the state of a demoralized West as the term itself does about our increasingly emboldened enemies. Historical Significance
Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between England and America for food and war materials. At that time the US was in an isolationist, pacifist mood, and most Americans wanted nothing to do with the European or the Asian war. Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not yet attacked us. It was a dicey thing. We had few allies. France was not an ally, as the Vichy government of France quickly aligned itself with its German occupiers. Germany was certainly not an ally, as Hitler was intent on setting up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan was not an ally, as it was well on its way to owning and controlling all of Asia. Together, Japan and Germany had long-range plans of invading Canada and Mexico, as launching pads to get into the United States over our northern and southern borders, after they finished gaining control of Asia and Europe. America's only allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada, Australia, and Russia. That was about it. All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the East, was already under the Nazi heel. America was certainly not prepared for war. America had drastically downgraded most of its military forces after W.W.I and throughout the depression, so that at the outbreak of WW2, army units were training with broomsticks because they didn't have guns, and cars with "tank" painted on the doors because they didn't have real tanks. And a huge chunk of our navy had just been sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor. Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England, that was actually the property of Belgium, given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler (a little known fact). Actually, Belgium surrendered on one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day just to prove they could. Britain had already been holding out for two years in the face of staggering shipping loses and the near-decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later, and first turning his attention to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse, in the late summer of 1940. Ironically, Russia saved America's butt by putting up a desperate fight for two years, until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany. Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Moscow alone... 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but also more than a MILLION soldiers. Had Russia surrendered, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire war effort against the Brits, then America. And the Nazis could possibly have won the war. All of this is to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things. And now, we find ourselves at another one of those key moments in history. There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or wants and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world. The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs -- they believe that Islam, a radically conservative form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe, then the world. And that all who do not bow to their will of thinking should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews. This is their mantra. There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East -- for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation, but it is not known yet which will win -- the Inquisitors, or the Reformationists. If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihadis, will control the Middle East, the OPEC oil, and the US, European, and Asian economies. The techno-industrial economies will be at the mercy of OPEC -- not an OPEC dominated by the educated, rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis. You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins. If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, and live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th century into the 21st, then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge. We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda and the Islamic terrorist movements. We have to do it somewhere. And we can't do it everywhere at once. We have created a focal point for the battle at a time and place of our choosing........in Iraq Not in New York, not in London, or Paris or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we are doing two important things. (1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians. (2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad people, and the ones we get there we won't have to get here. We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed. World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a "whimper" in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China It was a war for fourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in 1945 -- a 17 year war -- and was followed by another decade of US occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again... a 27 year war. World War II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year's GDP -- adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars. W.W.II cost America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action. The Iraq war has, so far, cost the US about $160 billion, which is roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 2,200 American lives, which is roughly 2/3 of the 3,000 lives that the Jihad snuffed on 9/11. But the cost of not fighting and winning W.W.II would have been unimaginably greater -- a world dominated by German and Japanese Nazism. Americans have a short attention span, conditioned by 30 second sound bites, 60 minute TV shows, and 2 hour movies in which everything comes out okay. The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly. Always has been, and probably always will be. The bottom line is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away if we ignore it. If the US can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an " England " in the Middle East, a platform, from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates. The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and never-ending war. And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons. Unless somebody prevents them. We have four options: 1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons. 2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is). 3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America. 4. Or, we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe. It will, of course, be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier. If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today. The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win. Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them. Remember, perspective is everything, and America's schools teach too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the young American mind. The Cold war lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Forty-two years. Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany. World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year occupation, and the US still has troops in Germany and Japan. World War II resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept. The US has taken more than 2,000 KIA in Iraq. The US took more than 4,000 killed in action on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism. In W.W.II the US averaged 2,000 KIA a week -- for four years. Most of the individual battles of W.W.II lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far. But the stakes are at least as high... A world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms ... or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law). It's difficult to understand why the American left does not grasp this. They favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but evidently not for Iraqis. "Peace Activists" always seem to demonstrate here in America, where it's safe. Why don't we see Peace Activist demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea, in the places that really need peace activism the most? The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc. Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy. Raymond S. Kraft is a writer living in Northern California. Please consider passing along copies of this article to students in high school, college and university as it contains information about the American past that is very meaningful today -- history about America that very likely is completely unknown by them (and their instructors, too). By being denied the facts of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They are prime targets for being mislead about our history. Jewish World Review Sept. 7, 2006 / 14 Elul, 5766
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who likes historical analogies, compares the appeasers of Germany in the run-up to World War II to his critics who stubbornly refuse to see in full the terrorists who want to destroy the civilized way of life, and us along with it. The 1930s were "a time when a certain cynicism and moral confusion set in among the Western democracies." Men and women who should have known better refused to see what was writ large and plain before their eyes, and what Winston Churchill meant when he said that accommodating Hitler was "a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last." The analogy to modern appeasement is not exact, but the faint-hearted who demand a quick withdrawal from Iraq are trying to appease a hungry crocodile. The French, as the Germans of the Weimar Republic had before them, wore blinkers looking at the crocodile. Those most blinded to the evil threat of Hitler were exactly those with the most to lose. Many intellectuals and Democratic politicians of our own time resemble the Germans so soothed by rhetoric and intoxicated by the creativity of the 1920s and early 1930s that they could not see how all they held dear could be destroyed by Hitler. The Germans were afflicted with a terminal naivete, confronting the emerging fascists in their country, just as many Americans are confronting the "new fascism." When Walter Rathenau, the Jewish foreign minister for the Weimar Republic, was assassinated in 1922 by right-wing thugs, an outpouring of grief enveloped one of the largest funerals in German memory. Thousands of fascists at that very moment raised their beer mugs in celebration of his death. Those in the liberal press of Weimar who called for stern measures against the fascists conspiring against the republic were ignored or discounted as unreasoning hysterics. The government did nothing to curb the anti-republican forces in the judiciary, the police or the state bureaucracies; all would contribute to the rise of Nazism. When Hitler famously marched into Munich in 1923 with like-minded thugs calling for the dissolution of the "criminal government" of Germany, the minimum sentence for high treason was five years, the maximum, life. A sympathetic judge saw that Hitler served less than a year. When "Mein Kampf" was published in 1925, it was largely ignored, and the few who publicly noted his plans for the Jews and the republic were largely ignored as well. Not even the German Communists, who despised the fascists, deigned to unite against him, calculating that he was a mere minor threat. They could wait him out. The Bush administration now concedes errors in Iraq, foremost among them failure to understand the reluctance of so many Iraqis to support a democratic government. While historical parallels are always imperfect, it's fair to observe that the Germans who supported Weimar also failed to understand how fragile their republican government could be. The Western democracies were slow to perceive that, too. Just as anti-Semitism was harnessed to bring down Weimar, hatred of the Jews keeps trouble on the boil today in the Middle East. Anti-Semitism is the refuge of cowards who are eager to exploit the appetite for hatred of the Jews. Anti-Semitism in the '20s and '30s was respectable in Germany, just as it is fashionable today among certain intellectuals and creative artists, including some Jews. Describing the Israelis as the "new Nazis" invites no outrage among certain bright young (and old) things who decry bigotry in others. Martin Heidegger, the German philosopher of the 1930s, complained about the "Judaization" of the German university. He defended himself, saying that he was no more anti-Semitic than many of his Jewish colleagues. It was a glib observation not entirely wrong, but few took on Heidegger for his outspoken anti-Semitism. Noam Chomsky is widely respected today for his linguistic theories, but he is willing to join forces with those who deny the Holocaust. He wrote the foreword to the standard French-language textbook of Holocaust denial. He praises "Jewish History, Jewish Religion," a book by Israel Shalak, one of the most outspoken Jewish anti-Semites. Gore Vidal, who insists he's not an anti-Semite, wrote the foreword for that one. "The appearance of political anti-Semitism in the Arab and Muslim world is of relatively recent date," writes Walter Laqueur in "The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism." He observes how the Muslims who preach hatred of the Jews have found friends in Europe: "Islamist anti-Semites have collaborated with European anti-Semites of the left and with the neo-fascist anti-Semites in convening various conferences, protest meetings, demonstrations and declarations." Those who assisted the Nazi rise to power held diverse views and were motivated by different influences, both inside and outside Germany, and the rest of the world recognized the peril of Nazism only slowly and reluctantly. Islamo-fascism poses a similar danger for us now.
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
|
|
WESTERN CIVILISATION
Posted by Tom Carew, September 7, 2006. |
|
"The notion that 'Western culture or civilisation' is better than any other, is bogus", declared the bearded "Republican" chief, and also Her Royal Britannic Majesty's Right Honourable UK Member of Parliament for Belfast West, Northern Ireland, G Adams, speaking in Jerusalem. How does that sweeping, unqualified claim ring if we replace "Western culture or civilisation" with e.g. [a] "the Sinn Fein Party", or [b] "the republican analysis", or [c] "The Army Council, as opposed to the so-called 'Real IRA' or 'Continuity IRA' Army Councils, or UDA Inner Council, or UVF Brigade Staff", or [d] "The IRA Chief-of-Staff", or [f] "the Hizb-ALLAH or PIRA or Hamas style of abduction and execution", or [g] "the PIRA record on knee-capping, bank-robbery, money-laundering, espionage and propaganda"? I list only 7 options, one for each seat on the "Army Council", but I wonder how such total relativism can apply to that foundational and overarching category of "Western civilisation", but not to any of my 7 alternatives? Or did Mr A only mean "Western Belfast culture and civilisation"? Maybe such moral relativism essential to "justify" the brutal and bloody Provo campaign. Surely what the Arab and wider Muslim worlds, especially Lebanese and Palestinians, need to-day is moral clarity? And if "Western civilisation" has nothing distinctive and inherently valuable to offer, why bother sharing it with Arabs, Muslims, or any other people? Tom Carew lives in Ranelagh, Dublin, Ireland. Contact him at tmcarew@yahoo.com |
|
PLOTTING AGAINST JEWS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, September 7, 2006. |
|
Historians have written thousands of books about the travails of the Jewish people as they have been murdered, plotted against in virtually every minute of every century. Now in the year 2006 the stench of betrayal once more rises from the plotting nations, both declared enemies and sometimes even supposed friends. The gagging odor also comes, as it often does, from Un-Jewish Jews among us - sometimes called or descended from the Erev Rav (those non-Jewish pagan criminals who joined Moses escaping from Egypt), now in modern times fashionably called the radical Left Liberals. Among our readers, we will find intellectuals, historians, people whose instincts have been honed by our centuries of living among hostile host populations. From the analysis of evidence and the very smell in the air or the sense in the ether of the Media which adds to what is being planned for the Jews - and when. Presently, we observe with confusion how the once great warrior, Arik Sharon reversed all he ever said he stood for - by his selling of the Jewish Land in a nefarious, self-serving plan of re-partition he called: "Disengagement". Once he exhibited his willingness to betray the nation and those who believed in his prior persona, the political trash - living as parasites in both the Right and the Left, flocked to his banner. Most are now under investigation for using their prior positions of power to hire their political friends and other illegal schemes. I have previously written in at least three articles entitled "The Gathering 1, 2 & 3" which speak of the nations (from the North especially) gathering to impose their hostile will upon the Jewish nation-people. You do understand that it wasn't only the Arab/Muslim nations who themselves came into existence by way of the gift of partition by the Allies after they broke up the Ottoman Empire. It was the pro-Arab U.S. State Department who fought the partition of Israel as a Jewish homeland. When that failed, they settled down to a low-intensity hostility/war, often in collusion with the Europeans, Jewish Leftists and Muslim Arab League. Now, today September 7th according to the New York Times article: "Monitors Ready, Israel will Ease Grip on Lebanon" by Steven Erlanger states: "Israel will lift its air and sea blockade of Lebanon on Thursday evening (September 7)....because international forces were ready to move into place to impose an arms embargo on the Hezbollah mlitiia....Israel, the U.S. and Europe want Hamas to recognize the right of Israel to exist, forswear violence and recognize previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements, Some Europeans are now suggesting, according to a senior French diplomat, that these restrictions. be eased if the Palestinians come up with a national-unity government that at least forswears violence and terrorism. The U.S. and Britian are against weakening the terms demanded of Hamas." (1) I sense that this effort is about to pick up steam due to the inability of the Free West to face down Islamic Jihadists Globally. A sacrifice is needed for political reasons and Israel is ideal for this purpose. There were always mixed interests who used the Jewish State as a target to achieve their hidden, secret vested interests. The Europeans, almost always hated their Jews to a greater or lesser degree and, of course, many assisted Hitler in deporting and killing them, now used the persecution of the Jewish nation as a way to strike back at America. It's not that the Europeans and the Arabs hated the Jews any less than they always did. But, it is curious and alarming that the Muslims who are overrunning native Christian Europeans in many countries achieving a critical mass are joining together against the Jewish State. Despite being assaulted by Islamists, they found that they could enjoy prodding America by making common cause with the Muslim Arabs who hated the Jews outright and, of course, hated the Jewish State for beating them in the six or more wars the Arab Muslims initiated. Strangely, while the Muslims are taking over Christian Europe, those same Christians are making common cause against the Jewish State - perhaps the one strong military base which could save them against the Islamic Global Terrorism. The Muslim Arabs were frustrated because they simply could not get at the Jews in a way that would eliminate the entire nation. They could not bring themselves to blame their own inadequate armies so they blamed America for selling or providing Israel with the weapons which defeated the Arab Muslims in six wars, plus the on-going low-intensity warfare called "Terrorism". Some of this is changing as the Jewish Leftists have become an efficient Fifth Column in subverting Israel's ability to fight terror - as we saw during the 2006 War in Lebanon. Of course, America sold the same weapons to the Arab Muslim nations but, even with mountains of armaments, they still could not defeat this Lilliputian Jewish Sparta nation. So, let us move up to the present and see what the world has cooked up for the Jewish nation and not necessarily in order of importance or sequence. Have you heard that the Europeans will now not allow El Al Cargo planes to land in their airports to re-fuel IF their cargo carries any weapons for Israel? This new rule, of course, only applies to the Jewish State. All weapons for Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Hezb'Allah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza have a free pass. First, it was necessary to recruit Liberal-Leftist Jews who were not tied to G-d nor the G-d-given Land. Enter Rabin, Peres, Beilin, Barak, Netanyahu, Sharon and many others. They were engaged both by their own attitudes of making the Jewish nation secular and their hostility to those observant Jews who believed that the Land was gifted to them by HaShem (G-d) - so they were easy and enthusiastic recruits to the ideology pushing to give up their Land. These Un-Jewish Jews were delighted to be recognized by the Europeans who, heretofore, eliminated their Jews in centuries of murder, rape and pillage - mostly drive by Church doctrine and ideology. What we thought was the aberrance of the past is rapidly returning. How to get rid of all the Jews using their own assistance? There were many methods but all required the willingness of the Jews to participate their own demise. Several years ago, I wrote about the attempt by the European Union to "borrow" NATO troops and facilities to create a Rapid Deployment Force which the Europeans did not have and would not develop for themselves. They did not want to be required to join America in fighting hostiles or terrorists in other lands - especially Arab countries. I smelled a big rat! It looked to me as if NATO was about to be employed for the occupation of the Middle East and Israel, primarily. That translates into meaning that a mix of European/NATO troops would create their own designated borders between Israel and the local Arab Muslims (now called "Palestinians" although they really immigrated in from all the surrounding Arab Muslim countries for greater economic opportunities, jobs, education and health care). (2) If you don't know, one of the largest armadas ever gathered is now assembling off-shore of Lebanon on the pretext that they are there to protect the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Forces In Lebanon) so-called "Peace Keepers". When I previously wrote about a NATO armada crossing the Mediterranean Sea in order to occupy the Jewish State, I raised the question as to whether Israel would see this as an invasion and to attack the Armada in self-defense. The "Ploy" would look "humanitarian" but it would really be scaled to ignore the unstoppable terror by the Arab Muslim Palestinians, backed by such rogue terror states as Iran, Syria, Iraq in its time and Egypt. (You don't believe that Egypt would engage in subversive action against Israel?) Please recall the shiploads of armaments traversing the Suez Canal and the Sinai with Egypt's assistance. There the ships were supposed to unload in Alexandria, Egypt with weapons destined for the Sinai to be transferred via smuggling tunnels with President Hosni Mubarak's knowledge and the assistance of Egypt's military. Let us keep all the balls in the air at the same time to see the linkage and synergism. The Oslo fiasco was more than just the actions of the "bought-off" Leftist Jews of the Israeli Labor Party. Oslo had the full backing of the Europeans and likely the fingerprints of James Baker, III's team of Jews, much as they did during the Madrid Conference. Here the un-Jews of Rabin, Peres, Beilin and others played the enabling role of divesting themselves of their G-d-given Land. The two separate institutions - one for Peres, and one for Beilin - are both funded by the Europeans but have yet to investigated. Also, Egypt was solicited during the Madrid Conference to demand that Israel stand down any nuclear deterrence she may have. Then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was warned that James Baker's "Jew Boys" would ambush him at Madrid. But, like most Israelis, he had the supreme belief and arrogance that he would come out on top...He didn't, although he tried mightily. Oslo was a gathering of the Slugs: the Leftist Jews of Rabin, Peres and Beilin, among others. The Norwegians were the host "Slugs" but France and Germany had their fingers in the plan to bamboozle the Jews. And they certainly did! Keep in mind the Norwegians like the Dutch joined the SS in substantial numbers and haven't changed much over the years. ### 1. "Monitors Ready, Israel will Ease Grip on Lebanon" by Steven Erlanger New York Times September 7, 2006 2. "FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL: Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over "Palestine" [1850 to present]" by Joan Peters Harper & Rowe NY 1984 Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
POWERFUL FILM CLIP: IDF IN HOUSE TO HOUSE COMBAT WITH HEZBOLLAH AT NIGHT
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 7, 2006. |
|
I watched the 27 minutes video and at the end the tears could not stop gushing... Though much constructive criticism about the IDF fighting methods, it is powerful, moving video, a portrait of Israel's war that is worth every second of its twenty-seven or so minutes viewing. I'm taking the liberty of reminding readers to take the time and watch. I hope the IDF wasfare method will be fast corrected.--Nurit http://switch248-01.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID9947&ak=63628786 Jim Brown posted the link to an incredible 27-minute piece by an Israeli video journalist depicting Israel's war against Hezbollah: "To hell and back." Jim wrote: Israeli video journalist Itai Anghel joined IDF Nachal Regiment 931, went into Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon and shot 25 minutes of riveting house-to-house combat footage with a night vision lens. The Hezbollah fighters went as far as wearing Israeli uniforms. To watch the video, paste this URL into your browser:
UPDATE: James Sitlington III writes to comment: I watched the video after your first reference to it and was struck by its candor and how it gives us an ability to take an unvarnished look into an IDF "Regular Army" Regiment. A little background. I'm a West Point grad, and while on active duty in the 80's, had the luxury of working for exceptional leaders: Carl Vuono, Denny Reimer and Gary Luck. Vuono and Reimer became Chief of Staff of the Army, and Luck is still doing special ops stuff, though retired as a 4 star. They taught me lessons in leadership and training that are invaluable and serve me to this day. I am a student of "leadership," particularly in the military sense, which brings me to my criticisms of the IDF as shown by this video, which I believe to be representative. This will sound harsh, but is given with the hope of being seen as constructive. 1) A Regiment was repulsed and therefore failed to complete its mission (the occupation of the village) by three terrorists. I could go on, but the sense I get is that the IDF is not ready for prime time. I have chatted with Yoni about my concerns as to why it took 24 hours to recover the dead following the first 531 firefight and wondered how many of those "bled out" waiting for help that never came. In Europe, in the 80's the Soviet Army only gave radios to their leaders. Hence, you knew which tank was a leader by its having an antenna. Two antennas meant Company Commander, etc. So, kill the tank with antennas, and the rest of the tanks are leaderless. I fear the same is true with the IDF...Kill the first and second guy in, and you take out the leadership. There is no doubt the terrorists understand this. I expect/hope that we will have some SF guys giving some urgent training on Company and Battalion level tactics and support to the IDF. I look for more OH-58 type helicopters to be purchased by the IDF, and I expect to hear of orders that Battalion Commanders will no longer "lead from the front." It is hard enough to command a battalion in combat, without adding the stress and exertion brought on by reverting to a Platoon Leader whenever the bullets begin to fly. All the best, and God Bless Israel!
Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
THEY WIN BY STOPPING US FROM LEARNING THE TRUTH
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 7, 2006. |
|
This is how they win. Through threats and intimidation, backed up by bona fide acts of murder, they silence their critics. With the critics silenced, they can more effectively spread the lies that we encounter in their revisionist propaganda history of the Arab-Israel conflict, or the suppessing in college textbooks of the reality about the violent spread of Islam and conversion at the point of a sword, or the distortion of the historic and judicial reality of 'dhimmitude' and other oppressive Moslem discrimination agianst Jews and Christians and Hindus and Zoroastrians. But why must they lie, and threaten, and kill, and bribe? Why not just let people learn about Islam, and the Qur'an, and Moslem history, and Jihad, and Shari'a and Dhimma? They lie and suppress the truth or the same reason that anyone else does.....because the truth does not serve their purposes. They do not want us to learn the truth about Islam. This is an op-ed essay written by Winfield Myers. It appeared today in The Examiner. She is a member of The Examiner's Blog Board of Contributors and blogs at DemocracyProject.com and CampusWatch.org. |
|
WASHINGTON - When Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie in 1989 for "blasphemy" against Islam, the reaction was swift: Rushdie repented and killed the paperback edition of his novel, lest he be killed himself. As the BBC put it in 1990, "He renewed his faith in Islam on Christmas Eve and disassociated himself from the anti-Muslim sentiments expressed by characters in his book." Not that his obsequiousness did him any good. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Khomeini's successor, pronounced the fatwa a "divine ruling" that couldn't be withdrawn even if Rushdie "repents and becomes the most pious man of his time." Since then, intolerance among Islamists in Europe has grown to the point that public figures are cowed by the constant threat of violence, often acted upon, should anyone insult the faith -- "insult" being defined as disagreeing with its precepts or refusing to live by its mores. Just last month, Muslim leaders in the U.K. demanded public holidays to mark religious festivals and to implement Islamic family law; they warned government officials that they wouldn't be treated like "patsies" to publicly defend the war in Iraq or Britain's policies in Lebanon. Worse, this effort to legitimize the implementation of sharia (Islamic law) in a Western country was proclaimed as part of an effort to prevent further terrorist acts. Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said of his talk with Ruth Kelly, the government's communities secretary: "We accepted on our side there are issues with extremism. However, we need better to understand how it is otherwise ordinary young minds are becoming radicalized." All of which is to argue that the disease is the cure: Give us radical Islam, which drives young people to blow themselves up in order to indiscriminately kill innocents, and we'll stop the killing. And pneumoconiosis is the cure for coal mining. Such bravado is encouraged when so many of Europe's intellectual and political elites, steeped in philosophical nihilism and ridden with guilt for their own nations' bloody histories, prove themselves incapable -- or at best unwilling -- to fight for the survival of liberal democracy. More examples of Euro-casualties to Islamist demands abound. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch-Somali politician and apostate from Islam, was forced to flee for her life to a think tank in Washington. Yet her fate is preferable to that of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who produced Hirsi Ali's film Submission and was murdered by an Islamist, whose five-page note (left stuck into van Gogh's chest with a knife) threatened Hirsi Ali with the same punishment. And Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was murdered by a Dutchman who claimed to have acted for the country's Muslim minority, of which Fortuyn was very critical. It's unlikely that, absent Fortuyn's calls for restrictions on immigration from Muslim lands, he would have met such a grisly end. In Germany this week, the prominent German-Turkish women's rights lawyer Seyran Ates announced she was quitting her practice because of death threats from militant Turks who resent her defense of Turkish women. Few groups in the West need more protection than Turkish women, who are subjected to physical and psychological abuse and even murder at the hands of husbands, brothers and fathers, and who rarely learn German -- the single most important assimilative act they could take. Ates is a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), but she told a Berlin newspaper that, "The SPD is still dominated by an immigration policy that plays things down." Radical Islamism's enablers have other ways of making one not talk. When Professor Pieter W. Van Der Horst retired from teaching early Jewish studies at the University of Utrecht in Holland, he proposed in his valedictory address to trace the history of the charge that Jews eat human flesh from its classical origins to the modern Middle East. This would necessarily entail discussion of anti-Semitism in the contemporary Middle East, but he intended to offer no criticism of Islam itself. Yet the dean of the faculty asked Van Der Horst to refrain from mentioning Islamic Jew hatred. As he wrote in the European Wall Street Journal, an internal committee sided with the dean, citing fear that his uncensored lecture would lead to "violent reactions" from Muslim student groups and harm relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. He had no choice but to comply, although his uncensored lecture was published in the Dutch media, which proved more courageous than Utrecht's administrators. 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 |
|
STOP APPEASING "MUSLIM OPINION"
Posted by Alex Epstein, September 7, 2006. |
|
America's attempts to appease "Muslim opinion" are self-destructive.
To listen to most of our foreign-policy commentators, the biggest problem facing America today--five years after Sept. 11--is the fact that many Muslims are mad at us. "Whatever one's views on the [Iraq] war," writes a New York Times columnist, "thoughtful Americans need to consider ... the bitter anger that it has provoked among Muslims around the world." In response to Abu Ghraib, Ted Kennedy lamented, "We have become the most hated nation in the world, as a result of this disastrous policy in the prisons." Muslim anger over America's support of Israel, we are told, is a major cause of anti-American terrorism. We face, these commentators say, a crisis of "Muslim opinion." We must, they say, win the "hearts and minds" of angry Muslims by heaping public affection on Islam, by shutting down Guantanamo, by being more "evenhanded" between free Israel and the terrorist Palestinian Authority--and certainly by avoiding any new military action in the Muslim world. If we fail to win over "Muslim opinion," we are told, we will drive even more to become terrorists. All of this evades one blatant truth: the hatred being heaped on America is irrational and undeserved. Consider the issue of treatment of POWs. Many Muslims are up in arms about the treatment of prisoners of war in Iraq and at Guantanamo--many of whom were captured on battlefields trying to kill Americans. Yet these same Muslims are silent about the summary convictions and torture--real torture, with electric drills and vats of acid--that are official policy and daily practice throughout the Middle East. Or consider "Muslim opinion" over the U.S. handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which the United States is accused of not being "hard enough" on Israel--a free nation with laws that protect all citizens, Jew and Arab alike--for Israel's supposed mistreatment of Palestinians. Yet "Muslim opinion" reveres the Palestinians, a people who overwhelming want to destroy the only oasis of freedom in the Middle East, and who just elected Hamas, the Islamic totalitarian organization, to run their country. So-called Muslim opinion is not the unanimous and just consensus that its seekers pretend. It is the irrational and unjust opinion of the world's worst Muslims: Islamists and their legions of "moderate" supporters and sympathizers. These people oppose us not because of any legitimate grievances against America, but because they are steeped in a fundamentalist interpretation of their religion--one that views America's freedom, prosperity, and pursuit of worldly pleasures as the height of depravity. They do not seek respect for the rights of the individual (Muslim or non-Muslim), they seek a world in which the rights of all are sacrificed to the dictates of Islam. The proper response to Islamists and their supporters is to identify them as our ideological and political enemies--and dispense justice accordingly. In the case of our militant enemies, we must kill or demoralize them--especially those regimes that support terrorism and fuel the Islamist movement; as for the rest, we must politically ignore them and intellectually discredit them, while proudly arguing for the superiority of Americanism. Such a policy would make us safe, expose Islamic anti-Americanism as irrational and immoral, and embolden the better Muslims to support our ideals and emulate our ways. President Bush, like most politicians and intellectuals, has taken the opposite approach to "Muslim opinion": appeasement. Instead of identifying anti-American Muslims as ideological enemies to be discredited, he has appealed to their sensibilities and met their demands--e.g., sacrificing American soldiers to save Iraqi civilians and mosques. Instead of seeking to crush the Islamists by defeating the causes they fight for--such as Islamic world domination and the destruction of Israel--he has appeased those causes, declaring Islam a "great religion" and rewarding the ongoing Palestinian terrorist Jihad with a promised Palestinian state. Instead of destroying terrorist regimes that wage war against the West--including, most notably, Iran--he has sought their "cooperation"--and, in the case of Iran, engaged in feckless "negotiations" that give Iran time to develop the nuclear weapons and long-range missiles it lusts after. Such measures have rewarded our enemy for waging physical and spiritual war against us. "Condemn America," they have learned, "and American leaders will praise your ideals and meet your demands." "Attack America via terrorist proxy," terrorist states and movements have been taught, "and America will neither blame you nor destroy you, but redouble its efforts to buy your love." Every attempt to appease "Muslim opinion" preserves, promotes, and emboldens our enemies. Every concession to angry Muslim mobs gives hope to the Islamist cause. Every day we allow terrorist regimes to exist gives their minions time to execute the next Sept. 11. America needs honest leadership with the courage to identify and defeat our enemies--"Muslim opinion" be damned. Alex Epstein is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, CA. The Institute promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand--best-selling author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead and originator of the philosophy of Objectivism. |
|
DO ISRAEL'S MEDIA KNOW THEIR PLACE?
Posted by Yisrael Medad, September 7, 2006. |
|
News is what people want to keep hidden; everything else is publicity.- Bill Moyers For four weeks this summer during the second Lebanon War, Israel's media provided consumers with more publicity and spin than hard news. True electronic media consumers did not lack for breaking news. The three main television stations - Channels 1, 2 and 10 - all provided live continuous coverage of the war. Studios were filled with commentators, politicians and reports from the field. Reporters, many of them women, went north to face the missiles. And who can forget Yoav Limor dodging an incoming Katyusha in Safed? Reporters Itai Engel, Mukki Hadar and Amir Bar-Chen all accompanied front-line troops into battle and returned with outstanding reports and footage. Israel Radio (Reshet Bet) and Army Radio provided a wealth of news, opinions and updates, even as broadcasts were often interrupted by announcements from the Home Command urging citizens in the North to enter their bomb shelters, WITH THE war over, however, recriminations are being openly voiced about media partisanship and recklessness. Letters to the editor columns are full of complaints about how the media handled itself. Oversight authorities have received hundreds of complaints from consumers about television coverage particularly. People are mostly angry that television stations seemingly provided information that could have been helpful to the enemy, and that too much time was spent airing personal opinions cloaked as news. I share many of these concerns. There have even been suggestions from within the media that true soul-searching demanded the appointment of a media-specific commission of inquiry. IN TIME of war the media is not only an objective information provider; it must also not assume the role of cheerleader. The media's role is to seek the story behind the story and try to explain the "why" behind the "what." The media is an instrument of democracy and civil society. While some in the media correctly refused to take on the role of mobilizing society for the war effort, many more took advantage of the opportunity to advance personal agendas. It's indisputable that, both prior to and during the four weeks of battle, there was a lack of investigative reporting on the central political, diplomatic and security failures that only came out afterwards. Why should we, ex post facto, be demanding a commission of inquiry? Where was the press for the past six years while events were allowed to deteriorate? Could it be that they were smitten by the mirage of a quiet northern border? Did they adopt Amnon Abramovitz's "etrog" paradigm of swathing favored politicians with fawning protection? Or did the press sound the alarm only to be ignored by politicos and the public? Why did IDF Spokeswoman Miri Regev take advice from Reuven Adler, Eyal Arad and Leor Chorev, the triumvirate spinmasters who guided Ariel Sharon and Kadima? Was there a partisan agenda afoot? Did the IDF allow itself to become the agency of a political party? JUST A week before the war Haaretz reporter Aluf Benn wrote that Hassan Nasrallah had been behaving responsibly, and that a balance of deterrence had been created on both sides of the Lebanon border. "Hizbullah is preserving quiet in the Galilee better than did the pro-Israeli South Lebanese Army," he had written. Only on July 20 did Benn admit that "the mistake in my assessment stemmed, as always, from the idee fixe that what was is what will be." There certainly was a recurring theme, but it was rooted in the ideological mind-set of Israel's liberal/progressive media elite. It hadn't stopped applauding Ehud Barak's run-in-the-night withdrawal from Lebanon, and was not about to admit the error in his move - certainly not in advance of Sharon's trade of land-for-nothing. Asked, in a Ynet interview, if he felt frustrated that his prewar calls about the rocket threat facing Israel had been ignored, former Likud MK Uzi Landau responded, "I was made to look delusional, because part and parcel of the [media's] campaign against the disengagement opposition was a nonsensical discourse. They said I was a warmonger." WHEN THE war began, elements in the media spent the first fortnight warning the government and the IDF not to send ground troops into Lebanon. The media also let Hizbullah know, in real time, exactly where the rockets were falling, and even the unit numbers of the battalions and divisions crossing the northern border. Many in the media also covered up for the lapses of Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz, whose declarations during the fighting were mostly bluster. There were exceptions, such as Haaretz's Ari Shavit, who was devastating: "Political correctness and the illusion-of-normalcy spread first and foremost among the Israeli elites... the media... have blinded Israel and deprived it of its spirit... Instead of being constructive elites [they] have become dismantling elites." Yediot columnist Yair Lapid admitted the media was irresponsible, unrestrained, unfair and confused opinions with fact. In a Globes op-ed, Prof. Gabriel Ben-Simchon of Tel Aviv University's Cinema Department accused Haaretz of being a "newspaper in Hizbullah's service." Israel's media has much to make up for. One step that should be taken is editors and media stars distancing themselves from relationships with the politicians and generals they cover. One of the many lessons of the war is that the public needs a "free
press," in every sense.
The writer comments on politics, culture and the media. His blog is
www.myrightword.blogspot.com
This article appeared August 28, 2006 in the Jerusalem Post
as an op-ed piece
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525961849&pagename=
JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull). |
|
MR. PRESIDENT, JERUSALEM CALLING!
Posted by Harry W. Weber, September 7, 2006. |
|
In recent days the government of El Salvador declared that it has decided to follow in the footsteps of its neighbor, Costa Rica, and move its embassy in Israel from Israel's capital, Jerusalem, to Tel Aviv. El Salvador's decision left the Holy City without even one nation willing to declare, by deed, that it supports the right of the people of Israel -- like every other people on the face of the earth -- to decide for themselves where in their country to locate their capital city, without pressure from outside forces. On the surface of the matter, it would appear that the world has truly gone mad with irrationalism in its inexplicable compliance with Moslem hatred for Israel and the Jews. For with the exception of the Moslem states and their oil lackies, no one openly espouses the position that Israel is not entitled to decide where to locate its capital. Moreover, no one, except the rejectionist Moslem coalition, denies that the Western portion of Jerusalem -- unlike the eastern portion that was annexed after Israel's triumphant victory over its neighbors in the Six Day War -- is an integral part of the Jewish state, territory eligible to house all the world's embassies in Israel. So why in the world are all, I repeat -- all -- the planet's states kowtowing to the Arab line that not even Western Jerusalem can ever be Israel's capital? The answer is clear: The price of oil is hovering around $70 a barrel, versus around $40 a mere year and a half ago, and the Arab world controls a hefty portion of the world's oil reserves. Yet, despite all the seemingly obvious geopolitical interests in not angering the ever-intolerant, anti-West Moslem Mob, don't the Western states realize that in an ever interdependent globally interconnected world, the Arabs need the West at least as much as the West needs their oil? When will Arab blackmail, no oilmail, end? The West's Pavlovian capitulation to Arab demands that it deprive Israel of its right to conduct its diplomatic contacts in its capital city, and that it deny Israel the land granted to it by the One Source (The Bible) that all mankind reads and believes was written and/or inspired by God Himself, is the post World War II equivalent to the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930's. The only head of state in the world who understands that 2006 is comparable to 1936, that Ahmadinejad is today's Hitler, that Arab bullying and terrorism is taken out of Hitler's playbook, but with jihad undertones, is President George W. Bush. He is the first U.S. president in a long time to understand that America's business is not just business; that in order to stay in business America needs to redefine its interests to include the creation of a freer world, a world without that peculiarly Moslem export -- terrorism, mass murder and global religious intimidation. Mr. Bush got it right after 9/11. However, it has taken the U.S. "allies" five long years, and they still don't see the handwriting on the wall -- that Iran and Al Qaeda and Hizbollah -- have declared World War III on the West! What will it take for Spain, Britain, France and the rest of the World War II shell-shocked states to recover from that trauma and its resultant pacifism, and take up arms against the new menace that threatens their way of life, no, their very lives? In the war against Moslem arm-twisting and Moslem terror a small-big step is to tell them: Israel is here to stay! And Jerusalem is firstly Israel's eternal capital, and secondly, the Holy City of the world. Jerusalem the Holy will be shamed no more. Nothing would be more symbolic of the West's resolve against Moslem aggression than the firm declaration of that time-honored truth -- that Jerusalem and Israel are one, forever. Therefore, President Bush should immediately make good on his promise before his first election as president, to move the U.S. embassy to Israel's capital. Nothing will do more to send the message to Arab blackmailers, terrorists and would-be jihadists that the leader of the West will not kowtow to their demands anymore. This will greatly reinforce the message throughout the world that the U.S. stands of freedom, justice, morality, and the word of God -- the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And Jerusalem shall no longer be like a mother shamed, whose children have deserted her. Mr. President, just do it, for your place in history, for the sake of history, and for the sake of a better future for all men of good will. Harry W. Weber is a C.P.A. (U.S., Israel), and a political commentator whose articles appear on many websites. Contact him at sandyirv@netvision.net.il |
|
THE STOCKHOLM CONFERENCE: A POLITICAL OBSCENITY
Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, September 7, 2006. |
| After a month of military action in Lebanon pitting Israel against Hezbollah, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1701. A cessation of hostilities was reached in mid-August, 2006, and two weeks later a conference was held in Stockholm to specifically raise funds for the reconstruction of Lebanon, its infrastructure, buildings and houses but without any concern whatsoever on the damage inflicted by Hezbollah on Israeli civilian facilities. The Stockholm Conference included some sixty participants, comprising many countries, international organizations and NGOs. The Lebanese Prime Minister, Fouad Siniora, opened the conference on August 31, with an appeal for help after "Israeli bombing wiped out 15 years of postwar development." Expected to raise about $500 million, the participants pledged close to twice that amount in what was considered an overwhelming success, while Israel was sidelined. The Swedish Prime Minister, Goran Persson, showed his solidarity with the Lebanese people: "Our message... should be clear and firm: You are not alone," he said. "War may be the business of some, but peace will always be our common duty." These are noble sentiments; no one should be indifferent to the human suffering of civilian populations. But there is a shocking omission in this kind of statement: the quest for responsibility. Whereas the European Left has always been eager to find exculpatory "root causes" in all matters related to Islamic terrorism after 9/11, and found them in such implausible factors as poverty, inequality, oppression, joblessness and alienation, there was no mention in Stockholm of the root causes of the Lebanese ordeal. This omission is nothing short of obscene. A brief background is in order. Israel was attacked in an unprovoked aggression. The aggressor was Hezb'allah. The casus belli which triggered the war on July 12 -- after 6 years of constant infiltrations and cross-border violations in full view of the UNIFIL observers whose dubious role is still being questioned today (To read, click here. )-- was the launching of Katyushas across the Israel-Lebanon border at the same time that two Israeli soldiers were kidnapped and a few others were killed. Everyone recognized that Israel was the attacked party: the G8, the UN, the EU and even Saudi Arabia in their official statement just after July 12 were all unequivocal in identifying Hezbollah as the aggressor. And yet, at the Stockholm Conference, the only thing we heard from the "international community" was pledges to assist Lebanon in its reconstruction effort as if the country had suffered a natural disaster. This is an obscenity. There was nothing natural in this destruction: it was the result of a war which was launched from Lebanese territory against a sovereign neighboring country. Certainly, Lebanon, as a country, did not attack Israel. Hezb'allah did. But Hezb'allah is an armed militia which is affiliated to a political party with significant representation in the Lebanese Parliament and at the ministerial level, even though it is trained, armed and spiritually supported by a foreign power, Iran. Moreover, except for his declaration on the first day of hostilities, Fouad Siniora maintained his unveiled support for Hezb'allah during the five weeks of hostilities, conveniently forgetting his obligation to disarm Hezb'allah, as required by UN Resolution 1559 which was passed two years earlier. It has also been established that the regular Lebanese army cooperated with Hezb'allah in more than one occasion. Therefore, holding Lebanon as a squeaky clean victim of aggression is also obscene. Whatever the legal responsibility of Hezb'allah-Lebanon may be in triggering the war, and conducting it, there is no doubt that Israel was the victim of aggression. But none of the participants in the Stockholm Conference ever raised this issue. Worse, some organizations even compounded the obscenity by accusing Israel. In an appalling statement, analysts of the European-based Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt (French acronym CADTM) declared, "Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon must demand accountability from their aggressors." They went on to say that "for Lebanon, a possible solution resides in the immediate cancellation of its debt and the establishment of funds for its reconstruction, which would be fed by reparations deposited by Israel" [emphasis added]. Not content to single out Israel, CADTM suggested that the United States, which backed Israel and helps equip and finance the Israeli army, should also be liable for "reparations." And they concluded with this pearl of Orwellian doublespeak: "It is only then that it will be possible to say that the Lebanese people will have received justice." These comments from CADTM should have provoked an uproar of indignation, but nothing was heard in the august halls of the Stockholm Conference. This silence was also obscene. Now is the time to raise the issue of "reparations" in its proper context. The Fourth Hague Convention (1907) in its Article 3 covers the conditions for war reparations that the aggressor is liable for. These provisions were further developed in the Geneva Conventions of 1949. More recently, the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), created in 1991 as a subsidiary organ of the UN Security Council, had a mandate to process claims and pay compensation for losses and damage suffered as a direct result of Iraq's aggression on Kuwait. UN Security Council Resolution 687, dated April 3, 1991 and adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter, mentions that "Iraq ...is liable under international law for any direct loss, damage, ... or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations, as a result of Iraq's unlawful invasion ... of Kuwait." Chapter VII is important because it concerns "threats to peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression." We should also remember that the formal cease-fire between Iraq and the Allied Coalition was made dependent upon Iraq's acceptance of all the provisions of Resolution 687. The parallel with the unlawful attack by Hezb'allah on July 12, 2006, and the resulting damage inflicted on Israel's civilian areas could not be starker even though, in this case, UN Resolution 1701 failed to mention any liability on the part of the aggressor. Had a conference been convened in Stockholm back in 1991, I doubt its single concern would have been to assist Iraq financially. No one would deny that innocent Lebanese civilians suffered greatly from the war. But so did Israeli civilians, with hundreds of thousands of people displaced, 6,000 homes destroyed and the northern Israel economy in shambles. So, rather than basking in the one-sided consensus of Stockholm, a more constructive way to handle the situation would be to create a joint Lebanese-Israeli body, comprising those elements of Lebanese society that have not been tainted by Hezb'allah, i.e. Christians, Druzes, Sunnis and possibly a portion of their Shia population, and launch a combined claim for war reparations to Hezb'allah's supporters, namely, Syria and especially Iran. This approach would have many advantages that were not apparent in the ill-conceived Stockholm Conference: 1) A claim for war reparations would be a powerful deterrent to aggressive "adventurism", as the Saudi Foreign Minister characterized the Hezb'allah attack. If we leave military aggressors unscathed financially, we are leaving the door open to further aggression. None of the above was in the agenda of the Stockholm Conference, where Israel was viewed either as the aggressor or as the party working against peace. In the conferees' lopsided view of reality, where the relationship of cause to effect never enters the equation, the donor countries at the Conference also pledged half a billion dollars to the Palestinians, 90% of which is to be channeled through the Palestinian Authority, now controlled by the terrorist organization Hamas. No questions were asked, no conditions set. Once again, the international donors were mesmerized by the swan song of Mahmoud Abbas, whose senior advisor complained about the "never-ending" humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. He lamented the "deterioration of the situation, given the constraints imposed on the Palestinians." It would take a volley of Kassam rockets crashing at the entrance of the Stockholm Conference hall to give these donors a bitter taste of reality. Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee. Contact her by email at rachterry@sbcglobal.net Salomon Benzimra contributed to this article. |
|
FATHER PRODUCES MORE EVIDENCE IMPLICATING UN IN KIDNAPPING
Posted by Hillel Fendel, September 7, 2006. |
|
The film of the kidnapping of the 3 IDF soldiers on the Lebanese border in 2000, simulcast in Lebanon and Israel this week, lacks the parts implicating the UN in the affair, says the father of one. Chaim Avraham is the father of Benny Avraham, who was one of the three soldiers kidnapped and murdered by Hizbullah in October 2000. He produced a photograph today further implicating the UN in at least indirect involvement in the violent abduction. Videotapes of the kidnapping, filmed by UNIFIL sources, have long been known to exist, though the UN originally denied it for months. Finally, the UN acknowledged that it had two tapes, but allowed the families and Israeli officials to see only an edited version - claiming it had to maintain objectivity. The film broadcast publicly this week shows how Hizbullah terrorists trained for the kidnapping, and then the abduction itself: the arrival of the unescorted IDF jeep, explosions, terrorists running to the site, gunfire, the actual taking of two soldiers into a dark-colored car, and the car's get-away into Lebanon. However, Chaim Avraham says, it does not show a white car that he knows took part in the kidnapping - a car that "stars," he told Arutz-7 today, in the original movie he and the other families saw a few years ago. "The car became stuck, and the movie shows how a UN vehicle towed it away. Inside that car were found items with the blood of my son and of Adi Avitan." More significantly, in terms of the UN's involvement in the kidnapping, the car had two dismantled license plates reading "UNIFIL 2707" in the back. Avraham has long had a photograph of this, and he released it for publication today. Why today? "Because it wasn't in the film that everyone saw on TV," he told Israel Radio today, and "[UN Middle East envoy] Terje Larsen called me and demanded to know why I was making claims against the UN - so I said I would show proof, and here it is." Why today? "Because [UN Middle East envoy] Terje Larsen called me and demanded to know why I was making claims against the UN," Avraham told Israel Radio, "so I said I would bring a proof. The car wasn't in the film that everyone saw on TV, I said I would show proof, and here it is." Avraham says he found, on the internet, a description of UNIFIL vehicle 2707: "The description shows clearly that the vehicle was used by the UN, was always on alert, and was responsible for monitoring Israeli patrols," Avraham said. Arutz-7 has found, interestingly, that the site -- http://www.ken-tore.com/Army/NORBATT.htm -- on which Avraham found this information (cached here -- http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:5M7AMOuC9QkJ: www.ken-tore.com/Army/NORBATT.htm+UNIFIL+2707&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1) is a personal one belonging to a former Norwegian member of the UNIFIL force. The former peacekeeper - who later married a Lebanese woman and considers Lebanon his "second homeland" - uploaded a picture of the original UNIFIL 2707, with this description: "This old vehicle served as the platoon HQ [headquarters] immediate response vehicle. The crew were on a 2 minute state of readiness, and were tasked with tailing GSS and IDF patrols within [the Lebanese area] Blat, as well as reinforcing the CP if necessary." Speaking with Arutz-7 today, Avraham did not wish to offer a conjecture as to how the UNIFIL plates found their way into the kidnapping car. He would say only that UNIFIL-marked cars were very familiar and unsuspicious to the Israeli forces. However, Avraham has long accused the UN of acting with partiality against Israel throughout the entire affair. In Dec. 2001, when UN Secretary-General Kofi Anan received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, the families of the soldiers were on hand to protest. They maintained that the UN soldiers turned a blind eye to the terrorists' preparations for the kidnapping. This appears to be verified in the film broadcast in Israel and Lebanon this week, which shows the terrorists training for the abduction and the kidnappers making their way through territory controlled by an Indian contingent of the UNIFIL force. In short, Chaim Avraham feels, the full story of the extent of the UN involvement in the kidnapping of his son and two friends has not yet been told. Hizbullah pretended for close to a year that the soldiers were alive, until the Chief Rabbinate of the IDF declared, based on evidence and testimony, that the three were dead. Their bodies were returned to Israeli in early 2004, together with kidnapped civilian Elchanan Tenenbaum, in exchange for over 400 Arab terrorist prisoners held in Israel. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News. |
|
CALL TO WORLD JEWRY: HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE IRANIAN THREAT?
Posted by Hillel Fendel, September 7, 2006. |
|
Sha'ul Schiff, veteran columnist for Israel's daily HaTzofeh newspaper, makes an impassioned plea to world Jewry to wake up to Iran's threat to destroy Israel. HaTzofeh has served, until recently, as the only voice of the religious-Zionist public in Israel since before the establishment of the State, and is still the sector's only daily paper. Excerpts from Schiff's recent column: "...Yes, I plead guilty to being slightly hysterical about the Iranian danger. [Here's why:] The problem with Iran is that its president, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, has declared, and continues to declare, openly in his speeches to his nation -- and that's what's important -- that his eyes are raised towards destroying the State of Israel... Iran, as is known, arms Hizbullah with advanced weapons and much money and trains its terrorists. But this is the small change. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.
|
|
AHMADINEJAD AND FRIENDS
Posted by Tom Carew, September 7, 2006. |
|
We rightly hear of Iran's President Ahmadinejad and "wiping Israel off the map", but equally sinister incitement to anti-Semitic genocide comes from the Hizb-Allah "al-Risala al-Maftuha" [Open Letter] from 16 Feb 1985, and also the 18 Aug 1988 Hamas Charter. Some key points both the Hizb-ALLAH Open Letter and the Hamas Charter are very informative and worth quoting. The Hizb-ALLAH paragraph re destruction of Israel was not published on their web-site, according to ICT, www.ict.org.il, which offers a complete English translation, or in "al-Safir" of Beirut which published the manifesto, but that paragraph was in the original programme, and was read by Sheikh Ibrahim Amin at al-Ouzai Mosque, West Beirut in Feb, 1985 at the launch of Hizb-ALLAH. There is also an interesting 65-page Hizb-ALLAH booklet, several copies of which were found in South Lebanon by IDF recently. It was published in 2004 by the Khomeini Cultural Centre in South Beirut, but with no author listed. It is an ideological/training manual, with a Forewod by current Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei, who also commands their IRGC {Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, which trained Hizb-ALLAH in the Beqaa Valley in East Lebanon} and quotes his predecessor, Ayatollah Khomeini. This 2004 manual quotes the 4th Caliph Ali ["Commander of the Faithful", and revered by Shias] on Jihad as "the gateway to Paradise, which Allah has opened unto His most loyal believers (only)". It praises self-sacrifice ["al-Tadhiya"], and unwavering steadfastness ["al-Sabr wal-Sumud"], and quotes Quran, Sura Baqara, V 52, that "one of the two acts of the greatest beauty" are victory, or "martyrdom for the sake of Allah during combat" ["Nasr aw istishad"]. Devotion to Allah is the backbone of such warrior-believer forces as the Iranian Revolutionaryy Guards. True Islam is revolutionary Islam. Adhering to the principle of "the guardianship of the jurist ["wilayat al-Faqih"] is "the ideological Islamic-Shiite foundation laid by Imam Khomeini". Hamas defines itself as one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. The MB {"Ikwan"] was founded in 1928, and its founder al-Banna [1906-1949] was assassinated [possibly by security force elements] after the Egyptian PM was murdered by MB in Dec 1948. In 1954 MB tried to murder President Nasir, and in 1965 there was a coup attempt. The Egyptians thus cracked down on MB in both Egypt and Gaza in 1954 and 1965. MB was one of the irregular armed elements attacking Israel in 1948, advancing across the Sinai frontier. From 1979, there was a non-revolutionary MB arm, "Mujamma" [Islamic Association] operating in Gaza, which concentrated on social and educational work, but Hamas emerged in late 1987, with the First Intifada, over 8 months before its Charter appeared. Art 8 of the Hamas Charter adopts the MB slogan of " Allah is the target, the Messenger is the model, the Quran is its constitution, Jihad is its path, and death for the sake of Allah is its most sublime aspiration". Art 6 defines Hamas as a Palestinian movement whose struggle is to be waged "for every inch of Palestine", [Palestine being from the River Jordan to the Med Sea], and Palestine is an Islamic endowment ["waqf"] "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgment Day". Add that ideology to suicide-bombing, and you can see the unreality of expecting normal negotiations with such an outfit. Tom Carew lives in Ranelagh, Dublin, Ireland. Contact him at tmcarew@yahoo.com |
|
IRANIAN THREAT
Posted by Tom Carew, September 6, 2006. | ||
|
This was a letter to The Guardian | ||
|
| Dear Sir, I look forward some day soon to reading of the plans of the "anti-war" brigade to travel to South Beirut, Damascus and Tehran, to investigate the movement of rockets to the Iran-funded, armed and trained Hezb-ALLAH gangs, which both the European Paliament and USA regard as a terror group. Their tour might also take in Central Iran with the Khondab Heavy Water Plant near Arak City, 360 kms SW of Tehran, or the Saghand Uranium Mine, the Ardakan Yellow Cake Plant only 35km from Tehran with its Uranium Oxide, the many centrifuges in Natanz Underground Uranium Enrichment Plant 300 kms S of Tehran, the Esfahan Uranium Conversion Plant 400 km S of Tehran with its Uranium Hexafluoride Gas [UF-6], and 1200 km SW of Tehran, on the Gulf the $800m Russian-built Bushehr Nuclear Reactor. Iran has a nice double-bet going, since they can make N-bombs with either plutonium as the explosive core, from their Heavy Water process, using their own natural uranium mine, or else with Highly Enriched Uranium, using regular or "light" water. Or even with both. Add this Iranian regime's ongoing long-range missile development, and repeated genocidal threat to "wipe Israel off the map", to their emerging nuclear capability, and humanity faces a stark moment of decision. Either appease this nuclear bully, or else confront and prevail. Win or surrender. And when they go nuclear, they wont even need to fire their devastating weapons - their nuclear blackmail, plus oil, will allow them to do whatever they wish, including slowly bleed Israel to death under a rain of rockets and missiles and suicide-attacks. And likewise with Iraq. No doubt these professional protesters will receive kid gloves treatment from the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps [like the Nazi SS, with their own army, naval and air units] and the p/t Basiji militia [=Nazi SA stormtroopers] as is given them by our Western police, and the same rights of public trial, not to mention protest outside the Courts. And without wearing Hijabs, Nequibs or Burqas. But if any of them are still concerned on any of those fronts, they can still find Iranian Embassies in our capitals, outside which protest is safe and risk-free. Could I have missed them there? I wonder why? Could even some of them be more Anti-Israeli or Anti-American or Anti-West, than just "anti-war"? The longer we wait to confront the grave Iranian threat, the higher the price we pay.
| Tom Carew lives in Ranelagh, Dublin, Ireland. Contact him at tmcarew@yahoo.com |
|
LOVERS OF DEATH: UNDERSTANDING THE ISLAMIC "SUICIDE" BOMBER
Posted by Louis Rene Beres, September 6, 2006. |
|
In 1936, on the occasion of a speech by the nationalist general Millan Astray at the University of Salamanca in Spain, the hall thundered with the general's favorite motto: VIVA LA MUERTE! "Long live death." When the speech was over, Miguel de Unamuno, rector of the University, rose and said: "Just now I heard a necrophilious and senseless cry ... this outlandish paradox is repellent to me." Yet, this very same repellent cry is, today, the lurid rallying cry of Islamic "suicide" terrorists. Again and again, we hear from Hezbollah, and Hamas and Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda and also Fatah, "We love death." Why do we put the word "suicide" in quotation marks? Islamic "lovers of death" certainly do not commit suicide in any ordinary fashion. As they believe that acts of "martyrdom" always assure a blissful immortality, their "suicide" makes a mockery of any morbid affection. As they commit "suicide" only to assure eternal life, their pretended heroism is never more than a furiously voluptuous act of cowardice. There are subtle complications. The self-proclaimed Islamic "lover of death: also fears continuation of his life on earth. This life is almost always devoid of any felt opportunity to do something rewarding and almost always prohibits, inhibits and disdains the most compelling needs of his inborn human sexuality. Thwarting both meaning and eros, elements of Islamic society continue to prod thousands of young males to "matyr" themselves in the killing of "infidels." The explosive link between suicide terror violenceand repressed male sexuality is still widely unrecognized. On female suicide bombers, the jury is still out. September 11th had nothing really to do with politics. These terror attacks were not produced by Islamic anger about certain allegedly objectionable features of American foreign policy. Such feeble explanations were merely the predictable ventings of certain misguided academics and journalists.. What animated September 11th was the tangibly ecstatic promise of personal salvation through distinctly "sacred" acts of killing. The "suicide" killing of American men, women and children on that day stemmed from the very same sentiments that continue to produce "suicide" killings of Israeli noncombatants. Consider the ominously characteristic statement by one Jamal Abdel Hamid Yussef, explaining operations of the Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades (military wing of Hamas in Gaza): "Our suicide operations are a message...that our people love death. Our goal is to die for the sake of God, and if we live we want to humiliate Jews and trample on their necks." Hamas, which was loudly overjoyed at the murders of September 11th, promises all Islamic "suicides" nothing less than FREEDOM FROM DEATH. By "dying" in the divinely-mandated act of killing "Jews" or "Americans" (it makes no difference that these are not mutually exclusive categories; Islamic terrorists are interested in blood sacrifice, not formal logic), the "suicide"terrorist believes that he conquers death. In his clerically-promised eternal life, there will be rivers of honey and seventy-two virgins. None of this is mere metaphor. These are the literal and very palpable rewards for "dying" in a mandated and glorious fight against the most despised enemies of The One True Faith. With Allah on his or her side, the Islamic "suicide" terrorist sees absolutely nothing suicidal about his willful murder of Jews, or Americans. For him or for her, a plain coward immobilized by fear of both death and life, "suicide" is just a momentary inconvenience on the fiery trajectory into heaven. Now the insufferable death fear of ego is lessened by SACRIFICE of the infidel. It is expressly through the burning and maiming of defenseless men, women and children that the terrorist seeks to buy himself free from personal death. ^M We are left to deal with an apparent paradox. What shall we do about a "suicide" that does not intend to end the murderer's own life, but to extend it forever? For Israel, for America, there is now little point to deterring the determined murderers with threats of death. Such threats, after all, would be received not only without apprehension, but also with a delirious cry of joy and a collective moan of fulfillment. To deter the Islamic "suicide" terrorists, Israel and America must now offer the aspiring mass murderers a tangible threat of REAL suicide. Violence and the sacred are presently inseparable for the Islamic "suicide" terrorist. But Israel and America should immediately think in terms of "desacrilizing" his/her grotesque inversion of holiness. Now it must be our prompt task to convince the would-be mass-terrorist that divine reward will never follow his sacrificial logic, and that his prayerful murders in the name of Allah will lead not to paradise, but to the grave. Louis Rene Beres is Professor of International Law in Department of Political Science at Purdue University. He has been a consultant and written on the prevention of chemical, biological and nuclear terrorism. Contact him at beres@polsci.purdue.edu |
|
QUANTUM REPENTANCE
Posted by Arnie Gotfryd, September 6 2006. |
|
As the New Year rapidly approaches, it's time for some year-end stocktaking. If you're like most of us, there are probably defective goods clogging your spiritual warehouse, taking up valuable space. But imagine if you could turn your very worst liabilities into your most precious assets. Nice dream, isn't it? Well, as it turns out, this is no wistful fancy but a daily reality, according to both cutting edge science and state-of-the-art religion, i.e., Judaism. To explain, let's peer into the subatomic world of the quantum and explore an amazing property of nature, a weird, almost quirky kind of fact: Wave-particle duality. The idea is that things are what you choose them to be, literally. For example, when photons pass through a barrier with two slits, you can choose to observe them as waves, in which case they necessarily went through both slits, or as particles, in which case they went through only one. You determine the reality. But it gets even stranger. An implication of this "observer power" is that once you choose to see the photon as a wave, it was a wave all the way back to when it was emitted. Similarly if you choose to observe it as a particle, it was a particle not only at the time of observation, but retroactively all the way back to its origin. "Whoa!" says the logical brain. "How can it be that an observation I make now is changing things earlier? It makes no sense. There must be some mistake here." But there is no mistake. In 1978, physicist John Wheeler concocted a thought experiment to test this time-travel effect observers have on quantum systems, and lo-and-behold by 1984 it was proven in the lab and replicated dozens of times since. Today there is no doubt about it. Observer choices made now determine the history of quanta in the past, whether it's nanoseconds, minutes, or millennia ago. And it's not just a matter of proton here and a neutron there. The entire cosmos is made of this stuff, so it turns out that any observations and all observations share this remarkable property. We recreate all of history and even pre-history just by opening our eyes in the morning! In Judaic terms it's not all that strange. Jews celebrate the renewal of the universe every day in their morning prayers, which speaks of the Creator's "daily, constant renewal of the work of Creation." And all of that is because of us, as the Talmud states that "every individual is obliged to say: For my sake was the world created." But this whole retroactive reality business has an even a deeper spiritual significance. It refers to the power of teshuvah, "repentance," more accurately translated "return" or "restoration." We all have some fixing up to do in preparation for the New Year. But in this there are different levels. There's a basic kind of restoration that rights a wrong, repays a debt, gets us back to level ground. But then there's another, higher mode of teshuvah, where negatives get transformed to positives. A teshuvah where errors become assets, where even intentional sins become merits. Where darkness is transformed to light. And here's where photons can illuminate our spiritual life as well. By choosing to return in the best possible way, we demonstrate to our Creator that we are in tune with the possibility of reinventing ourselves, of transcending sustainability, surpassing even tikkun olam, achieving a perfection within ourselves and the world. Find-a-Service (listing over 2,400 events in over 250 cities):
Wishing you and your family a happy, sweet new year! Arnie Gotfryd is a speaker and writer who understands secular and religious perspectives from both sides of the fence. He earned Canada's first doctorate in Applied Ecology and taught an award-winning, accredited course on Faith and Science at the University of Toronto. Visit him at www.arniegotfryd.com. This article is archived at http://www.chabad.org/420587. |
|
DUTCH INTERVENTION
Posted by Rachel Saperstein, September 6, 2006. |
|
Moshe and I are leaving for Holland early Sunday morning. We'll return to Israel on Thursday afternoon. It's a quick trip, but necessary. First, we need a vacation. Second, it's our 44th wedding anniversary. Third, we want to be with our very dear friends, Johan and Christa Rhodius, who are organizing Orange Gallery exhibitions and sales in Holland. Eight days before our expulsion from Gush Katif Christa and Johan appeared. They were friends of our houseguests, Rabbi Chaim and Raya Eisen of Jerusalem. Could they stay? They had arrived with no change of clothing, not even a toothbrush between them. They moved into one of our spare rooms. Two sofa beds, a dismantled closet and a night light made up the décor. Christa is the guiding light behind the Davidka Fund, a Dutch Christian organization dedicated to helping Israeli victims of terror and the families of Missing in Action soldiers. Now she has added the refugees of Gush Katif to her list of charities. Johan is a distinguished lawyer. His family has been in the service of the Royal House of Orange for generations. Soon we were joined by the Eisen's teenaged sons, a friend's daughter and her two pals, and one "Please take in my grandson." A half dozen other young people appeared and disappeared at irregular intervals. We all settled into a household routine. Raya did the shopping, I cooked, and Christa cleaned up. Rabbi Eisen and Johan did garbage detail. The teenagers did volunteer work in the community and eventually, sadly, all helped in packing our belongings. Moshe? He listened to music, wandered the dunes, and sulked. I would like to share a story with you, a story that binds Johan and I together. A story of how Johan and I fought and won a small victory against the government of Israel. A few days before the army entered Neve Dekalim the government announced it would be closing down our water and electricity. We had been stockpiling water and candles for such an eventuality. But I was furious. "Johan" I said, "you are a lawyer. Does the government have the right to deny its citizens water and electricity? Isn't that a breach of our human rights?" "I think it would be" Johan nodded with lawyerly circumspection. "Then let's do something about it. We've got mothers and babies here. The temperature is hitting record highs. Without air conditioning or a water supply we're heading for a humanitarian disaster. At best we'll have massive dehydration. At worst, typhoid or cholera. And the medical clinic is due to be shut down. Without medical staff we won't survive at all." "What do you propose"? Johan asked. "We call the International Committee for the Red Cross and the World Health Organization to declare a humanitarian disaster in the making. You speak Dutch and you're a lawyer. They'll listen to you." And so Johan called his friends in The Hague, and we received calls from the ICRC in Jerusalem. Clearly our frantic messages were being relayed all over, especially to the Prime Minister's office. And the pressure was building. A CNN crew had rented a house nearby and we had become friendly. I appeared live on CNN, and on Sky News courtesy of Emma Hurd who was a regular at our home. My message was that here is Israel, always the first to offer humanitarian aid to the disaster-stricken all over the world, about to bring disaster on its own citizens in Gush Katif. I begged the international community to send observers to prevent the disaster. It worked. The Prime Minister's office called CNN and Sky News and insisted that "that woman" is a liar and there was no intention of cutting water and electricity. And so Johan and I won our skirmish. Electricity and water stayed on. But though we won the skirmish we lost the war. Days later the Eisen, Rhodius and Saperstein families were forced onto a bus and removed from Neve Dekalim. I never saw my home again. The three families, having shared so intensely, have remained special friends to this day. OPERATION DIGNITY is bringing hope, financial aid and employment to our people. OPERATION DIGNITY needs your help to revitalize a once proud people. Send your check, earmarked "Operation Dignity" to Central Fund for Israel
OR Central Fund for Israel
Rachel Saperstein and her husband, Moshe, were among the thousands of
Jews kicked out of their homes in Gush Katif, in the Gaza strip, and
forced into temporary quarters so dismal, their still-temporary
paper-based trailers in Nitzan, seemed a step up. Contact them at
ruchimo@.netvision.net.il
|
|
IRAN CAN STRIKE US MILITARILY
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 6, 2006. |
|
Bennet Ramberg's "Bomb Tehran Today or be bombed Tomorrow" (SF Chron, 9.6.06) makes the case for pre-emptive strikes with conventional weapons to prevent nuclear war with Iran. But he makes a serious error the correction of which greatly strengthens his argument. He asserts in par. 8 that: "...the mullahs cannot strike against the United States militarily". This is not true. Iran has created strong diplomatic ties with Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia. Hugo Chavez has visited with Bashir Assad of Syria, and with Akhmedi-Nejad of Iran. The leaders of these three South American countries have very strong anti-USA policies and have expressed their firm support for Iran. Also, there are literally tens of thousands of Arab and Iranian terrorists ensconced in terror training camps in Venezuela and in the tri-border region between Paraguay, Chile and Argentina. Some say that Akhmedi-Nejad is crazy, but he is not stupid. He knows the deterrent value of WMDs located just south of our border, and poised for attack against the southern United States. What would the USA's pre-emptive strike capacity be if we knew for sure that no matter how hard Iran were hit, those South American countries could put every major American city in the south, from San Diego to Sarasota, into Iranian WMD cross-hairs? In 1963, President Kennedy deployed a full-scale naval blocade and military embargo against Cuba until the USSR removed its nuclear missiles. It was clear then, as it should be now, that the proximity of such weapons poses not only a clear and present danger to the USA, but is also a bona fide casus belli (legitimate cause for war) per international law and the 4th Geneva Convention. Can President Bush do the same thing now to prevent Arab and Iranian terrorists, in collusion with lcoal South American dictators, from neutralizing our ability to take the action necessary to protect our citizens from an Iranian nuclear attack? David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
THE LOEWENSTEIN SYNDROME
Posted by Sanda Abramovici, September 6, 2006. |
|
Ronald Green is author of 13 ESL books, and lives in Ramat Hasharon, Israel. Antony Loewenstein stayed with his cousin Ronald In Israel last year to do research for his book. |
|
The recently published book "My Israel Question" by Antony Loewenstein is an auspicious event - for the author, obviously, but perhaps more so for the rest of us. It is not the book itself that is important, since any book endorsed by John Pilger and Robert Fisk will not leave any surprises as to its contents. And in case we are in any doubt, the front cover showing a temporary Star of David about to dissipate in a pristine blue sky leaves very little to the imagination as to the author's wishful thinking. But it is a good time to ask WHY. Not about Pilger and Fisk, for we have been dealing with their ilk for as long as there were Jews in the world. The question is: Why is Loewenstein the way he is? How did a Jewish boy, whose grandparents escaped from Germany in the 30's and who grew up in a warm Jewish house in Melbourne become obsessed with turning against his past? Loewenstein, after all, was always aware of the centrality of Jerusalem to the Jewish people, and long before "Zionist" became a dirty word for him, he read about yearnings for the return to Zion countless times in his prayer book. Did this only child take teenage revolt so far as to turn over all the tables and cross every red line? And what is he still proving? It is serious to label someone a racist. Loewenstein is a racist. In that he is not unique, of course. The phenomenon is interesting in his case not only because it is something of which he accuses others (very common among the righteous left), but because his racism manifests itself in a self-loathing that finds its outlet in his obsessive ravings against Israel, Israelis, Zionists and assorted other Jews. Every Jewish community has its Loewenstein, some have even a number of those suffering from the Loewenstein Syndrome. What is the Loewenstein Syndrome and what distinguishes it from your common or garden racist? A racist is generally defined as a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. A Loewenstein Syndrome sufferer is a person with a prejudiced and obsessive belief that his race is inferior to others; "inferior" in this case means more evil, more inherently wicked than others. Since it is obsessive, there is virtually nothing the sufferer won't do in order to prove that he is right. In the Loewenstein Syndrome, Israel cannot do anything right or be condoned for any behaviour whatsoever, even in defence of its very life, because the country was born in original sin. The very fact of Israel's existence is an affront. It's not a matter of withdrawing to pre-67 lines, for example, for even that comes with provisos that mean dismantling of the Jewish state. It is clear from Loewenstein's writings that Israel is some sort of aberration as far as he is concerned. His book (as stated on its website) mentions that "Israel asserts the right of the Jewish state to exist". Note the wording: not that Israel has the right to exist, but that Israel asserts it has that right. But Loewenstein also has his humanitarian side, as attested by Sarah Smiles ("Willing to critique Israel" - August 20, 2006), who informs us that "while he supports Israel's right to exist" (thanks; we also support Loewenstein's right to exist, but we don't think we need to state it as if it is a great concession), he has a problem with the concept of a Jewish state. Strangely - but not so when we take into account the Loewenstein Syndrome - he does not have a problem with the concept of Islamic states. A symptom of the Loewenstein Syndrome, one that is soothing for the sufferer, is the simplicity of the world's problems as seen through his eyes. So here we have Loewenstein's definition and example of racism: "If an Israeli marries a Palestinian from the Occupied Territories - they can't have the same rights of citizenship," says Loewenstein. "That's racism, pure and simple." (Sarah Smiles, ibid) Loewenstein needs to pass on that simple message to countries in Europe, for example, where marriage to a non-citizen does not grant automatic citizenship. Racists all? And so Haifa being bombed is not as bad as Beirut being bombed. And we all know who started the last war, don't we? This is Loewenstein's take on it: "At base, this war has never been about the retrieval of the Hizbollah-abducted Israeli soldiers. That was just the trigger. Washington's key proxy in the Middle East is attempting to decapitate the two nations not under Western control, Syria and Iran, and in the process prove to the Arab world that any military conflict with Israel will result in overwhelming force against its people." (The Courier Mail, 7 August 2006). Note the subtle last few words, where Israel's action always results in overwhelming force against innocent people. Of course Israel always breaks international law, as far as Loewenstein is concerned. But what about when it doesn't? Loewenstein, never one to let facts come in his way, says: "Nasrallah has become a symbol of Muslim pride, a man unafraid to stand up to Israeli aggression." (The Courier Mail, 7 August 2006). Loewenstein, who quotes UN resolutions with alacrity, does not, this time, mention that Israel withdrew to UN-recognised borders. How does he define "aggression" when it comes to Israel? Obviously the way Hizbollah does: Israel's very existence. "Total victory, as outlined by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, is impossible to achieve because Israel is fighting an opponent that was born to challenge Israel's provocations." Which provocations, one wonders, are those? Although those with Loewenstein Syndrome don't necessarily have to be particularly intelligent, they do suffer from the illusion that they can fool all the people all of the time, so that even when they are unable to deny what is being said by Israel's enemies, they can mitigate it through sleight of hand. Even when Loewenstein cannot ignore Iran's president calling for Israel to be wiped off the map and a denial of the Holocaust to boot, he does call the remarks "both unacceptable and repulsive" ("Spinning us to war in Iran" - Znet, March 8 2006), only to immediately question why wiping Israel off the map would be genocide. "Rather than focusing on leaders who have actually caused death and destruction - take Bush, Blair and Howard in Iraq and the estimated toll of over 100,000 dead - the Jewish group wanted the world to focus on a country that poses no direct threat to anybody." Leaving aside Loewenstein's canard that it was Bush, Blair and Howard who killed 100,000 people and not Muslims killing Muslims, he states that Iran "is a country that poses no direct threat to anybody", i.e. the same country that he had quoted a few sentences earlier as "calling for Israel to be wiped off the map." It gets even more muddled. A few sentences later Loewenstein has Iran merely as a "perceived threat to the Jewish state" and that "Israeli generals and politicians know Iran is not a serious threat", but two sentences further on tells us that "Iranian influence now stretches through Iraq, through the Kurdistan region into Turkey, a weak Syria and through into Lebanon's Hezbollah-dominated south, on Israel's border. Iran's reach also extends into the Arabian peninsula through Shiite communities scattered in the Persian Gulf countries." This is not just bad writing, unacceptable even for a first-year undergraduate, but a lame, albeit clumsy attempt to deny the obvious. Racism and demonisation go together, and George Orwell would have been proud of Antony Loewenstein. It is interesting how the word Zionism has gradually and relentlessly been given an evil connotation. Like Pavlov's dog and the bell, if you hear the juxtaposition of Zionism and Nazism enough times, people will have a knee-jerk reaction to Zionism even when mentioned on its own. How evil does "the Zionist state" sound when used by Loewenstein! Almost as odious is "The Jewish state". And there is, of course, the "Zionist lobby" in the USA, in Australia, in fact everywhere. This is not anti-Semitism, of course, but anti-Zionism. Those with Loewenstein Syndrome don't multi-task. They can only concentrate on their one obsession: the evil that is Israel. Nothing taking place in the world is as bad as what Israel does. Not Darfur, not Ethiopia, not Chechenya, not massacres in Sri Lanka, not China's suppression of China. Andre Glucksmann (The Jerusalem syndrome - Sign and Sight, 10 August, 2006) asks: "Why do the 200,000 slaughtered Muslims of Darfur not arouse even half a quarter of the fury caused by 200-times fewer dead in Lebanon?" Where was the Organization of Islamic States when the Russian Army razed the capital of Chechnian Muslims (Grosny, with 400,000 residents) killing tens of thousands of children in the process. More to the point: Where was Loewenstein? He has an excuse: the Syndrome, which cause him to be horrified only when a Muslim is killed by Israelis. We should also ask why Palestinian refugees are relentlessly kept where they are - physically by the Arabs and spiritually in the world's gaze by the Loewenstein Sydromers. Jewish refugees from Arab countries in the '40s and '50s? Not important. Whose fault must it be that Arab refugees have been left to rot in camps for 58 years? The Jews, of course. Sorry, the Zionists that support the original sin that is Israel. The most heinous of acts by those with Loewenstein Syndrome is the insidious and relentless subliminal message that the misfortunes of the world are due to Israel's existence. As Glucksman puts it: "As long as four million Israelis and as many Palestinians are facing off against one another, 300 million Arabs and 1.5 billion Muslims are condemned to live in hate, bloody slaughter and desperation. And the rosier version: We just need peace in Jerusalem to put out the fires in Tehran, Karachi, Khartoum and Baghdad and to set the course for universal harmony." Just as the Germans wrote at their rallies in the '30s "Die Juden sind unserer Unglück" (The Jews are our misfortune), so the world is led to believe that every bad thing that has happened and is happening, from the deadly Khomeini Revolution, the bloody Baathist dictatorships in Syria and Iraq, the decade of Islamic terrorism in Algeria, the Taliban in Afghanistan, none would have occurred if it hadn't been for the founding of the Zionist state. The conclusion is that if only Israel were to disappear, there would be peace on earth with all living in harmony. For those who have Loewenstein Syndrome, Israel is guilty. It is guilty if it defends itself, it is guilty if it builds a wall to stop suicide bombers killing its children, It is guilty because it is. It is guilty because it exists. Those with Loewenstein Syndrome do not threaten Israel and neither do they threaten Zionist organizations. The problem is not ours. The problem is theirs. Contact Sanda Abramovici at sab@telefonica.net.pe |
|
JONATHAN AND THE JUDGE
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, September 6, 2006. |
|
A Final Chapter in The Pollard Case? This is the text of Esther Pollard's Speech at (Y.I.) Beit Knesset Hanassi, September 6, 2006 B"H/13 Ellul 5766 |
|
Prefacing Remarks: Jonathan and I would like to extend our profound gratitude to the National Council of Young Israel, the only Jewish Organization in America devoted to the Mitzvah of Pidyan Shvuyim, and the only Jewish Organization in America which has stood by Jonathan and me, throughout this terrible ordeal. Our thanks as well to the Past President, the President and the Board of Hanassi (Young Israel) Beit Knesset for inviting me to speak here tonight. On a sunny winter day, early in the New Year 2006, one of the most historic meetings we have ever had on this case took place in Jerusalem. Jonathan and I have never before breathed a word about our meeting with Israel's State Comptroller, Judge Micha Lindenstrauss. Tonight we would like to share that experience with you. For years Jonathan has appealed to one State Comptroller after another to investigate the Government's mishandling of his case. All his appeals were rejected with flimsy excuses. Consequently, we had pretty much despaired of ever getting a hearing. That is why it was so exciting when Israel's newest State Comptroller, Judge Micha Lindenstrauss, responded positively to our request for a meeting. Israel's State Comptroller, also known as the Mivaker HaMidina, has broad powers of oversight and the right to investigate every government office, decision and process. No individual or office in this country is exempt from the Mivaker HaMidina's probe and all are compelled by law to respond to his questions and provide whatever information is requested. The ultimate goal of an investigation by the State Comptroller is the publication of a public report. The report is intended to bring to light those areas or issues that must be rectified, with a view to improving Government efficiency; safe-guarding the interests of the public; protecting the rights of the individual; and eliminating government waste, graft, corruption, and cronyism. Our long-awaited meeting with Judge Lindenstrauss took place on February 23, 2006 at the offices of the Mivaker HaMidina. I was accompanied by Larry Dub, Jonathan's Jerusalem attorney. As if to underscore the seriousness of the meeting, Judge Lindenstrauss had invited all of his extended executive staff to attend, the heads of every State office under his auspices - from the State Ombudsman to the head of the State Legal Department, about half a dozen people in all. At the outset of the meeting, I presented Judge Lindenstrauss with a personal message from Jonathan and then with a file of documented information regarding the issues that Jonathan wanted to bring to the judge's attention. Delivering Jonathan's message took about 15 minutes. It removed any doubt about Jonathan's awareness of the meeting and underscored his deep appreciation for the Mivaker's willingness to receive us. It was my job for the next 2 hours to expand on the issues that Jonathan had touched on. I would like briefly to review for you some of the facts that were presented to Judge Lindenstrauss. * My husband, Jonathan Pollard, is an Israeli agent in captivity, currently completing his 21st year of a life sentence for his service to the security of The State of Israel. These facts and documented information were presented to the Mivaker HaMidina, Judge Micha Lindenstrauss, on that fateful day in February when after years and years of waiting, a new State Comptroller received us and seemed to embrace the case. The meeting was a great success! It had originally been scheduled to last 1 hour, but went on for some 2 ˝ hours before it was reluctantly concluded -- and even then, only because we all had other commitments. I went straight from the meeting with the Mivaker HaMidina, to report personally to Jonathan's rav, HaRav Mordecai Eliyahu, shlita. He was as delighted as we were with the reception and the commitment we had received from the Mivaker. He and all of our closest associates were especially buoyed to hear about the warm wishes and blessings we received from Judge Lindenstrauss and his executive staff. I remember one of the last things that I said to Judge Lindenstrauss before saying good-bye. I told him, "We do not expect you to secure Jonathan's release, but your investigation may be an important part of the process of bringing it about. Your public report has the potential to shine a light on this case that has never been shone, and in that way to be a catalyst for Jonathan's freedom. But, even if your report results in no direct advantage for Jonathan, it must be written in order to ensure that what happened to Jonathan never ever again happens to anyone else who serves the State of Israel." Judge Lindenstrauss seemed to understand; he responded warmly and reassuringly, and promised to investigate. He promised that he and his staff would stay in touch and would contact us if they needed any further information. We were deeply touched by his words of support and encouragement; and by his and his executive staff's warmth and enthusiasm. That was six months ago. On August 17th, Jonathan used up a week's worth of his precious telephone minutes to dictate a personal letter to Judge Lindenstrauss. In it Jonathan reiterated the facts that I have shared with you tonight, and he added: "[Judge Lindenstrauss] with the exception of a brief message we received in March of this year (5 and a half months ago) from one of your staff, saying that you are investigating, there has not been a word from you or your office since then. My situation in the meantime only continues to deteriorate. Every day that I survive is a complete miracle... May we know the status of your investigation, and when you anticipate publishing your findings. A few days later, on August 23rd Jonathan and I received a reply. The very brief response was signed by the "Senior Assistant to the State Comptroller and International Liaison" and echoed virtually the same unmistakable message we have gotten from Israeli Government officials for the last 21 years: The matter is being handled. Don't call us; we'll call you. I am sharing this with you tonight, because it is anecdotally representative of the last 21 years that Jonathan has been slowly bleeding to death in prison, in full view of the State of Israel and its elected and appointed officials, and in full view of the Jewish People. Why does it matter that my husband continues to languish in prison after 21 years in some of the harshest of conditions? Why should the fate of one individual be of concern to anyone - especially when so much time has passed, and there are now seemingly "more pressing problems" such as the impending threat of another outbreak of war, and the fate of Israel's 3 latest captive soldiers? It matters because the fate of my husband, Jonathan Pollard, is the miner's canary of the moral health and welfare of the People of Israel. A State that first betrays and then abandons its own agent for more than 2 decades and then relegates him to the dustbin of history while it moves on to other exploits is a State that is morally bankrupt. And a State that is morally bankrupt will not be able to fulfill its People's highest national aspirations, nor will it ever be capable of commanding the kind of moral resolve needed to bring its captives home. As Jonathan himself recently wrote in a letter to the families of the 3 newly captive soldiers: "... fighting for the return of a captive requires a moral basis. It requires a commitment to G-d, country and fellow man. It requires the kind of morality that the State of Israel no longer seems to have... When there is no moral basis for the return of a captive, there is of course no moral resolve, no determination to succeed, and as result no effective action is taken. This creates a vacuum which the politicians love to fill with empty words and empty promises..." While we cannot say with certainty when the State of Israel became detached from its moral roots and the People from our commitment to each other, we do know that the moral decay was there 21 years ago when Jonathan was thrown out of the Israeli Embassy in Washington and into the waiting arms of the FBI. That moral failure, that on-going sin against a loyal son of Israel who served the State and its People, has gone unchallenged and unrepaired for 21 years. It hangs like a curse over the Nation. It spawned the abandonment of Ron Arad, Zachary Baummel, Tzvi Feldman, Yehuda Katz, and Guy Hever. It bred the callous abandonment of Mudhat Yosuf who was wounded on the field of battle and left to bleed to death at Kever Yosef in Shchem. It is the same moral failure that conceived and implemented the inhumane expulsion and destruction of Gush Katif and northern Samaria; and more recently facilitated the abandonment of all of the citizens of northern Israel. It is the same moral failure which has given birth to a culture of empty words and broken promises which subsequent Governments of Israel have perfected to a high art. It is the same moral failure that now also threatens the lives of Gilead Shalit, Eldad Regev, and Ehud Goldwasser. As long as we allow Jonathan to continue to rot in prison, and we act as if his fate is of no consequence to us, the poison will continue to seep into our national consciousness and continue to destroy the fabric of our society as a moral and just People, as a Light unto the Nations. As long as we do not rectify the problem at its root by bringing Jonathan home, this culture of abandonment will continue its relentless march onward, as the government openly plans for the next round of uprooting, betrayal and abandonment of its loyal citizens and communities. You may have come here tonight to be entertained, or because the subject was of interest, or you may have come because you always come when there is a program at Beit Knesset Hanassi. But, if my message has reached your heart, you must leave here tonight knowing that each of us owes a debt of gratitude to Jonathan Pollard and that each of us bears a personal responsibility for his fate. Redemption of Israel's longest-held captive, Jonathan Pollard, cannot help but lead to redemption for all of Israel and for all of her captives, for it lies at the heart of the matter. No one person alone can save Jonathan, but each of us has something to contribute. Not a single person is exempt from doing whatever he or she can - be it prayer both public and private, or hanging Pollard balcony banners, or participating in activities to raise the public profile of the case, or contributing to activities of The Committee to Bring Jonathan Pollard Home (they are the only group in Israel totally coordinated with Jonathan) or supporting the National Council of Young Israel's deeply appreciated efforts to assist Jonathan with his needs in prison. Even at this late date, I urge you all to become involved, as much for your own sakes as for that of Jonathan and the Nation. As Jonathan writes in his letter to the families of the captive soldiers, "We cannot, we must not allow this culture of abandonment to go on! The People of Israel must find the emotional strength to return to the path of arevut hadaddeet (mutual responsibility). We must rekindle and recapture our strength as nation that stands united... [and as a nation that has] at its root, the moral resolve necessary to be utterly committed to not surrendering to evil, and to absolutely never abandoning a brother in time of trouble... If we can do this, and I believe we can, then we may once again be worthy of the blessing of Heaven - as we were at Entebbe - and be worthy of the swift return home of all of Zion's prisoners. " May G-d bless us all, and may we soon see the speedy release of Jonathan Gilad, Eldad and Ehud, along with all of Israel's captives and MIA's! Amain! Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard at Justice4JP@aol.com |
|
THE TRUE DISPROPORTION
Posted by AFSI, September 6, 2006. |
|
As Israel plans to release hundreds of terrorists in exchange for Gilad Shalit, Palestinian terror organizations are already training in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to carry out operations aimed at kidnapping more Israeli soldiers, According to Aaron Klein of World Net Daily, a terrorist leader thanked the international community for what he said was its recognition that kidnappings of Israeli soldiers are not considered terrorism but "military operations that bring very big results." He said the "best way" to gain the freedom of thousands of Palestinians being held in Israeli jails, including convicted terrorists, is by more kidnappings of Israeli soldiers. In light of these recent developments we ask you to publish and forward to your email list this article by Rael Jean Isaac, editor of OUTPOST, which appears in the latest edition and is reproduced below. |
|
French President Jacques Chirac is only the most prominent of the multitude who raised their voices against Israel for supposedly engaging in, to use Chirac's phrase, "totally disproportionate" actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon. (Meanwhile the French foreign minister revealed his sense of "proportion" by calling Iran, Hezbollah's controller "a great country ... which plays a stabilizing role in the region.") Although not in the sense meant by hostile critics, Israel is indeed guilty of gross disproportion in its response to the challenges facing the state. One could argue that such "disproportionate response," repeated over and over again, regardless of which party is in power, is at the core of Israel's present desperate existential danger. Let us begin with the most obvious area in which Israel has been guilty of disproportion -- prisoner exchanges. The first of these ludicrously imbalanced "exchanges" occurred in May 1985 on the watch of the joint Likud-Labor government presided over (in agreed sequence) by Yitzhak Shamir and Shimon Peres. In exchange for three Israeli soldiers Israel released 1150 Palestinian Arab prisoners. The pattern has continued with, for example, Israel releasing 436 terrorists in January 2004 in exchange for the remains of 3 Israeli soldiers and the release of a civilian, Elhanan Tennenbaum. No one should be surprised if eventually Israel releases hundreds of prisoners in exchange for the two soldiers Hezbollah captured. Many in Israel seem to take a perverse pride in these lopsided exchanges, viewing them as evidence of moral superiority, proof that Israel will go to any length to secure the life of a single individual, the state serving as an extended family. But a country is not and must not behave like a family. Most parents would sacrifice everything they have to ransom a kidnapped child. In doing so, they may make it more likely that the kidnappers, or other would-be kidnappers, will seize someone else's child, but they cannot be faulted for thinking only of saving the life important to them, without the broader implications even crossing their minds. But a government must think of the implications of its actions. As would subsequently be widely acknowledged, that initial 1985 "exchange" provided the basis for the first Intifada (which in turn paved the way for the disastrous Oslo agreement), as those released became its organizers and leaders. Nadav Shragai recently pointed out in Haaretz that fourteen of the mass terror attacks in the last several years were carried out by freed terrorists and dozens of attacks in which hundreds of Israelis were killed or wounded were also organized by terrorists released by Israel. In choosing to secure the life (or sometimes dead bodies) of a very few at the price of setting free hundreds of terrorists to attack her citizens again, it can be argued that the Israeli government is as responsible for the clearly foreseeable deaths as if cabinet members had strapped on the suicide belts. The widely publicized large scale prisoner releases (often made simply as a "gesture" of good will to her enemies) are not even the whole story. In foolish response to the pressures of Israel's "human rights" organizations (as phony in Israel as most of the groups going under that rubric are in the United States) Israel has been steadily releasing teenagers and women engaged in terrorism simply on the ground of their sex and age. Nor has Israel's government learned anything. On August 1, with the war in both Lebanon and Gaza still in full swing, Israel announced it was releasing 100 Hamas and Islamic Jihad prisoners, obviously as an exchange for the single Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, whom Hamas had captured. Nabil Shaath, former PA foreign minister, dismissed this as a wholly inadequate gesture, telling the newspaper Al Quds that negotiations were in the last stages to free 700 prisoners for Shalit. These wildly disproportionate "exchanges" have other far-reaching consequences. The terror organizations (including the so-called government of the PA, whether Fatah or Hamas-led) have become accustomed to allowing the numbers of their members in Israeli prisons to grow into the thousands (there are 9,700 now), comfortable in the assurance that at any point they can capture one or two Israelis and secure the release of most of them. The present war may have been the inadvertent consequence of such "business as usual" with Hezbollah kidnapping two Jewish soldiers on the assumption that in its wonted fashion Israel would obligingly embark upon an "exchange." As The New York Times (Aug. 4) notes, Hezbollah was particularly anxious to secure the release of Samir Kuntar, who had raided the apartment of the Haran family in Nahariya, killed the father, then killed his four year old daughter by smashing her head with a rifle butt. The mother survived, hiding in the attic with her two year old daughter whom she inadvertently suffocated as she tried to prevent her from crying. Hezbollah spokesmen have openly expressed their surprise and outrage that Israel did not react in the way experience had led them to expect. While Israel's sensitivity to casualties is understandable, again, a country is not a family and cannot focus only on the immediate casualties, ignoring longer-range benefits. In another wildly disproportionate response, Israel fled headlong from southern Lebanon in 2000 in response to a protest group of "four mothers" who had lost their sons in the fighting there. The lives of soldiers should not be carelessly squandered (as was done in the terrible trench battles of World War I) but what is an army for if not to put lives on the line for vital goals? In The Jerusalem Post (August 10) Evelyn Gordon points out that from 1982 until 2000 Israel's fatalities in Lebanon averaged 20-25 soldiers a year. Southern Lebanon was a crucial buffer zone protecting northern Israel from Hezbollah terrorists; it was controlled by a Christian militia (the South Lebanese army) trained, supported and helped on the ground by Israel. There would be a huge price for winning a six year reprieve from the drip of Israeli casualties. The price of the disproportionate response in 2000 is not only paid six years later in far more lives lost, in one million displaced persons within Israel, in economic devastation, but most important, in the destruction of Israel's deterrence, her only protection against future warfare that will leave her losses even in the costly War of Independence seem trivial. Again, in Israel there is no learning curve. The original four mothers have given extensive interviews in which they declare their support for today's war against Hezbollah while reaffirming the "rightness" of their earlier insistence that Israel leave. They simply will not connect the dots. Israel also demonstrates a wholly disproportionate sensitivity to and respect for "world opinion." In what Victor Davis Hanson rightly calls a West "on the brink of moral insanity," a corrupt world "awash with a vicious hatred [for Jews] that we have not seen in our generation," it is folly for Israel to think it can shape world opinion by its actions. Yet American Jewish leaders who went to Israel while the air campaign against Hezbollah was going on (Olmert prevented the army until the last moment from engaging in a meaningful ground campaign) found that Israeli politicians wanted only to talk of their effort to prevent civilian casualties in Lebanon -- apparently this, not crushing Hezbollah, was their chief concern. Israeli leaders typically embark on preemptive apologies at the first squeak of Western or even Arab outrage -- and investigate afterwards, often to find the charges ludicrous. But by their apology they have given credence to the accusations, encouraging their enemies and making what friends they have abroad despair. For example, there was the embarrassing spectacle of Olmert apologizing to Mubarak for the killing of two Egyptian terrorists. The episode at the Lebanese village of Qana, where the number of deaths were doubled (as even the bitterly anti-Israel Human Rights Watch has acknowledged) and there remain questions whether the entire "event" was staged by Hezbollah not only made the government go into apologetic overdrive but led Israel to announce suspension of all air operations for two days. The desultory way in which Israel conducted the war against Hezbollah was the product of the two ingrained disproportionate responses we have already noted -- the fear of Israeli casualties and the fear of world opinion. Of course in the end, the feeble campaign maximized both. The war lost the element of surprise (what could have been a swift hard-driving ground invasion became a slow, slogging affair) and there was a torrent of world abuse. It is a series of disproportionate responses which has led Israel into the terrible existential dangers she faces today. Israel responded to the first Intifada, a minor nuisance of stone-throwing, chiefly by teenagers -- with Oslo, installing a terror state on her doorstep. Israel would eventually respond to the second Intifada, launched by Arafat in 2000, with so-called "disengagement" (although it is possible the "disproportion" here was even more sordid -- with disengagement being Sharon's response to the threat of a probe into his election finances.) The ultimate disproportion is between Israel's government and her people. Maintaining the state requires strength, courage and sacrifice. Yes, Israel's intelligentsia contains a sizable number of scoundrels and outright traitors. But far more ordinary Israelis are imbued with the necessary strength and spirit of sacrifice. In the last issue we published Naomi Ragen's "The Taxi Driver" about the security officer who told Sharon he could not participate in the eviction of Jews from Gaza and thus lost his career. Ragen concluded: "Once again, the reality of living in a country with wonderful people and terrible leadership struck me full force." For Israel's leaders have gone from disproportionate response to outright disconnect from reality. Israel experiences government by the Marx Brothers. Look at perennial Israeli leader (now vice premier) Shimon Peres. After Oslo he babbles of a delusory New Middle East. With the victory of Hamas, he announces that Israel is closer to peace than ever before. Now with this war he declaims on CNN (August 10): "Since we didn't initiate the war, we don't have to win it. We just have to stop it." The second member of the trio, Defense Minister Amir Peretz, proudly announces that the war has laid "the groundwork for negotiations with Syria" (to return the Golan Heights) and says he is eager "to resume negotiations with the Palestinians" (i.e. presumably to turn over more territory for the rocket launchers). Nor is Prime Minister Ehud Olmert any improvement. At the start of the war he told Associated Press reporters "I'll surprise you. I genuinely believe that the outcome of the present conflict" will provide "new momentum" (for his "convergence" plan, i.e. more retreats in Judea and Samaria). His government actually chose this moment to send out eviction notices to families at Givat Ronen in Samaria. As northern Israel became uninhabitable, Olmert spun empty boasts not heard since "Baghdad Bob" announced Saddam's great victories over U.S. forces even as they rolled into Baghdad. Olmert declared that Israel has won because Hezbollah "can never [again] threaten this nation that it will fire missiles at it." No wonder that Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Abu Maamun declared that Olmert's statements were proof Arab attacks were working. Said Maamun: "This is a great period and I believe a new era." The responses of Israel's rulers to the challenges facing the country are no longer simply disproportionate -- they are insane. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Barry Freedman is Executive Director. |
|
"I KILLED RABBI KAHANE"
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, September 6, 2006. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) On Saturday night, Channel 2 television will broadcast a feature report by Israeli journalists Danny Siton, Tzaddok Yechezkeli and Anat Tal Shir in which they purport to show how the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon could have been prevented. The key, the reporters claim, is to be found in the investigation into the assassination of Knesset Member Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York in 1991 by Egyptian terrorist El-Sayyid Nosair. In the film, for the first time since the murder, it is revealed that Nosair publicly admitted that he killed Rabbi Kahane in correspondence with the Israeli journalists. Speaking with Arutz Sheva Radio on Tuesday, Yechezkeli claimed that in an effort to isolate the Kahane murder, to ignore the connections with global Islamic jihad terror, American investigators ignored or whitewashed certain aspects of the crime, which even led to Nosair's aquittal on the murder charge (although he was jailed for illegal weapons possession and subsequently had his sentence extended to life following revelations that he was involved in the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center). In correspondence with the filmmakers, Nosair claims that he has given up the path of terror and supports a peaceful resolution of the conflict over Israel -- a single Jewish-Arab "State of Avraham". 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. |
|
ISRAELI NEWSPAPER EDITOR CRITIQUES ISRAEL'S HUMANITARIAN AIDE TO PALESTINIANS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 6, 2006. |
|
The Israeli Hebrew (supposedly middle-of-the-road) newspaper, Yediot Aharonot (9.6.06) points out in today's editorial that the economic situation in the Gaza Strip for 2006, since the abduction of Gilad Shalit, is far worse than the World Bank first reported. Donor nations have cut off funds and Arab banks have closed the Palestinian government's accounts. The PA's monthly income, most of which goes to salaries, has dwindled from roughly $200 million-$180m. to only $25m. With an abundance of roadblocks and closed border crossings, Gaza has been hermetically sealed, preventing any semblance of economic activity. In the West Bank a similar situation exists, with the addition of many roads being for "Jewish access only." "One may say that this is the price of terrorism, yet Israeli governments have rightfully claimed that Palestinian welfare is important to Israel's security. The current situation is explosive, unstable, and morally, politically, and historically unacceptable. Therefore, we must open a dialogue with them immediately." Interesting yet horrifying to see how even the so-called middle-of-the-road Israeli press has adopted the terrorists' PR/Propaganda language. The roads in the West Bank are NOT "Jewish access only". They are Israeli access only. Many Israelis who use those roads are not Jewish. By buying in to the terror propaganda language, this Israeli newspaper propogates the fiction that the roads are a part of some chimerical "religious apartheid" program that Israel has perpetrated against the Palestinians. Propagating that fiction supports the terrorists......that's treason. Sounds like Yediot Aharonot has been taken over by Ha'Aretz. It is also intriguing to analyze the logic of the need to "open a dialogue" with the Palestinians. I wonder with whom the editor thinks Israel should open that dialogue? With Abbas?....what for? He is helpless before the massive and renewed popularity of Hamas and Hezbollah, and the swell of excited anticipation in some (many, most? can't know) of the palestinian population who subscribe to the assertion that "...Hezbollah has shown the way -- Israel can be defeated -- now it is time to give war a chance." Or with PA's PM Haniyeh?....has Yediot Aharonot forgotten that with his ascent to power after the January elections, Haniyeh re-iterated Hamas' immutable position: no recognition, no negotiations, no peace. So, should Olmert talk to Haniyeh and Haniyeh not listen and not respond? Or maybe with young Bashir of Syria....after all, it is Syria which supports and arms and deploys and directs and shelters and trains Hamas. Oh, but wait...that won't work. Bashir just got finished doing his own sabre-rattling, telling the world that he will not allow UN troops on his border (translation: it is his intention to go on supplying Hezbollah with missiles) and telling his own people that maybe now is the time to renew the war option. Besides, as some Palestinians have often quipped, Bashir (and his father Hafez) is more than happy to fight to the last Palestinian. It does not seem likely that he will care very much about the well-being of the Gaza Arabs. Or maybe with the UN....maybe a UN force in Gaza could do all of the good things for the Arabs that the UNIFIL did in Lebanon. Oh, but wait....that's not a good idea. UNIFIL colluded with Hezbollah and helped them kidnap and kill Israeli soldiers, and let them bivouc next to UN camps so when Israel returned fire it ran the risk of hitting UN forces (and when Israelil return-fire did hit UN forces, the UN accused Israel of intentionally targetting the UN -- but when Hezbollah fire inadvertantly hit UN forces, the UN said nothing)....so that's not a good idea. A UN force providing humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip would just become another aider-and-abettor to the terrorists. It is sort of nice to see that an Israeli newspaper editor cares more about the well being of the Gaza Arabs than do the leaders of the Gaza Arabs, of the Palestinian Authority, and of the Syrian government. But it is not nice to see that editor employing the language of the terrorists' mendacious propaganda as a means of attacking the Israeli government; nor to read that editor's urging his government to adopt a course of action that is bereft of all rational thought; nor to see that the editor, in his hurry to attack his government, ignores the obvious very dire realities and existential threats posed by the war that Israel is in; nor to see that the editor, as he chides his government for not caring enough about the Gaza Arabs, ignores the unique-in-all-of-world-history reality of what Israel is doing to help the Gazan Arabs avoid humanitarian crisis, by providing free electricity and water and allowing food to go in and those in need of medical care to go out --- even as Hamas fires its qassams daily and digs tunnels to blowup Israelis and tries (but mostly fails) to send suicide bombers into Israel. There is no country in the world, and across all of world history (to my knoweldge), that has ever treated, or treats now, its avowed bloodthirsty genocidal enemies with the humanity and consideration that Israel has shown the Palestinian population. And how have the Palestinians returned the favour?
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
|
|
WHY WE ARE LOSING HEARTS AND MINDS
Posted by Keith Lockitch, September 6, 2006. |
|
Our leaders have failed to answer the evil moral ideal of Islamic totalitarianism with a rational ideal of our own. Five years into our "war on terror," the Iraqi insurgency is raging, with no apparent end to the new recruits eager to wage jihad against the West. Support for offensive action has faded among a disheartened American public, while the terrorists are growing in number and in boldness. Where have our leaders gone wrong? What kind of leadership failure can demoralize a whole nation of honest, productive citizens, while leaving suicide murderers stirred to righteous action? The power that inspires righteous action--and which, by its absence, breeds discouragement--is the power of moral idealism. What has brought us to our present state is our leaders' moral weakness in response to the jihadists' moral zeal. Observe that what draws the recruits to terrorist cells is a powerful ideal: the advancement of their religion. The jihadists believe fervently that Islam is the revealed word of Allah, that selfless submission to Allah is the purpose of life, and that all individuals should be subjugated to Islamic law under a theocracy. They believe in spreading the rule of Islam worldwide, and killing any "infidels" who stand in their way. They are morally outraged by the American ideal of individual liberty and regard our this-worldly, capitalistic culture as an evil that must be destroyed. America can only defend itself against such a zealous, militant movement if we have moral confidence in our own ideals--and fight for them. We must repudiate the Islamists' "ideals" of other-worldliness, of blind faith, of renunciation and suffering, of theocracy, and proudly uphold the superior, American ideals of reason, freedom, and the pursuit of worldly happiness. But our leaders have not shown such moral confidence. When the terrorists of Sept. 11 struck in the name of Islam, President Bush did not identify them as Islamic totalitarians and condemn their murderous ideology and its supporters. Instead, he painted the hijackers as a band of isolated lunatics who had "hijacked a great religion." (Only recently has President Bush even acknowledged that our enemy is Islamic, with his use of the term "Islamic fascism.") In response to Muslim denunciations of America's secularism, our leaders did not defend this attribute of America, but instead stressed Americans' religiosity. A mere two weeks after Sept. 11, with the ruins of the World Trade Towers still smoldering, our planned Afghanistan campaign, "Operation Infinite Justice," was renamed to appease Muslims protesting that only Allah can dispense "infinite justice." Unable to defend America intellectually, our leaders are unable to defend her militarily. Have our leaders acted consistently against terrorist regimes? Consider our policy toward Iran, the primary state sponsor of terrorism. Refusing to identify Iran as the fatherland of Islamic totalitarianism, our president initially beseeched its Mullahs to join our "war on terror." And he has consistently answered their chants of "Death to America" and their quest for nuclear weapons with negotiation and spineless diplomacy. Have our leaders asserted that they will use America's formidable military to secure our way of life by whatever means necessary? No. Lacking the moral confidence to defeat our enemies, they have instead squandered our military resources and sacrificed our brave soldiers in a futile quest to spread "democracy" around the globe--as though bringing the vote to Muslim mobs sympathetic to Islamic totalitarianism will somehow end the terrorist threat. The reason the terrorists and their state sponsors are not demoralized is that our leaders have failed to demoralize them. Our leaders' words and actions have signaled that we are not as morally committed to our lives and freedom as the terrorists are to our destruction. We must make it clear to the jihadists that we will destroy anyone who takes up arms for Islamic totalitarianism. No one wants to fight and die for a hopeless cause. The jihadists will continue to be emboldened and to attract new recruits until they are convinced their goal is unachievable. They must see that we have the moral confidence to defend our lives--to answer their violence with an overwhelming military response, without pulling punches. They must see us willing to visit such crushing devastation on them that they fear us more than they fear Allah. It is often said that we must win the "hearts and minds" of supporters of totalitarian Islam. Indeed we must: their hearts must be made to despair at the futility of their cause, and their minds must be convinced that any threat to our lives and freedom will bring them swift and certain doom. The ideologues of totalitarian Islam have seized the power of moral idealism in the service of our destruction. It is time we reclaimed that power in defense of our freedom. Keith Lockitch, Ph.D. in physics, is a fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, CA. The Institute promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand--best-selling author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead and originator of the philosophy of Objectivism. |
|
SILENT MOSLEMS ARE COMPLICIT
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 6, 2006. |
|
It is deeply disturbing that almost all of the world's Moslems (all 1,300,000,000 of them) are silent in the face of Osama and Zawahiri and Qaradhawi and Nusrallah and Haniyeh and Hizb-ut-tahrir and Ansar el-Islam and all the Moslem terrorists who have declared World War 4 against the West (and agianst Israel, and against Jews, and against Christianity). It is far more disturbing that Moslems mob the court house, ignoring evidence and court process, to cry out in support of a convicted terrorist, to urge leniency, to proclaim his innocence, and to accuse our legal system of "Islamophobia". It has happened numerous times in the USA and European states, and Australia. It is almost a knee-jerk reaction among local Moslems. And Moslem national and international organizations (like CAIR) do the same thing routinely on the national level, issuing statements of critique and warning when our leaders speak of the need to confront Moslem terrorism. It does not matter that he is a terrorist; if he is one of the "brothers", then the non-Moslem world must be singling him out for punishment because he is a Moslem. So his Moslem "brethren" must decry his innocence, demand leniency, try to inimidate the courts with a crowd and shouts and accusations, protest the supposed misguided justice system that unujustly singles out Moslems for punishment, and protect the terrorist because he is a Moslem (and if he is a Moslem, it does not matter that he is a terrorist and is breaking laws and helping to murder innocent people)............ ........even as the evidence of the terrorist's guilt mounts relentlessly..... ........even as no one in the world can rationally deny that while not all the world'sMoslems are terrorists, almost all the world's terrorists are Moslems. This phenomenon, oft-repeated all over the non-Moslem world, tells us that many so-called peaceful innocent Moslems who are supposedly good citizens of their countries....are actually quite actively supporting Moslem terrorism against their own countries. If silence in the face of evil is complicity, then how much more evil is the active support for terrorist evil despite all the evidence of that evil? This article is entitled "The Terrorist Next Door" and was written by Paul Sperry. It appeared in www.FrontPageagazine.com August 31, 2006. |
|
The recent terror case of a "gentle" third-grade teacher from the D.C. suburbs shows the danger is at once closer and harder to ID than you think. The enemy is hiding not in the shadows, but in plain sight, and may even wear a smile. Hundreds of Muslims last week flocked to a federal courtroom to show their support for the affable and soft-spoken Ali Asad Chandia of Maryland as he was sentenced to 15 years in prison for supporting terrorists. Friends say anti-Muslim prosecutors railroaded a "law-abiding" and "peaceful" brother. "He is a dedicated teacher," said one. "A great family man," said another. Another told the judge Chandia's so gentle he wouldn't hurt a tree branch in his yard. "I said to Ali that I may need to cut the branch (but) he asked that I not hurt the tree," the friend, a landscaper, said in a letter. "I was touched by Ali's insistence that the tree not be harmed in any way." But prosecutors tell a different story. They showed evidence that Chandia, 29, trained at a jihad camp in Lahore, Pakistan, run by the terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba, an al-Qaida subcontractor that also trained some of the London bombers. He helped Lashkar ship 50,000 paintball pellets, unmanned aerial vehicles, night-vision gear and wireless video cameras from the U.S. to Pakistan for paramilitary training. He even chauffeured a Lashkar lieutenant around Washington on trips the officer made here after 9-11. Within months of the attacks, Chandia joined the so-called Virginia jihad network dedicated to preparing for holy war against U.S. troops deployed to Afghanistan. The gang's ringleader was the civil-rights coordinator for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, a Washington-based nonprofit leading the charge against airport and subway terror profiling. Chandia, who graduated from the University of Maryland and once worked at Costco, also worked as a former personal assistant to the jihad gang's spiritual leader -- imam Ali al-Timimi, a native Washingtonian convicted last year for soliciting the Muslim men to levy war against the U.S. Al-Timimi praised the hijackers who carried out the 9-11 attacks and even cheered the crash of the space shuttle Columbia. Chandia helped al-Timimi schedule his sermons. In Chandia's car, not surprisingly, federal investigators found a CD-ROM containing videos that glorified Osama bin Laden and the 19 hijackers. All this took place in the shadow of the U.S. capital. And yet members of the large Muslim community there, many of whom work for the government, were unfazed by the evidence aligned against Chandia. After his conviction, some 350 Muslims including Islamic scholars, activists and other leaders, as well as government employees and contractors, donated generously to his defense fund. "We ask Allah to reward everyone who supported this cause," gushed the head of the Ali Asad Support Committee. "We ask Allah to raise their ranks and to grant them goodness in this world and in the hereafter." The local Muslim luminaries also wrote letters to the judge complaining of a U.S. witch hunt against "Brother Ali" and other "principled" Muslims who support "mujahideen" groups. And they mobbed the federal courtroom in Alexandria, Va., hoping for a lenient punishment. But the judge wasn't buying it, and he imposed a fairly stiff sentence. Chandia, for his part, was unrepentant to the end. Upon his sentencing, Chandia lashed out at prosecutors, warning "their judgment is on the way." U.S. marshals then led away a terrorist -- not a mild-mannered teacher or loving father -- but a terrorist. 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 |
|
WAITING TO BE KILLED
Posted by Emauel A. Winston, September 5, 2006. |
|
Why must we Jews wait in line, preparing to be killed, not just by our enemies but also by pathologically twisted Jews who hate the appellation: "Jew"? We seem always astonished that, among our own people, we have such pernicious betrayers ready to make common cause with our most dedicated enemies who swear on their own holy books to eliminate all Jews. As we write this, it is the deadline day (August 31st) given to Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to forswear his build-up to nuclear weapons with his declared intention to "wipe Israel and the Jews off the map" - to "create a bright light over Jerusalem". Well, it didn't happen this time but be assured, Ahmadinejad plans that it will. We closely observe political Jewish leaders spend their waking moments plotting the demise of fellow Jews - always under an umbrella of twisted rationale that, by sacrifice of some part of our small Holy Land and the people in it, we will be forgiven our "Jewishness" which seems to offend so many Un-Jews in the world. But, we are never forgiven our Jewishness and doubtful - if we ever will. These twisted folk always portray themselves as advanced thinkers, so-called intellectuals of our race and religion. Instead, with a bit of psychological probing, we find something more akin to the mad Hatter of "Alice in Wonderland". (Perhaps you will recall the Hat-makers of London, along with their elite clientele, who wore hats made with a leather hat-band that had been cured with arsenic. Eventually, both hat-makers and hat-wearers went quite mad, incurably poisoned.) What poison is in the hats worn by Jews who define themselves as "Left Liberal"? What then poisons our Jews whom we find lurking inside the Israeli government and military officers of the highest rank? What is the poison that is leeching into their bloodstream and into their minds? They gather under different titles but, they are always the same genre. Left-wing Liberals who are camouflaged as 'thinkers' who tell us that we must disappear from our Land so Arab Muslims can absorb what we have so lovingly developed. We are assured that their loyalty to Allah and Mohammed is merely a 'religious aberrance'...That once we Jews are no long in their sight and they have a tight grasp on the Land G-d gave us, they will disavow their solemn pledge to kill us all. Our Jewish pseudo-intellectuals also engage in manipulation of the mind with such intensity that they adopt the personae of the three addled monkeys who "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil". Nothing the Arabs can do, no matter how heinous, will change the perception of these monkeys as they swing merrily from tree-to-tree, totally oblivious to the probability of being killed by Muslim predators who hunt us mercilessly. After each hunting episode (as in the latest Hezb'Allah and Hamas missile savagery of 34 days from July 12, 2006), which we have already forgotten and now are engaged in their favorite argument of: What else can we do to please the Muslim Arabs into peaceful co-existence? Any psychiatrists who treat the criminally insane will diagnose those practitioners of being perpetual victims as incurably insane - self-preservation being the number one criteria of sanity. With that shocking madness, they expect all of us to follow them in their myriad forms of self-sacrifice. We were the people who were tasked by G-d to eliminate those who practiced human sacrifice but, we instead became its most recent practitioners. We put our women, children, young soldiers at risk of death and injury. We invent brilliant excuses as to why we must accommodate our executioners. Even the most sane amongst us stand back and observe with incredulity this orgy of self-annihilation. We do not move to capture our killers and execute them like the incurable rabid animals they are - or at least put them away for life where they can't hurt us or our children. Instead, we make excuses for their aberrant behavior and then release them so they may be free to kill more of us and to teach their children the fine art of Genocide for the honor of Allah. Sometimes we adopt a name like Judenrat (those Jews who become leaders in organizing our 'selectia', transportation and demise) which all Jews know encompasses a sickness that can only be cured by elimination. We think that, if we wait a bit longer, our Jewish collaborators in our elimination will miraculously come to their senses. Of course, they never do and we lose more of our young people in wars chosen by our enemies. Now with missiles, they can reach deep into our cities so our losses range from children in kindergarten to oldsters who thought their last years would be peaceful. I wonder, if among those scattered genes that make up our Einsteins, there are also genes that gave us Rabin, Peres, Beilin, Barak, Sharon, Olmert, Peretz, Ben Ami and the thousands of professors in higher academia teaching our young that, somehow, we do not belong on our G-d-given Land. We are no longer fighting wars against adversaries who pledge to cut off our heads and dance in our blood. Now we are forced to fight wars against our own Jews who use their knowledge of our ways and weakness to hand us over to our worst enemies. These so-called Jews plot with other nations who, over the centuries, have done their best to eliminate all Jews from the planet. We seem to understand the motives of Stalin or Hitler. Now we are expected to understand the ultimate plan of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran. He said repeatedly a prime motivation of Islam is to would wipe Israel off the map which he promises to do - preferably with nuclear weapons. Then, in parallel, we observe Israel's current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his Kadimite party pledge to surrender the west bank (Judea and Samaria) just as he and Sharon abandoned Gush Katif/Gaza to Hamas - as Barak ran away from Israel's security strip in southern Lebanon, allowing Hezb'Allah to dig into tunnels and caves, collect mountains of munitions and train a vicious terrorist guerilla army to attack northern Israel - aiming his rockets at civilian cities including Haifa. Now we also hear increasing talk of sacrificing the Golan Heights to Syria who is working with Iran to fund and arm the Hezb'Allah in Lebanon. We all listen with rapt attention to U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan who has adopted the role of great protector of Hezb'Allah, Syria and Iran. Terrorists have never had a better spokesman or leader. What real difference is there in putting our head on the chopping block to Stalin, Hitler, and many other despots when our own Jewish leaders who call themselves "Left-Liberal", offer the same gift of our heads - only they call it "gestures of Peace". The Jews who come from inside, primed with what we Jews recognize as self-hatred are far more dangerous than our more openly adversarial enemies. When a Muslim proclaims his hatred and intentions to wipe us off the map, we understand that he is Muslim, dedicated to Islam and killing infidels. When a Jew becomes a Prime Minister, Defense Minister, Chief-of-Staff, leader of his political party and is engaged in a visceral hatred of other Jews then that is an existential danger. They are a danger that threatens our very existence. Theirs goal is to issue a quit claim deed to the Muslim Arabs for the Land of Israel given to Jews in perpetuity. These Un-Jews believe that their rise to power is equal to a transfer of ownership of the Land owned by all Jewish people and not reserved for a few power brokers. It does not matter to these Un-Jews that they are bringing a dedicated enemy close to our population centers. That they have successfully accomplished this move only to find that the enemy has used this transfer of precious Land to increase their efficiency in mounting attacks from their improved firing positions. The Un-Jews, nevertheless, even having seen the results of their retreat in terms of dead Jews, they refuse to admit their mistakes (such as Olso, etc.) and they go on to force the nation to abandon even larger areas. When the gift of Gush Katif/Gaza failed, followed by the Lebanon failure, Olmert and his fellow Un-Jews pledged further plans to evacuate Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights, the holiest parts of Jerusalem... All of this and more was cited as a major mistake on June 29, 1967[1] by the U.S. Joint Chiefs-of-Staff as imperative Land to keep if Israel was not to be a burden for America to come rescue her from her neighboring hostile Arab Muslims. When President Lyndon Johnson ordered Gen. Earle Wheeler to undertake this study by all of America's armed forces, namely, air, sea, ground and intelligence, it had a certain self-serving reason, mainly America did not want to be forced into sending American troops in to rescue Israel and fight the attacking Arabs. As we now know, today's weak politicians of Israel did NOT follow the recommendations of General Wheeler. There is a story following Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's failure which revolves around the U.S. pulling away from backing Israel because, with the Lebanon failure, the U.S. is not sure it can depend upon Israel and her military. ### 1. "Secret Memorandum" by the U.S. Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, signed by Gen. Earle Wheeler June 29, 1967" for President Lyndon Johnson, revealed by the Wall St. Journal in 1983. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
THE CULPABILITY OF EGYPT -- IF ISRAEL MAKES AN ISSUE OF IT
Posted by David Bedein, September 5, 2006. |
|
The London-based newspaper Al-Hayat reported oN Sept. 5th that the kidnapped Israeli hostage, Gilad Shalit is now in Egypt as part of a deal to release him. The paper reported that Shalit was brought to Egypt a short while ago in return for guarantees that Israel would release 800 Palestinian prisoners in three stages. Al-Hayat also reported that Hamas retracted its demand that Shalit be released at the same time as the prisoners. Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen said that a prisoner exchange agreement has been reached in which Gilad Shalit will be returned to Israel. In an interview with a Bahraini newspaper, Abu Mazen said Shalit will be transferred to Egypt and held there until Israel carries out its part of the deal. No Israeli government official would comment on this report. However, if it is true that Shalit is in Egypt, there will be far reaching legal implications Egypt, as a sovereign nation state, with a peace treaty with Israel, would have trouble explaining how it is that their government would not hand over a citizen from a neighboring state who had been abducted by a terrorist organization.
Israeli legal authorities are now conferring on the implications what it would mean if, indeed, an abducted Israeli citizen is in the custody of the Egyptian government. Such a situation would transform Egypt into a state which collaborates in kidnapping. International law would require Egypt to hand over the hostage, regardless of any commitment given to the terror organization that had kidnapped the hostage. A leading international lawyer in Jerusalem gave his his perspective: We have a peace treaty with Egypt. We have formal diplomatic relations with Egypt. If the Egyptian government takes possession of our soldier and refuses to release him on our demand, then Egypt will be in violation of customary international law. States at peace do not hold each other's soldiers against their will. HOWEVER... Israel has to demand his release. If Israel says it's OK for Egypt to hold Shalit for some duration, then Egypt is not violating international law. Marc says in essence Egypt will be holding Shalit in escrow: Egypt as a third party demonstrating that Shalit is alive and can be released, but holding him until the agreed upon terms have been fulfilled -- until however many prisoners Israel has agreed to let go prior to his release have been let go. The key here, then, once Egypt has Shalit, is GETTING THE ISRAELI GOV'T TO DEMAND HIS RELEASE. Egypt is under absolutely no obligation under international law to honor the demands of the kidnappers, who have released Shalit to Egypt's possession. Israel can say, "You've got him, now give him to us, without stipulations or delay." Then if Egypt balks it's time to put pressure on Egypt. Egypt -- which may well say things about how it has to act as an honest broker and this will ruin trust -- would have no legal grounds to stand on if it tried to keep Shalit following an Israeli demand for his release and there could be threats of international repercussions. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il or go to www.ibtn.co.il |
|
HIZBULLAH'S CHILDREN'S MILITIAS
Posted by Tsila Group, September 5, 2006. |
|
This is from Memri's Jihad & Terrorism Studies Project and is archived at http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD127606 It is entitled "Egyptian Weekly on Hizbullah's Armed Children's Militias: Over 2,000 Children Aged 10-15 Serving"> In its August 18, 2006 edition, the Egyptian weekly Roz Al-Yusuf August 18, 2006, featured an investigative article by Mirfat Al-Hakim titled Hizbullah's Children's Militias. The article reveals that Hizbullah has recruited over 2,000 children aged 10-15 to serve in armed militias, and that the Hizbullah-affiliated Mahdi Scouts youth organization is training them to become martyrs (). The following are excerpts from the article. |
Hizbullah Recruits Children Barely 10 Years Old According to Roz Al-Yusuf, "Hizbullah has recruited over 2,000 innocent children aged 10-15 to form armed militias. Before the recent war with Israel, these children appeared only in the annual Jerusalem Day celebrations, and were referred to as the 'December 14 Units,' but today they are called istishhadiyun ['martyrs']..." "Hizbullah has customarily recruited youths and children and trained them to fight from a very early age. These are children barely 10 years old, who wear camouflage uniforms, cover their faces with black [camouflage] paint, swear to wage jihad, and join the Mahdi Scouts [youth organization]... "The children are selected by Hizbullah recruitment [officers] based on one criterion only: They must be willing to become martyrs." The Children Train to Become Martyrs "The children are educated from an early age to become martyrs in their youth, like their fathers, and their training is carried out by the Mahdi Scouts youth organization... [This organization], which is affiliated with Hizbullah, teaches the children the basic principles of Shi'ite ideology and of Hizbullah's ideology... The first lesson that the children are taught by Hizbullah is 'The Disappearance of Israel,' and it is always an important part of the [training] program... "The Mahdi Scouts organization was founded in Lebanon on May 5, 1985... According to the organization's website, the number of [scouts] who had undergone training by the end of 2004 was 1,491, and the number of scout groups which had joined [the organization] was 449, with a membership of 41,960. According to the organization's most recent statistics, since 2004, 120 of its members have been ready to become martyrs. "The organization's goal is to train an exemplary generation of Muslims based on the [principle of] 'the rule of the jurisprudent' [a founding principle of the Islamic Revolution in Iran], and to prepare for the coming of the Imam Mahdi [the Shi'ite messiah]. Its members, including the children, undertake to obey their commanders, to bring honor to the [Muslim] nation, and to prepare themselves for helping the Mahdi [when he comes]." "A Nation With Child-Martyrs Will Be Victorious" According to the article, Na'im Qasim, deputy to Hizbullah
Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, said in an interview on Radio
Canada: "A nation with child-martyrs will be victorious, no matter
what difficulties lie in its path. Israel cannot conquer us or violate
our territories, because we have martyr sons who will purge the land
of the Zionist filth... This will be done through the blood of the
martyrs, until we eventually achieve our goals."
Contact the Tsila Group at tsilagroups@yahoo.com
|
|
SAUDI PRINCE PONTIFICATES ON THE CUSTODY OF THE MOSQUES IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Appoline 6, September 5, 2006. |
|
In A Press Conference In Jeddah: Prince Saud Al-Faisal stresses the endeavour of the custodian of the
two holy mosques to go back to our arab identity and to take serious
action in making our views clear and unified to protect our interests.
|
|
Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the foreign minister, held the periodical press briefing at the headquarters of the foreign ministry. At the outset of the statement, he said the region is currently witnessing an intensive political activity to enhance cease-fire and implement the un security council resolution no. 1701 and probe the overall political process in the aftermath of the recent jog that hit the region. We underscore the importance of the recent extraordinary Arab League foreign ministers meeting and its decisions, most important of which are the assertion of complete Arab solidarity with Lebanon, provision of political and economic support for it so that it could preserve its national unity, security, stability and sovereignty and rehabilitation in addition to the call of the un security council for considering the Israeli Arab conflict in a radical and comprehensive form in view of the extreme danger emanating from the continuation of the status quo at the expense of regional and international security and peace. As for the call for convening an extraordinary Arab summit, he said as we all know the kingdom has no reservation on such a proposal except that, as I mentioned in the meeting, it should be well prepared in a way that meets the Arab summit aspirations and issues dramatic decisions that tackle the current Arab situation and produces some qualitative way of reaction as what is required as the current phase is the objective assessment of the role of the Arab league and its member states and fixing the fruitful and effective approach of work that enables it to accomplish its job. What is required now is to overpass what we can call the reaction meetings where people are satisfied with denunciation statements to move to the tangible and positive actions of the world of today in a way that responds to the aspirations of the Arab nation peoples and snatch them from the current state of upset and frustration. Prince Saud gave an account on the Arab League's development. He said the organization was established as an alliance that draws clear lines to the bilateral relations of its member states and their relations with others. There was consensus on the nature and the core of threats and the joint aspirations of cooperation but as the Arab League expanded and its membership increased and its members witnessed dramatic changes and political fluctuations, this led to domestic pressures that affected the joint Arab path. For instance, the Arab countries were classified to reactionists and progressive and the countries of steadfast and confrontation a matter that led to the joint Arab paralysis and whereby it managed to deal with its joint matters periodically and routinely instead of dealing with it according to a strategic perspective that complies with our Arab belongingness. We are facing the danger of losing our identity as some Arab countries have built relations with other parties at the expense of other Arab member states. Accordingly, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques instructed that the required studies to change the disastrous situation changes be conducted. This is what we are doing now. As soon as we complete it, it will be presented to the Arab leaders to consider it. This does not mean that we are going to obstruct any attempt of holding of any urgent extraordinary conference that will be called for by any other party. The current phase necessitates serious and strenuous work to restore confidence of our peoples and respect of the world community. This will not by realized by wishes but through the return to our Arab identity and serious work to unify and clarify our visions towards the requirements of that interest. In response to a question on whether there is a mechanism to stop the repetition of the Lebanon's case, he said this is what the kingdom is seeking through forging a new identification for the bases on which the joint Arab work is based and the strategies required to avoid reactions and be prepared for facing the crises and precede them through correct planning and clear approach. Asked about the position of the kingdom in case of a preemptive strike by Israel against Iran or imposition of economic sanctions by the UN Security Council on it, he said we are dealing with Iran as an Islamic neighboring country who has its own policies and positions and relations with others including its regional strategies which necessitate on her the way it reacts to regional or external threats facing it. However, if such assumptions, or any, took place, we were to consider them at the time. Now, we cannot respond to such assumptions based on threats and predictions. On the emergence of a rational thinking during dealing with the war on Lebanon, Prince Saud wished that that would have happened; saying that we hope that rationalism would prevail in any Arab country. As for the international situation, we are facing a real defect in our Arab approach. He repeated what he said in the introductory statement about the need to forge a strategy for joint Arab work rather than deal with reactions for actions done by others. He called for proceeding with the initiatives of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques in this regard. On the need to identify the word victory following the war in Lebanon, Prince Saud said the real victory for Lebanon is to rebuild the destroyed cities, towns and villages, remain united and regain its sovereignty on all its territories. Lebanon has to score self-victory which is far difficult than defeating the enemy, he told reporters. Asked about whether there is a second initiative by the king for reforming the Arab League, Prince Saud explained that the study ordered by the monarch is designed to hold a well-prepared Arab conference which will restore unity and Arab identity and approach to tackle the nation's hot issues. Even though differences between Arab factions and countries would go too far, the Arab nation would never be an easy bite for other parties to swallow, he said. On the situation in Iraq and how the Arab countries would do something to stop the bloodshed in the Arab country, Prince Saud said Iraq is in bad need for national reconciliation. The Arab League's endeavor in the past, led to the convening of Iraq's reconciliation conference which led to the holding of elections and the formation of a legitimate government, he added. he described the initiative launched by Iraq's Prime Minister as good and that if it succeeded, it would leave a positive impact on the situation in Iraq. On the king's visit to turkey recently, Prince Saud said it resulted in more close ties between turkey and the Arab world in all fields. In response to a question on the support provided by the kingdom for Lebanon, Prince Saud said Saudi Arabia was presenting its relief and assistance to Lebanon as a whole and not as categories or groups. This will continue to be our path, he added. In response to a question, he called on the world community and the un security council to consider Sudan's demands not to deploy international forces on its territories and venture taking procedures that would rather aggravate the situation. He suggested that what is required in this case is cooling the matter down rather than provoking it, particularly when the forces go to Sudan without political ceiling, he said. On the other hand Prince Saud Al-Faisal, Foreign Minister, met at his office in Jeddah with all heads of diplomatic missions accredited to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia to brief them on the critical situation in Lebanon following the Israeli hostilities. During the meeting, Prince Saud highlighted the ordeal witnessed by Lebanon as a result of the Israeli attacks and cast light on the critical situations of a crisis Lebanon was never part of. He said the incidents witnessed by Lebanon and the destruction of its infrastructure, the killing of its innocent people and the demolition of properties have created a disastrous situation in Lebanon expected to trigger the world community to respond to that need and crystallize a strong and serious international will to support that country in a way that convinces the Lebanese people that the world community is standing beside them. Prince Saud urged the world community to provide utmost levels of support, each according to its ability and at all economic, political, diplomatic and military levels in order to snatch Lebanon out of its catastrophe, alleviate the sufferings of the Lebanese people, reconstruct the devastated country and bolster its security, stability and sovereignty over all its territories. He said the support for Lebanon comes in line with the UN Security Council's resolution no. 1701 and that the kingdom of Saudi Arabia would provide all the diplomatic mission accredited to it with a list of the urgent requirements and needs which, if met, would help alleviate the sufferings of the people, and rehabilitate the country's infrastructure, including housing units and armed forces. On their part, a number of heads of missions, led by the dean diplomatic corps accredited to the kingdom, praised this initiative presented by the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and vowed to urge their respective countries to come to the support of Lebanon. In turn, the representative of the Lebanese embassy thanked the kingdom's government and people for the strenuous efforts it was exerting in support of Lebanon and Lebanese people, noting that this is not surprising as the Saudi government was and still supporting Lebanon's stability, national integrity and prosperity, and citing the achievements of the historical Al-Taif agreement that ended the civil war and bolstered the national unity of Lebanon. Meanwhile Prime Minister Fouad Saniora said his government planned to pay 33,000 dollars in compensation to families whose homes were destroyed in southern Lebanon during the war between Israel and Hezbollah. Saniora, who spoke before heading to Sweden to attend an emergency conference on humanitarian and reconstruction needs, said 130,000 homes had been destroyed or damaged in Lebanon during the war, including 50,000 in the southern suburbs of Beirut. He said the compensation package of 33,000 dollars, plus 7,000 dollars for furniture, did not concern the latter, but did not provide details on the number of homes destroyed in the south of the country. Saniora said he planned to ask countries attending the meeting in Stockholm to sponsor rebuilding in around 38 southern Lebanese villages that suffered heavy damage during the 34-day conflict. It was sparked by the July 12 capture of two Israeli soldiers during a cross-border raid by Hezbollah. The Lebanese premier also said he would appeal for mobile homes to temporarily house thousands displaced by the war. Saniora rejected criticism of his government in the aftermath of the war saying that while it may have been slow to respond at the beginning it was now "present and active" in tackling the huge challenges it faced. "The government is bearing up to its responsibilities ... and will do its utmost to improve services," he said. The Lebanese government has come under intense criticism for reacting too slowly to the population's needs once the war ended, while Hezbollah moved quickly to compensate victims. Saniora appealed for national unity, saying that Lebanon's various factions needed to stick together to help the country recover. "Today more than ever, we need national unity to help the government stand on its feet," he said. Saniora said the conference in Stockholm was only an initial step in efforts to help Lebanon and should be followed by a donor's conference. Much of southern Lebanon lies in ruins following the war and the government has estimated the overall cost of damage at 3.6 billion dollars. Saniora also said that he refused to have any direct contact with Israel and Lebanon would be the last Arab country to ever sign a peace deal with the Jewish state. "Let it be clear, we are not seeking any agreement until there is just and comprehensive peace based on the Arab initiative," he said. He was referring to a plan that came out of a 2002 Arab League summit in Beirut. It calls for Israel to return all territories it conquered in the 1967 Middle East war, the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital and a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem -- all in exchange for peace and full normalization of Arab relations with Israel. Israel has long sought a peace deal with Lebanon, but Beirut has hesitated as long as Israel's conflicts with the Palestinians and Syria remained unresolved. Saniora said Lebanon wants to go back to the 1949 armistice agreement that formally ended the Arab-Israeli war over Israel's creation. The European Commission said Wednesday it will pledge $54 million at the conference on top of the $64 million that the European Union's head office has already earmarked for emergency relief to Lebanon. Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berry received Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon Dr. Abdulaziz Khojah. During the meeting, the Ambassador stressed Saudi support for Lebanon. On the other hand U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan ended his visit to Beirut after touring war-battered south Lebanon and meeting with UN peacekeepers there. From Lebanon, the U.N. Chief arrived in Israel for talks with Israeli leaders. He is expected to discuss the Jewish state's crippling blockade of Lebanon and a potential prisoner swap. The U.N. chief's visit to Israel is the second leg of an 11-day Mideast tour that would take him to Syria and Iran -- Hezbollah's main benefactors. Annan and his entourage left Beirut Tuesday morning in two white United Nations helicopters, and landed in Naqoura, a town on the Mediterranean coast about 4 kilometers north of the Israeli border, and home to headquarters of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon. Annan was briefed by French Maj. Gen. Alain Pellegrini, the UNIFIL commander, and other top officials, and then reviewed an honor guard of U.N. troops in blue berets standing at attention on the green lawn inside the U.N.'s white-walled compound. A military band played alongside them. Annan laid a wreath at a monument for peacekeepers killed in Lebanon since UNIFIL deployed there in 1978. Muslim and Christian clergymen said prayers, and the U.N. chief stood in silence in front of a display of portraits of those killed, including four UNIFIL members killed in an Israeli airstrike on their base in Khiam on July 25. Annan left Naqoura after about 2 1/2 hours and flew along the border by helicopter, surveying UNIFIL posts by air before heading south to Israel. Annan, wearing a business suit, shook hands with members of the 2,000-member force, which is being expanded to 15,000 under the U.N. resolution that halted fighting between Israel and Hezbollah on Aug. 14. Flags of countries contributing troops to UNIFIL, including Annan's native Ghana, fluttered in the breeze as the band played their national anthems. Annan pressed Hezbollah to release two Israeli soldiers, whose July 12 capture started the 34-day Israel-Hezbollah war, and called on Israel to lift its sea and air blockade. After talks with Lebanese leaders in Beirut, the U.N. chief faulted both Israel and Hezbollah for not living up to key sections of the cease-fire resolution, and warned that fighting could resume if the parties did not abide by the full resolution. "Without the full implementation of resolution 1701, I fear the risk is great for renewal of hostilities," he said. He also toured a bombed out neighborhood in the Hezbollah stronghold of south Beirut, where hundreds of residents booed him as he toured the ruins. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan chided both Israel and Hezbollah, saying they could not "choose and pick" parts of a U.N. cease-fire resolution to implement, and demanded Hezbollah release two captured Israeli soldiers and Israel lift a blockade on Lebanon. Visiting Beirut on the first leg of an 11-day Middle East tour, Annan called U.N. resolution 1701 "a fixed menu." "It's not a buffet ... It's not an a la carte menu where you choose and pick. We have to implement 1701 in its entirety and I hope that all parties will pay attention and act in that spirit," he said in a press conference with Prime Minister Fouad Saniora. "Without the full implementation of resolution 1701, I fear the risk is great for renewal of hostilities." The top U.N. diplomat also said he was renewing his "call for the abducted soldiers to be free." He urged Hezbollah to transfer them to the Lebanese government "or a third party" under the auspices of the international Red Cross. "We, the U.N., will be prepared to play a role if we are required to do so. And I offer our services," he said. Hezbollah fighters seized two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid July 12 that started the 34-day war. Annan also urged Israel to lift its air and sea blockade on Lebanon. "I'm working with them and a number of international partners to see to it that this is done," he said. He said the lifting of the blockade will be one of the first items on his agenda when he visits Israel on Tuesday. Annan obliquely renewed the U.N.'s call for Hezbollah's disarmament. "In Lebanon there should, as we have all agreed, be one law, one authority, one gun," he said. Annan however said it was not the duty of U.N. forces to disarm Hezbollah but to monitor the ceasefire. He said the U.N. peacekeepers would only open fire if attacked. Annan hailed Lebanese efforts to control its borders, including with neighboring Syria from where Israel says arms are smuggled into the country by Hezbollah. "I am satisfied with the steps the government is taking to control those borders, once it is done it will be very satisfactory," he said. Meanwhile, Annan held a private meeting with Energy Minister Mohammad Fneish, a top Hezbollah official, in Beirut on Monday, a senior Lebanese official told AFP. "Annan held a private meeting with Minister Mohammad Fneish, in the presence of Annan's representative in Lebanon Gier Pedersen," said the official. Later, Saniora led Annan on a tour of Beirut's southern suburbs, an area that was ravaged by Israeli air strikes during the 34-day war. Hundreds of Lebanese shouted pro-Hezbollah slogans and booed him as he toured the rubble-strewn streets. Many carried posters of Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, and one man carried a large portrait of U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with vampire's teeth. The crowd mobbed Annan's heavily guarded motorcade, and security agents ran along both sides of the vehicles. Annan met separately with Premier Saniora and Speaker Nabih Berri, who serves as Hezbollah's de facto negotiator. "This is a very critical time for Lebanon, and I think it's important that I've come here myself to discuss with the Lebanese authorities the aftermath of the war and the measures we need to take to implement U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 and to underscore international solidarity," Annan told reporters after being met at the airport by Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh. Before touching down, Annan asked to fly over Beirut's southern suburbs that were heavily bombed by Israel during the month-long war, according to a military official at the airport. "We are entering the stage of recovery and reconstruction," Annan said after his meeting with Berri. "We have a chance now to have a long-term cease-fire and a long-term peace (in Lebanon), and we all need to work together and this is the purpose of my visit here," he said. Annan said Lebanese government officials assured him they would "faithfully" implement the U.N. cease-fire resolution Berri said his talks with Annan focused on the punishing Israeli air and naval blockade on Lebanon which, he said, was in violation of the U.N.-brokered truce and insisted that Lebanon had abided by all the terms of the ceasefire. Annan visited the U.N. peacekeeping force's headquarters in the coastal town of Naqura, by the Israeli border, before heading on to Egypt and then Amman, Israel and Syria. Head of the Future bloc in Parliament MP Saad Hariri said the Lebanese "government will rebuild the country as it succeeded in stopping the war" and "in pressing major world powers to include Lebanese demands in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701". Speaking after talks with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, who is visiting Beirut as part of a regional tour, MP Hariri also rejected calls for a change in government. MP Hariri told reporters after the meeting, which was attended by special UN envoy for the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1550 Mr. Terje Roed-Larsen, that discussions focused on steps aimed at implementing Security Council Resolution 1701. He stressed that it should be carried out "quickly to end all military action and to pave the way for the withdrawal of Israeli occupation troops from Lebanese territory", adding the "enemy should not remain on Lebanese soil." Speaking to reporters at the Movenpick Hotel, where the UN Secretary General is residing during his visit to Beirut, head of the Future bloc pointed out that Mr. Annan's support of Lebanon has been unwavering since the "martyrdom of Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri." MP Hariri was asked about calls "by Hezbollah and General [Michel] Aoun" for a cabinet change, he said the government of Prime Minister Fouad Saniora will continue to carry out its mandate, since it is a government of 'resistance,' and was able to get Israel out of Lebanon, and include Lebanese concerns in Resolution 1701. Describing Premier Saniora as a statesman, MP Hariri made clear that his government will reconstruct all the houses that were destroyed during the war. Head of the Future bloc had accompanied the UN Secretary General, and Mr. Terje-Roed Larsen, joined by Foreign Minister Fawzi Saloukh, to assassinated Prime Minister Hariri's grave in downtown Beirut, where Mr. Annan laid a wreath. On the other hand US civil rights leader Jesse Jackson said that he hoped direct talks with Hezbollah, Palestinian group Hamas and Syria would secure prisoner exchanges with Israel. "We need to break the silence," said Jackson upon arrival in Beirut. Jackson said he was due to meet with President Emile Lahoud and religious leaders and officials from Hezbollah, which captured two Israeli soldiers on July 12 to force a swap of prisoners held in Israeli jails. Jackson was accompanied by 12 people including a rabbi. Contact the poster at appoline06@ams012.ftl.affinity.com |
|
THE NEXT "WE TOLD YOU SO"
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, September 5, 2006. |
|
If you are from the Orange Camp of the "Religious Zionists" your warnings are meaningless. It makes no difference that you saw what was in store and you warned of the imminent danger. If you are Orange nobody listened to you before and even now, after it became clear that you were right, still nobody will listen. Nevertheless, I am writing the next "We told you so..." When it happens -- and it's going to happen -- there is going to be a much worse catastrophe here than in the previous round. In the upcoming catastrophe, we will be facing a regular army that is well equipped and well trained, complete with an efficient air force, anti-aircraft capabilities and full armored and engineering corps. Who knows? Maybe then people will start to pay attention to those who "told them so." The greatest danger to Israel at this point is Egypt. When Iran will go nuclear, that will change. But right now, the greatest military threat hanging over Israel's head is the Egyptian threat. There is not, and there never was -- peace with Egypt. "All that poor Menachem got was a piece of paper," chuckled Anwar Sadat referring to his "peace partner -- Menachem Begin, "and I got the entire Sinai peninsula, the oil -- everything." True, since the signing of the Camp David Accords there has not been a war with Egypt. But there has also not been a war with Syria. The only difference between Egypt and Syria is that Egypt - under the cover of the peace treaty - has upgraded its primitive army and transformed it into a modern, Western army - large and well equipped. The Syrian army is still muddling with outdated Soviet weapons from over thirty years ago, T62 tanks and MIG airplanes. The Egyptian army, on the other hand -- thanks to $2 billion annual military aid from the United States - has modern Abrams tanks, F16s, Harpoon missiles and AWACS Radar planes. The Egyptian army has absolutely no external enemy other than Israel. Sudan and Libya pose no threat to its security. Egypt spends the same percentage of its GNP on building its military might that Britain spent during World War 2. It is a country that is preparing its army to destroy Israel -- and they even admit it. The anti-Semitic propaganda in Egypt's government newspapers is even more venomous than the Nazi propaganda rag Der Sturmer. They are preparing themselves militarily and emotionally for a war while we continue to glorify the peace garments of the emperor with no clothes. True, Syria is transferring huge amounts of weapons to Hizballah. But who exactly is transferring all the weapons into Gaza? (Besides the weapons shipments that Olmert, himself, sent to Gaza...) Where did the Karine A - loaded with katyushas and anti-aircraft missiles - come from? From Alexandria! How many other weapons ships did we miss? Nobody asks that question as it may spoil the "peace" with Egypt. And since the destruction of Gush Katif and the abandonment by Israel of the Sinai-Gaza border crossings, they don't even have to use ships anymore! So don't say that we didn't warn you. And please, don't explain to the grieving families that you just had to give peace a chance. We don't have any more children to donate to your experiments. 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) |
|
ISRAELI VICTIMS
Posted by Tom Carew, September 5, 2006. |
|
It may be worth recalling the usually forgotten facts about the very heavy price Israelis have paid, and continue to pay, simply to defend their very existence. A price in life, limb, and broken hearts as well as resources. With 67% of Jews in Europe massacred in 1939-45, or 5,933,900 of 8,861,800, the new State of Israel, mandated by the April, 1920 San Remo Conference, the League of Nations in July, 1922, and finally UN General Assembly Resolution 181 on 29 Nov, 1947, nonetheless had to fight unaided for its life at birth, and lost just 1% of its people, or 6,373 in its 1947-49 War of Independence against 9 Arab invaders, plus 6,500 irregulars from Syria and other states, and local armed Palestinians bands. Israel's total war-dead were 21,951 until Hezb-Allah added another 158 dead, with 3,769 injured.That compares with 500 dead in 1916, or 1,400 in 1919-1921 in Ireland, or over 3,600 in NI from 1969. Hezb-Allah, decribed as a terrorist outfit by both the EU Parliament and USA, also launched 3,970 rockets against Israel in 34 days, with 1,012 against Kiryat Shmona border area, which brought the total tally for that area from 31 Dec 1968, to 4,321. Only 6,000 of 24,000 people remained there, and saw 2,003 apartments and 151 vehicles damaged. The Galilee capital Safed saw 471 rocket attacks, with 700 buildings and 100 vehicles damaged, and only 10-12,000 of 34,000 people remaining. That Israel has known little peace is shown by the pattern of dead. The 6 major war-periods [1947-9, 1956, 1967, 1968-70, 1973 and 1982-5] only account for 12,708 dead, but the other years were far from peaceful with 9,243 dead. The 3 years 1951-53 had 459 dead, while the Palestinians "2nd Intifada" from 28 Sept 2000, has slain over 1,000 more Israelis, over 75% being non-combatants, deliberately targeted by Hamas or other suicide-bombers in buses, cafes, discos and shops. The ongoing toll of the Israeli suffering is shown by their 79,239 disabled veterans, and 17,979 bereaved - widows, orphans and parents. And the Hezb-Allah aggression has cost Israel $5.2bn, between revenue loss of $0.45bn, 1.5% GNP loss of $1.55bn, damage of $1.1bn, extra IDF costs of $1.6bn, and extra local Council spending of $0.45bn. That is $740 per head. That cost of this unprovoked Hezb-Allah aggression is equal to 47.7% of their 2006 Defence Budget. These stark, brutal facts need to inform our thinking, and balance our emotions, when that undefined label "proportionality" is wheeled out once again. And this sad history shows that if Israel abandons her guard, she will face annihilation, but if Arabs end their resort to violence, there can be peace. It all depends on accepting the first UN Resolution 181 from 1947, which most of the Arab and Muslim world still reject, the universal obligation to recognise the unconditional right of Israel to simply exist - like every other people and state. And a people where the Histadrut union organises both Arab and Jewish workers in its ranks, where most Arabs vote for Labour or other mixed lists, not for the 2 purely Arab parties, and where the Arabic-speaking Druze 1.5% and the Sunni Muslim Circassian minorities both sought to be included in compulsory National Service, with a Druze reaching Major-General rank, and where some Sunni Arabs volunteer for army service, with Beduoins staffing and commanding their own Recce Batallion. And the only state in the entire region where Arabs enjoy the normal civil and political rights of free elections, free speech, freedom of organisation and assembly, and where women and gays have full equality. Tom Carew lives in Ranelagh, Dublin, Ireland. Contact him at tmcarew@yahoo.com |
|
NOBEL PRIZE IS PROBABLY GOOD INDICATOR OF WHO HELPS HUMANITY ADVANCE
Posted by Milton Fried, September 5, 2006. |
|
Except for maybe the Peace Prize. |
|
The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000, or 20% of the world population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes: Literature:
Peace:
Medicine:
************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ******** The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000, or about 0.02 % of the world population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes: Literature:
Peace:
Physics:
Economics:
Medicine:
The Jews are not promoting brain washing the children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics. The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels. Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems. Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, even if you believe there is more culpability on Israel's part, the following two sentences really say it all: If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence.
Contact Dr. Milton Fried at docmiltfried@mindspring.com |
|
A HEARTFELT PLEA FROM YAD ELIEZER
Posted by Yad Eliezer, September 4, 2006. | |
|
|
WHAT TO SAY TO CAIR AND WAMY AND OTHER ISLAMIC PACS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 4, 2006. |
|
To President Bush Australian Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you", he said on National Television. I suggest, Mr. President, with all due respect and cognizance of your office, that you would do well to read carefully PM John Howard's response to pressures from Islamic groups in Australia. I assert that you would be completely justified in using the same or similar language when dealing with CAIR or WAMY or any of the other many Islamic PACs that are operating in our country to legitimize putting Islamic law on equal footing with constitutional law. Below are PM Howard's quotes. |
|
"I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia: one the Australian law and another the Islamic law, that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option". Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off. Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want, to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off", he said. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians." "However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia." "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle." "This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom" "We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society ... Learn the language!" "Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture." "We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us." "If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others. "This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'." "If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted." 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 |
|
BLAME THE BLACK CAT
Posted by Women in Green, September 4, 2006. |
|
This article was written by Sarah Honig, and it appeared in The Jerusalem Post September 1, 2006. |
|
Ehud Olmert, with the fear of the inquiry into his Lebanese fiasco upon him, desperately ventures into a dark room to chase a non-existent black cat which he professes to believe is really there. His panicky propagandists follow him, also chasing the non-existent black cat, knowing full well, all along, that there is no cat. They only fool others into thinking they can catch it. Last into the proverbial dark room are the ever-obedient press-pooches, also chasing the non-existent black cat. The problem is that they claim they keep finding it. That claim, repeated and resonated often enough, can change minds and convince ordinary folks that the non-existent cat is for real. These aren't harmless perceptual peculiarities. To understand their context it's helpful to realize that the above imagery is borrowed from the parlance of the erstwhile USSR, where the cat first popularly embodied unattainable Communist utopia. Its most striking feature was that it was imaginary, a fact which didn't prevent Marxists from seeking the invisible feline inside a closed unlit space. In time, however, the cat took on a more sinister significance, and came to represent official fabrications - some malicious to the extreme - geared at concocting false pretexts to remove political dissidents. That's what the pitch-colored kitty now being tracked so avidly by our troubled higher-ups is expected to do for them. They conjure the creature and then go after it in pursuit of a cop-out for their northern summer fling. They need someone handy and hated to blame for it. Enter Binyamin Netanyahu. What a perfectly odious puss. Bibi after all has long been in the cat-chasers' sights. They ingenuously managed to turn his rescue of the economy into a terrible transgression sufficient to exile him to the political gulag. If they can again get a solid grip on the cat-that-isn't, they might dump all the logistical failings of the July-August campaign on it - and all resultant or attendant inadequacies, including operational shortsightedness, conceptual muddle and strategic indecisiveness. Hence the cat-chasers latest hit refrain has indeed become Bibi's 2005 budget cut. The former finance minister is accordingly charged with having trimmed defense outlays ultra-radically, rendering the IDF under-trained, ill-equipped and unprepared for battle. Two question, however, are left unanswered: 1. Why did the cat-chasers urge the cuts and pillory Netanyahu for not slashing defense deeper? 2. Having suspected that the IDF was so out-of-sorts, why did they send it into an avoidable confrontation rather than first rehabilitating it from Bibi's ravages? Maybe because there were no Bibi ravages. The real value of the defense budget hadn't decreased since 2000. The intifada, spawned that year by Ehud Barak's flash flight from Lebanon, mandated special security expenditures, which in turn aggravated a worsening economic situation. Between 2003-2005 Netanyahu indeed reduced makeshift extraordinary defense disbursements - as he should have. Nonetheless, the overall defense budget remains larger than in 2000. MOREOVER, NO one forced a scale of priorities on the defense establishment. How it spent what was at its disposal was solely its responsibility. Even a cursory acquaintance with the IDF reveals that there's no shortage of waste therein, with last year's disengagement extravaganza undoubtedly constituting the definitive culmination. The Sharon government, with Olmert its vociferous second-in-command, insisted the IDF carry out the Gush Katif expulsion. Billions were squandered on that ignominy. While the IDF dispatched soldiers without sufficient food or water into Hizbullahland, the disengagement folly was among its best mounted campaigns ever. Soldiers were even outfitted with spanking new-design gear like hats, overalls, backpacks, water canteens and unforgettable flag-insignia appliques. It was all quite deluxe, with lots of frills, drills, maneuvers, pep-talks and preparation. Quite the antithesis of the Lebanese misadventure a few weeks back. Only because he promised to produce the grand eviction spectacle was Dan Halutz handpicked by best-bud Omri Sharon to replace the heretical Moshe Ya'alon. Conformity in the ranks was paramount. Those who refused to endorse the IDF's most expensive logistical undertaking are now brazenly blamed for the failings of its most ill-planned operation. Yes, the Olmerites are out to get Ya'alon too, though - for now - still not quite as energetically as they hunt prime-black cat Netanyahu. After all, Ya'alon hasn't yet thrown his hat in the political ring. He may be a convenient fall-guy, but isn't pro-forma an adversary. Netanyahu is a distinct and immediate threat. It's expedient to hound him rather than ask why the government, in which Olmert was such a central fixture, splurged so much on every dispensable disengagement detail, yet was so hesitant and parsimonious when it came to acquiring essential military hardware. How could there be such flawless organization in Gush Katif and such an inglorious mess in Lebanon? Why could funds allocated so generously to the cause of uprooting Jews not have been earmarked for improving the armor of tanks and other vehicles, for ceramic vests for reservists, for minimal refresher exercises, for supplying emergency provisions and even for looking after the civilians abandoned to their fates in substandard bomb-shelters? But then again, the Gush Katif expellees have been abandoned too. These are the harsh facts in the full light of day. Yet the elusive cat's allure doesn't fade even under the starkest illumination. Olmert's spin-docs and media lackeys swear they detect it crouching concealed in some corner and dream up "creative methods" to tempt out the mythic meower. If they try hard enough - they hope - they may yet convince a sympathetic inquiry panel that they have the unreal feline firmly by the scruff of its neck. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
RUSSIAN FOOTPRINTS: WHAT DID MOSCOW HAVE TO DO WITH THE RECENT WAR IN LEBANON?
Posted by Albert Soued, September 4, 2006. |
|
This was written by Lt. General Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest-ranking
intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet
bloc. His book Red Horizons has been republished in 27 countries.
It appeared August 24, 2006 in National Review Online
|
|
The Kremlin may be the main winner in the Lebanon war. Israel has been attacked with Soviet Kalashnikovs and Katyushas, Russian Fajr-1 and Fajr-3 rockets, Russian AT-5 Spandrel antitank missiles and Kornet antitank rockets. Russia's outmoded weapons are now all the rage with terrorists everywhere in the world, and the bad guys know exactly where to get them. The weapons cases abandoned by Hezbollah [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/15/wmid15.xml ] were marked: "Customer : Ministry of Defense of Syria. Supplier: KBP, Tula, Russia." Today's international terrorism was conceived at the Lubyanka, the headquarters of the KGB, in the aftermath of the1967 Six-Day War in the Middle East. I witnessed its birth in my other life, as a Communist general. Israel humiliated Egypt and Syria, whose bellicose governments were being run by Soviet razvedka (Russian for "foreign intelligence") advisers, whereupon the Kremlin decided to arm Israel's enemy neighbors, the Palestinians, and draw them into a terrorist war against Israel. General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, who created Communist Romania's intelligence structure and then rose to head up all of Soviet Russia's foreign intelligence, often lectured me: "In today's world, when nuclear arms have made military force obsolete, terrorism should become our main weapon." Between 1968 and 1978, when I broke with Communism, the security forces of Romania alone sent two cargo planes full of military goodies every week to Palestinian terrorists in Lebanon. Since the fall of Communism the East German Stasi archives have revealed that, in 1983 alone, its foreign intelligence service sent $1,877,600 worth of AK-47 ammunition to Lebanon. According to Vaclav Havel, Communist Czechoslovakia shipped 1,000 tons of the odorless explosive Semtex-H (which can't be detected by sniffer dogs) to Islamic terrorists -- enough for 150 years. The terrorist war per se came into action at the end of 1968, when the KGB transformed airplane hijacking - that weapon of choice for September 11, 2001 - into an instrument of terror. In 1969 alone there were 82 hijackings of planes worldwide, carried out by the KGB-financed PLO. In 1971, when I was visiting Sakharovsky at his Lubyanka office, he called my attention to a sea of red flags pinned onto a world map hanging on the wall. Each flag represented a captured plane. "Airplane hijacking is my own invention," he claimed. The political "success" occasioned by hijacking Israeli airplanes prompted the KGB's 13th Department, known in our intelligence jargon as the "Department for Wet Affairs" (wet being a euphemism for bloody), to expand into organizing "public executions" of Jews in airports, train stations, and other public places. In 1969 Dr. George Habash, a KGB puppet, explained: "Killing one Jew far away from the field of battle is more effective than killing a hundred Jews on the field of battle, because it attracts more attention." By the end of the 1960s, the KGB was deeply involved in mass terrorism against Jews, carried out by various Palestinian client organizations. Here are some terrorist actions for which the KGB took credit while I was still in Romania: November 1969, armed attack on the El Al office in Athens, leaving 1 dead and 14 wounded; May 30, 1972, Ben Gurion Airport attack, leaving 22 dead and 76 wounded; December 1974, Tel Aviv movie theater bomb, leaving 2 dead and 66 wounded; March 1975, attack on a Tel Aviv hotel, leaving 25 dead and 6 wounded; May 1975, Jerusalem bomb, leaving 1 dead and 3 wounded; July 4, 1975, bomb in Zion Square, Jerusalem, leaving 15 dead and 62 wounded; April 1978, Brussels airport attack, leaving 12 wounded; May 1978, attack on an El Al plane in Paris, leaving 12 wounded. In 1971, the KGB launched operation Tayfun (Russian for "typhoon"), aimed at destabilizing Western Europe. The Baader-Meinhof, the Red Army Faction (RAF), and other KGB-sponsored Marxist organizations unleashed a wave of anti-American terrorism that shook Western Europe. Richard Welsh, the CIA station chief in Athens, was shot to death in Greece on December 23, 1975. General Alexander Haig, commander of NATO in Brussels was injured in a bomb attack that damaged his armored Mercedes beyond repair in June 1979. General Frederick J. Kroesen, commander of U.S. forces in Europe, barely survived a rocket attack in September 1981. Alfred Herrhausen, the pro-American chairman of Deutsche Bank, was killed during a grenade attack in November 1989. Hans Neusel, a pro-American state secretary in the West German interior ministry, was wounded during an assassination attempt in July 1990. In 1972, the Kremlin decided to turn the whole Islamic world against Israel and the U.S. As KGB chairman Yury Andropov told me, a billion adversaries could inflict far greater damage on America than could a few millions. We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world, and to turn this weapon of the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States. No one within the American/Zionist sphere of influence should any longer feel safe. According to Andropov, the Islamic world was a waiting petri dish in which we could nurture a virulent strain of America-hatred, grown from the bacterium of Marxist-Leninist thought. Islamic anti-Semitism ran deep. The Muslims had a taste for nationalism, jingoism, and victimology. Their illiterate, oppressed mobs could be whipped up to a fever pitch. Terrorism and violence against Israel and her master, American Zionism, would flow naturally from the Muslims' religious fervor, Andropov sermonized. We had only to keep repeating our themes - that the United States and Israel were "fascist, imperial-Zionist countries" bankrolled by rich Jews. Islam was obsessed with preventing the infidels' occupation of its territory, and it would be highly receptive to our characterization of the U.S. Congress as a rapacious Zionist body aiming to turn the world into a Jewish fiefdom. The codename of this operation was "SIG" (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva, or "Zionist Governments"), and was within my Romanian service's "sphere of influence," for it embraced Libya, Lebanon, and Syria. SIG was a large party/state operation. We created joint ventures to build hospitals, houses, and roads in these countries, and there we sent thousands of doctors, engineers, technicians, professors, and even dance instructors. All had the task of portraying the United States as an arrogant and haughty Jewish fiefdom financed by Jewish money and run by Jewish politicians, whose aim was to subordinate the entire Islamic world. In the mid 1970s, the KGB ordered my service, the DIE - along with other East European sister services - to scour the country for trusted party activists belonging to various Islamic ethnic groups, train them in disinformation and terrorist operations, and infiltrate them into the countries of our "sphere of influence." Their task was to export a rabid, demented hatred for American Zionism by manipulating the ancestral abhorrence for Jews felt by the people in that part of the world. Before I left Romania for good, in 1978, my DIE had dispatched around 500 such undercover agents to Islamic countries. According to a rough estimate received from Moscow, by 1978 the whole Soviet-bloc intelligence community had sent some 4,000 such agents of influence into the Islamic world. In the mid-1970s we also started showering the Islamic world with an Arabic translation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a tsarist Russian forgery that had been used by Hitler as the foundation for his anti-Semitic philosophy. We also disseminated a KGB-fabricated "documentary" paper in Arabic alleging that Israel and its main supporter, the United States, were Zionist countries dedicated to converting the Islamic world into a Jewish colony. We in the Soviet bloc tried to conquer minds, because we knew we could not win any military battles. It is hard to say what exactly are the lasting effects of operation SIG. But the cumulative effect of disseminating hundreds of thousands of Protocols in the Islamic world and portraying Israel and the United States as Islam's deadly enemies was surely not constructive. Post-Soviet Russia has been transformed in unprecedented ways, but the widely popular belief that the nefarious Soviet legacy was rooted out at the end of the Cold War the same way that Nazism was rooted out with the conclusion of World War II, is not yet correct. In the 1950s, when I was chief of Romania's foreign intelligence station in West Germany, I witnessed how Hitler's Third Reich had been demolished, its war criminals put on trial, its military and police forces disbanded, and the Nazis removed from public office. None of these things has happened in the former Soviet Union. No individual has been put on trial, although the Soviet Union's Communist regime killed over a hundred million people. Most Soviet institutions have been left in place, having simply been given new names, and are now run by many of the same people who guided the Communist state. In 2000, former officers of the KGB and the Soviet Red Army took over the Kremlin and Russia's government. Germany would have never become a democracy with Gestapo and SS officers running the show. On September 11, 2001, President Vladimir Putin became the first leader of a foreign country to express sympathy to President George W. Bush for what he called "these terrible tragedies of the terrorist attacks." Soon, however, Putin began moving his country back into the terrorist business. In March 2002, he quietly reinstituted sales of weapons to Iran's terrorist dictator, Ayatollah Khamenei, and engaged Russia in the construction of a 1,000-megawatt nuclear reactor at Bushehr, with a uranium conversion facility able to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons. Hundreds of Russian technicians also started helping the government of Iran to develop the Shahab-4 missile, with a range of over 1,250 miles, which can carry a nuclear or germ warhead anywhere in the Middle East and Europe. Iran's current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had already announced that nothing could stop his country from building nuclear weapons, and he stated that Israel was a "disgraceful stain [on] the Islamic world" that would be eliminated. During World War II, 405,399 Americans died to eradicate Nazism and its anti-Semitic terrorism. Now we are facing Islamic fascism and nuclear anti-Semitic terrorism. The United Nations can offer no hope. It has not yet even been able to define terrorism. A proverb says that one fire drives out another. The Kremlin may be our best hope. In May 2002, the NATO foreign ministers approved a partnership with Russia, the alliance's former enemy. The rest of the world said that the Cold War was over and done with. Kaput. Now Russia wants to be admitted to the World Trade Organization. For that to happen, the Kremlin should be firmly told first to get out of the terrorism business. We should also help the Russians realize that it is in their own interest to make President Ahmadinejad renounce nuclear weapons. He is an unpredictable tyrant who may also consider Russia an enemy at some point in time. "If Iran gets weapons of mass destruction, deliverable by a missile, that's going to be a problem," President Bush correctly stated. "That's going to be a problem for all of us, including Russia." Contact Albert Soued at alres@club-internet.fr |
|
HOW DEEP THEIR HATRED RUNS: "WE SIMPLY WANT TO DESTROY YOU"
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 4, 2006. |
|
It is too easy to forget how deep and how brutal the Arab tradition of Jew-hatred runs. The article below reminds us. "When an Iraqi politician, Mithal al-Alusi, attended a conference in Israel, his two sons were killed in Iraq as punishment" (from Sun article below). Almost two years after Arafat's death (Nov. 11, 2004), it is still a capital crime in the Palestinian Authority for anyone to sell land to a Jew. It is a capital crime in Jordan (the most western and modern of all Arab countries) for anyone to sell land to a Jew. A Lebanese general was fired for having tea with an Israeli in recent cease-fire talks. He should count himself lucky. He got off easy for his crime against Islam. Among the many vociferous cries of joy and bleats of exaltation among Palesstinians, and to a lesser extent among Moslems world-wide, after Hezbollah's victory in the recent Lebanon war, was the oft-repeated statement: "killing Jews brings honor". Add that one to "we buy paradise with Jewish blood" and "we knock on heaven's door with the skulls of Jews".....and you see why I believe that M. B. Zuckerman's "From Bad to Worse" (Editorial, U.S. News and World Report, 7.24.06) is right on target: "The core of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is not Israel's unwillingness to compromise, but (the) Palestinians' adherence to vioilence"........violence, I must add, against Jews (not Israelis....but Jews). The core ideologies of Hamas and Hezbollah (and in somewhat less religious terms in the PLO/Fatah founding documents as well) maintain as a cornerstone article of faith the absolute certainty that Allah wants all Jews destroyed, all over the world, but first and foremost in "occupied Palestine"....and it is the primary duty of these Islamic ideological terrorist organization to fullfill Allah's will as quickly as possible. This hatred is pathological. They posture to the West with false excuses, and propagandistic distoritions of history and reality, to make it look to us as thought there are some valid grievances by which their endless relentless hatred can be explained, and for which some irrational Israeli suicidal concession would bring solace.There are no rational concessions that one can make to mitigate psychotic murderous hatred. Concessions merely embolden the haters to grasp for more in order to advance their agenda of genocide. That is why Israel's endless efforts to find the right concession, to offer the right compromise, to cede more land, evacuate more settlements....all end in failure: as the Gaza war and Lebanon war now show. It is indeed as Abbas Massawi (former head of Hezbollah) told the world back in 1993: "Israel, we are not fighting you because we want something from you. We are fighting you because we want to destroy you". Where, then, would negotiations start? "Kill half of us?" How about that? If Hezbollah would agree to kill only half the world's Jews, would that be a reasonable compromise? Out of greed, fear, and/or complicity in the hatred, much Western (and especially mainstream mass media) leadership (and some rank-and-file) collude with the terrorists to make the psychosis look like justified grienvances. That way, pressure on Israel to make suicidal concessions can be made to appear rational...good politics....good statesmanship. But the bottom line is obvious.....especially now, after Israel evacuates Gaza and Qassams rain down daily. Israel evacuates Lebanon and Hezbollah gears up for war. They really do simply want to destroy us. And when we ignore that, we are helping them. This editorial is by the New York Sun Staff and was published July 25, 2006 (www.nysun.com/article/36668). |
|
We've been steady supporters of the liberation of Iraq for a decade now, since the idea was just a dream. So it comes as a disappointment to see two recent statements from high Iraqi officials. The prime minister of Iraq, Nouri Maliki, who is due to arrive in Washington today, has been quoted by the New York Times condemning "Israeli aggression" in Lebanon. And the speaker of the Iraqi parliament, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, this month blamed Jews for acts of violence in Iraq. "These acts are not the work of Iraqis. I am sure that he who does this is a Jew and the son of a Jew," he said, according to the Associated Press. There are those who argue that Mr. Maliki's comments are a sign of freedom of speech and thought in independent Iraq, which is a good thing. President Bush's chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, straight-facedly attempted this argument Sunday on "Meet the Press," where NBC News's Timothy Russert asked him about Mr. Maliki's comment. But this supposed freedom of speech seems to run only in one direction, the direction of criticizing Israel. When an Iraqi politician, Mithal al-Alusi, attended a conference in Israel, his two sons were killed in Iraq as punishment. Iraq, unlike Egypt and Jordan, has no peace treaty or formal diplomatic relations with Israel. Mr. Bolten said that Messrs. Maliki and Bush would have a chance to discuss things in person.It would be a fine opportunity for the president of America to explain unambiguously to the Iraqi leader that the American taxpayers have no desire or inclination to spend government money or sacrifice the lives of American soldiers to defend a government in Baghdad that shares even a hint of the anti-Semitism or anti-Israelism that infected Saddam Hussein's regime. If the Iraqis want to go in that direction they can do it without help from Washington. This is not because of the "Israel lobby's" supposed stranglehold on Congress but because the American people understand that the treatment of Israel and of the Jews is a signal of what side this Iraqi government is on in the broader war for freedom. 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 TO DO ABOUT TEL AVIV
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 3, 2006. |
|
This article is by Isi Leibler, who chairs the Diaspora-Israel Relations Committee of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and is a veteran international Jewish leader. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post August 28, 2006. This article speaks loud about the biblical values abandonment, as well as the contemporary Jewish history, all the root of the erosion of national values, patriotism, pride, and the willingness, if not desire, to sacrifice everything in defense of the homeland Israel. in calminates into the erosion of the national spirit among Israeli elite circles. In the USA we have the identical problem -- i.e. morals and ethics are being abandoned and the distinction between right and wrong has gone totally blurred, giving birth to political correctness, which is chocking our ability to criticize even those who dare to announce that they want to destroy us. Growing up in Israel, I remember that in the fifties-sixties I was taught the Torah and Tanach (Old Testament) as part of Jewish history, a tool of teaching standards, and a source of great pride, knowing how enduring and resilient Judaism is. From this article it is clear that this has fallen out of vogue, spelling serious trouble for the future of Israel. Similarly, if we do not teach U.S. history, government, and moral values and our children in the U.S., are growing up with no patriotism and appreciation for our American heritage, thus we will all be doomed. |
|
We are already immersed in painful evaluations to identify the cause of the breakdowns in our decision-making processes and in rectifying the weaknesses in the IDF as a consequence of the recent war. What went wrong? The problem goes far beyond the failings of individual leaders. Nor, as is frequently alleged, is the primary source the pain and agony endured by successive generations of Israelis witnessing their children leaving for the battlefields to risk their lives in defense of the nation. It is rather the logical outcome of a profound malaise, which over the years, has infiltrated the psyche of a significant proportion of what can vaguely be described as secular Israeli leadership elites. One of Israel's most incisive and respected journalists, Ari Shavit, a secular, politically center-left Haaretz contributor, recently wrote exposing the core elements, which he asserts paved the way for the current malaise. Shavit maintains that the main lesson to be absorbed from the Lebanon imbroglio is that the shocking performance of our national leadership was a logical consequence of the erosion of the national spirit among Israeli elite circles. He writes that " we were drugged by political correctness," by a discourse dominated by the baseless assumption that "occupation" is the source of all evil. According to Shavit, that resulted in the demonization of core values like heroism and fortitude. Military power became identified with fascism, and the army, the most hallowed icon of the state, was transformed into a dirty word. Those who warned that we were becoming weaker and our enemies stronger were mocked, as were those who dared question unilateral withdrawals. Shavit notes that "The unending attacks, both direct and indirect, on nationalism, on militarism and on the Zionist narrative have eaten away, from the inside, at the tree trunk of Israel's existence and sucked away its life force." THE DECONSTRUCTION of Zionist ideals led to the repudiation of practices considered sacrosanct by our founding fathers and undermined the spirit of volunteerism, one of the pillars of Israeli society. In these circles money was everything; they began to convince themselves that Tel Aviv was Manhattan. Shavit failed to mention that in the reality of our lives civic-mindedness and an appreciation of the justice of the case for Israel will not in itself suffice to provide the ideological motivation for a youngster to be willing to risk his life in order to defend the state. After all, why should a Hebrew-speaking Canaanite, devoid of Jewish roots and steeped in universalism, opt to live in a country permanently undergoing terror attacks and facing successive wars initiated by barbarians committed to its destruction? Surely a person whose overriding objective is a life of self-gratification and the accumulation of money will, provided with an option, desert the country for greener pastures. This undermining of national idealism in the "elite" sector of Israeli society is already highly advanced. One need only observe the increasing numbers from our secular political and business elites, including the children of leaders, who have already emigrated to the fleshpots of the United States, Canada, Australia and Europe. BUT THAT represents only one aspect of the rot. It is now a given that a disproportionate percentage of soldiers in combat units comprise religious Zionists, kibbutzniks, moshavniks, Russians, Ethiopians and new immigrants. The reverse trend seemingly applies to many yuppie types in Tel Aviv, the metropolis and largest urban center in the country. There, it would seem that an increasing percentage of youngsters from affluent families attending elite schools are being discouraged by their parents from entering combat units and, in extreme cases, even shamelessly evading military service altogether. Paradoxically, many parents of these draft dodgers were themselves leaders of combat units, at a time when failure to serve in the army was considered the ultimate social disgrace. IDF Manpower Chief Maj.-Gen. Elazar Stern recently made the chilling observation that he paid proportionately fewer condolence calls to bereaved families in Tel Aviv than in the rest of the country. If children of elite families become increasingly underrepresented in combat units, if a greater proportion than the norm evade national service, and if a higher percentage emigrate than from other sectors, warning bells require us to take drastic remedial action. WHY DO religious Zionists and kibbutzniks proportionately represent the vanguard in combat units? Because the religious education of the former is motivated toward love of Eretz Yisrael and the emphasis of the latter is toward volunteerism and civic obligations rather than selfish consumerism. Clearly the educational system is the only vehicle via which these negative attitudes can be reversed. Yet Education Minister Yuli Tamir is herself a classic embodiment of these elitist ideas. Not surprisingly, she has already announced that her objective would be to reinforce universal rather than national values in the school curriculum. If she retains her ministry, Tamir would be well advised to reacquaint herself with the ideas of Ahad Ha'am, whose concept of a Zionist ideology was based on the utilization of traditional Jewish texts to create a secular Jewish national identity centered on Eretz Yisrael. She should revert to Ben-Gurion and the Zionist establishment of his era, who considered the Hebrew scriptures the cornerstone of the school curriculum, designed to generate love of the land and promote it as the core of a secular Jewish narrative and Jewish civilization. She should also study the writings of her predecessor of the Sixties, Education Minister Ben-Zion Dinur, who launched the Jewish-identity curriculum in secular schools. Above all, she should urgently train teachers who are able to communicate these values, which constitute the core narrative of our people. Forget that narrative, and we are doomed! The Lebanon war demonstrated that in contrast to the "elites," the vast majority of Israelis remain fully committed to the nation and willing to pay whatever sacrifices are demanded to ensure our future as a Jewish state. However, if we fail to inspire future generations of secular Israelis with positive national ideals and inculcate them with a love of their Jewish heritage, the corruption of our national values restricted until now to segments of our "elites" will inevitably become a more widespread phenomenon. TEN YEARS ago it would have been inconceivable to hear a contender for the leadership of the people of Israel say: "We have become tired of fighting; tired of being arrogant; tired of winning; tired of defeating our enemies." That statement by Ehud Olmert will forever haunt him. But it encapsulates the extent to which the new elitist philosophy of consumerism and capitulation, bordering on post-Zionism, has been internalized in his circles. If we fail to reverse such attitudes we will experience more examples of the national crisis we have just undergone, and probably worse. Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
THE SILENCE AMONG US
Posted by Naomi Ragen, September 3, 2006. |
|
Friends, An article written by my friend and neighbor Andrea Simantov that was written during the war, and that says some things that are heartbreakingly true. Thanks Andrea. Naomi |
|
It took me forever to submit this month's article because I was hoping against hope that the war would be over before my editors were forced to ask, "Nu?" I had planned to write about a stunning amateur art exhibit by haredi women -- the joie de vivre that bubbled out of the more mysterious Jerusalem neighborhoods, revealing a spirit not often captured in the secular media. After all, the indomitable Jewish spirit that lined the walls of the shabby community center was a surprise. Women, glorious Torah-observant women who hailed from North America, Russia, South Africa, and Israel, finding time within their forty-hour days of mothering, teaching, and learning to photograph, paint, sculpt, and design. That is what I wanted to write about. Instead, I offer an anemic explanation of what it feels like to live in Israel today and to answer, aloud, the unasked question, "Why do you live there?" Eleven summers ago I arrived in Israel with a husband and six children. We couldn't imagine what the future held but, in truth, hadn't given it a lot of thought. We came, simply, because the brand of Zionism in which we believed said that if we have a homeland, we should live in it. At the time of my personal aliyah, I felt adamant that, even if I was dreadfully unhappy here, I would not leave. My personal mantra was "Unhappiness has nothing to do with doing the right thing." After a month in ulpan and receiving an Israeli driver's license, I laughingly said at a community Shabbos luncheon that I finally "felt Israeli." An attractive, middle-aged woman sat across from me and said -- not unkindly -- "You aren't Israeli until you attend your first soldier's funeral." I was stunned and felt chastened but knew that there was truth in what she said -- that the shared experience of burying an anonymous young man who made life here more livable and safe was something that transcends verb conjugations and lane changing. That conversation came back to haunt me on Tisha B'Av as I stood with thousands of other Israelis beneath a scorching sun at the military cemetery at Har Herzl. The beautiful surroundings belie the weighty reason for its existence. Boys, beautiful boys, sleep forever beneath the trees. Amidst the eerie silence of our march toward the most freshly dug grave was the occasional murmur: "It's such an honor to be buried here." I didn't know the young man who was being honored but had an inexplicable compulsion to join the mourners from the moment I heard of his killing. The description of his Philadelphia upbringing sounded akin to my own life. There was talk of his community. His education. His love for the land of Israel and his supportive family. How could I not share their pain? The parents and two sisters of this chayal boded (lone soldier) were the only blood relatives present, but that didn't matter to the thousands of other attendees. We wanted Mr. and Mrs. Levine to know that we love Michael. We cherish his memory. We are grateful for his sacrifice and will never forget his spirit and, in turn, his love for us. We cannot give him back. But we can "pay it forward" and not let his sacrifice be for naught. Here, we talk of routine and living a normal life, but how can anything feel normal? There are weddings and new babies who need inoculations. Even if a missile lands near Beit Shean, I'm still expected to pay my telephone bill. Yesterday, after a day of consulting, laundry, and writing, I took the children to the park for a picnic supper. War or no war, we have to eat, and we have to breathe, and we have to talk about school and when to take the dog to the groomer, no? Three weeks ago I wrote an article for an Israeli newspaper supplement dealing with fine dining and home entertaining. It was a fluff piece. Light-hearted and truly superfluous in the context of day-to-day existence. I wrote about decorating one's patio with seasonal flowers, fresh fruits, and tissue paper lanterns. I researched al fresco menus and suggested simple napkin rings fashioned with colored twine and dried roses. And although the train station in Haifa had already been bombed, and the citizens of Nahariya were dodging katusha rockets, my editor and I agreed that "life goes on," and we can't live in a state of pessimism. Within a week, it was clear that running this article would be an obscenity. It wasn't published, because even folks in the "safer" parts of the country would take offense. Yes, life does "go on," and even war doesn't prevent a Shabbos table from looking beautiful. But to celebrate the "good life" while our every tomorrow is up for grabs, seems, at the time of this writing, an exercise in madness. My friend, Raymond, lives in South Africa but that didn't stop his two oldest sons from making aliyah as soon as they were able. They went to university here and did their army service. Happily. Proudly. Their dad also was in the IDF and talks about army service with absolute reverence. Thus, it was only a matter of time before the boys got called up for reserve duty. When I spoke with his eldest son, Tomer, I was particularly struck by his sense of relief. "I finished my exams, so that's out of the way," he said. "Now I can't think of anything better to do than take part in this operation." "But Tomer," I asked, "are you going right into Lebanon? How does this work?" "No, we are starting our training. It's been a while since we've been to war, and a lot of us are rusty. But don't worry, Andrea!" he laughed. "We miluim'niks (reservists) are the best there is. We're older. More mature. We don't try to be heroes ..." Of course, I invited him for Shabbos, and, of course, he said, "No." After all, it would be the last Shabbos home for a while and he wants to be with friends. He told me, "Everyone else has already been called up. There's hardly anyone left. "I'm ready." My fervent wish on this Sabbath Eve, as I press "send" and submit this to my editors is that, at the hour of publication, this article should no longer be "timely." That the war will have passed and all of my deliberate wording and attention to detail shall have been in vain. That, like the aforementioned "Good Life" piece that describes elegant home dining, this piece shall be deemed "unusable," because the war is over, and we've moved on. Amen For feedback, contact editor@ocjewishlife.com Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. |
|
MY BOY WHO MAY NEVER COME BACK TO ME
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 3, 2006. |
|
Israel signed the ceasefire but did not get the three captured soldiers back, in fact not a sign of life from them since Hamas captured Gilad Shalit and since Hezballah captured Ehud Wasserman and Eldad Regev. The text below explains their mothers' emotional state. |
|
This is my child The first life I created, my own body creation, my soul my love. His voice I heard for the last 20 years, from the moment he was born and until the last phone call we had. "Mom, I am coming home; you hear!" I hear my son. Clear, like the first cry I heard from you. I hear you cry at nights, when you were little -- you did not let me sleep at night. I used to sleep next to you to calm you down when you were sick the first time; I was scared like a little girl -- from what? From simple flu. I took you to first grade you made me promise that I will come back to get you. I promised I would. And the years that followed I never broke my promise. I hung your drawing on the refrigerator door, on all the kitchen walls just for you to know that this is your home. Here I am among your old drawing and even older memories. You grew up too fast, in front of my tired aging eyes. In your Br Mitzvah I all of the sudden realized how fast you grew, almost in a haste. I was the proudest Mom in the world. You grew up to be good, charming and smart. "This is my son," I thought then, yes, this is my son." When you started going out with friends, you went out with part of me. I used to hug you and tell you to be careful. "Don't worry Mom, I am a big boy." I used to wake up during the night, watch the clock, thinking where you are, waiting for you to come back. Just come back to me healthy and well. And when I heard you fall into bed, in your typical sloppy manner, I knew you are back home, with me. Then I could fall asleep. When you got your driving license and you took the car I prayed that nothing will happen to you, that you don't swerve the car into a ditch, that no one collides with you, that you don't drive when you are not supposed to. You did not disappoint me -- you came back healthy and happy. I was happy to see your smile, even though I paid for it with worry and sleepless nights. I knew there is nothing you lack. My heart missed many beats when, at 17 you went to your first enlisting. You came back happy; your [health] profile was high; pride was glowing in your eyes. That night I could not fall asleep. All I asked that you don't join the special units; that you don't serve in dangerous territory. I also asked you but you did not listen. You wanted to defend your homeland. But the homeland did not raise you -- it was me who did. And the day you closed the door behind you and you went to the military recruiting offices, all excited to do your service, you began counting the days when you will come back to me Each Saturday when you came back, I thanked God; I swore to go to the Synagogue, to follow all the obligations; to thank God that He brought my child back. But instead it was all substituted with washing your uniform and preparing your favorite food. The day I heard the strong knock on the door I almost felt something was wrong. I opened the door and I prayed not to find exactly what I found. Tow men in uniform and a medic. One of them, your commander held my hand tight. I did not have to hear what he had to say. The darkness that came over my eyes blocked my arteries and was enough for me to understand that something is wrong; something in out of the ordinary. The news shows your picture and I sit and cry. I went to the synagogue. I prayed. I pray in my frenzy sleep that you come back. This is my boy! The one who was snatched into Lebanon -- my boy who may never come back to me. Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
SHADES OF THE BRITISH MANDATE!
Posted by Batya Medad, September 3, 2006. |
|
Israeli kids were once raised on the legends of the Zionist pioneers who braved the evil British Mandate and risked their lives to establish the early kibbutzim and moshavot! Those same kids are now the "establishment" and somehow absurdly are repeating history but from the other side. They are trying to destroy Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. Yes, that's it in a nutshell. Subsequent to the 1967 Six Days War, when the historic, Biblical Land of Israel was freed from Arab occupation, instead of enthusiastically settling it, the various governments did their best to keep it as Judenrein, empty of Jews, as possible. This didn't stop thousands of Jews, who continued in the Zionist tradition and battled the government to establish new communities. As they took root, the younger generation went further and established even more, known as the "hilltop communities." In recent years a new myth was formulated by the Israeli left wing, which claimed that the "hilltop communities" in Judea and Samaria are illegal, but it's not true. According to a group of legal experts called the the Land of Israel Legal Forum, there is no legal problem with the vast majority of the communities. Nearly all of the Jewish neighborhoods deemed "unauthorized" by Talia Sasson were established before Mazuz's 2004 stipulation and are therefore, in fact, legally authorized. "It seems that Atty. Sasson was trying to enforce legal directives against communities that were already in existence before the new guidelines were issued," a Forum statement said. That's not the only problem. Even though Olmert's Plan, Destruction of Jewish Communities in most of Judea & Samaria, also known by various euphemisms which were carefully invented to try to take the "bite" out of the plan, has never been approved by any government body, Israeli banks are already implementing the first stage. For the past few months it is becoming almost impossible to get building loans and mortgages for construction and purchase of homes in most of Judea and Samaria. The banks are implementing laws which were never passed. They are participating in the "drying up" of vibrant communities. They are making political policy. Despite it all, the yeshuvim are still growing and developing, and Olmert and gang are battling more corruption charges. It's never dull, is it? 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 |
|
MUSLIM ATROCITIES CONTINUE UNABATED WHILE MUCH OF THE WORLD YAWNS
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, September 3, 2006. |
|
Drug trafficking fundamentalist Islamic Taliban movers and shakers in Afghanistan offer protection to poppy growers as they expand their opium/heroin operations, thus yields are better than ever, providing addicts of the world 6,100 metric tons this year, or about 92% of world supply. Of course, such narcotic pushing swine (my humble apologies to the porcine species for the comparison) profit dramatically, are wealthier, thus are better able to push their misogynist fanatical jihadist filth on a captive population. Presumably, narcotizing mostly infidel consumers is Koranically correct, to better serve Allah, or why else are not Muslims worldwide outraged at such behavior by a group of their own? Why is there such a deafening silence from planetary leaders of that 'moralizing Israel/Jew bashing' community? Genocide perpetrated against Black African non-Arab Muslims in the Darfur region of oil-rich Sudan rages on, yet these same Muslim Israel/Jew bashers will likewise not bash contemptible Islamic President Omar al-Bashir and his crew of subhumans; instigators and perpetrators of the pillaging, raping, torturing, mutilating, and murdering of such non-Arab Black Muslim men, women, and children in the homeland they control. Presumably, pillaging, raping, torturing, mutilating, and murdering non-Arab Black men, women, and children, albeit they are Muslims, is Koranically correct, to better serve Allah, as far as the outer Muslim apparently racist world is concerned. Such persuasive facts on the ground, in the collective mind's-eye of civil heretofore pro-Palestinian/Muslim non-Muslim popinjays, especially in Europe, ought to favorably alter their 'intellectually derived' collective opinion concerning Israel, a nation inhabited by a Jewish culture whose morality quotient obviously dwarfs Muslim adversaries. (Furthermore, when was the last time any Jew adorned him or herself with a de rigueur ball bearing packed suicide belt and exploded in a crowd?) Alas, if unbiased insight were at all a factor in the information processing networks of such pundits, an epiphany leading to such logic might result. Unfortunately, that is not so. Hence, the likes of London Mayor Ken Livingston and kindred spirit Israel/Jew bashers (in spirit not unlike the aforementioned Islamic communities these popinjays adore) will continue kissing Arab/Muslim butt, without holding them accountable for not aggressively condemning the Taliban and those Sudanese Khartoum caricatures truly besmirching any professed decency presumably inherent to Koranic verse devout Muslims (perhaps hypocritically) recite many times per day. Are such assessments highly skewed or right on the money? Should Muslims be their brother's keepers, or is their lack of concern okay? Is bashing Israel the sanctioned sport of choice to be tolerated by a species, apparently stunted in evolution, willing to collectively exhibit less moral fiber than a gnat, passively watching growing numbers snort, shoot up, and undergo the horrific indignities associated with genocide? If humankind is serious about its prospects entering a new millennium, intense introspection must occur forthwith. The status quo is intolerable! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
A CRITIC'S FIRST DUTY IS TO GET HIS FACTS RIGHT, MR. ROTH
Posted by Maurice Ostroff, September 3, 2006. |
|
This is the letter I posted to the New York Sun. |
|
A critic's first duty is to get his facts right I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Roth's statement "A critic's first duty is to get his facts right" 'Roth's False God' (NY Sun August 23). It is particularly appropriate as it is HRW's failure to separate fact from conjecture that gives rise to the severe criticism that has unfortunately diminished the stature of this very important humanitarian organization. For example in his letter of August 8, 'Roth's Supersessionism' Roth states categorically that Human Rights Watch researchers found no Hezbollah soldiers or arms anywhere in sight of a very large number of the civilians killed in their homes or vehicles by Israeli bombs. HRW workers may well have found no signs of arms or Hezbollah soldiers when they arrived. But the statement that none were there immediately prior to, or at the time of the relevant attacks is conjecture. So too, is the assumption that the casualties found were all civilians. Permit me to explain. In a letter I wrote to Mr. Roth on August 20, (which remains unacknowledged), I attached photographs of Hezbollah fighters on heavily armed vehicles in the midst of high rise residential areas. According to Chris Tinkler of the Australian Sunday Mail, the extremists use high-density residential areas as launch pads for rockets and heavy caliber weapons. Dressed in civilian clothing so they can quickly melt back into suburbia, the fighters carrying automatic assault rifles ride in on trucks laden with cannons. (My complete letter to Mr.Roth, including the photographs, may be found on the web at http://tinyurl.co.uk/nlio) A little research reveals that it is futile to expect evidence of a rocket launcher, even soon after a firing. According to the Global Security Organization, mobile rocket launchers move out from underground facilities, fire from pre planned firing positions, and return in a few minutes to protected caves or to alternate firing positions. Surely it is unforgivable for a serious organization to ignore evidence of this nature It is puzzling that Mr. Roth seems to be unconcerned about Hezbollah's locating of military objectives near concentrations of civilians; a serious a war crime. Nor does he take into account that the laws of armed conflict do not preclude attacking a legitimate military target in the proximity of civilians. I quote article 51.7 of the protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions, which specifically states: "The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations." This reinforces Art. 28 of the Fourth Geneva convention, which expressly states "The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations." Sadly, in ignoring the regular, cynical and grossly illegal practice by Palestinian terrorists and Hezbollah of hiding behind civilians, and even launching their rockets from civilian houses, HRW fails to distinguish between cause and effect. Where have HRW investigators been while this inhumane practice has been deliberately used from day one in Jenin and Gaza? How do HRW investigators manage to obtain information certain enough to permit them to condemn Israel, a state, struggling for its existence, when seasoned journalists admit difficulty in ascertaining facts in Hezbollah territory? For example, CNN's Nic Robertson admitted that Hezbollah controlled an anti-Israel piece he wrote and that in examining damaged buildings he was unable to "see if perhaps there was somebody there who was, you know, a taxi driver by day, and a Hezbollah fighter by night...." (http://newsbusters.org/node/6552) Mr. Roth's reference to Qana is also subject to doubt. If HRW investigations are to be credible, they dare not ignore any shred of evidence, even evidence produced by bloggers who have raised strong suspicions that the Qana tragedy may have been staged by Hezbollah. More so since the exposure by bloggers of Dan Rather's story on 60 minutes and the admission by Reuters that photos have been doctored. I am not claiming that the accusations are accurate. I do state categorically that in a search for truth they cannot be ignored and must be investigated. (See http://tinyurl.com/jljdb) There are other aspects which cannot be ignored if one is determined to ascertain the facts. It was reported that the roof of the building was intact when first viewed. Journalist Ben Wedeman of CNN noted that there was a large crater next to the building, but observed that the building appeared not to have collapsed as a result of the Israeli strike. There were also widespread reports that civilians were unable to flee Qana due to destruction of bridges and roads. In the circumstances one wonders how HRW investigators journalists and rescue teams had no problem getting there in droves. It is sad and disappointing that HRW has not raised strong criticism of Hezbollah's violation of every humanitarian law in cruelly withholding any shred of information about the kidnapped soldiers. The deliberate cruelty inflicted on the families is beyond comprehension. Is it too much to expect HRW to demand that the captives be visited by the Red Cross and be permitted to telephone their families in the presence of neutral parties? In a recent article in the Jerusalem Post Mr. Roth accused Israel of indiscriminate bombardment. With respect, I suggest that a more realistic understanding of 'Indiscriminate bombardment" would have been achieved if HRW investigators had taken the trouble to interview and even to participate in planning sessions with a number of IAF pilots and an equal number of Hezbollah missile launchers to ascertain the factors they take into consideration in selecting their targets. There can be no doubt who would be judged guilty of "indiscriminate bombardment". As Human Rights Watch is far too valuable a humanitarian instrument to be devalued by prejudice and bias, it is essential that it weigh evidence more carefully to ensure that reports are fair and balanced. Contact Murice Ostroff at maurice@trendline.co.il |
|
CLUELESS IN KIRYAT ONO
Posted by Steven Plaut, September 3, 2006. |
|
If Israeli leftists and Post-Zionists could be somehow transferred in time back to 1942, they would all be taking to the streets demanding that unilateral force not be used against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Unilateralism is a form of aggression and Western imperialism, they would bellow. Time to open up talks and reach a mutual agreement. Time to stop using any military tactics that might cause civilian casualties. Time to stop killing German troops without letting them have their day in court. The jihad against "unilateralism" has become the new mantra of Israel's far Left in the wake of the war with the Hezbollah. With nearly 100% of the Jewish population of Israel endorsing massive military retaliation against the Hezbollah and Hamas, and most Israelis demanding a new Israeli government that will finish the job that Olmert was afraid to begin, the Left now has a dilemma. It is trying to position itself as close as it can to the national consensus in rhetorical denunciation of the terror aggression, while trying to sell the public on the snake oil that "unilateralism is bad". Bar-Ilan University is not the first place one thinks of when contemplating the activities of Israel's academic Fifth Column. After all, it is a nominally Orthodox institution, and the Orthodox generally maintain a healthy skepticism about the "Peace through Capitulation" mindset that has dominated Israeli politics in recent years. But even Bar-Ilan has its share of post-Zionists, radical leftists, and advocates of the Rwanda solution to Israel's existence. One of the most radical leftist at Bar-Ilan is Dr. Menachem Klein,
who teaches political science there. (Klein likes to sign his name
"professor" even though he is only a senior lecturer.) Klein is linked
to assorted Far-Leftist anti-Zionist groups like "Brit Tzedek
V'shalom" (http://btvshalom.org/conference/sf_2006/klein_bio.html )
and "Betselem", a make-pretend human rights watchdog that cannot
conceive of Jews having any human rights. He was an adviser to the
leftist Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami and to Ehud Barak when the
Labor Party was in power, and his main efforts were devoted to
convincing Barak to turn the Old City of Jerusalem over to the
Palestinian terrorists (see http://www.upf.com/fall2003/Klein.htm ).
He has been one of the main people pushing Yossi Beilin's "Geneva
Accord", based on Israeli capitulation
Here is representative Klein Newspeak: "The Symbiotic Connection with the Palestinian 'Other'. "The struggle with the Palestinian demon is not carried on with a being that is outside of the collective self, but rather with the dark, repressed side of the Israeli experience. The attitude toward the Other as a demonic icon is an opposite discourse with the collective self. The demonized Other is created by the collective self to enable it to be destroyed over and over and to cleanse the Israeli self." (http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=303 ) Klein has a column in the August 7, 2006 issue of Jerusalem Report. The Jerusalem Report has tried to fence off for itself the left wing of Jewish public opinion, down to and including the practitioners of the Tikkun Cult. The article by Klein there is entitled "Eyeless in Gaza," but should more properly be entitled "Clueless in Bar-Ilan." It is a broadside against "unilateralism". The alternative to "unilateralism" that Klein wants is really Israeli capitulation to terrorist demands. If unilateralism is prohibited, this amounts to granting Arab terrorists a veto power over Israeli decisions and strategy. "Unilateralism is not a strategy," writes Klein, "or even a tactic. It is a state of mind that has taken hold of the collective Israeli psyche." Klein is never bothered by Arab unilateralism. When the Hamas unilaterally fires Kassams at Israeli civilians and unilaterally kidnaps a soldier, Klein will not hear of Israel using force in retaliation. When the Hezbollah unilaterally fires 4000 missiles loaded up with ball bearings at Jewish civilians, Klein refuses to approve Israel's using force against such unilateralism. Unilateralism is something that only Israel must be deprived of using. That is because unilateralism would mean that Israel would defend itself, and that is the one thing Israeli leftists insist Israel must never do! Klein adds: "Unlike Palestinian terrorists, Israel does not set out to kill of injure as many civilians as it can (unilaterally? .SP). But deliberately pressuring non-combatants as a means of achieving political goals is nevertheless considered a terrorist act by many of Israel's critics. (Like Klein? .SP)" Now I would really like to hear from Klein a list of historic conflicts that were not in fact ended by "unilateralism". The best example of the rejection of "unilateralism" these days is the campaign to let Iran go ahead with building nukes rather than use "unilateralism". Sanctions that make it harder to shop at Walmart are the Left's only answer to the Iranian Holocaust Denial and nukes. Multilateralism basically assures that all conflicts will end like the League of Nation's attempt to prevent Italy from annexing (unilaterally) Abyssinia, meaning - in failure. Now the real problem of course is that Israel's governments over the past two decades or so have been too pusillanimous to pursue the only sorts of unilateralism that can end the Middle East conflict. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
OF WARS AND WEDDINGS
Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, September 3, 2006. |
| You prepare a table for me in view of my tormentors. -- (Psalm 23) |
|
The last several weeks have been so surrealistic as to render anything Salvador Dali could have come up with as conventional. I sent my eldest son off to war and simultaneously planned his wedding. This was done to the accompaniment of the relentless, albeit distant sounds, of Katushas and artillery. After three weeks of fierce combat, my son walked out of Lebanon. He and his unit walked 10 kilometers - strapped with 50 kilo backpacks - and bearing stretchers with wounded. Itšs ironic that the helicopters, which managed to drop soldiers into the battle zone, were unable to effectively evacuate them. And so they walked their way out. It was Tu b'Av - an appropriate day to shift gears from battle plans to wedding plans. When he walked through the door, I embraced him and blessed him. I quietly and gratefully watched as he drank and ate. I wasn't sure what to say, and so I broke the silence and asked him, "what did you see?" I guess I was asking for his perceptions and feelings, rather than an actual visual account. He said, "I saw miracles, mom. I saw miracles." The visual accounts came one night later, as he sat down with his father, some close friends, and a couple of six packs. I went to bed early, but I couldn't sleep - and so I listened in the dark as my son relayed graphic descriptions of battles, and miracles. So the Shabbat before his wedding, I blessed him with strength and the ability to always recognize his Creator and to see the miracles and good in whatever future challenges he and his bride will face. I suppose I could have sufficed with a standard blessing of health, happiness and tranquility, but somehow I felt that the harsh reality of these times called for an additional and more realistic prayer. It should be noted that the combination of taking action in the face of challenges and requesting Divine assistance (in the form of miracles) is neither a foreign nor impractical formula for the Jewish people to employ. It's as real as it gets - just ask a young man who returned from Lebanon. My son made a point of asking me to thank the many people who were praying on his behalf, and on behalf of this unit. He candidly told me that he was sure that these prayers were effective, and that he was strengthened by them. Indeed, I had circulated his name, and several names of his comrades to individual friends, as well as to various groups organizing prayer efforts. Unlike other special combat units, his unit was fortunate enough to sustain few injuries, and they met with notable success in the field. Unable to concentrate on lengthy prayers, I spent a disproportionate amount of time during those three weeks reciting Psalm 23. It's short, comforting, and the right number for the mother of a 22 year-old son who so desperately wants to see him reach age 23, and far beyond that. The psalm is clear enough, but I admit to having been a bit baffled by the line, "You prepare a table for me in view of my tormentors." But now I understand. On Rosh Chodesh Elul, my son and his bride were married at sunset in Mitzpe Yericho - in front of a panoramic view of the Judean desert. It's an historic and stunning location. During the last months of Moses's life, the Israelites caught their first glimpse of the Land of Israel and it was the Judean hills of Mitzpe Yericho which were in their sights. Whereas ancient history offered and continues to offer promise, modern history weighs heavily on the site. To the left of the chupah, in the distance, one could clearly see Jericho's Oasis Casino. That casino has become a symbol of the type of deranged thinking, collusion, and recklessness which led the leaders of this nation to gamble away our deterrence, our security, our principles, and the lives of some of our very best. Jericho's casino and similar twisted experiments involving commerce, politics, and ultimately terror; serve as the great equalizers for Arafat, Abbas, Peres, Sharon, Olmert, some Diaspora businessmen and a variety of dubious international diplomats. These are endeavors where common enemies find common ground and ample opportunity to perpetuate their corruption, arrogance and godlessness. It was the kind of thinking (or lack thereof) which laid the groundwork for the Gaza - Jericho First Agreement of 1994 (an outgrowth of the 1993 Oslo Accords) which would grant killers autonomy, breed incompetent leaders, and produce future disasters in the form of rampant terrorism; the Wye and Hebron Accords; a hasty withdrawal from Lebanon; four years of suicide bombings; the expulsion of 9000 Jewish residents from Gush Katif and parts of Shomron; the government ordered brutality against the young people in Amona; and a savage summer rain of Kassam rockets in our South and Katusha rockets in our North. And this perpetual lack of leadership, lack of foresight, and disregard for all we should hold dear, has created a situation where our major cities are left vulnerable to attack, and our ill-equipped soldiers can be carelessly thrown to the wolves. The threat from Iran and our Arab neighbors looms bigger than ever, and still there is no accountability, no justice, and the outcry from the public remains muted at best. But juxtaposed against this bleak and barren landscape is the promise found in a wedding. Indeed the magnificence of the desert lies in its ability to evoke and synchronize feelings of both desolation and hope. Its vastness dwarfs any perceptions we may have of man's majesty, and it causes us to stand on a vulnerable and humbling brink where our choices become so clear. Against all of this, the tables were beautifully set in view of our tormentors. And my son's unit was there and celebrating in full force - save for a soldier who was undergoing yet another surgery at Rambam Hospital, and another soldier who was recovering. Others were absent, too. One good friend was killed in action, and another friend is recovering from a broken back and legs. At this time in history, there may be no better place than the Judean desert, overlooking Jericho, to celebrate a Jewish wedding. It's an awesome place to break a glass and pray for comfort, joy and miracles. Ellen Horowitz is an artist and writer. She lives on the Golan Heights and is the author of the The Oslo Years: a mother's journal. The book is available through Gefen Publishing and through retailers listed at http://osloyears.com/retail.htm |
|
ISRAEL STILL GRIPPED BY FANTASY; EXTENT OF WAR DAMAGE IN ISRAEL; NGOS FAKING REPORTS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, September 3, 2006. |
|
ISRAEL STILL GRIPPED BY FANTASY As the Muslim world stocks up on deadly weapons, friends of Israel urge it to make peace with the Muslims before it is too late. Their question is how. The notion spread from the Labor Party into much of Likud that if Israel grants the Palestinian Arabs' immediate demands, the P.A. would respond with good will, declare an end to the conflict, and the Arab states would make genuine peace with Israel. However, any size of a Jewish state is an affront to hegemonic Islam. Therefore, whatever the P.A. may say for tactical advantage, it never would end the conflict. It makes no sense to attempt to deal with the Muslim military buildup by a policy of fantasy (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/7). The fantasy indicates willful ignorance of the Islamic goal of world conquest. The current war wars afford an opportunity for eradicating the P.A. and Hizbullah forces and then wrecking the Syrian army. That would be the start of defeating international jihad. THE ATTACK IN SEATTLE A Muslim murdered one Jew and attacked others at a Jewish center in Seattle, declaring it was because he is a Muslim angry with Israel. Since he didn't belong to a terrorist organization, Seattle police did not classify this Islamist attack on civilians as terrorism. But it is. The head of the Jewish Federation of Seattle said she had not believed something like that would happen. However, Daniel Pipes had warned Seattle of it, a year earlier. He thinks this violent Muslim hostility in the US is ending the golden age of Jewry in the US. The perpetrator was a good student but a pervert and antisemite, though not violent before. He manifests what Mr. Pipes calls "sudden jihad syndrome." Someone who would not have been suspected of Islamist terrorism suddenly adopts jihad. That predilection among Muslims is why Pipes suggests special monitoring of Muslims in the US. (I suggest putting them outside the US.) "...sudden jihad syndrome never erupts in isolation, but results from a steady diet of antisemitic, anti-Zionist, anti-Christian, and anti-American incitement fed by Islamist mosques, schools, voluntary associations, and media. Leftist demonizing of Israel further contributes to the problem." (Pipes #695, 8/8.) SIGNS OF SANITY IN ISRAEL Israeli radio used to be full of "peace songs" that really sought surrender to the Arabs. Not anymore. There is a war song It seeks surrender by the Arabs. Haaretz, which took the line of appeasement, instead mostly has Op-Ed pieces demanding a strong offensive against the Arab aggressors (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/8). SIGN OF GOVERNMENTAL INSANITY "For the past 14 years, Israel has invested all of its energy in pursuit of make-pretend peace (via Oslo)." "Now the Olmert government has at last changed direction. The Olmert government is, instead, conducting a make-pretend war." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/9). "Most wartime leaders look for 'an exit strategy,' but in the case of Israeli PMr Ehud Olmert, many Israelis are wondering if there is an 'entry strategy'?" (Michael Widlansky in IMRA, 8/9.) EXTENT OF WAR DAMAGE IN ISRAEL In some cities of northern Israel, such as Safed, Tiberias, and Acre, the damage is worse than in some cities of Lebanon, such as Beirut and Sidon. FAKING PHOTOS Reuters and Associated Press used two photos of a Beirut woman, with a scar on her left cheek, mourning the destruction of her house. Problem is, the photographs are two weeks apart and in different locations. It is as if she were paid to pose as a mourner. The BBC shows war damage mostly in Lebanon and very little of Israel's. (The BBC wouldn't want the public to sympathize with Israel.) Photographs about damage are accompanied by photographs of Israeli troops firing, with captions about the fighting continuing, as if the clashes were Israel's fault. There are very few pictures of Hizbullah firing. There are many other altered or faked photographs, including one about Israel firing at Lebanon, and a suspiciously identical picture of Hizbullah rockets flying towards Israel (IMRA, 8,9). Some of the fakery seems commercial and some seems propagandistic. NGOS FAKING REPORTS -- Update They make: (1) "Judgments and claims regarding 'military targets' in the context of asymmetric warfare that most humanitarian and human rights NGOs are not equipped to make;..."; (2) "Political lobbying such as sending letters to politicians demanding that pressure be brought to bear on Israel;" (3) "Minimal references to the role of Iran and Syria in providing missiles and support to Hizbullah;" (4) "Few NGOs call for the release of the two abducted Israeli soldiers;" (5) Amnesty Intl. demanded an arms embargo against Israel as well as Hizbullah (IMRA, 8/9 from NGO monitor) though Hizbullah is the aggressor and Israel has other enemies. I read the NGO assessments, mostly false and misleading. It was a barrage like Hizbullah's, but of propaganda. TURNING THE OTHER CHEEK TO IRAN Iran has, largely through its proxies, been attacking other countries, including Western ones, for years. Iran formed Hizbullah, which blew up 241 US marines years ago, without repercussion. The US did not retaliate against even the proxies, and has restrained Israel from destroying them. As Iran develops nuclear weapons capability, the Security Council has offered Iran "concessions and accommodations." (Jewish Political Chronicle, 7/2006, p.16 from Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online, 7/17, 2006). Having found the world relatively unresisting, it is preparing a major assault. China and Russia expect that Iran would weaken the West, so they protect Iran, in the Security Council. Does the West imagine that those death cult Muslims in Teheran would react to accommodations by ceasing their drive to establish a world-wide, dictatorial caliphate? RUSSIA VS. U.S. The US has imposed sanctions against a Russian weapons manufacturing company that contracted to enhance the Iranian and Venezuelan air forces. Russia called that act non-cooperative, unfriendly, and possibly competition under the guise of politics (IMRA, 8/9). The US does reduce Israeli arms competition. Its excuse was Israeli arms sales to China, though Pres. Clinton helped arm China and was not impeached for it. The US does arm enemies of Israel. In any case, how cooperative and friendly is it for Russia to arm avowed enemies of the US? Most countries and companies lack scruples in business and in politics. They find lofty excuses for base motives. ISRAELI SACRIFICES FOR ETHICS UNAPPRECIATED "That Israel would risk the lives of Israelis rather than risk the lives of enemy human shields is typically either ignored overseas or considered an Israeli stupidity." "A check by IMRA fails to find any foreign appreciation of the human shield policy." (IMRA, 8/9.) That what I've been writing. Antisemites and mercenary countries don't appreciate Jewish decency. It appears to them simply as weakness. I agree with them when Israel carries it to excess. ORIGINAL ISRAELI POLICY FOR PEACE WITH HIZBULLAH Israel seemed to be waiting until Hizbullah fired all its 14,000 rockets at Israel, and was out of ammunition. Then Hizbullah couldn't make war anymore (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/9). 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. |
|
TRUE UNITY
Posted by Rabbi YehoishophotOliver, September 3, 2006. |
|
"Now is not the time to dig up old grudges. We are living in very hard times, with so many Jews wounded, threatened, and displaced from their homes. Be sensitive to their feelings. We ought to set aside our differences and give encouragement, and not dwell on the faults of the government or the army; instead, let's gather to pray for them." "The whole world is against us. We must unite to defend the State of Israel's right to self-defense. We are all ambassadors for the State of Israel." "It's not about uniting in support of the government, but about uniting in support of the people under attack." Although at first compelling, I contend that the highly selective definition of national crisis visible between the lines reveals that these calls are demonstrably warped: If unity for the Jewish people is really what all this hoo-ha of patriotic frenzy is about, then: Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer when the Israeli government started sponsoring and arming terrorist groups under the transparent guise of peace, even letting top terrorist leaders and their collaborators roam free, and maintaining a charade of "the Arabs want peace" even after everyone saw through it as a blatant lie? "One makes peace with enemies, not friends!" they preached. Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer in defending the right of our fellow Jews of Gush Katif and Northern Shomron to their homes, villages, and land? "We don't mix into politics," the "leaders" declared. Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer when, after the army fled and ceased patrolling areas of Gaza outside Gush Katif, Kassams and mortars rained down incessantly on the Jewish villages there, and the army didn't lift a finger, and the Jewish world sat idly by, pretending that this was normal, or denying it altogether? "Oh, what do those settlers expect, living where they live? Yawn. Pass the juice." Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer after the homicide bombings, drive-by shootings, and sniper attacks that murder Jews in Yehudah and Shomron on a daily basis? "Sacrifices for peace," right? Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer when the homes of the Jews of Amonah were demolished and the thousands of youth who dared protest were cruelly beaten and molested, with riot police (better put, storm troopers) ordered to use their batons to strike at the heads and private parts of defenseless protesters, and trample them with German horses? Oh, they were "just following orders." Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer when the surrender of Gush Katif was followed so predictably by Hamas bombarding the Jews of Sderot, Netiv Ha'Asarah, and nearby villages with Kassam rockets daily for months on end, and the Israeli government did nothing because it didn't want to look stupid and admit its "mistake" in surrendering land vital for security to terrorists? "Kassams, shmassams!" Where were the calls for unity and mass prayer when the Jews of the Avraham Avinu neighbourhood and the Shapira building in Chevron were to be expelled? "The fanatic settlers are causing trouble again." Why is it that only when the Israeli government decides that murderous attacks on its citizens are intolerable that the right of Jews to defend their lives and property is allowed to be promoted in rallies, demonstrations, and prayer gatherings--where someone invariably makes sure that the Israeli flag is patriotically waved? Why are these calls coming largely from the same rabbis and laymen who were so shamefully silent during the Gush Katif expulsion, or actively supported it, from those who never said--my, what a coincidence--"Lo nishkach ve'lo nislach"? ("We will neither forgive nor forget.") The answer to all these questions is chillingly simple: According to democracy, the secular goddess of Western culture and the Zionists who worship that culture, and that has deviously infiltrated into the thinking of Jewry as a whole, omniscience and absolute moral correctness is conferred upon all those democratically elected. Thus, a crisis is defined as a situation where a democratically elected government declares it a time of crisis; until then, there is no crisis, no matter how many Jews are wounded and slain. Jews' right to live in their homes securely is valid only if the popular vote deems it valid, and hard facts of danger to Jewish lives are only accepted as real if the majority recognizes them as such. The State is all-powerful, and that is axiomatic, and anyone caught doubting the supremacy of its authority is hounded as an infidel and ostracized as a fanatic, lunatic, and anarchist. Thus, the message is clear: The democratically elected state deems the blood of the Jews of Chaifa and Rosh Pina redder than that of the Jews of Gush Katif, Yehuda and Shomron, and of anyone daring to challenge its tyrannical rule. The right to safety and property of the former is legitimate, of the latter, illegitimate, or at best, "a matter of opinion." And we've been duped by this insidious, obscene distortion of our values, this intellectual mishmash; in fact, most of us have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Indeed, it's about time for unity. Unity in supporting the right of all Jews to self-defense, not only those in the North, or in Ashkelon. Unity in supporting the right of all Jews to remain in their homes unmolested, not only those of Tiberias and Carmiel, but even those in (gasp) those "outposts," a.k.a. Jewish villages. Unity in disengaging ourselves from the cowards (vis-ŕ-vis the goyim) and bullies (vis-ŕ-vis the Jews) calling themselves our leaders, and insisting on leadership of honesty, integrity, and genuine respect for Jewish safety and property, based on timeless Torah values. Above all, there must be unity in declaring the most taboo statement of all, but the one upon whose recognition our very survival hangs: "The attacks against the Jews both in the South and the North are the direct result of the Israeli government's reckless, senseless, treacherous retreats from those fronts, spawning a downward-spiralling trend of self-destruction that must be expunged from our midst once and for all, before it's too late." Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver lives in Melbourne, Australia. Contact him at rabbioliver@gmail.com |
|
WHAT U.S. JEWS NOW EXPECT OF ISRAEL
Posted by Lee Caplan, September 3, 2006. |
|
This was written by Aron U. Raskas, a Baltimore, Maryland attorney, who holds leadership positions in several important U.S. Jewish organizations; the views conveyed herein, however, are his own. The article appears in Haaretz today (www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/754726.html). |
|
In the three most recent years of the 21st century, successive Israeli governments have catastrophically undermined two fundamental principles that Israel and her supporters worked for a better part of the 20th century to establish. First, Israel's historic claim to the territories of Judea and Samaria, and the notion that these territories are, at ! most, "disputed." Second, Israel's irreplaceable value as a strategic asset and reliable ally of the United States. The government's actions have not just eviscerated these concepts. They have perplexed and disillusioned Israel's staunchest supporters in the United States - both Jew and gentile - who have worked arduously for decades to enshrine these principles in the foreign policy arena. Unless promptly remedied, Israel stands in mortal danger of losing the international support that it requires to securely exist. Since June 1967, there has been rigorous debate about the wisdom of retaining the territories that came into Israel's hands in the Six-Day War. Yet, almost no individual with a whit of appreciation for Jewish history would deny the essential right of the Jewish people to return and repopulate these territories that already millennia ago served as the cradle of the Jewish people. From the days following the Six-Day War, through the process of drafting UN Resolution 242 later that same year, the Johnson administration parried the demands that Israel promptly withdraw from all of the territories that it liberated. Throughout the ensuing 40 years, with only a few sorry exceptions, successiv! e U.S. administrations fended off attempts to pronounce as illegal Israel's presence in the territories. American support for Israel's claim to Judea and Samaria reached its crescendo in President George Bush's April 14, 2004 letter to then prime minister Sharon, acknowledging that it would be "unrealistic to expect ... a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949 ..." This U.S. support for Israel did not arise in a vacuum. Israel's protectors in the United States, in the plethora of Jewish organizations that dot the American landscape and at the grass-roots level, have relentlessly struggled to shore up this support. The unilateral removal of Jews from Gaza implemented by prime minister Sharon, after chiding Israelis for conducting an "occupation," undermined in a matter of months any legitimacy for Israel's presence in the territories. Likewise, notwithstanding his paeans to Jewish history, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's laser-like focu! s (until just last week) on unilaterally removing Jews from Judea and Samaria has further corroded the claims of his people to these lands, and with it any bargaining power that they had. In a similar vein, consecutive Israeli governments and their U.S. supporters have worked for decades to ensure that Americans recognize the support that Israel provides in the Middle East. Through careful coordination - from important contacts at Defense Department levels, to meticulously managed visits to Israel by members of Congress, as well as by way of grass-roots lobbying and advocacy - Israel's role as a reliable ally and strategic asset of the United States had become an almost unassailable truth. Yet, Israeli actions over the past 12 months have actually damaged the interests of the United States. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was viewed as a reward for terrorism. It led to a government headed by an organization that the United States had labored, largely at Israel's urging, to isolate as a terrorist entity. And now, the striking mismanagement of this war has only further undermined the U.S.-led global war on terror. Short of erecting a billboard on Rehov Kaplan, it would have been difficult for the Bush administration to have more strongly communicated to the Israeli government its desire for the Israel Defense Forces to crush - forcefully, vigorously and without inhibition - Hezbollah's forces. It was painful to watch the Israeli government start, hesitate, stop, falter and stop again as the American administration increasingly signaled its desire for Israel to complete the task. The administration's disappointment was palpable, even if it remained politely inaudible. All this now leaves Israel's most ardent American supporters - Jew and non-Jew - increasingly disheartened. American officials have admitted in private conversations to being bewildered about Israeli intentions, and many of Israel's Jewish supporters in the United States are no less befuddled. Yet, much as we are pained, we will never waver nor falter in our ardor and support for the Jewish state. We know that our work pales starkly in contrast to the real life-and-death decisions made daily at all levels in Israel, by its government officials, military staff and every citizen in the street. Nonetheless, as partners in this struggle, as frequent visitors and people who send their children to study in the land, and who aspire to live there as well, we express these concerns to help shape the debate that has already begun. It is not too late. The Israeli people must establish leadership with the fortitude and will to stand up for their principles and to lead those who look to them for guidance. They must preserve Israel's strengths and unabashedly pursue its historic rights. Compromises may be necessary, but they can only be achieved - with peace and security - from a position of moral clarity and strength. Most important, the government must craft a coherent strategic policy message for its supporters to pursue. Israel's advocates in the United States are many. They are Jews from all walks of life, Christians in both the north and south, liberals and conservatives, and elected officials across party lines. They share a common desire to strengthen the Jewish state. To do so, however, they will require courageous, principled and unwavering leadership from Jerusalem. Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
ISRAEL NOT PRESSING ON MIAS
Posted by Israel Resource News Agency, September 2, 2006. |
|
This is by Ze'ev Schiff and appeared in Haaretz yesterday.
It is archived at
|
|
One of the aims of the Lebanon war, as initially laid down by the the General Staff's Operations Directorate, was "pressuring Hezbollah into releasing the captives." Some Israel Defense Forces raids during the war were aimed at furthering this goal, but without success. Since the cease-fire went into effect, Israel has avoided exerting any pressure, even when the army has recommended doing so. This was also the case following the abduction of Corporal Gilad Shalit and the killing of two of his comrades during a Palestinian raid into Israel from the Gaza Strip. Following the abduction, the IDF embarked on a military operation in Gaza. One method employed to pressure the Palestinians was stopping family visits to Hamas prisoners held in Israeli jails. The families complained to the Red Cross, which complained to Israel, but its representatives also met with Hamas leaders, including Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and Foreign Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar in Gaza and Khaled Meshal in Damascus. The three refused to allow the Red Cross to meet with Shalit. They also refused to allow him to send a letter to his family in Israel. Nonetheless, and contrary to the recommendation of the IDF chief of staff, the ban on family visits to Hamas prisoners was lifted. Israel responded to humanitarian concerns, but the other side refuses to do the same. Hezbollah has been even more aggressive about not allowing any contact with the two IDF soldiers that it abducted inside Israel on July 12. Every request by the Red Cross to the group has been turned down, despite the fact that UN Resolution 1701 calls for the soldiers' unconditional release. Israel had the option of delaying the return of refugees to villages in southern Lebanon, which is where Hezbollah established its military positions. Such a delay could have pressured Hezbollah's leadership to agree to the basic request of a Red Cross meeting with the two prisoners. But Israel avoided taking such a step. A recommendation that the IDF, before withdrawing, raze all structures that housed Hezbollah military positions in southern Lebanon was also rejected. This was the IDF's policy in the Golan following the Six Day War and in the town of Quneitra after the Yom Kippur War. Legal experts say that destroying homes after the fighting has stopped can constitute a war crime. Israel Resource News Agency is based in Jerusalem (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). David Bedein is Bureau Chief. Contact the Agency at media@actcom.co.il |
|
HUGO CHAVEZ BASHES ISRAEL; NOT AT ALL SURPRISING
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, September 2, 2006. |
|
Bashing Israel is all the rage among egomaniacal dictators, especially those wishing to suck up to kindred spirit tyrants worldwide for strategic reasons. Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's firebrand president, a major fossil fuel supplier to planetary addicted nations, bolsters his status in the muddled mind's eye of similarly fossil fuel drenched Iran and Syria's current set of Jew/Israel and United States despising Muslims by spewing venom at the Jewish State, asserting for one that military actions in Lebanon were "being carried out in the style of Hitler, in a fascist fashion." You might think one fascist mentality would recognize other fascist mentalities, such as convenient Islamic buddies AhMADinejad and Assad, squatting in Iran and Syria respectively, hence not shamefully attach that loathsome label to the antithesis of fascism, the democratic tolerant nation, ironically inhabited by descendants of the ultimate fascist Hitler's brutalized victims, linked in time to the modern day Holocaust that will forever blight the dysfunctional history of a species, yet amoral Machiavellian types like Chavez forsake honesty whenever necessary, scoring points without conscious for the sake of a carefully calculated end result. It is important to express outrage at disgusting duplicitous rhetoric from this South American demagogue, yet it is more critical to contemplate emerging highly convoluted alliances at the onset of a potential World War, surreally juxtaposed at a place in human evolution distinguished by movers and shakers, in many parts of the planet, possessing collective maturity levels befitting prehistoric savages yet perilously bequeathed with nuclear technology. Israel, the chronic dependable punching bag and scapegoat most every fiend loves to hate, well serves Muslim despots as an ever-useful diversionary repository for the rancor and frustrations of exploitable gullible Islamic populations. The United States, Israel's most formidable and essential ally, today's premier military and economic leviathan, alas premier debtor nation as well, is viewed as the Great Satan by Israel's Islamic foes, even being disdained by many such Islamic jihadist apologists and supporters. A concerted effort must be made by the United States and Israel, castigated by so many Muslim regimes, to forthwith recruit dependable partners with clout such as India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and a waffling Europe to offset the viperous growing axis of Iran, Syria, current Venezuela, sponsored Islamic terrorist organizations infecting many lands, other Muslim enclaves currently on the fringe of fanaticism, and perhaps most insidiously China and Russia, if they choose to crossover to the dark side. The United States might consider redeploying its finite overworked troops from chaotic Shiite and Sunni out of control regions in Iraq, to a more hospitable environment in virtually sovereign Kurdistan. Such a combat ready force would be in a much more suitable position to focus its military might on potential nuclear nemesis Iran, led by Imam crazed Islamic lunatics possibly willing someday to launch the deadliest of rockets at Israel for one, such a suicidal strategy not at all inconsistent with a belief system afflicting those with martyr mentalities, yearning for their place in Allahland rife with compliant virgins. Israel, however, can employ the most effective strategy, perhaps one that will deal a fatal blow to the aforementioned emerging maniacal axis, preempting an exponentially exploding Chinese superpower's policy teetering towards the dark side, by cajoling the Oriental Dragon to enter into an entrepreneurial partnership located in the Golan Heights, building a state of the art mega-research center intent on developing an efficient cost-effective alternative energy source compatible with a global-warming challenged century twenty-one. China must fuel its raging economy, imports most of its oil, and could be quite willing to partner with cerebral Israeli scientists in a quest to achieve energy independence. Iran's proxy Hizbullah would not dare attack land hosting Chinese scientists, their homeland much more than an essential oil customer, indeed the one nation that commands respect and obedience from the Persian theocracy. Surely, if an Islam overloaded China is unhappy everybody in the axis is unhappy, including that upstart Shiite regime, Syria, Islamic terrorist organizations, other Muslim enclaves on the fringe of fanaticism, as well as Hugo Chavez's crew of oil extortionists. All the Jew/Israel bashing promoted by Islamic lowlife and supporters means little if both United States and Chinese juggernauts put the kabash on meaningful military aggressiveness. Being in the good graces of the world's two most powerful countries should be priority for the disrespected State of Israel. Not only would the beleaguered Jewish State benefit, so would this imperiled orb. Lets hope Prime Minister Olmert and his Knesset comprehend the obvious. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
A WORD FROM A FRUSTRATED ISRAELI SOLDIER
Posted by Yosef Rabin, September 2, 2006. |
|
After Commander Roi Farjoun from Nachal Charedi was killed about two weeks ago, I wrote this to relate my experiences as well as my feelings. Yosef |
|
Two Shabbatot ago, I stood on the small hill adjacent to the
checkpoint located next to my base guarding over my friends who were
busy checking passing Arab cars. About an hour before the end of my
shift 12:00pm, we heard over the radio that an Arab opened fire on
the Bekaot checkpoint, only a short twenty minutes away. Suddenly,
the air filled with screaming Sirens calling soldiers to action.
Jeeps, hummers and other military vehicles suddenly came zooming out
of my base, we immediately received orders to shut down our
checkpoint and confiscate the Arab car keys and identification
cards. The entire Jordan valley was now a closed zone, not one Arab
was allowed in or out or allowed to travel in between.
About five minutes latter we heard news that struck us like lightning, "Good news and bad news, the good news is that the terrorist has been killed, but the checkpoint commander has gone up on high". We were shocked; we could not believe that a soldier from our battalion had been killed. No soldier in the 8-year history of Nachal Charedi had even been seriously injured, and now one had been killed while trying to guard our nation. We soon received orders to open the checkpoint allowing Arabs to only travel into `Area A, which is supposedly under the full civil and security control of the basically non-existent Palestinian Authority, but not towards the areas under Israeli control. I finished my shift about 1:30 and then was sent immediately to Bekaot to replace the unit whose commander had been killed just a couple hours earlier. When we got to the checkpoint, we were given orders to reopen it because it had been closed since the murder. We protested the order, and said that the Arabs would see the opening of the checkpoint as a sign of weakness, and therefore, it should remain closed indefinitely. But orders are orders and so we opened the checkpoint. Even though we were forced to open the checkpoint, we checked cars and trucks very slowly and very carefully. We made every truck take down all of its produce for inspection, every bag and package was opened and searched, we usually would not have gone through the trouble, but this was no ordinary day. Every Arab male approaching was also told to raise his shirt at a safe distance to make sure he did not have a weapon or explosive belt. Our anger intensified after we talked to one of the first soldiers who arrived immediately after the attack, he told us, they saw many Arabs smiling and laughing after the soldier was killed. We thought that now, finally, there would be a great operation against the Arab nationalists operating in the Jordan Valley. We thought that finally there would be a full invasion into the Arab areas to collect their weapons and arrest their fighters. We were hoping that maybe they would even allow us to destroy the houses of the enemy fighters. We were hoping for strong condemnation of the government's insistence on giving weapons to our enemy. I would not be surprised that the gun that killed Commander Roi Fargoun came from the hands of Rabin, Peres, Barak or Olmert. The men, who gave and continue to give weapons to our enemies, should be brought to trial for their terrible crimes. They should be held responsible for deaths of the countless soldiers that have been murdered in the last 15 years or so. They have committed treason of the highest order! They give weapons to the enemy, and then force us the soldiers, to clean up the mess! When these criminals send us to clean up their mess, they then add to their atrocities by tying our hands! Today soldiers are very much afraid to use their weapons for fear of being imprisoned. Was the terrorist with in 30 meters? Were there civilians next to him? Was he pointing the gun at you or just maybe moving it? If we see an Arab holding a Molotov cocktail, we must ask ourselves, if his arm is held high enough for us to shoot him. If he is not in the process of throwing it, shooting him would be murder. Even if he already threw one, and you know, that he is not just holding the second one for fun, you must wait until he is definitely in the act. Do you believe what you are reading?! The ones who created this "morality" should be taught what real morality is, at their trials. The left wing, the anti Jewish nationalists, who swap our land for paper, who arm our foes with weapons, money, electricity and water, they are the ones who killed Roi, and they should pay! Needless to say, the great operation we were hoping for did not come, nor will it. Neither will the condemnations. We go on as if nothing happened at all. We the soldiers want to fight! We know for what we are fighting and for whom we are fighting! We go into battle equipped with our training, weapons and a very deep faith, which is actually, the most powerful weapon we have. When we say in Shacharit, the Morning Prayer, "Some with chariots, some with horses, but we - in the name of Hashem our God -- call out," we mean it! While the nations of the world put their faith in weapons, we put on our weapons with faith in God and with the faith of God. When we read in Parshat Shoftim, "When you go out to battle against your enemy, and you see horse and chariot, a people more numerous than you, do not fear them, for Hashem your God is with you" (Deuteronomy 20:1). We don't just read these words, we believe these words, we know that Hashem Elokai Tzivakot Yisrael -- Hashem the Almighty God of Israel -- who is the ultimate Commander in Chief, believes in us and thus we fight with even more zeal. We do not give up hope! With love of the People, Land and God of Israel, Contact Yosef Rabin at yosefrabin@yahoo.com |
|
SETTING THE CONDITIONS FOR DISASTER
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, September 2, 2006. |
|
Dear friends, Unfortunately some of us can say with confidence "we told you so." Most prominent among us is Caroline Glick and other prominent figures such as Benjamin Netanyahu, Avigdor Libermann, Moshe Yaalon, Moshe Arens and many more, all qualified to lead Israel, all better than the amateur Olmert government. When you evaluate the conditions following the 2000 escape from Lebanon, the eviction from Gaza, the crazy Olmert "re-alignment" plan and the management of the latest war in Lebanon... When the Sinai peninsula is becoming a new Al Qaeda heaven, when massive armaments and explosives are smuggled daily into Gaza, when the Egyptian government, appointed by Israel to prevent the smuggling fails miserably, when Iran and Syria continue to arm Hezballah, the conclusion is one and only: Israel's leaders and their bankrupt policies brought Israel to the brink of extinction. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, pay close attention and wake up. I do not think we are left with many more opportunities to utter the words: "We told you so." Israel needs strong and effective national leadership immediately. Not a leadership that allows Egyptian, French and Indonesian soldiers to protect Israel's borders. Not leadership that shuts its eyes to what is happening in Sinai. Not a leadership that goes to war citing specific goals and returns from it with its tail between its legs. Not a leadership that can so easily be manipulated into mad concessions! The first article that follows was written by Caroline Glick and it
appeared in the Jerusalem Post yesterday. It is archived at |
|
On Tuesday, Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin warned of the growing threats to Israel's security emanating from the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria in the aftermath of the latest war. If the proper steps are not taken to stop the massive transfers of advanced armaments to Gaza, he warned, in just a few years, it will turn into a second south Lebanon. In south Lebanon itself, Hizbullah is creating the illusion of cooperation with the Lebanese army in order to put us all to sleep as it quietly rebuilds its forces in anticipation of an Iranian order to renew the war against Israel. Hizbullah chieftain Hassan Nasrallah's assertions last week that his organization had no intention of starting a second round and that it had had no idea that Israel would respond so massively to its abduction of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev on July 12 were aimed at confusing Israel and calming the Lebanese. At least as far as Israel is concerned, his goal was accomplished. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the Israeli media pounced on Nasrallah's statements as "proof" that Israel had won the war. In the meantime, the Ayatollah Republic is proceeding steadily toward the acquisition of a nuclear capability. The conciliatory international reactions to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement Thursday that Iran rejected the UN Security Council's demand that it end all uranium enrichment actually preceded Ahmadinejad's insolent statement. On Wednesday, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana was busily attempting to renew talks with Iran. Meanwhile, the UN is behaving not as an international policeman, but rather as Iran's defense attorney. During his visit to Israel Wednesday, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan sounded like an Arab leader with his unrestrained, obnoxious condemnations of Israel for every act of self-defense it has taken in Gaza and Lebanon on the one hand, and his seemingly endless tolerance for Iranian threats of nuclear genocide against Israel on the other. During his press conference with Olmert, Annan intimated that from his perspective, the problem with Iran's threats to annihilate Israel is not that they are illegal or morally inexcusable. Rather, Iran's threats are wrong simply because Israel is a member of the UN. Surrealistically ignoring both Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons and its command over the latest war in Lebanon and Gaza, Annan stated bizarrely, "One cannot wipe away Israel with statements." Today, unbeknownst to the Israeli public, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government is steering Israel down a course that, if not quickly abandoned, will render our right to self-defense - and by extension our independence - conditional. The proliferation of security threats is being exacerbated by the government's facilitation of an UN-EU diplomatic bid to chip away at Israel's right to defend itself against Hizbullah, the Palestinians and Iran. The present danger is rooted in the text of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which set the guidelines for the cease-fire in Lebanon. That decision constituted an unprecedented diplomatic victory for Hizbullah by placing the sub-national, jihadist, illegal militia on equal footing with Israel. Moreover, Resolution 1701 set the terms for the reinforcement of UNIFIL forces in a way that enables Hizbullah to continue to reinforce its forces in south Lebanon while barring Israel from exercising its right to defend itself against the growing threat. Resolution 1701 restricts Israel's freedom of action in three additional ways. First, the resolution named Ahmadinejad's solicitor, Kofi Annan, as arbiter of the sides' compliance. Annan revealed how he will be using this authority two weeks ago when he condemned the IDF's commando raid in Baalbek while beginning his calls for Israel to lift its air and sea blockade of Lebanon and so enable Hizbullah to rearm, not only by land, but by air and sea as well. Second, although Olmert and Livni loudly champion the European forces being deployed to Lebanon as an important diplomatic achievement, the fact is that the decision to empower the EU to dominate UNIFIL is disastrous for Israel. While protesting their "love" for Israel, the Europeans are making no bones about the fact that their decision to lead UNIFIL is motivated by their intention to prevent Israel from defending itself. Italy's Communist Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema made this point clearly in his interview last Friday with Ha'aretz. There he explained that the EU goal in Lebanon is to "prove to Israel that it can ensure its security better through the politics of peace than through war." D'Alema then insulted the US by adding, "The American policy, which Israel also supported, created an impossible situation... The thinking was that it is possible to control the world via the power of a hegemonic liberal power. This philosophy has created serious damage, and now the US is looking for a logical way out." So by deploying troops to UNIFIL, the Europeans will show us that the only way to contend with enemies who wish to destroy us is by appeasement and more appeasement. The Europeans and Annan also do not hide the fact that they plan to use their deployment in Lebanon as a springboard for achieving greater influence on Israel in its dealings with the Palestinians. In this vein, D'Alema stated, "I think if things go well in Lebanon, a similar positive process could also begin in the Gaza Strip: The release of [Israeli hostage Cpl. Gilad] Shalit, a Palestinian unity government that meets the criteria set by the international community, and the presence of a UN force to bolster the Palestinian government." Here the EU is openly joining forces with radical leftist Israeli policymakers led by Meretz leader MK Yossi Beilin, who for the past two years have been quietly advancing the idea of internationalizing the conflict. After both Israel's negotiations and its unilateral surrender of land to the Palestinians both led to war, the thinking now is that the Palestinians will accept Israel after the UN divests the Jewish state of its ability to defend itself. IF THE above is insufficient to convince us that the expanded UNIFIL force, whose arrival is so eagerly awaited by Olmert-Livni-Peretz, is not a good thing for Israel, there's also the Islamic element of the proposed force. Both Annan and the Europeans are insisting that a force of up to 7,000 soldiers from Muslim countries be included in the UNIFIL force. These soldiers are set to be sent by Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia and Turkey. All of these countries are commonly referred to as "moderate Muslim countries." This assertion bears investigation. The jihadist party Jamaat-e-Islami is a member of Bangladesh's coalition government. Its student activists recently sent death threats to two prominent intellectuals for teaching the country's youth the values of secularism, democracy and science. Furthermore, in November 2003, Bengali journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury was arrested as he waited to board a flight to Bangkok with continuing service to Tel Aviv. Choudhury, who was set to attend a conference in Israel about how the media can promote peace, was accused of sedition and spying for Israel. He was repeatedly tortured during his 17-month incarceration. Bangladesh plans to send 2,000 soldiers to Lebanon. Then there is Indonesia, the largest Muslim state. As punishment for inciting the terror bombings in Bali in 2002 that killed 202 people, the not-particularly-independent Indonesian judiciary sentenced Jemaah Islamiyah leader Abu Bakar Bashir to 30 months in prison, the last five of which were commuted in June. In May, Ahmadinejad was received by roaring crowds during a visit to Jakarta. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal Tuesday, Indonesian Defense Minister Juwono Sudarsono said he believed the best way to secure south Lebanon was for Hizbullah forces to be "absorbed" into the Lebanese army. As the war in Lebanon raged, the Malaysian government called for all nations of the world to cut off diplomatic relations with Israel. This week, senior Malaysian officials said that there was no justification for the West's opposition to Iran's nuclear program. Of all the Muslim countries who are planning to contribute forces to UNIFIL, Turkey is the only one that has diplomatic relations with Israel. As a result, to date, its forces are the only ones the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government is willing to see deployed in Lebanon. Two weeks ago, during a visit with Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, Olmert said, "Turkey plays an important role in the Middle East and will continue to do so." He added, "Israel has confidence in Turkey." While until the formation of the AKP's Islamist government in 2002 it made sense for Israeli prime ministers to say such things, today such statements are unjustified. Over the past four years, Turkey has been transformed from a stalwart US and Israeli ally into one of the most overtly anti-American and anti-Semitic states in the world. By the same token, Turkey has gone to great lengths to warm its relations with the Arab world and Iran. During the war, IDF Military Intelligence discovered that Iran was shipping weapons to Hizbullah through Turkey. After Hamas's electoral victory in January, Turkish Prime Minister Recip Erdogan was the first international leader to host Hamas terror leaders in an official visit. During the war, Erdogan announced Turkey's support for Hizbullah, saying that "nobody should expect us to be neutral and impartial." From all of this it is apparent that the participation of Muslim armies in the UNIFIL force - even if they are only from Turkey - could easily lead to a situation where the IDF finds itself fighting UN forces. Alternatively, as the UN and EU foresee, cowed by the "international community," the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government may simply concede Israel's right to self-defense, in spite of the growing threats from Hizbullah, the Palestinians and Iran. AS FOR America, disturbingly the Bush administration, like the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government, is showing acute signs of policy collapse. In a near inexplicable move, the State Department issued a visa to former Iranian president Muhammad Khatami. Obscenely, the former leader and regime flack for the Islamic supremacist ayatollahs has been invited to speak at the National Cathedral in Washington. As it did at the beginning of the war in Lebanon, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government set the proper goals for managing the cease-fire. But as it did during the war, it has proceeded to take every step possible to ensure that those goals will not be achieved. Now, the troika hopes that through UNIFIL, Israel will cobble together a coalition against Hizbullah, while it is actually facilitating the formation of a coalition that will protect Hizbullah against Israel. They have failed to recognize that to secure its national security interests, Israel does not need to negotiate, it needs to act. The only reason the EU and the UN feel comfortable ordering Israel around is because the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government obeys them. Things do not have to be this way. No country in the world lets outsiders dictate its policies on fundamental issues of national security. Israel must not be the first to do so. Yesterday, General Yaalon, the former IDF Chief of Staff, gave us, and our network of terrific bloggers, an excellent update on the current situation in Israel. Clear, straight-forward, and honest analysis of the troubles currently facing the Jewish State. The General made the following powerful points: 1. The war in Lebanon was mismanaged by the political and senior military leadership of Israel, and was perceived as a victory for Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria. 2. The committee set up by Olmert is moot, as it is clear to that the war was mishandled by Israel's top leadership. Those responsible should resign and avoid a long political process. 3. A two-state solution is irrelevant at this time. No territorial compromise will settle the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in this generation, and probably not in the foreseeable 50 to 100 years! In the meantime, Israel needs to maintain its security operations and keep control of the West Bank, as it currently does. 4. Disengagement was created by "a culture of spin." The Israeli public was manipulated and deceived into believing that since they had no "partner," they needed to act unilaterally. In the last decade, the Israeli public was confused, deceived and manipulated by the media and political leadership. The public needs to gain clarity to understand the challenges they are facing. 5. During the Lebanon war, Israel foiled NINE major attempted attacks from the West Bank. All were encouraged by Hezbollah. 6. Yesterday, the head of the Shabak (Israel's Internal Security Service) briefed members of Knesset and warned them that Palestinians are smuggling large amounts of weapons into Gaza, and that the current situation is bound to lead to another Lebanon. The only way to avoid this course is for Israel to intensify its Gaza operations, and take control of the Philadelphi corridor. 7. Regarding the IDF - "I commanded the IDF until 15 moths ago... it is the army that stopped Palestinian terrorists, was ready to deal with all charges regarding conventional forces like Syria and the Iranian threat. It didn't suffer from a logistical problem... more soldiers were called up for Disengagement than the Lebanon war. The war didn't even use 10% of the IDF. Again, mismanagement of political and senior military leadership... Politicians will try to blame the military but this was a case of mis-management, not capabilities." 8. On Syria - "I didn't understand the declarations telling Assad not to be afraid. He should have been scared!" Again, mismanagement... 9. On Corruption within Israe l's Leadership - "I worry about this phenomenon more than the Iranian threat, and we have to deal with it. Disengagement was because of corruption... the PM (Sharon) saved himself from investigations and unfortunately this still exists and is the most important challenge to deal with. Mismanagement...and incompetence of leadership is an outcome of corruption. 10. On personal plans - "My plan is to live in Israel, to be a part of the Shalem Center, to come out with clear ideas about what should be done... to save the State... in security, strategy, education... So far I am not going to join any political party. I am going to do what is needed for the State in the future, like I did in the past, and like I am doing today. We look forward to postings by the other bloggers on the call, including: Pamela at Atlas Shrugs, Anne at Boker Tov Boulder, Jim at Gateway Pundit, Ted Belman and Jerry Gordon from Israpundit, Omri at Mere Rhetoric, Robert at Publius Pundit, Avi at Tel Chai Nation, and West Bank Blog. Sincerely, Allen Roth and David Goder
Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send
an email to ynz@netvision.net.il
|
|
WHY TERRORISTS HATE US
Posted by Walid Phares, September 2, 2006. |
|
IN the five years since the terror attacks of 9/11, Walid Phares has been consistently consulted by high-ranking US officials to explain who the jihadists are and to help the West prepare for what may come. Walid's study of the phenomenon of jihad -- or Islamic struggle -- for more than 25 years has enabled him to translate the intentions, justifications and goals of the terrorists who are determined to defeat America and her allies. Here, he answers critical questions including: Who are the people who want to destroy the West and why do they want to hurt us? SINCE September 11 in New York, March 11 in Madrid and July 7 in London, questions have been forming among a stunned public -- why do these people hate us, who are they and what do they want? As someone who studied the jihadist movement for a quarter of a century on three continents, I find the questions indicate a greater drama -- how can societies targeted for a systematic and global warfare by terrorist forces operating in the open for at least two decades be asking questions about their identification? Instead, the Americans, British and Spanish should ask how the jihadists were able to strike successfully, how long they have been able to infiltrate democratic societies and who is helping them do it. The real question is this -- why are most British citizens, let alone Europeans and Westerners, lost about who the enemy is? How come they aren't able to see clearly, and who is blurring their vision and how? Ironically, the debate about these concepts is raging in the West, on its university campuses and in its media, but not elsewhere. Thus it is within Europe and other democracies that the real war of ideas is happening. And as I have made the case for years, it is about the public being able, or enabled by those qualified, to learn about the root causes, the identity and strategies of the groups claiming jihadism and acting violently on behalf of this ideology. WHAT DO THEY WANT THE terrorists who have been conducting suicide attacks, producing videos calling for violence and recruiting more terrorists among a radicalised pool of youth are acting on behalf of an old, sophisticated and totalitarian ideology, with long-range strategic objectives -- jihadism, or al Jihadiya. These jihadists aren't born overnight, nor are they an automatic response to state policies so far as -- according to their own texts, chatrooms, books and ideologues -- indoctrinated militants who have been made to believe that by killing and being killed, they are fulfilling a higher divine mission. It is not about British policies so much as Russians, Indians, Americans, Spaniards, Arabs and all those who do not bow to the ultimate goal of "the return of the caliphate and its dominance of humanity." These aren't some Star Wars movie themes but speeches delivered from Hyde Park to Osama's hideout. In short, the jihadists believe in an ideology that wants to reshape the West's "evil world", particularly its most liberal, secular and democratic dimensions. The ultimate worst enemies of the jihadists aren't Bush, Blair and Putin, but a new generation of Muslims opposed to fundamentalism in Tehran, Khartoum and beyond. Their war in the West is in fact a tool to obstruct the rise to freedom for women, minorities and youth in the Middle East and the Islamic world. Evidence abounds from Morocco to Afghanistan. WHO ARE THEY? THE jihadists borrowed heavily from what they claim is or was religion, while in fact they created an all-out ideology. They shielded themselves by filling an immense gap created by the crushing of liberal Arabs and Muslims at the hands of dictatorships in the Middle East. There are two "trees" of jihadism -- the Salafists, who want a renewed caliphate after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The other "tree" is the followers of Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran and their extension Hezbollah -- they want to establish an imamate, competitive with the Salafists. While described wrongly by Western observers as mere extremists and frustrated violent groups, in fact they are radical and have a very long-term strategic patience. They have survived World War II, the Cold War, thought they had defeated the Soviets and methodically moved to finish off the other "infidels". STRATEGIES AND TACTICS THE main feature of the jihadists is their amazing ability to placate the societies -- principally democratic -- which they target. Experts in political camouflage and students of both Islamic and Western institutions, they have carried out a long-term infiltration of societies on both sides of the Mediterranean using the appropriate means. The fundamentalist militants skilfully use the legal protections provided by liberal democracies to insert themselves within ethnic communities and use democracies to shield their ideology in a robe of religion. Their major success has been to mass "dis-educate" the public, hence they abuse collective tolerance as they convert their doctrines into the so-called "political correctness". The latter is proportional to the public's awareness -- the fewer citizens who know about this "ideology", the more the radicals have a free ride. Hence it is crucial for the British and others around the world to learn as quickly as possible about the real "factory" producing the bombs. Not the warehouses themselves, but the set of ideas that ideologues have been able to implant in the minds of many in this generation and are about to instill in the next. In short, Muslim democrats in particular and informed British in general are the answer to future jihad. Dr Walid Phares is the author of Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against The West. It was published by Palgrave Macmillan. He is a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy and a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. www.futurejihad.com. Thia article is archived at
|
|
PROFILING THE DEAD
Posted by Joe Kaufman and Jeffrey Epstein, September 2, 2006. |
|
One of the biggest concerns for prospective airline passengers is the screening process of flight cargo. According to reports, only a small percentage of cargo that is loaded onto planes is screened for explosives. And of the cargo that is in fact screened, rarely does it include large containers. The question needs to be asked: What if, in our laxity, these containers became a preferred method of attack by terrorists? And what if the contents of the containers being used for the attacks were once living and breathing? Just like with any other religion, Muslim funerals have their own distinct customs and traditions. As stated in the 'Muslim Funeral Guide for the residents of the Chicagoland,' the funerals include: the preparation and washing of the deceased (Ghusl); the placing of a shroud (Kafan) over the body; transportation from the funeral home to the mosque for prayers; and transportation from the mosque back to the funeral home. It is the movement of the body to and from the mosque that is of concern. According to the Funeral Home Administrator for a large facility based in Orlando, Florida, the prayers that take place at the mosque are fairly extensive. In addition, depending on how religious the family is, the body may, instead of being cleansed at the funeral home, be cleansed at the mosque. As well, in the Islamic tradition, bodies must be buried within 24 hours of death. If the body has to be transported to another state, or even another country, this certainly puts a constraint on the process. Funeral homes will go out of their way to satisfy their customers, with respect to these needs and more. According to the Orlando facility, "It depends what the family desires. [If they] wish to have a cleansing ceremony, before the shipping out, so they know that the appropriate religious measures have been taken, that's not a problem. These days, it doesn't have to be one way or the other. Generally, a funeral home is flexible in trying to accommodate everybody's wishes. I mean, that's what we're here for." In that flexibility, funeral home directors or administrators do not have to supervise what happens inside of the mosque. And given the sensitive nature of loved ones passing away, that is understandable. However, if the intent of those within the mosque is to inflict harm on others, this flexibility could be quite deadly. Funeral homes take great pains to respect the remains of the dead. If the body inside the casket is altered in any way - even removed and replaced by something with similar weight - it is quite possible that this will go unnoticed by the funeral home. That means that, if an explosive were to be placed inside of the deceased's body, no one would know. Appalling as this may be, it is far from an unfounded notion. Just this past June, two U.S. soldiers were found dead in Iraq, their bodies rigged with explosives. Reports of the incident described the bodies as being "booby-trapped." As well, in April of 2005, Al-Iraqiya TV aired an interrogation of terrorist Adnan Elias who assisted in the kidnapping and beheading of an Iraqi police officer, whose body was later used as a bomb loaded with TNT. Elias illustrated the brutal death of the officer at the hands of a fellow terrorist: "Habib 'Izzat Hamu got the knife. He slaughtered him, and when he was dead, he opened his shirt buttons and cut open his stomach. He opened him up, took stuff out, and put TNT and explosives inside. Then, he sewed up his stomach with thick thread." He then discussed how his 'cell' used the body to kill others. He stated, "We were told to take him in the car near the square in Tel A'far. We threw him there and placed his head back on his shoulders. 15 to 30 minutes later, they told his family to come and get their son. His father came with two policemen. They picked up the body and made no more than two steps - we were standing far away - Ahmad Sinjar pressed the button. The body exploded on them, and they died." The fear, with regard to Islamic funeral services, is that the bodies may be packed with explosives, as what was described in the aforementioned, and then used to blow holes in planes mid-air. Of course, this scenario cannot occur if the bodies are checked before being boarded onto the aircraft. Unfortunately, according to industry sources, inspection of caskets or shipping containers with the deceased inside - out of respect for the dead - does not take place. During discussions with representatives from the Miami cargo station of 'Delta Cares,' it was learnt that large containers are not scrutinized, unless there is thought something suspect about the containers or unless the containers are bound for another country. And caskets or containers holding the deceased are never looked at period, including, as stated by one of the reps, those that are being loaded for international flights. The only things that are checked are the paperwork (death certificates, burial transit permits, etc.) necessary to ship the bodies. "Would you want your mother's casket being inspected?" the Delta rep asked. In a May 2005 Wall Street Journal article, entitled 'Shipping News: How funeral directors earn free flights,' Delta claimed that its company alone ships 50,000 corpses per year in the cargo holds of its passenger planes. According to the article, the perks funeral homes receive from this have been nicknamed the "frequent dier program." One has to figure that at least some of these corpses are mothers of those that fit the profile of potential terrorists. In that case, the answer to the question is "yes." In the war on terrorism, measures that would normally be thought of as unconventional, if not entirely offensive, need to be taken to protect the security of the nation. The profiling of the deceased is but one of these measures - and certainly one that should garner more attention than the examination of passengers' mascara or ChapStick. In the end, saving lives is all that matters. [To learn more about how to secure the United States from terrorist attacks, attend the upcoming America's Truth Forum symposium, 'Understanding the Threat of Radical Islamist Terrorism,' taking place in Las Vegas this November 10th and 11th. Go to www.americastruthforum.com for more details.] This article appeared yesterday on Front Page Magazine. It is archived at www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24174 |
|
ISRAELI CHRISTIANS, MUSLIMS, JEWS UNITS RISKED THEIR LIVES NOT TO INSULTS ALLAH
Posted by Nurit Greenger, September 2, 2006. |
|
Israel sent soldiers into potentially booby-trapped mosques rather than employing bomb-sniffing dogs, thus risking offending Muslims. Muslims always go on rampage when one insults their religion and their Allah? Isn't offensive to use mosques as munitions and rockets storage facility? I guess not! Hezb'allah use of indiscriminate weapons against civilian populations is recognized as a war crime in every court in every nation. The Hezb'allah launching of four thousand war crime rockets against Israel's cities and villages, is war crime, which no one seems to be investigating, let alone prosecuting. However, Hezb'allah firing rockets from within ones own civilian population is not only a war crime, not only a crime against one's own people, but a crime against humanity and no one seems to be investigating, let alone prosecuting. Hopefully, when next time, if there is next time, someone so very casually refers to Israel's barbaric attacks against the Lebanese people, they remember Israeli Druze Moslem, and Jewish alike soldier units, risked their lives rather than offend the sensitivities of the Lebanese people, those very same people whom Hezb'allah's terrorist army so readily sacrificed in their unprovoked attack against Israel. This article is entitled "Soldiers, Dogs and Mosques. It was
written by Dan Gordon, who wrote such films as The Hurricane, Murder
in the First, Wyatt Earp, and The Assignment. He served as a captain
in the reserves in the IDF during the recent war. It appeared August
30, 2006 in the American Thinker and is archived at |
|
During the recent war launched by Hezb'allah against Israel I served as an escort officer with the IDF Military Spokesperson's Unit. In that role, Captain Doron Speilman and I on separate occasions hooked up Martin Fletcher of NBC News, and a separate BBC crew with the Deputy Commander of an armored brigade whose base was on the Lebanese border. The Deputy Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Ishai (last name omitted) related in one of those interviews the following: Units of his brigade made incursions into Southern Lebanon with the objective of knocking out positions and arms depots of Hezb'allah's terrorist army along their sector. In so doing they came under intense anti-tank fire. Having taken out the terrorists who fired on them they began systematically searching through the terrorist positions all of which were located in a civilian village, exposing its inhabitants in the most cynical fashion possible to Israeli return fire. They had received intelligence that arms were being stored in the mosque of that village, and that possibly it had been booby trapped in order to kill or maim any Israeli troops trying to enter the mosque in search of weapons. Lieutenant Colonel Ishai related that normal operating procedures and common sense would dictate that he first send in bomb sniffing dogs. It should be noted that Lieutenant Colonel Ishai's brigade is made up not only of Jews but Druze and Bedouin Muslims. All of these fighters came from villages in the Galilee which had been hit by Hezb'allah's constant barrages of katyusha rockets aimed at Israel's civilian population. For them this fight was not a political struggle, nor even a national one, it was quite literally in defense of their homes. Lieutenant Colonel Ishai has served for many years shoulder to shoulder with Muslim troops in the army of the Jewish state. Indeed I was privileged to meet Druze commanders, who commanded almost exclusively Jewish troops. The first one of those commanders was my own company commander when I was in basic training in 1973. The soldiers who fight for the state of Israel are not only Jews they are Christian, Druze and Moslem as well. Far from the image of a barbaric Nazi-like military, the IDF takes great pains even in war time to respect the sensitivities not only of its own troops but of the Palestinian and Lebanese civilians caught up in the cross fire brought about by the Islamist terrorists who hide behind them. Lieutenant Colonel Ishai decided that sending bomb sniffing dogs into a Moslem mosque would be offensive to members of that religion. He thus decided that rather than do that he would send in soldiers, knowing that he was risking their lives to do so. He gave that order and his soldiers obeyed it in full knowledge of all the implications of their actions. They would risk their lives to respect the sanctity of another's religion and the sensitivities of another people. Those were the actions of the Israeli army. What they found in the mosque were anti-tank missiles of the kind that had just been used to try and kill them and katyusha rockets of the kind that quite literally had been aimed at their own homes and families. This is the nature of the enemy we faced. It was a terrorist army organized, trained, financed and equipped as an army whose short, medium and long range rockets rained at Israel's civilian population, while hiding behind Lebanon's civilian population. It is a terrorist army that sought to maximize both Israeli and Lebanese civilian loss of life. The use of indiscriminate weapons against civilian populations is recognized as a war crime in every court in every nation. Hezb'allah committed four thousand of those war crimes in launching its four thousand rockets against Israel's cities and villages. That is a war crime which no one seems to be investigating, let alone prosecuting. However, one could add to that, that the firing of such weapons from within ones own civilian population is not only a war crime, not only a crime against one's own people, but a crime against humanity. I would hope that the next time someone so casually refers to Israel's barbaric attacks against the Lebanese people, they remember Lieutenant Colonel Ishai and his soldiers, Druze Moslem, and Jewish alike who risked their lives rather than offend the sensitivities of the Lebanese people, those very same people whom Hezb'allah's terrorist army so readily sacrificed in their unprovoked attack against Israel. Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@gmail.com |
|
'SOMETHING TERRIBLY WRONG' ABOUT AIDING ENEMIES IN TIME OF WAR
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 1, 2006. |
|
the main points in this article are those which I have argued in the past, and about which I have received much flack): "There is something terribly wrong with people seeking to demean and weaken the president in war time, thereby strengthening our country's enemies" This was written by Edward I. Koch, who served as mayor of New York City from 1978 to 1989, and is a partner in the law firm of Bryan Cave. It appeared today as a Special in www.World Tribune.com |
|
Why do so many Americans refuse to face the fact that our country is at war with international terrorism? The leading terrorist group, Al Qaida, is fighting us on the ground in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Both Iran and North Korea are threatening nuclear war. And yet many Americans, including some Congressional Democrats, denounce President Bush, and in so doing, weaken our country's ability to resist Islamic fascism. One Congressional Democrat, John Conyers of Michigan, announced his intention to impeach the President when Republicans lose control of both Houses of Congress. There is something terribly wrong with people seeking to demean and weaken the president in war time, thereby strengthening our country's enemies. As a result of the language and tactics of those opposed to our presence in Iraq, our enemies have been emboldened, believing the American public to be sharply divided on the war, and in fact at war with itself. To other countries, Americans appear pitted against one another not in an election, but in a verbal bloodbath, convincing the world we are impotent -- a paper tiger. The tyrannical forces in Iran led by its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, make clear that if they can destroy us, they will. Ahmadinejad has said about the U.S., "...Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?... you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved..." Ahmadinejad has also stated his goal of destroying the state of Israel several times, saying, "...Israel must be wiped off the map." If a sovereign nation makes such threats, do those who are threatened have to wait until the missiles are in the air before taking action? Or may threatened states defend themselves with preemptive action? The U.N. Security Council has demanded that Iran stop developing nuclear technology leading to the creation of a nuclear bomb. Iran has refused, notwithstanding threatened sanctions. Iran's conventional missiles can already reach Europe and Israel. Must Israel wait until the world knows exactly when Iran's bomb has been built? Experts estimate that it may take years or as little as six months. No one knows with certainty when the cobra will be able to strike. Iran has lied to the U.N. about its nuclear development efforts before. Is there anyone who believes it is not prepared to lie in the future or is currently lying? Many of those who attack the president, hoping to make him ineffective and bring him down, are opposed to our alliance with Israel. You can verify that and the signs of anti-Semitism by looking at the banners and listening to the anti-Israel invective in the speeches in the street demonstrations and marches against the war in Iraq and President Bush. Regrettably, many of those marchers are blind to the terrorism that faces the Western civilization, sympathize with it, or fear it less than they despise the governmental leaders of the U.S. Recently, Scotland Yard arrested 25 British-born Muslims in the midst of plotting to blow up over the Atlantic Ocean ten U.S.-bound airplanes filled with approximately 4,000 people. The British authorities have indicted 14 and continue with its investigation of 11 more, having released several suspects. In a recent poll of British Muslims by NOP Research, broadcast by British Channel 4-TV on August 7, "Forty-five percent say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments. This figure is more than twice as high as those who say it was not a conspiracy. Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror." I know of no comparable poll taken in the American Muslim community, which numbers 2 to 6 million. There are certainly enough Muslims here to poll. Are we afraid to learn the results? When the government engages in racial and ethnic profiling at our airports, there is an outcry among those who call themselves civil libertarians. They seek to shame us, citing the actions taken in World War II against Japanese-American citizens. The difference is that no Japanese-American engaged in a single hostile act against the U.S. in World War II. We know today that the 19 terrorists who brought the World Trade Center towers down were Muslims. We know that Muslims planned and implemented the attacks on our embassies in Africa, the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen and the army barracks in Saudi Arabia. So when our counter intelligence investigates alleged terrorist groups, shouldn't suspected Muslim groups be first on the list? At airports, shouldn't those who speak Arabic or are identified by trained inspectors by clothing, actions, appearance or information as Muslims receive special attention? Most will undoubtedly be innocent, and understandably affronted and inconvenienced. Nevertheless, it is the rational measure to take when we are at war. Protecting the nation does not mean silence in the face of criminality on the part of the U.S. military forces or improper government action. It means exercising restraint, responsibility, good faith and respect for other people. It means not seeking political gain at the expense of the nation?'s security in war time. Knowing what to do can be likened to Mr. Justice Potter Stewart's statement in a pornography case. Said he, "I know it when I see it." We should not say "My country right or wrong," as Commander Stephen Decatur did, but we should preserve our country's values while not jeopardizing its very existence. 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 |
|
LOCAL MOSLEM JIHADISTS POSE LETHAL THREAT BUT GO UNREPORTED
Posted by David Meir-Levi, September 1, 2006. |
|
Jaxon Van Derbeken's "Everyone needs to be killed" (SF Chron, 9.1.06, B-1), tells us how, on Tuesday evening (8/29/06), a 29-year-old Afghani, Omeed Aziz Popal, went on a rampage in his father's SUV in San Francisco, killing one man and sending 14 other victims to the hospital, seven in critical condition. But the article fails to connect some very important dots. Bloggers and on-line news sites report that Popal is a Moslem and called himself a terrorist. And this information connects Popal with a series of similar terror attacks. Last month in Seattle, Naveed Afzal Haq, a Pakistani Moslem, shot six Jews, killing one, at a Jewish Community Federation office. He was specific as to his intentions and motivation: kill Jews as revenge against Israel. On 3 March, 2006, at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, a 22-year-old Iranian Moslem, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, went on a killing spree in a rented SUV to "punish the government of the United States" and "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world." When making his initial statement in court, Taheri-azar expressed gratitude "for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah." He also stated that he purposely rented an SUV in order to inflict more damage with the large vehicle. Other cases in recent years include Hasan Akbar, an American Moslem sergeant in the 101st Airborne Division, who attacked his fellow soldiers at an American command center in Kuwait with grenades and rifle fire, killing one and wounding 15. His explanation: his American soldier comrades were killing "his people" in the Middle East. In 2002, an Egyptian Moslem, Hesham Ali Hadayet, killed two people when he shot up the El Al ticket counter at the Los Angeles airport. His motive: he was contemplating suicide and wanted to guarantee his place in paradise with his virgins, alongside of Allah, by taking Jews with him. And Ali Hasan Abu Kamal, a Moslem, was carrying a note denouncing "Zionists" and others who "must be annihilated & exterminated" when he opened fire on tourists from the observation deck of the Empire State Building. In February of last year, Moslem Americans in New Jersey posted on their websites such comments as: "Oh Allah, grant me the privilege of slitting his throat" with reference to Armenian and Coptic Christian Americans who had the temerity to engage in debate about Islam on the web. When a local Christian Coptic family was found ritually slaughtered (all tied to chairs, gagged, and their throats slit), with a note condemning them for their anti-Islamic comments, the FBI and local police refused to consider it a hate-crime. Later, in the same area, an Armenian Christian family was found murdered in the same gruesome manner. And lets not forget the murderous rampage of Lee Boyd Malvo and John Allen Muhammad, two Moslems who perpetrated 13 shooting attacks, of which ten were fatal, randomly killing innocent pedestrians in the D.C. area. Muhammad declared that he "hated this country" and planned to carry out many more killings in order to terrorize the nation and undercut its economy. Over the past few years, dozens of murders and attempted murders have been perpetrated by Moslems who espouse hate-America slogans and declare openly that their dirty deeds are done to advance the international Islamic Jihad against the West. Yet our law enforcement organizations refuse to designate these as hate crimes or terror attacks, and most of our mainstream media refuse to inform the public of the one common factor that links them: the perpetrators are Moslem men who declare openly their hatred for America; and who describe their motive as the desire to kill American infidels in the name of Allah. Perhaps most troubling, our mainstream Moslem community, most of whom surely are upstanding honest citizens who want nothing more than to live a good life, raise a family, and leave the world a bit better off than when they entered it -- these good American Moslems are silent in the face of the evil perpetrated by their co-religionists. Silence in the face of evil is complicity. Everyone in America is facing the threat of murderous Moslem terrorists living in our very midst. But no one seems to be willing to analyze this threat. No one wants to connect the dots. 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 |
|
TIME FOR OLMERT TO GO
Posted by Kevin Bjornson, September 1, 2006. |
|
Israel can ill afford stalemate in Lebanon. Sooner or later, Hezbollah will need to be rooted out. But the main threat is from their puppet-masters, Iran and Syria. Hezb had six years to prepare traps and ambushes for an attack from the South. Suppose that IDF had continued it's recent attack. Hezb would have continued to retreat further north, drawing Israel into the briar patch, without a clear resolution. Ultimately, they could have retreated into Syria, to come back another day. Instead, IDF should invade Syria, deposing the Assad regime. Then, invade Lebanon through the Bekka Valley, capturing relevant portions of Beirut; and attack Hezb from the north. Instead of attacking infrastructure in Lebanon (those roads could be used by IDF, and electricity is necessary only in the long-run). This would relieve pressure from the Syrian front, on US forces in Iraq. This would enable the US to lean forward against Iran, with a massive cruise missile attack and the arming of insurgents. I heard a rumor from intelligence that Israel cut short the Lebanon operation after a nuclear threat from Iran. Supposedly, Iran purchased three nukes from Kazakstan in 1991, transporting them through Turkey. We have no physical proof of that, and perhaps somebody wants us to think Iran already has nukes. If true, this threat should be treated as a first nuclear strike. There was a good reason to cut the operation short. IDF reserve wasn't properly equipped (or trained). All vehicles should be up-armored, and all soldiers should have state-of-the-art body armor and weapons. Because of our bigger land area and population, the US could absorb a few nukes and still survive. The same cannot be said of Israel. Therefore, if the US doesn't launch missiles against Iran, Israel should. And soon. Contact Kevin Bjornsson at kevinsbjornson@yahoo.com |
|
HELP THE ISRAELI PUBLIC SEE THE FACE OF THEIR "PEACE PARTNERS"
Posted by David Bedein, September 1, 2006. |
|
Momentum is under way to expedite negotiations between Israel and its Palestinian Arab adversaries. Millions of dollars are being poured into that campaign, designed to convince the people of Israel that a dialogue must be nurtured with two levels of Palestinian Arab leadership: 1. Those who sit in prisons who will pay for their freedom by choosing a path of non-violence 2. Those who are are democratically elected who will embark on a future path of peace. A few months ago, Israel Resource News Agency dispatched an American TV producer and an Arabic speaking journalist to interview leading Palestinian Arabs who now sit in jail for life and then to interview the newly elected leadership of the Palestinian Authority. The questions asked:
*Do you have any regret for murders that you have conducted or endorsed?
Their answers were clear and frank: *Justification for murder Negotiations are now imminent to free these convicts, and to make an accord with the elected leaders of Palestinian Authority. The same American TV producer has returned to Israel for one week to work with his Arabic speaking Israeli journalist colleague to edit and produce this film and to present it to the Israeli public. The people of Israel deserve the opportunity to see what their adversaries are saying. $20,000 is needed for the final edit and production a 30 minute version of this film, this week. $20,000 is needed to conduct public presentations of the film to the Israeli public and to show clips on Israeli TV and for the foreign and local media.. The IRS tax deductible avenue to support this film : THE CENTER FOR NEAR EAST POLICY RESEARCH, POB 1783, BROOKLINE, MASS 02446 or through its address in Israel: Beit Agron, 37 Hillel, Jerusalem 94581. HERE IS A 19 Minute trailer of the movie: http://israelissues.com/media/hamasinterview.html |
|
SUMMARIES OF SELECTED INTERVIEWS: Hassam Wakim was interviewed for several bombings, two of which were described in detail by Hassam himself. Wakim explained his involved in the bombings of the Yeshiva University Cafeteria and the Moment Café. Wakim explains how he drove to Yeshiva and waited for his accomplice to plant the bag carrying the bomb. Wakim stated that he detonated the bomb remotely via cellular telephone as he drove away. Wakim then explains how he drove the suicide bomber to the Moment Café and how he advised the suicide bomber to find and target the most populated area. He also advised the suicide bomber to push his way through inside the targeted location at all cost and then detonate the bomb. Wakim describes the Jews as "evil" and that there is no negotiating with Jews. He stated that violence is the only option. Bargouti describes his involvement in the bombing of Sbarro Restaurant. Bargouti discusses what led him to join the Hamas Terrorist Organization, and what led to the bombing of Sbarro. He built the bomb and placed it in a guitar, handed the guitar to a woman who would meet the suicide bomber. Bargouti explains how he was arrested and how he heard the news about the attack on Sbarro Restaurant. He then describes his feelings about the attack. He states that he along with all Palestinians were happy after hearing the new of the terrorist attack. Several female prisoners were interviewed regarding their role in terrorist attacks. They freely discussed their hatred and lack of tolerance to Jews. One female prisoner stated that if it were up to her she would "kill" all the Jews. Another female prisoner stated how she felt honored to wear a suicide belt, while a third stated that the Jews have no right to land that belongs to the Palestinians and that the Jews can never co-exist with Palestinians. The newly elected leaders of the Palestinian Authority they concur with the convicts who have been incarcerated: terror attacks will not cease until the Zionist entity is removed from the Middle East, by any and all means possible. The time has come to present this film to the people of Israel to judge for themselves as to whether they have a partner for peace. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il or go to www.ibtn.co.il |
|
ARE THE NON-SHIITE LEBANESE INNOCENT?; A LEFTIST ON THE P.A. WAR;
THE ILLOGIC OF RETREAT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, September 1, 2006. |
|
HOW INNOCENT ARE THE NON-SHIITE LEBANESE? Hizbullah represents in the parliament of Lebanon the Shiites of the south, from whose governance it excludes the national government. Hizbullah members sit in the Cabinet even while it commits aggression across the border, against Israel. The UNO Security Council resolved that Hizbullah must be disarmed. Lebanon pleads helplessness. But it did not ask for UNO support in disarming Hizbullah. When Syrian troops left, the government of Lebanon did not try to build up its military so it could regain control over the southern part of the country. Therefore, it cannot disclaim all responsibility for the consequences of Hizbullah aggression (Jewish Political Chronicle, 7/2006, David Schimmel, Ed.). The government did not disarm the PLO in the north, either. It allowed Syrian arms it could have stopped, to flow to Hizbullah. Its government calls Israel the enemy. JORDAN CONVICTS ISLAMISTS A couple of Islamist members of Jordan's parliament were convicted, when parliament was not in session, for supporting terrorism against Jordan. Their punishment was two years in jail and fines (IMRA, 8/6). Let's see whether they serve their full term, short as it is. P.A. CIVIL STRIFE SPILLS INTO PRISONS In both parts of the P.A., Fatah men or their rivals dress as policemen, enter prisons, and shoot their rivals in retaliation for their rivals having shot some of them. Other prisoners attacked were being held on accusations of having "collaborated" with Israel (IMRA, 8/6). Such charges often are false excuses for arresting people out of political, clan, or business rivalry. Deserving of statehood are they? Democratizing are they? P.A. WEDDINGS: BRING EARPLUGS & ARMOR At a wedding celebration in Jenin, several men were firing automatic rifles into the air. Losing control of his weapon, one man shot three children to death. This is a common problem that concerns the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (IMRA, 8/6). Does it concern the NY Times? Among the various human rights stories about the Arabs featured by the NY Times, I have never seen any showing their barbarism. Does the Times reserve its criticism over the deaths of Palestinian Arab children for Israel, as about cluster bombs, or does it lament Arab callousness in those editions that I miss? ISRAELI MILITARY STRATEGY Hizbullah has short-range and long-range rockets. The short-range ones are fired from southern Lebanon, fairly close to the border. The longer-range ones can be fired from further north. At first, the IDF merely bombed Hizbullah, but since the rockets were not in fixed position, the bombing gave Hizbullah the opportunity to fire many of them. Then the government sent the infantry a short distance into Lebanon. The troops could find short-range rockets, but they weren't far enough in to reach the long-range ones. Defense Min. Peretz wanted to send the troops further in, but PM Olmert overruled him. "Diplomatic pressure"? A further thrust northward was inevitable (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 8/6). Israelis suffered needless casualties because the government was timid and started with half-measures. This is not intelligent. The same failure to start out with overwhelming force characterizes the US efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. THE ILLOGIC OF RETREAT Thanks to having considerably more territorial depth in 1973, Israel was able to turn back the Arab invaders. This should have taught Israelis that withdrawal is foolish. Instead, it gave them a feeling that they are so strong they don't need the Territories. They reached an illogical conclusion (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 8/6). The Olmert regime ordered the IDF not to pursue P.A. rocket squads and not to set up ambushes for them in Gaza. A tank commander had to call higher up the chain for permission to shoot at the Hizbullah kidnappers of Israeli troops. That prevented rescue. It seems as if the stupidity, timidity, or treason of the government makes Israel lose wars it should win handily (Barry Chamish, 8/6). Ideology before logic, timidity before reason, bribes before patriotism. WHAT DOES IT TAKE FOR THE WEST TO LEARN? The West hardly paid attention to the various terrorist attacks on it. Then Islamic terrorists brought down the World Trade Center and 3,000 civilians. More recently, Muslim terrorists plotted to blow up several airplanes from London. Nevertheless, political correctness still prevents most police forces from using profiling to assess realistically whom to examine more thoroughly. Daniel Pipes thinks that it will take the murder of 100,000 Westerners, before political correctness is overcome (NY Sun, 8/22, p.5). That is the price of political correctness. As with the government of Israel, ideology intimidates the natural conclusions from fact and logic. WHAT DOES "SELF-DEFENSE" MEAN? In devising a ceasefire to impose upon Israel, the US seems to interpret self-defense narrowly, which favors Hizbullah. Hizbullah may arm and prepare for battle, without Israel taking preventive measures. When it opens fire, Israel may fire back. As soon as Hizbullah finds Israeli fire intense, and disengages, Israel must not pursue them (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 8/6). The State Dept. press briefing that led Dr. Lerner to express these doubts referred to Israeli bombing missions as "offensive." The purpose of the bombing, however, is to destroy Hizbullah's ability to launch more attacks. I call that defensive against continued aggression after the ceasefire. I think that a ceasefire should not be imposed upon the victim of aggression while it is drying up the source of aggression. DEATHS OF ARAB "CIVILIANS" Meanwhile, a rocket fired from Kfar Qana struck the building of the Arab Communist Party in Haifa. The editor expressed anger not at the perpetrators but at Israel, for having committed "aggression." Kfar Qana is the town that Israel was accused of having bombed for no reason and for having killed civilians in the unnecessary attack. Since Arab terrorists usually don't wear uniforms, they are called civilians, when killed, so Israel is further accused of killing civilians (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/7). According to the Communists and Arabs, when Israel defends itself against an unprovoked Arab attack, it commits aggression. The Arabs find it too shameful to admit guilt. They keep flinging mud at Israel. Some, at least in Europe, sticks. If American leaders are more stupid than European ones, how come the European ones are more prejudiced? Because their media is more prejudiced? ISRAEL'S OTHER BOMBING TARGETS Israel bombed some banks in Lebanon used by Hizbullah. Those apparently civilian targets funnel money to Hizbullah. The NBC news team that reported this asked an Islamist organization mentioned in the news report how to send money to the jihadists. They were told of a couple of banks to which they should wire the donation. Instead, they informed the banks' US correspondent that the accounts to which such wires go are terrorist. The US banks severed relations with the Lebanese banks. How effective are US efforts against terrorist financing, that there remains so much terrorist financing and a news team could undo some of it without needing police power (Daniel Pipes, 8/7, #694). "RELY ON INTERNATIONAL FORCES" Israeli Leftist A.B. Yehoshua broadcast an exhortation to the government of Israel to stop fighting, stop thinking ahead, and instead rely upon international forces to handle Hizbullah (IMRA, 8/7). What does he think Israel had been doing, while Hizbullah periodically raided Israel after the UNO resolved that Hizbullah should disarm? Notice how ineffective are international forces and how hostile most countries are to Israel! As for thinking ahead, the government is notorious for myopia, especially during this war and for permitting Hizbullah to build up to it. Yehoshua is appeasement-minded and defeatist. U.S. STAKE IN LEBANON WAR The current clash of civilizations may take a long time to be resolved. The stronger the states that aid and abet terrorism, the longer the war. Syria and Iran, which sponsor terrorism and help direct this clash are enemies both of Israel and of the US. The US has not taken them on (probably still blinded by the backward-looking State Dept. bias against Israel and its officials' looking forward to jobs as consultants for S. Arabia). The US must fight harder in Afghanistan and Iraq and damage the regimes in Syria and Iran (Jewish Political Chronicle, 7/2006, p.7 from William Kristol, Weekly Standard, 7/24). Some people don't take the President of Iran seriously. They think he is just ranting and boasting. However, he represents the clerical regime, which wouldn't let him commit the country if he weren't in league with them. He says Iran wants to destroy Israel and the US. Believe him! (Op. Cit. p.12 from Hirsh Goodman, Jer. Report, 6/26). Iran has been preparing for a conflict with the US. Its proxy war on Israel via Hizbullah and Hamas is a step in that conflict. By wearing down a US ally, Iran would weaken the US. Iran trained 3,000 Hizbullah men in guerilla warfare, missiles and artillery, unmanned aerial drones, conventional warfare, and marine warfare. With its weaponry, Hizbullah became an army, fighting conventionally and dirty (Ibid., p.12 from Yehudit Barsky, NY Sun, 7/28). The current wars took extensive preparation. Obviously, Iran wanted them (Ibid, p.11 from Michael Ledeen in National Review Online, 7/13). Instead of adopting the converse of Iran's policy, that by wearing down Iranian outposts, including Syria, Israel would weaken Iran's war on Western civilization, the US and Israel agreed that Israel would not strike Syria or Iran (Ibid., p.13 from Lawrence F. Kaplan in New Republic, 7/31) and would not completely destroy Hizbullah or P.A. terrorism. Whom is the US appeasing? -- France, the UNO, the Democrats, the media? ARABS TAKE CASUALTIES IN ISRAEL There is a large Arab population in northern Israel, where Hizbullah rockets land. Probably half the casualties there are of Israeli Arabs. Nevertheless, those Arabs cheer the terrorists on. They talk about Hizbullah troops as "theirs" as if those cheering Arabs were not citizens of bombarded Israel (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/7). A country is foolish to allow a fifth column that roots for the enemy and whose political representatives do more than root for it. A LEFTIST TAKE ON THE P.A. WAR Yossi Klein Halevi is one of Israel's leftist patriots. He thinks Israel made a mistake in letting Hamas stay in power, because by running the P.A. educational system, it will prevent the Arabs from reconciling with Israel for generations. He still thinks that unilateral withdrawals were a practical policy, except that Israel failed to fulfill the part of that policy that promised swift and harsh retaliation against any Arab aggression from the withdrawn territory. Although most of the world considers the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers as a legitimate act of war, it fails to realize that whereas Israel allows visits from family and Red Cross, the Arabs hide (and usually murder) Israeli prisoners. The prisoners whom the Arabs demand be released are not ordinary soldiers but brutes like Samir Kuntar, the PLO terrorist who took a family hostage in Israel and smashed the child's head against a rock. The P.A. considers him a hero. No wonder Israel gets fighting made when Arabs capture its troops! (Jewish Political Chronicle, 7/2006, p.8 from New Republic Online, 7/12.) The kidnapping violated a ceasefire, so it was not legitimate. Israel made a mistake not only in letting Hamas stay in power, but also earlier in bringing the PLO to power and letting it keep power. There isn't much difference between the PLO and Hamas curriculum. The PLO under Arafat and Abbas taught that Jews are evil and Israel must be destroyed. Mr. Halevi is deceiving himself that some Arab leaders in the confrontation areas are moderate. Doesn't he see that prisoner Kuntar is the worst barbarian and yet a PLO hero? Mr. Halevi believed Israel's leaders' promises and threats that they would retaliate harshly. I didn't. That is because they did not keep their earlier promises and threats, under Oslo. I believe that Israeli bluster is a bluff, a cover for weakness of will. The Arabs repeatedly commit aggression from areas vacated by Israel. That is what Israel's leaders and leftist commentators should have learned. Under international law, Israel is entitled to keep the territories to prevent further aggression from them (and for other reasons under the Mandate). Israeli should absorb the land without the Arabs. ORDERS TO THE IDF Israeli Defense Min. Peretz has ordered the IDF to seize all the Hizbullah rockets, if diplomacy does not work (IMRA, 8/7). Diplomacy is the tool of the devil. The enemy is united in it, stubborn, and clever; the West is divided about it, hesitant, and foolish. What does Min. Peretz think diplomacy is for, after it has been used to halt every Israeli victory? What would make diplomacy "work," for him? Israel keeps changing its diplomatic goal, according to US demands and other pressures, not the necessity to protect Israel. What it comes down to is a ceasefire. That means Hizbullah would keep its missiles and possibly acquire more, until it overcomes the constraint that imposed the ceasefire. This is classical Islamic strategy. Would that the mainstream Western leaders and media point this out, and that Israeli leaders were aware of it. They play into Islamic hands! Diplomacy has not worked with the P.A.. Why doesn't Peretz order the IDF to seize all the Hamas rockets? And why doesn't he study classical Islamic strategy? LEBANON'S INFRASTRUCTURE The Arabs and much of the rest of the world complain that Israel is destroying Lebanon's infrastructure, and don't complain that Hizbullah insinuates its military facilities within that infrastructure to induce their complaints against Israel. Israel attacked dual-use bridges, roads, airports, and ports, to prevent arms from reaching Hizbullah. If it wanted to destroy the civilian infrastructure, it could have destroyed the power grid and imposed a blackout on the whole country. It did not do that (Jewish Political Chronicle, 7/2006, p.9 from Charles Krauthammer, Wash. Post, 7/28). FLAW IN THE CEASEFIRE The pact would require a halt to offensive operations, a Lebanese and UNO buffer between the two parties, and an embargo on arms shipments to Lebanon except as approved by Lebanon (which previously has approved shipments to Hizbullah). Once Israeli troops withdrew, Israelis would not be allowed to fly over the Lebanon-Syria border to observe compliance with the embargo by Hizbullah and Syria (both violators of UNO resolutions). The UNO might issue a self-serving but false report of compliance. If Israel were to complain of violations, the UNO would ask for proof. (Of Israel, proof always is asked and usually disbelieved.) If Israel produced evidence obtained by over-flights, it would be indicating that it had violated the terms of the ceasefire (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 8/7). As for disarming Hizbullah, it is not expected to be done without the cooperation of Syria and Hizbullah (NY Times, 8/28, A9). Who expects 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. |
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |