ROSH HASHANA 5768 REFLECTIONS Posted by Yoram Ettinger, August 31, 2007.

The photo art above is by Fred Reifenberg. It is called "Reflect on This."

1. ROSH HASHANA commemorates the emergence of human being on the sixth day of creation. ROSH (Hashana) means in Hebrew "BEGINNING", "Head", "Chief". The Hebrew letters of ROSH are at the heart/middle of the Hebrew word for Genesis, "BERESHIT", which is the first word in Old Testament. Just like The Creation, so should the new year and our own actions, be a thoughtful (head-driven) -- rather than a hasty -- process. Rosh Hashana is celebrated during the Hebrew month of TISHREY, which means GENESIS in ancient Acadian. Rosh Hashana is referred to as "HA'RA'T OLAM" (the pregnancy of the world), and its prayers highlight the pregnancies of SARAH and CHANAH who gave birth to ISAAC and SAMUEL. NOAH -- who led the rebirth of humanity/world -- also features in Rosh Hashana prayers. 2. THE SHOFAR (ritual horn) is blown on Rosh Hashana, which is also called "YOM TE'ROO'AH" (the day of blowing the Shofar). Shofar is a derivative of the Hebrew word for ENHANCEMENT/IMPROVEMENT (Shipur), which is expected of human beings during the new year. A blow of the Shofar is intended to assemble the People and to awaken one's conscience and soul-searching, a prerequisite for improvement. Such a process requires HUMILITY, symbolized by the Shofar, which is bent and is not supposed to be decorated. The Shofar is the epitome of Peace-Through-Strength: It is made from the horn of a ram, which is a peaceful animal equipped with strong horns, in order to fend off wild animals. While the BLOWING of the Shofar is a major virtue (of one person), LISTENING to the sound of the Shofar is a major virtue as well (of the whole community). The Hebrew root of "listening" is the same as the root for SCALE and BALANCE (good deeds vs bad deeds), which is the zodiac sign of the month of Tishrey. The same root also applies to the Hebrew word for "ear", which contains the balancing mechanism in our body. Both Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur are observed during the month of Tishrey. There are three types of Shofar-blowing, highlighting Liberty of human-beings and G-D's Kingdom (MALKHOUYOT), history/memory (ZIKHRONOT) and enhancement (SHOFAROT). They also commemorate the three patriarchs, the three parts of the Old Testament and the three types of human beings on judgment day (pious, evil and mediocre). The Shofar is blown 101 times, which is the numerical value (in Hebrew) of the name Michael, which was one of the names of Moses. 3. THE SHOFAR commemorates faith in G-D, optimism in face of adversity, the lessons of the almost-sacrifice of Isaac (thou shall not sacrifice human beings!), the gift of the Torah at Mt. Sinai (which was ushered in by the Shofar), spiritual and physical deliverance of slaves, destruction of the two Temples, ingathering of the Jews to the Land of Israel and the day of judgment. 4. THE POMEGRANATE -- one of the seven species blessed by the Land of Israel -- features during Rosh Hashana meals and in a key blessing on Rosh Hashana: "May you be credited with as many rewards as the seeds of the pomegranate." The pomegranate becomes ripe on time for Rosh Hashana and contains -- genetically -- 613 seeds, which is the number of Jewish laws (of Moses). It was employed as an ornament of the Holy Arc, the Menorah (candelabrum) and the Grand Priest coat, and is employed as an ornament of the Torah Scroll. The first two letters of the Hebrew word for pomegranate, RIMON, mean sublime and it is known for its crown. The pomegranate (skin and seeds) is the healthiest fruit: much iron, anti-oxidant, anti-cancer, decreases blood pressure, enhances quality of blood and cardiac and digestion system. A Hebrew synonym to a wise person: Wholesome like a pomegranate. 5. COMMEMORATION DAY ("Yom Hazikaron" in Hebrew) is one of the names of Rosh Hashana. One can avoid -- rather than repeat -- past mistakes by examining history. The more one remembers, the deeper are the roots and the greater is one's stability and one's capability to withstand storms of pressure and temptation. The more stable/calculated/moral is the head of the year (Rosh Hashana), the more constructive is the rest of the year. Rosh Hashana commemorates: The appearance of the FIRST HUMAN BEING on the sixth day of The Creation, The beginning of the CYCLE OF NATURE -- seed planting -- and equality of day and night; The opening of the Ark of NOAH following The Flood; The almost-sacrifice of ISAAC; The release of JOSEPH (who is buried in northern Samaria, Nablus) from Egyptian jail; The laying of the cornerstone to the Second TEMPLE; The three Patriarchs, ABRAHAM, ISAAC and JACOB were born during the month of Tishrey, which is called "The Month of the Strong Ones" -- Nature and Patriarchs; The two days of Rosh Hashana are dedicated to Abraham and Isaac and Yom Kippur (which ends the Ten Days of Repentance/Atonement, initiated on Rosh Hashana) is dedicated to JACOB; The Patriarch ISAAC and the Prophet SAMUEL were conceived, in Tishrey, by SARAH and CHANAH; 6. ROSH HASHANA IS A UNIVERSAL -- NOT JUST JEWISH -- STOCK TAKING (REPENTANCE) DAY (Yom Teshuva, Yom Hadeen in Hebrew), which is the first of the Ten Days of Atonement, culminating on Yom Kippur. A Hebrew word for atonement/repentance is TESHUVA, which also means spiritual and physical RETURN (to core values and to the Land of Israel). On Rosh Hashana one is expected to plan a "budget" for the entire year. The prerequisite for a wholesome "budget" is HUMILITY, without which one is incapable of objective "stock taking". The three Hebrew words, Teshuva (repentance/atonement), Shiva (return) and Shabbat -- derived from the same root -- constitute a triangular (personal, national and spiritual) foundation, whose strength depends on the level of Education and Commemoration. According to King Solomon, "The triangular cord cannot be broken." May past year's curses be over, and may we earn the blessings of the coming year! Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

WHAT IS THERE TO CELEBRATE? Posted by Eli E. Hertz, August 27, 2007.

The Israeli media is busy reporting: "This November will mark 60 years since the famous and fateful UN partition vote that paved the way for Israel's cre ation. The Knesset plans to reenact the vote with fanfare. "The commemoration is to occur this coming November 29 (Thursday, the 19th of Kislev), when Israel's parliament will festively reenact the UN vote that took place exactly 60 years before. An invitation has already been proffered to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and the ambassadors of the 33 countries that voted in favor of the partition will also be invited." [IsraelINN.com] What is there to celebrate? In a statement to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), on October 2, 1947, the representat ive of the Jewish Agency for Palestine said the following about fairness, balance, and justice of the recommendation to partition Palestine: "According to David Lloyd George, then British Prime Minister, the Balfour Declaration implied that the whole of Pal estine, including Transjordan, should ultimately become a Jewish state. Transjordan had, nevertheless, been severed from Palestine in 1922 and had subsequently been set up as an Arab kingdom. "Now a second Arab state was to be carved out of the remainder of Palestine, with the result that the Jewish Nationa l Home would represent less than one eighth of the territory originally set aside for it. Such a sacrifice should no t be asked of the Jewish people.[1] "... 17,000,000 Arabs now occupied an area of 1,290,000 square miles, including all the principal Arab and Moslem ce ntres, while Palestine, after the loss of Transjordan, was only 10,000 square miles; yet the majority plan proposed to reduce it by one half. UNSCOP proposed to eliminate Western Galilee from the Jewish State; that was an injustice and a grievous handicap to the development of the Jewish State."[2] If the Partition Plan would have been implemented, it is likely to assume that the tiny state of Israel would be unable to repel any coordinated Arab assault. Jerusalem, according to the recommended plan, would not be the Capitol of a Jewish state - Jerusalem would have been internationalized. The Knesset and the Government of Israel should reconsider their venue: What should be remembered is that Israel's independence is not a result of a partial implementation of the Partition Plan. Resolution 181 [Also known as the Partition Plan] has no legal ramifications -- that is, Resolution 181 recognized the Jewish right to statehood, but its validity as a potentially legal and binding document was never consummated. Like the schemes that preceded it, Resolution 181's validity hinged on acceptance of the General Assembly's recommendation by both parties. Professor Lauterpacht clarified that from a legal standpoint, the 1947 UN Partition Resolution had no legislative character to vest territorial rights to either Jews or Arabs. In a monograph relating to one of the most complex aspects of the territorial issue - the status of Jerusalem - Lauterpacht wrote that any binding force the Partition Plan would have had to arise from the principle pacta sunt servanda [Latin, "treaties must be honored"], that is, from agreement of the parties at variance to the proposed plan. In the case of Israel, Lauterpacht explains: "... the coming into existence of Israel does not depend legally upon the Resolution. The right of a State to exist flows from its factual existence - especially when that existence is prolonged, shows every sign of continuance and is recognised by the generality of nations."[3] Reviewing Lauterpacht's arguments, Professor Julius Stone, a distinguished authority on the Law of Nations, added that Israel's legitimacy, or the legal foundation for its birth, does not reside with the United Nations recommendation to partition Palestine, which as a consequence of Arab actions became a dead issue. Professor Stone concluded: "... The State of Israel is thus not legally derived from the partition plan, but rests (as do most other states in the world) on assertion of independence by its people and government, on the vindication of that independence by arm s against assault by other states, and on the establishment of orderly government within territory under its stable control."[4] Resolution 181 had been tossed into the waste bin of history, along with the partition plans that preceded it. Instead, celebrate by reenacting the reading of Israel's Declaration of Independence; 5 Iyar 5708, 14.5.1948   Footnotes 1 Yearbook of the United Nations 1947-48. 1949. I . 13. December 31, 1948. See: http://www.mefacts.com/cache/html/un-documents/11270.htm. (11270) 2 Delivered by Dr. Abba Hillel Silver, October 2, 1947. 3 See: Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, Jerusalem and the Holy Places (London: The Anglo-Israel Association, 1968), page 52. 4 Professor Julius Stone (1907-1985), Israel and Palestine, Assault on the Law of Nations (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981), p. 127. The late Professor Stone was recognized as one of the twentieth century's leading authorities on the Law of Nations. His work represents a detailed analysis of the central principles of international law governing the issues raised by the Arab-Israel conflict. He was one of a few scholars to gain outstanding recognition in more than one field. Professor Stone was one of the world's best-known authorities in both Jurisprudence and International Law. Eli E. Hertz, who is President of the Myths and Facts Organization. Contact him at the website: www.mythsandfacts.com. To Go To Top

SAUDIS, ARMS AND TERROR Posted by Daily Alert, August 31, 2007.

This was written by Robert Chamberlain and it appeared in the New York Post (www.nypost.com/seven/08072007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/saudis__arms__terror_opedcolumnists_robert_chamberlain.htm). Robert Chamberlain is an associate analyst at the Institute for Gulf Affairs, a Washington-based think tank focusing on the Persian Gulf Arab countries.

SAUDI Arabia is often touted as one of America's closest Middle Eastern allies. Indeed, the Bush administration is now negotiating a $20 billion arms deal providing the Saudis with America's best weaponry. The time, however, has come for the United States to challenge Saudi Arabia to act as an ally. The kingdom of Saudi Arabia has found itself in the news lately; a recent article in The LA Times reported that Saudi citizens comprise 45 percent of the foreign fighters in Iraq. Half of the suicide bombings are carried out by Saudi citizens, and of the 135 foreign fighters in American detention facilities, half are Saudi. This should function as a red warning light to American officials. But thus far, it hasn't. On July 27, The New York Times reported that some elements in Saudi Arabia are giving financial aid to Sunni groups involved in the Iraqi insurgency. Earlier this year, a close aide to the former Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, hinted that Saudi Arabia would fund Sunni groups to protect them from the Shiite majority in the case of a precipitous American withdrawal. Instead of help from Saudi Arabia, we get high-ranking Saudi officials who encourage Saudis to find a way to join the insurgency in Iraq. In 2005, NBC investigative reporter Lisa Myers reported that Sheikh Saleh al-Luhaidan, a close ally of King Abdullah and the president of the Saudi Supreme Judicial Council, stated that those who can enter Iraq safely with the intention of raising the word of Allah won't be blamed. He also said that those who wish to fight the Americans need no permission from anyone, or need not be under a reputable leadership, but must dedicate their work to the sake of Allah. To date, al-Luhaidan remains in his post, with no action taken against him. Saudi Assistant Minister of Interior Mohamed Bin Naif has allegedly been helping Saudi citizens travel to Iraq to fight against American troops. Through him, elements of the Saudi government do indeed fight terrorism - by exporting Saudi terrorists to Iraq. This is ironic, because the Interior Ministry is supposed to be halting the flow of terrorists out of Saudi Arabia. And in November of 2005, 26 Saudi clerics, including 21 government clerics, issued a fatwa that called for Muslims to join in the insurgency in Iraq. None of these clerics has been punished, and they still remain in their posts. Perhaps even worse, King Abdullah himself called the American operations in Iraq an "illegitimate" occupation. Saudi Arabia also seems intent upon opposing Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as a puppet of Iran. According to the Times, Saudi officials even tried to provide documents alleging that al-Maliki had advised radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to "lay low" during the American surge. The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilizad, protested to King Abdullah that the documents were forgeries. With Saudi officials acting in such a manner, it would only be logical for the Bush administration, at the very least, to push the government to clamp down on clerical fatwas calling for jihad against the United States and its Iraqi allies. Or even better, perhaps the Bush administration could urge the Saudi government to take a good, hard look at Saudi citizens with one-way tickets to Syria and Jordan. The Bush administration has done little to pressure the Saudi government to stem the flow of fighters to Iraq (via Syria and Jordan). The Saudis have taken some measures to stem the flow, but these are often weak, and fail to do much. These measures seem especially ironic in light of the fact that Saudi officials are encouraging Saudi citizens to fight in Iraq. It's time for the administration to take off the blinders when assessing their bilateral relations with the Saudis. The United States should threaten the Saudis with the prospect of losing the recently announced $20 billion arms deal unless the Saudi government shuts the faucets of terror and extremism spewing suicide bombers and fatwas. The Saudi networks of recruiters and financiers shipping thousands of Saudi suicide bombers and terrorists to Iraq and the world must be brought to a halt. The Saudi government must be forced to arrest clerics issuing pro-insurgency fatwas. Any Saudi official who aids or abets terrorism should be dealt with severely, meaning he should lose any official position and be punished with a harsh prison sentence. Most important, the United States must pressure the Saudis publicly; back-door assurances have not worked since 9/11. The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org To Go To Top

MSNBC'S ABRAMS HITS CNN'S AMANPOUR FOR DEFENDING ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM Posted by Ellen Horowitz, August , 2007.

This was written by Brad Wilmouth and it appeared August 28, 2007 on NewsBusters http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/08/28/ msnbcs-abrams-hits-cnns-amanpour-defending-islamic-fundamentalism

On Monday's MSNBC Live with Dan Abrams, host and MSNBC General Manager Abrams attacked CNN's series God's Warriors for "a defense of Islamic fundamentalism and the worst type of moral relativism," and as "shameful advocacy masked as journalism," quipping that series host Christiane Amanpour "avoided getting bogged down in objectivity." Abrams further took exception with Amanpour for comparing those who support Israel's defense strategy to Muslim terrorists: "Christians and Jews, for example, who support Israel's strategy for self-defense are just as much God's warriors, according to Amanpour, as the Islamic radicals who blow themselves and others up in an effort to destroy the world as we know it." (Transcript follows) After contending that Amanpour attempted to "understand" violent Muslim fundamentalists without trying to "understand" evangelical Christians and Israelis, Abrams played a clip of Amanpour in which she "blames the warrior Jews" for the anger of radical Muslims. Amanpour: "Muslims, like people everywhere, abhor terrorism. The small minority who resorts to violence is symptomatic of something many of us have failed to understand: the impact of God's Jewish warriors goes far beyond these rocky hills. The Jewish settlements have inflamed much of the Muslim world." Abrams soon brought aboard Muslim author Asma Hasan, Air America host Reverend Wilton Gaddy, and terrorism analyst Steve Emerson for a discussion of the topic, during which Emerson labeled the CNN series as "the most unfair series" and "the most dishonest series on television that I've seen in my 20 years of reporting or covering terrorism." Emerson further criticized Amanpour for not showing examples of violent Muslim extremists in Europe such as the Madrid and London bombings, and for portraying Jews and Christians as "demons." Emerson: "I thought that, in part, the actual dogma of this series actually focused mainly on Jews and Christians as being the demons, and in fact, one could accuse her of actually engaging in anti-Christian and anti-Semitic behavior by the selection of facts she chose to choose." Abrams showed a clip of Amanpour speaking to Christian youth leader Ron Luce of Teen Mania Ministries during which she contended that campus rules prohibiting female students from wearing short skirts and prohibiting male students from using the Internet without supervision reminded her of "totalitarian regimes," and compared the female dress code to what the Taliban did. Amanpour: "But that's what the Taliban said. They kept women in their house because men couldn't be trusted around them." Below is a transcript of relevant portions of the Monday August 27 MSNBC Live with Dan Abrams: DAN ABRAMS: For the past week, CNN has been proudly promoting and then celebrating its series called God's Warriors, presumably a look at radicals of different religions willing to fight for their cause. My take: I think it's fair to say it was not what it claimed or promised to be. CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: So we're not here lobbying for or advocating for or drawing conclusions, either political, religious or ideological- ABRAMS: Oh, yes they did. CNN should have called it what it was: a defense of Islamic fundamentalism and the worst type of moral relativism. For each of three nights, CNN devoted two hours to the, quote, "warriors" of each religion: Jewish, Christian and Muslim. But rather than distinguish between Islamic terrorists who utilize fierce violence to achieve warped goals, and the merely fiercely religious or even just those who fiercely believe in the state of Israel, Christiane Amanpour avoided getting bogged down in objectivity. Christians and Jews, for example, who support Israel's strategy for self-defense are just as much God's warriors, according to Amanpour, as the Islamic radicals who blow themselves and others up in an effort to destroy the world as we know it. A handful of the most radical of the Jews and Christians who can almost all be identified by name are highlighted. The violent Islamic fundamentalists are, quote, "understood," with no comparable effort to "understand" the evangelical Christians or Israelis. Amanpour even offers an explanation for the angry radical Islamists. She blames the warrior Jews. AMANPOUR: Muslims, like people everywhere, abhor terrorism. The small minority who resorts to violence is symptomatic of something many of us have failed to understand: the impact of God's Jewish warriors goes far beyond these rocky hills. The Jewish settlements have inflamed much of the Muslim world. ABRAMS: She takes Jewish and Christian political movements, even Jewish lobbyists in Congress, and lumps them in with God's warriors, thereby equating them with the radical Muslim warriors, the quote, "much feared and little understood." Maybe most troubling, much of the warrior Muslim program highlights not the warriors themselves, but claims of discrimination against Muslims. AMANPOUR: Geneive Abdo is the author of Mecca and Main Street. She says that since 9/11, the majority of American Muslims feel they're singled out for suspicion and surveillance by the government and by ordinary people. Imam Fawaz Jneid, leader of a mosque in the Hague, believes Muslims are under attack, victims of religious discrimination. ABRAMS: What does that have to do with the warriors? She portrays Muslims as victims, while accusing evangelical Christians of playing the victim. AMANPOUR: The religious right would have you believe that there's no mention of God anywhere in our public sphere. It's on the currency. JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN Legal Analyst: It's on the currency, and they say because it's on the currency, there's nothing wrong with it being in the schools, or in the courthouses, or in the Capitol. AMANPOUR: But they also play the victim somewhat. ABRAMS: This series was well-produced and successful, but also shameful advocacy masked as journalism. We have opinionated hosts here on MSNBC who offer opinions on a wide range of topics, including me, but I admit it when I'm advocating. In the end, this was exactly what she said it wasn't: lobbying, advocacy, and an effort, intentional or not, to have people draw particular conclusions. ... Before we talk about some of this other stuff, Asma, what do you think about the comments that I just made? [ASMA HASAN, Author of Why I Am a Muslim] ABRAMS: A little history lesson for you. I covered the Oklahoma City bombing trial, and you talk to any of the prosecutors who prosecuted the case. In the end, they don't believe that it was part of some militia effort. So that's just fiction, and that's the problem here. The facts are so important. HASAN: But didn't Timothy McVeigh say in writings from prison that he didn't like how the government was treating Christians, how they were restricting Christians? ABRAMS: Yeah, he didn't. He didn't. That's right. That's right. That's the beauty of this. Steve Emerson, the beauty of this is they highlight throughout the CNN piece, they highlight identifiable people, Christians and Jews, who've been arrested and convicted of various crimes. And they lump it in, and they claim this is all one big religious fundamentalism. STEVE EMERSON, Terrorism Analyst: Right. It's so contrived, I thought that I was watching Al-Jazeera. The treatment of radical Islamic fundamentalists were given kid-glove treatment. They explain the Muslim Brotherhood as a peaceful movement. They explain jihad as a peaceful internal struggle. I mean, this was inverting reality on its head. And when they described terrorism, they could only explain it in terms of Muslims being the victims, not being the perpetrators. I felt that, I was really, I felt that the viewer here was really dishonestly treated here. And as far as the treatment of Jews and Christians, when Christian lawyers went to law school, they were called, demonized as "God's warriors." And when Jewish supporters of Israel lobbied for Israel, they were demonized as somehow causing riots throughout the Middle East. This was the most unfair series and, I think, the most dishonest series on television that I've seen in my 20 years of reporting or covering terrorism. ... ABRAMS: Reverend Gaddy, let me ask you this. Let me play this piece of sound for you where, again, Christiane Amanpour compares some of the fundamentalist Christians to the Taliban. And I want to ask you if you think this is a fair comparison. AMANPOUR: On campus, students must follow a strict set of rules. When I, you know, read that women have to wear skirts of a certain length and guys aren't allowed to, you know, go on the Internet unsupervised, I mean, I think, you know, totalitarian regimes. RON LUCE, Christian youth leader: No, it's about learning to have disciplines that communicate purity, you know. The skirts' length are to keep guys from, you know, any man on the planet could be distracted, and we don't want to unintentionally create distraction. AMANPOUR: But, Ron, that's what the Taliban said. They kept women in their house because men couldn't be trusted around them. ABRAMS: Fair comparison, Reverend Gaddy, between a dress code and the Taliban? [Reverend WILTON GADDY, The Interfaith Counsel] ABRAMS: And they back it up, again, we're not just talking about individuals who we can name, but there is a large and significant movement of fundamentalist Islam, which I think ends up being minimized by equating this all. I'm sorry, Asma, I interrupted you before. [HASAN talks about international criticism of Jewish settlement expansion] ABRAMS: Okay, but that's fine. That's fine. But that doesn't address, look, I'm not going to have debates about the settlements here. I'm debating the bias, the overt bias of this CNN series. ... ABRAMS: Steve Emerson, I want to play you this piece of sound. It's a final one. ... And this is again suggesting, let's listen, and then we'll talk about it. AMANPOUR: Across Europe, Islam is the fastest growing religion, the number of Muslims tripling in the last 30 years. This increased Muslim presence and violence like the Van Gogh murder play into the hands of right-wing politicians, like Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch parliament. ABRAMS: All right, Steve Emerson, again, "play into the hands," the Muslims as the victims, again, throughout this whole piece. EMERSON: Exactly. She didn't mention the Madrid bombings, she didn't mention the two London series of bombings, she didn't mention the number of attacks in Europe, throughout Europe. She didn't mention the vast amount of Wahabist radical Islamic influence and supporters in the United States. She omitted all of that in an attempt to bring the perpetrators who she claimed were right-wingers or Christians or Jews. I thought that, in part, the actual dogma of this series actually focused mainly on Jews and Christians as being the demons, and in fact, one could accuse her of actually engaging in anti-Christian and anti-Semitic behavior by the selection of facts she chose to choose. ABRAMS: Reverend Gaddy, go ahead. [GADDY] ABRAMS: Well, I can tell you this, CNN is listening to this segment, so maybe they will hear you loud and clear on that and make up for what I think was really well done but ultimately shoddy journalism. Ellen W. Horowitz is an author who lives in the Golan with her husband and children. To Go To Top

THE NEWEST WAR HAS ALREADY BEEN WON Posted by Michelle Nevada, August 31, 2007.

As I sit here typing, the newest warrior in a religious war of sorts is kicking and punching and moving within me. As yet unborn, this tiny person represents the best hope for the future of Judaism, as do the new lives that are coming before and after. This child will be raised in a religious Zionist home, encouraged to be a part of Israel and the Jewish people, encouraged to pursue Torah, encouraged to marry Jewish and raise a family, encouraged to learn and grow and prosper. This child, like its many siblings, will find love and comfort in our traditions and our people, and will be surrounded with Jewish books, Jewish friends, and Jewish life. Even more importantly, this child will be joined by thousands upon thousands of Jewish friends who will be raised with the same important guiding principles: the newest draftees in a war of demographics. ItÇs a war we are already winning, at first whispered among us -- as if saying it too loudly might somehow break the magical power of which we were beginning to become aware, and then spoken of in tentative terms: perhaps, if things keep going this way, Israel will find itself a majority religious nation . . . . Now, as the headlines are beginning to build, as the newspapers and news shows are beginning to be more and more aware, and as the secular government ministers begin to speak with more and more panic about their inability to keep the state from itÇs religious roots, the parents and grandparents and aunts and uncles of this demographic force are beginning to smile outright. We arenÇt ready to boast, or cheer, or go into the streets -- yet. We are still waiting for the inevitable last throws of secularism to try to push its weight around and eliminate our advantage, importing large numbers of non-Jews, attempting to give away strategic lands -- doing anything to maintain their illusion of power. We look with sadness upon the last throws of their backward rein where they kowtow to terrorists and sacrifice our land and our people to the great idol of "peace." We have seen how "peace" has stood, like a graven image, unable to move or speak, while our living G-d still gives us hope and promise of returning to our Holy places and reclaiming our Holy land. We know there is a lot of pain to come, but we also know the slow unrelenting mass of religious children are headed their way, and there isnÇt a whole lot they can do about it. It has been going on for years. The secular public has been having fewer and fewer children, valuing life-style over life. The Reform and Conservative streams of Judaism in the US and Europe have been intermarrying, assimilating, and losing their Zionist ideals. As Reform and Conservative synagogues see their numbers decreasing over the years, religious Jews see their congregations growing. The religious public--still in love with the land of Israel; still yearning for our holy places; still dreaming of a land where Torah is important; and still understanding that without Israel, we are a lost people--have made aliyah; moved to Yesha, Jerusalem, Hevron, and Tiberias; sent our children to religious schools despite the great sacrifices weÇve had to make; defended the land; and established Hesder Yeshivas where we integrate Zionism and Torah. Even when we canÇt make aliyah, we send our children to Israel to study and to serve. And, all the while, all over the world, religious Jews have been growing in numbers. We have a high birth rate because we value life. Our numbers are increased by a great number of newly religious Jews, and a steady stream of sincere converts, who also value life and have many children. Now we see news stories of how the IDFÇs officers are 40 percent religious , how secular teaching colleges are facing shortages of students while religious teaching colleges have more students than they know what to do with . We see less tolerance for anti-Jewish secular policies like stores open on Shabbat, the sale of pork, the disruption of religious volunteers in Israeli schools, and the ejection of Jews from Jewish lands. We are not yet a majority in Israel, but we know the time is coming soon . We see the way that organizations like "Peace Now" try to remove us from our land, and we see that soon their complaints will lead not to abandoning the "territories," but to annexing them. We see in Gaza how abandoning land does not lead to peace; it leads to war. We see how abandoning Torah does not lead to success; it leads to failure. So, listen good Peres, Tamir, Beinish, and Olmert: your time in power is short. Soon our children will be in your seats, they will be making the decisions, and they will bring glory back to Israel in the only way it can be found: through G-d. ItÇs something you canÇt stop. It is already upon us. The demographic war is one you have already lost and will continue to lose -- with each and every tiny foot-blow and tiny punch of new Jewish lives. Michelle Nevada is a religious Jew from rural Nevada. Contact her by email at Michelle_Nevada@yahoo.com To Go To Top

THE AMANPOUR GOSPELS Posted by Phyllis Chesler, August 31, 2007.

Dhabah Almontaser, the nearly anointed principal of Brooklyn's madrassa and CNN's fully annointed Christiane Amanpour both agree that in Arabic, "Intifada" means a "shaking off." Amanpour gave an example of how to use the word by saying that "Palestinian (terrorists) were (merely) shaking off the Israeli Occupation;" Almontaser, when challenged about the infamous tee-shirts, said that "Intifada-NYC" referred to young Muslim girls "shaking off oppression." In November of 2005, Fox's O'Reilly showed live footage of the French Intifada as it raged in Paris. According to WorldNetDaily, Saudi billionaire Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, (aka Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin AbdulAziz AlSaud), who owns 5-6% of the Fox News Channel, personally called Rupert Murdoch and asked him to change the offensive (but accurate) caption: "Muslim Riots" to the less offensive (and less accurate) "Civil Riots." Within thirty minutes, the Prince had his way. To paraphrase New York Post columnist Cindy Adams: Only in America kids, only in America. Our fine Saudi prince also owns shares in Times-Warner/AOL/CNN, which he first acquired in 2002. According to Forbes, the London Guardian, and other media outlets, in 2002 the Prince "claimed to own 1.4 billion in AOL stock...in 2003 he bought another 450 million of AOL stock." God knows what he owns now. (Yes, he's the very Prince whom Presidential hopeful Rudy Guiliani humiliated when he refused to accept his ten million dollar donation for humanitarian aid immediately following 9/11). Has bin Talal's ownership influenced Amanpour's highly touted, highly slanted, and highly tedious three part series "God's Warriors?" I have no inside information here but I doubt that any overt bribes were involved. Amanpour dresses in safari-like bush jackets but they are never grungy, and are in fact glamorous in color and fit. She is no Oriana Fallaci, no Susan Sontag, but is probably the best CNN has to offer in terms of Talking Heads who presumably think. To those unfamiliar with Amanpour's background, she lived in London (still does), attended schools in America, and her husband, James Rubin, is Jewish. He once worked for former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright--another Jew who did not know she was one. After watching Amanpour's segment on the Jews, I was disheartened and outraged. How long will people have to suffer Big Lies on our screens and be forced to react defensively, only after the fact? How much Saudi money might really be involved in CNN's series? In addition to bin Talal, we do know that the Saudis have been buying up shares in the Western media, (UPI for example), influencing curriculum on campuses, and in some instances, buying certain journalists outright. (There is a scandal about this still under wraps in Europe right now. Stay tuned for an update). Amanpour, whose father is a Muslim Iranian, her mother British, and who spent the first eleven years of her life in Teheran, set out to portray Jews as religiously driven terrorists, illegal land-grabbers, and fat-cat American lobbyists with dual loyalties. She interviewed former President Carter and John Mearsheimer (but not anyone of stature who can easily rebut what they say). Both men believe that Israel is an apartheid state and that the Zionist lobby controls American foreign policy. (See CAMERA'S excellent point by point refutation of Amanpour). Amanpour makes sure to track down Israelis who have advised the government that "settling an occupied land" violates the Geneva convention and international law (such as Theodore Meron); the Jewish Israeli lawyers who defend Palestinians and who often successfully, challenge the Israeli demolition of Palestinian homes. She has female settlers on camera who allegedly say that they believe Palestinians should be killed or expelled. She shows the security wall at its ugliest without context and she focuses on individual Palestinians who are indeed being seriously harmed by its creation. (No, she does not show the Jews being blown up, week after week, in a non-stop series of 9/11s that might explain the desperate need for such a tragic but strategic structure). In my no doubt alarmist and paranoid view, she is trying to position American and world Jewish support for Israel as essentially equivalent to American and world Muslim support for Hamas and for other Muslim terorrist organizations who also engage in humanitarian aid and social service projects. Just as the leaders of the Holy Land foundation are being tried as supporters of terrorist organizations in America today, Amanpour's portrayal of Jewish support for an allegedly "illegal," "racist," or "apartheid" Jewish "settler state" with a "handful of Jewish terrorists" may now lead to simiilar attempts to shut down American-based fundraising for Israel and to dampen Congressional support for military foreign aid to Israel. Perhaps Amanpour does not envision this at all but merely wishes to show that there is terrorism on both sides of the divide. But this is not true. While there is indeed a "handful" of "Jewish terrorists" or ideologue of Jewish reprisals, (Meir Kahane, Baruch Goldstein, Yigal Amir, and the Jewish Underground are named), such figures are just that--a handful, and their attempts at indiscriminate violence have either been prevented or immediately and seriously punished by the Israeli government. Further, Amanpour fails to draw the right conclusions from what she does show on camera. In every instance, Israeli government officials, including former Shin Bet and IDF spokesmen are the ones who prevent Jewish terrorists from striking, who arrest and imprison them when they commit violence, who sentence them to between 7-15 years in jail or to life sentences. There are no posters all over Israel glorifying their violent deeds as there are on the West Bank for their shahids and shahidas and in the no-longer occupied Gaza strip. Israeli textbooks and television videos do not sing their praises in Israel as is the case among the Palestinians. It gets worse. She views the Muslim claim to Al Aqsa and the Temple Mount, not as equal to but as superior to the ancient Jewish claim. She fails to draw a single conclusion from the fact that Muslims did not--and still do not--allow non-Muslims access to their holy Jewish or Christian religious sites although Jews guarantee that access to all religions. So, there I was, licking my wounds when I turned on the TV to see Amanpour's second segment. Amanpour has never met an Iranian or for that matter a Muslim whom she does not like; yes, even the terrorists and one fundamentalist imam in "the holy city of Quom" receives only a flirtatious wag of her finger when he rather cheerfully admits that women are not allowed to do certain things and are condemned to other things--but that's for their own good, to protect them. She is warm with him, much less warm with his so-called Israeli counterparts. She opens her segment on Muslim Warriors with a charming, well-spoken, highly westernized young man, Ed Husain, who was deceived, or who rebelled and became associated with a terrorist group in his native London. Once he realized that they are killing innocent people, even children, he backed away. He has written a book about leaving Islamism. Ed Husain does not represent most Muslims who at best, remain silent and who do not condemn Islamist imperialism, religious fundamentalism, or America- and Jew-hatred. There are a handful of Muslims who criticize Islam openly. Many are tortured, killed, forced into exile, impoverished, live in hiding, publish under psedonyms. Her interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali was very, very brief --no more than a minute altogether. On the contrary, she kept returning to former nun Karen Armstrong whose views on Jews, Israel, and Zionism are anti-Semitic with a vengeance. Armstrong also defended veiling and compared it her own habit as a nun. (Stay tuned for more to come about this). As to women? Amanpour does not tell us any stories of honor killings or women who avoided being honor-murdered but instead focuses on a happy, modestly veiled Muslim-American woman who describes how her choice to "cover" is denigrated and held suspect in America. Each and every portrait of a Muslin or of a Muslin terrorist's family presents soulful, thoughtful people, perhaps a bit "different" than you and I but still human, likeable, charming--maybe even made of better stuff than you and I in the west who crave material posessions, display female bodies, allow men and women to intermingle in sexually charged ways, drink alcohol, and refuse to live in a God-centered world. Amanpour is worse than all the others (writers mainly) who have been blasting Judaism and Christianity but mainly in order to be able to also blast, but in a lesser way, Islam. The thesis is that we are all guilty, all to blame, that each religion is clannish, "different," its texts support violence, its extreme followers are but a handful, nothing for the world to worry about. These are all false assumptions and outright lies. I will be posting my views of Amanpour on God's Christian Warriors tommorrow. CHRISTIANS ALSO WANT A CALIPHATE. THE GOSPELS ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANE In her three part series, Amanpour is far more combative and confrontational with both Jewish and Christian religious leaders than she is with Muslim leaders. She is warmer, softer, more "at home," with even the most extreme of Islamist leaders, perhaps even more respectful, than she is with their allegedly Jewish or Christian counterparts. Amanpour completely fails to make the distinction between Islamists who teach hatred of infidels and women and who blow infidel and Muslim civilians up (as well as honor-murder their own women); Israelis who are under perpetual terrorist seige and who are trying to defend themselves against Islamist attacks; and conservative Christians who are trying to moblize votes, change laws, or win hearts and minds with words, not bombs (although she certainly has lots of footage of the bloody bombings at abortion clinics--bombings I personally abhor and mourn--as do many Christians). Amanpour wants us to like Muslims--even the most extremist among them. They are human, prick them will they not bleed? But she does not want us to like Christians or Jews, especially those who are Zionists. Amanpour does not seem to show the same respect towards conservative Christians who wish to dress modestly, remain chaste until marriage, and avoid a secular culture of rampant pornography and rape as she shows their far more extremist counterparts in the Islamist world or than she shows, at great length, one well-spoken Muslim-American woman who decides to "cover." In one instance, Amanpour accuses Ron Luce, a Christian leader of teenagers, as being like the Taliban. He actually answers Amanpour in a rather charming, disarming way. She will not be moved. Amanpour herself takes no stand on what Luce says about an American secular and popular culture which allows virgin teenager America to be raped on the sidewalk as we pass by without stopping or caring. Perhaps Amanpour can't forgive these "radical" Christians their support for Israel, their "Zionism." She presents Pastor John Hagee (together with the late Jerry Fallwell) as Doctor Strangeloves. Hagee, by the way, sees Iran as a threat to America and Israel. As he speaks of his Christian love of Zion, Amanpour cuts to a presumed Israeli air attack againt innocent civilians, replete with weeping, civilian Arab women. Amanpour again returns to former President Jimmy Carter--this time to have him tell us that he had to break with evangelical Baptists over their sexist position on women in the church. Carter who believes that Israel is an "apartheid" state and whose library has been hugely funded by the Saudis is the new feminist in town. Amanpour has a definite political agenda--no less so than the Christian conservatives whom she attacks for daring to conduct "stealth politics, under the radar" when they engage in Christian voter drives. Amanpour wants to put a Democrat in the White House. She wants someone there who will move against the so-called Israel Lobby and who will finally stop funding Israel. She wants our next Commander in Chief to engage in nicey-nice diplomacy with Iran. She wants Americans to stop fearing that every Muslim might be a terrorist and to start accepting a parallel Islamic/Islamist universe right here on our own soil. Yes, our ethnically super-trendy, British-accented war correspondent really wants exactly this. And she wants us to see that such right-wing Christians are no different than Islamists, including Bin Laden, who want a world Caliphate. (We are all the same, all cultures are equal, remove the mote from your own eye before you judge anyone else, etc.) To accomplish her goal, Amanpour presents Christian conservatives as truly scary, as mounting a Crusader-like Army against liberal secular America--but not necessarily a violent war against terrorist Islamism. Amanpour exploits America's hottest domestic issues (abortion and gay marriage) in order to accomplish her own foreign policy aims. By the end of her third and final segment we are meant to fear and loathe the Christian conservative right far more than we are meant to fear or loathe Amanpour's Amadinejad whom --incredibly--she never accuses of funding Hezbollah's terrorist work abroad. What she mainly shows us in Iran are Shi'a Muslims at prayer, engaged in theatrical-religious rituals. We do not see them funding and masterminding Hezbollah as it takes down civilian (and Christian) Lebanon, lays seige to Israel, blows up the Jewish Community Center in Argentina. She shows us the child-martyrs (one estimate has 850,000 dying in the Iran-Iraq war) as themselves true believers as opposed to victims of sadistic adult handlers. Her third segment is one long running advertisement for a Democratic candidate for the next Presidency. She is electioneering as hard as she accuses the Christians of doing. Dr. Phyllis Chesler is the well known author of classic works, including the bestseller Women and Madness (1972) and The New Anti-Semitism (2003). She has just published The Death of Feminism: What's Next in the Struggle for Women's Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as an updated and revised edition of Women and Madness. She is an Emerita Professor of psychology and women's studies, the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology (1969) and the National Women's Health Network (1974). She is currently on the Board of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and lives in New York City. Her website is www.phyllis-chesler.com. To Go To Top

HAARETZ EDITOR TELLS UN THAT ISRAEL IS AN "APARTHEID STATE" Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 31, 2007.

This is a UN Watch Briefing: Danny Rubinstein of the Israeli Haaretz newspaper editorial board used the World Zionist Organization to fly himself to a UN conference yesterday in Brussels where, according to a UN summary, he accused Israel of being "an apartheid State." Rubinstein was billed as the top speaker tonight at a Zionist Federation event in London, part of a series celebrating Israel's upcoming 60th anniversary. According to British community insiders, the World Zionist Organization paid for Rubinstein's return travel from Tel Aviv and -- unaware of the remarks he would make -- for his stop-over to address the UN event in Brussels. In addition, the London federation was reportedly to pay him an honorarium of U.S. $1500. It was suddenly announced this afternoon, however, that Rubinstein's appearance has now been canceled. The quote from Rubinstein's remarks was confirmed by several sources attending the 2-day conference organized by the UN's Palestinian division at the European Parliament in Brussels. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing, the UN conference describes itself in innocent language but in fact promotes a hardline agenda that runs contrary to the balanced principles of the Middle East peace process-whose Quartet sponsors, ironically, include both the European Union and the United Nations. That a leading Israeli journalist -- presented by the UN as a member of the Haaretz editorial board -- would participate and grant legitimacy to a Soviet-era enterprise born out of the "Zionism is Racism" canard, whose sole aim is to assault Israel morally, legally and financially, was disturbing enough. But that he would full-throatedly join the jackals, calling Israel an "apartheid state," is a scandal. The article below is called "UN Palestinian Conference at European Parliament is "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing." http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c= bdKKISNqEmG&b=1316871&ct=4338489 For additional informatio, call 41-22-734-1472

Geneva, Aug. 30, 2007 -- A conference organized today and tomorrow at the European Parliament in Brussels by a UN Palestinian committee contravenes the principles of the Quartet-sponsored Middle East peace process, said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based monitoring organization. The objective of the conference, according to its sponsor, the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, is to support Israeli-Palestinian peace. Yet the conference program and list of speakers reveals a one-sided focus on blaming and coercing Israel, said Neuer, and contravenes the balanced principles of the Road Map framework in which Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are now negotiating. "The conference is a wolf in sheep's clothing," said Neuer. "The UN Palestinian division portrays its event as building bridges, but they excluded anyone representing Israel's position, so these are bridges to nowhere." Palestinian presenters include activists like Raji Sourani, who justifies Hamas attacks as "resistance," and Jamal Juma, who describes Israel as a "colonial racist apartheid state." Also speaking at the conference will be Leila Shahid, Palestinian envoy to the EU and cousin to late PLO leader Yassir Arafat, along with several other Palestinian officials. Other presenters from the Middle East and Europe either head or are closely tied to pro-Palestinian lobby groups, and campaign for boycotts and sanctions against Israel. The conference also invited a handful of selected Israeli presenters who are ardent advocates for Palestinian claims, such as Michel Warschawski, self-described as a "well-known anti-Zionist activist." According to Neuer, "by citizenship they may be Israeli, but only a scoundrel or a fool would imagine these token Israelis as representatives of their nation's point of view. The organizers deliberately excluded anyone who genuinely represents Israeli society, or who might dare to speak for Israeli human rights, for Israeli women maimed by Hamas rockets, Israeli children traumatized by bus bombings, Israeli forests and eco-systems burnt and destroyed by Hezbollah rockets supplied by Iran and Syria. All of this is completely erased from the conference narrative." The UN's Palestinian division is funded by a multi-million dollar budget, part of a sprawling infrastructure of anti-Israel committees and programs launched by the General Assembly in 1975 alongside its resolution declaring that "Zionism is racism." In the past six months, the division organized gatherings in Doha, Rome, Pretoria, and New York. UN chief Ban Ki-moon and leaders of the EU and the European Parliament must commit themselves to the goal of redirecting the division's budget to actually helping Palestinians, said Neuer, by building medical clinics and schools that teach peace in the West Bank and Gaza. "Instead of taxpayers from Europe and the U.S. paying for more destructive propaganda, these funds should be converted into ploughshares of hope. Tragically, the Arab regimes responsible for the Palestinian division's annual renewal seem more interested in preserving grievances than solving them. It is time for European and UN leaders to emphasize that anti-Israel propaganda and posturing are relics of the past -- and hurt the cause of peace rather than help the Palestinians." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top

OLMERT OFFERS JUDEA, SAMARIA AND WILL DIVIDE JERUSALEM IN DRAFT ACCORD Posted by Bryna Berchuck, August 31, 2007.

The Sharon-Olmert bunch kicked 10,000 Jews out of Gaza two years ago and they have just begun to settle them into new lives. And it is going to cost many more billions before the damage done to the Gazan Jews is alleviated. Now they plan to kick out some 100,000 to 200,000 Jews from Biblical Israel! This is beyond insanity. The Jews are going to go from being the People of the Book to being the People of the Streets. Maybe if they're going to end up on the streets anyways, maybe they should start acting up now. Walking around the Knesset Building in a single file without stopping -- thus stopping traffic and having cars add some noisy honking. Singing with amplifiers outside Peres' home. Tracking the self-serving MKs who are letting Olmert's government destroy Israel, as long as they have their perks -- making disparaging remarks about these Olmert-enablers in rap mode. Lot's of things they could do. They could learn a few things from the Arabs, who have officialdom living in fear that they will riot at anything -- and it isn't an irrational fear, because the Arabs and their useful idiots (Lefts Marxist Israeli Jews, especially the Appease Now crowd) will indeed make media-worthy trouble at just about anything. And who is to receive Israel's heartland? The Abu Mazen Fatah and al Aqsa boys -- our "good terrorists". As an editorial in Asharq Alawsat pointed out: "The glaring farce today is that forces from the Hamas movement are the ones presently guarding the Israel-Gaza border, while al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade and Fatah are the ones bombarding Israeli towns with missiles. As for Ismail Haniyeh, the head of the state of Gaza -- or rather, the head of the coup -- he gave a speech last Friday in which he stated that there is a local, Arab and international conspiracy that aims to undermine Hamas so as to ensure the failure of the Islamic model of governance." So while Hamas and Fatah are exploring ways to kiss and make up, Fatah's boss, abu Mazen, has the job of grumbling while Olmert hands him Israel's heartland (what the Mainstream Press calls the West Bank, so people won't realize it's what's been called Samaria and Judea since ancient times.) "What," Abbas will mutter. "Is that all you are offering? And you expect me to talk to you for so little? Let the Arabs refugees into Israel and maybe I'll give you 5 min." Oh, will nothing wake the Israelis up? Will they sleep through their own demise? This was written by Gil Ronen and it appeared today in Arutz-Sheva (www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123549).

(IsraelNN.com) Israel's government has agreed, in writing, to hand over 6,250 square kilometers of land -- the equivalent of its entire biblical and strategic heartland -- to an Arab terror state. So reports Dr. Guy Bechor, a leading expert on Arab affairs, who also supplies some of the details of the negotiations. Bechor reports, based on "leaks from the Palestinian side," that Israel has, in the past few days, presented Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas at least one draft of an "agreement of principles." The agreement calls for a state named Palestine to be established alongside Israel, and have a territory of 6,250 square kilometers: the equivalent of all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. "Palestine" will be demilitarized. Most of the Jewish communities built in Judea and Samaria over the past 40 years are to demolished and their inhabitants expelled, according to the plan. The remaining communities are to be concentrated in small salients for which the Arab state will be compensated with additional territory elsewhere in present-day Israel. A passage of some sort will connect Gaza and Judea and Samaria. It will be under Jewish sovereignty and Palestinian administration. Israel agrees to redivide Jerusalem. Arab neighborhoods will be under Arab sovereignty and Jewish ones under Jewish sovereignty. Mention is made of "religious areas," but further details are not known as of yet. Each side will recognize the other's spiritual needs. The "refugee" question is not mentioned at all, and Bechor reports that this is the main sticking point. Abbas is insisting that Arabs descended from those who fled Israel in 1948 be allowed to return to Israel, at least in principle. Bechor says that Abbas and his men have gone over the draft and are not pleased; they know how to negotiate, he notes. In a recent interview with PA TV, Abbas said that "declarations of principles are a waste of time" and "useless." What the PA wants, he said, is a clear timetable for establishing Palestine, as well as an Israeli pullback, demolition of Jewish communities and "return of refugees" (i.e., the flooding of Israel with Arab citizens). The Arabs are hoping Israel will become more pliable in November, when an international diplomatic conference, sponsored by the US, is to be held in an attempt to hammer out an accord. An official close to Mahmoud Abbas, Mustafa Bargouti, said that the idea of a conference is "an Israeli trap" and that nothing will come of it. To Go To Top

GENERAL DAYTON TRYING TO REPEAT THE MISTAKE HE MADE IN THE GAZA STRIP Posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, August 31, 2007.

As Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA leader Mahmoud Abbas try to work out some phraseology that will satisfy everyone (from Olmert's standpoint that "everyone" includes not only key foreign players but also key decision makers in the Israeli criminal justice system) while not cornering any key Israeli or Palestinian element with wording that explicitly crosses their mutually irreconcilable red lines, U.S. security coordinator in the territories, General Keith Dayton, is busy trying to repeat the mistake he made in the Gaza Strip. Except this time Dayton is pushing for disaster on a much grander scale. General Dayton filled the PA and affiliated armories in the Gaza Strip with weapons and ammunition fully confident that this would stop Hamas. It didn't. In retrospect he armed Hamas. Today he is pressing for a huge project to create yet another Palestinian army in the West Bank. And given that the definition of the Road Map's "dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure" appears to be "putting the terrorists on the PA payroll", this army will hardly be comprised by former choir boys. And we will face the consequences when things break down. And the odds are very good that they will. General Dayton has an alternative. Instead of pushing for five new Palestinian battalions throughout the West Bank, why not focus first on a model city -- or even better a model village? Provide that village with what General Dayton considers the ideal level of security resources with a clear set of quantifiable performance goals. Goals that include the confiscation and destruction of weapons, ammunition and other contraband in the village. If and when the model village project works out it can be expanded to a cluster of villages and if and when that works to other clusters and cities until ultimately the entire West Bank is transformed. That's if things work out as General Dayton hopes and expects. On the other hand, if reality is more powerful than General Dayton's hopes and expectations the project can be stopped well before its failure would leave us facing another five battalions of well trained and armed terrorists. Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) and it appeared on the IMRA website today. Contact Dr. Lerner by email at imra@netvision.net.il and visit the website -- http://www.imra.org.il To Go To Top

HOW GAZA ARABS USE GREENHOUSES; SAUDI WOULD IMPOSE ISLAM; UNRWA COMPLAINS TO ABBAS' P.A. Posted by Richard Shulman, August 31, 2007.

GUILIANI DISAPPOINTING ON ISRAEL "It is not in the interest of the United States, at a time when it is being threatened by Islamist terrorists, to assist the creation of another state that will support terrorism." "'Palestinian statehood will have to be earned through sustained good governance, a clear commitment to fighting terrorism, and a willingness to live in peace with Israel, said Guiliani.'" (IMRA, 8/16.) From Guiliani one expects frankness. He said what the Bush administration says but puts off. Would he? He would not be in a hurry to set up another Islamic state as is the State Dept., but would he be firm with the State Dept.? My disappointment is his accepting the notion that Arabs are entitled to another Arab state, and that the Palestinian Arabs, who are not particularly different from the other Arabs in the region, are entitled to another Palestinian Arab state, again at the expense of the Jewish homeland. He should ask why. That vicious population deserves nothing. He also doesn't understand that Islam won't make peace with an infidel state. Such a state contradicts the basic principle of Islam. That principle is that once Islam has seized an area, as it once did ancient Judea, it is entitled to it forever. GUILIANI UNDERSTANDS JIHAD Conflict used to be by nation states. Now there is an amorphous assault on civilization. The challenge is based more on ideology. We need to strategize. The "realist" school of foreign policy would not fight Islamist ideology with our own. That forfeits a great advantage, failing to utilize our strengths. Understand that democracy follows good governance and not the reverse. We should not make a deal for the sake of having a treaty nor negotiate for the sake of negotiating. Successful negotiation requires national unity and strength to back it up! We must reform the State Dept. so it represents and presents American ideology to foreign countries. Judge our diplomats by their results! Although the UNO has some use, it has failed to help in every major dispute. We must understand the enemy and our own limitations, and not promise too much. We must reevaluate and rebuild our pared-down military refashion and expand NATO to meet the new, Islamist threat. (NATO is untrustworthy.) Our enemies are allowed to operate in many countries and are supported by some. They fight informally (but the ACLU thinks that makes them civilians). "Above all, we must understand that our enemies are emboldened by signs of weakness. Radical Islamic terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, the Khobar Towers facility in Saudi Arabia in 1996, our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, and the U.S.S. Cole in 2000. In some instances, we responded inadequately. In others, we failed to respond at all. Our retreat from Lebanon in 1983 and from Somalia in 1993 convinced them that our will was weak." We cannot rely upon mutually assured destruction as a deterrent. They would blackmail us with nuclear power (IMRA, 8/17). Guiliani's text as a whole is comprehensive, cogent, masterful. One can't see that from the portions newspapers selected. Does he mean what he said? Does he realize that the State Dept. is out to protect the Saudis and destroy Israel? GAZA ARABS USE SOME GREENHOUSES Most of the greenhouses with which the Jews in Gaza had built a marvelous agriculture and prospered, and which they left for the Arabs to keep thousands of people employed, instead were looted by the Arabs, destroyed, or used unsuccessfully and abandoned. The IDF discovered that one greenhouse was put to use. It hid the entrance to a tunnel being dug for infiltration into Israel to commit terrorism (IMRA, 8/15). TEARING THE VEIL OFF THE FACE OF COMMUNISM Germans were shocked. They read a document reprinted from the days of E. Germany. It ordered border guards to shoot people trying to flee at the border, even if women and children were among them. Germans had thought that Communism was a benign ideology that just didn't work. Some had nostalgia for the German Communist regime. The Communist Party was making a comeback (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/17). I remember the common practice of shooting people trying to escape. Why didn't Germans remember it, or, if too young, have been taught about it? People living in a country may be ignorant of its worst problems. IDF PREPARES RESERVISTS' SUPPLIES The IDF has completed the first stage in upgrading the reservists' equipment. It filled warehouses with modern and ample equipment (IMRA, 8/17). It won't get to the second stage, because war will come, first. I think that many reservists won't make it to the warehouses, because either the warehouses will be bombed by Arab missiles or the P.A. and Hizbullah forces will sweep in and cut them down en route. Israel is making a grave error in not wiping out the P.A. and Hizbullah forces in advance, another in shipping arms to Fatah. MISSING THE POINT ON HEALTH CARE Candidate Guiliani accepts federal responsibility for Americans' medical care, but his plan could not solve the problem. He proposed a $15,000 tax credit for families to spend on treatment or keep if they minimized expenses (NY Sun, 8/17). Plans need an incentive to reduce medical costs. His plan wouldn't reduce government expense, since the credit stays the same. The plan depends upon people being employed and at relatively high wages. Tax rates now are calibrated to exempt the high proportion of the population that earns little. They would neither get the tax credits he is contemplating, nor afford private insurance. More of the taxpayers who would be eligible for the tax credits would not need them. The plan, like plans for giving certain Palestinian Arabs a state, is not thought through. SAUDI CLERIC WOULD IMPOSE ISLAM FOR OUR OWN GOOD A Saudi cleric declared that Allah decreed Islam for the whole world, and for its own good. He described the non-Islamic world as beastly immodest, literally filthy, and unhappy (IMRA, 8/17). There is too much immodesty here, for me, but it is contrary to Western faiths, too. The problem is not lack of Islam but lack of faithfulness. It is a minor problem compared to the oppression and backwardness that makes so many Muslims constantly enraged, frustrated sexually, violent, approving of deceit, and tolerant of slavery. As for filth, they have many water shortages and open sewers. My officer had been stationed in Morocco. A Muslim wearing a robe would squat on the sidewalk, and then arise, leaving behind a pile of feces. That was decades ago and may have been just Morocco. If Islam is so great, let it prove it, especially by example, and not depend upon force and deceit to gain ground. UNRWA COMPLAINS TO ABBAS' P.A. UNRWA complained to the P.A. that its employees in Judea-Samaria were detained and threatened, in an attempt to drag UNRWA into its civil strife. Endangering its employees may make its mission impossible (IMRA, 8/17). In Afghanistan and Iraq, the Islamists drive out foreign relief agencies. In the P.A., Islamists often attack foreigners who've come to help their people. Charity for Muslims is not appreciated and facilitates jihad. It also fosters a welfare mentality upon the recipients. Let the Muslims stew until they reform. Defend ourselves better and take care of our own people. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com To Go To Top

WASHINGTON POST, OTHER NEWSPAPERS WON'T RUN 'OPUS' CARTOON MOCKING RADICAL ISLAM Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 31, 2007.

This was posted by Forkum on the Cox and Forkum website (http://www.coxandforkum.com/).

A popular comic strip that poked fun at the Rev. Jerry Falwell without incident one week ago was deemed too controversial to run over the weekend because this time it took a humorous swipe at Muslim fundamentalists. The Washington Post and several other newspapers around the country did not run Sunday's installment of Berkeley Breathed's "Opus," in which the spiritual fad-seeking character Lola Granola appears in a headscarf and explains to her boyfriend, Steve, why she wants to become a radical Islamist. The installment did not appear in the Post's print version, but it ran on WashingtonPost.com and Salon.com. The same will hold true for the upcoming Sept. 2 strip, which is a continuation of the plotline. Click here to see the Aug. 26 "Opus" strip about radical Islam. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top

ISLAMIST WEBSITES TEACH HOW TO SET UP TERROR CELLS Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 31, 2007.

This comes from today's World Net Daily http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57395

Affiliation with al-Qaida called totally unnecessary to be part of holy war Although the U.S. government and much of the press still look for an al-Qaida connection before referring to domestic mayhem committed by Muslims as "terrorism," Islamist websites are teaching the opposite: There's no need for al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden or any other terror group or leader -- just the dedicated Muslim and his "gun and bullet." The Middle East Media Research Institute says the campaign, which gives detailed instructions on how to set up a terror cell, raise money to fund its operations and select Western targets, calls on every Muslim to "regard jihad as a personal duty and to take initiative to establish a jihad cell without waiting for recognition from al-Qaida." "For example, assassinating the American ambassador," the website instructions said, "takes no more than a gun and a bullet." The instructions are titled, "How to Join Al-Qaida, Form a Jihad Cell, and Select a Western Target." It is not clear when the instructions, which appeared this week, were written, MEMRI said, but they were produced by the "Al-Thabitoujn 'Ala Al-'Ahd" website, affiliated with al-Qaida in Egypt but currently inactive. Some of the instructions, MEMRI said, include: "You feel that you want to carry a weapon, fight, and kill the occupiers, and that it is our duty to call for jihad as much as to call for prayer. ... All that is required is a firm personal decision to fulfill this obligation, and participation in jihad and the resistance. ... "Do you really have to meet Osama bin Laden in person in order to become a jihad fighter? Do you have to be recognized by al-Qaida as one of its members to become a jihad fighter? If al-Qaida commanders should be killed, would the jihad be eliminated? What would you do if al-Qaida did not exist today? How is Osama bin Laden different from you? -- [yet] he managed to establish the world jihad organization. Who provided training to Osama bin Laden and Abdallah 'Azzam when they went to Afghanistan to become the first Arab jihad fighters? "The answers to these questions are the following: I don't have to meet Osama bin Laden to become a jihad fighter. Moreover, there is no need to meet even one jihad fighter to become one. Neither do I need recognition from al-Qaida. ... "As the first step, imagine that al-Qaida does not exist and that you are interested [in waging] jihad -- what would you do in this case?. Ä If you know any young people -- whether one, two, or more -- in your area, mosque, or university who are as dedicated and enthusiastic about jihad as you are, come to an understanding with them, and together form a cell whose objective is to help Islam and only Islam. ... "At first, your cell should have no more than five members, all absolutely trustworthy. Ä The cell must have a commander and a shura council. Ä The commander must clearly realize that he is Osama bin Laden to the cell members... "Each cell should have a source of funding. Ä When you have several members, you will [surely] find the funds for your cell. Ä Then you should buy weapons, make plans, brainstorm, plot your plans, monitor your enemy's important objectives, and study its moves. Set a goal; for example, assassinating the American ambassador -- is it so difficult? Is it [indeed] difficult for someone who has already crushed America in his home? "What is the difference between you and the hero of the New York attack, Muhammad Atta, who planned an action which even today shakes the world every time it is mentioned? Assassinating the ambassador takes no more than a gun and a bullet. One could disguise oneself as a peddler in order to tail [the target], which shouldn't cost a lot of money. ..." MEMRI also said the website instructed cells to maintain contact among themselves "but by no means in a direct or conventional way. What will unite you is the love of Islam and the motto 'There is no God but Allah.' You much meet once a month. ... You must not meet in the same place twice. Ä Personal meetings with a small number of people [must happen] once a week." And the cells should have two classes of members, "members who do not [act] openly and are not wanted by the authorities, and members who are wanted (who have been arrested in the past or on whom the intelligence apparatuses have a file). ... " The instructions provide that the "secret" members will do the intelligence work, raise funds and recruit new members, while "those who act in the open must perform the primary military operations such as assassinations. ..." "You must be aware that you have brothers everywhere, and that they are expecting the actions of you and your friends even if they don't know you in person or by name, ..." MEMRI said the instructions reminded. President Bush has warned Americans of the danger of such cells. Near the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, which killed about 3,000 Americans, he said terrorism sends "small teams of operatives to infiltrate free nations; they live quietly among their victims; they conspire in secret, and then they strike without warning." "In this new war," Bush said, "the most important source of information on where the terrorists are hiding and what they are planning is the terrorists, themselves. Captured terrorists have unique knowledge about how terrorist networks operation. They have knowledge of where their operatives are deployed, and knowledge about what plots are under way. "To win the war on terror, we must be able to detain, question, and, when appropriate, prosecute terrorists captured here in America, and on the battlefields around the world," he said. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top

HEVRON'S JEWS: GOV'T MUST RETURN JEWISH PROPERTY Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 31, 2007.

(IsraelNN.com) The Hevron Jewish Community has released a sharp, detailed report accusing the Israeli Government of breach of trust, abuse, and hostility towards the Jewish owners of Arab-stolen property in the City of the Patriarchs. Entitled "The State of Israel's Management of the Stolen Jewish Property in Hevron," the report was issued this month in honor of the 78th anniversary of the Hevron massacre. In August 1929, Arabs brutally murdered 67 of their Jewish neighbors in their homes and in the local yeshiva. The Jewish survivors were then removed from Hevron, leaving behind their homes and land to be stolen by the Arabs. Only after the 1967 Six Day War did Jews return permanently to reclaim their homes and property. They soon found, however, that doing so under Israeli rule was not to be as easy as they thought. The report begins by terming itself a "grave indictment" against those in the government who, "for decades have been exploiting their standing and have tried to apply their full influence to prevent the return of the Jewish properties to their owners, and to prevent the correction of the historic injustice of the 1929 pogroms." The report aims to "detail how, for a generation, the State of Israel has been betraying its mission as the representative of the Jewish Nation in the City of its Forefathers, with disdain, disregard and even hostility vis-a-vis its historic mission of rehabilitating the ancient Hevron community that was destroyed by Arab rioters..." In short, the report presents what it calls "a major failure of legal, historic and moral significance." What Happened When? The report's authors feel that a historic perspective is necessary, and Chapter One recounts the massacre of 1929, followed by the transfer of most of the property to Jordan's "Trustee of Enemy Zionist Property" in 1948. With no one to stop them, the Jordanians proceeded to: bulldoze the Jewish quarter's houses, stationing an outdoor market there; destroy and desecrate the Avraham Avinu synagogue, building atop it a sheep sty, garbage dump, and public restroom; and destroy and vandalize the ancient Jewish cemetery, using the gravestones for local construction. Parts of the property were rented out by the Jordanian Trustee to local Arabs, while other parts were ignored by the Trustee, and were simply taken over by private or public elements without being registered. "There is actually no proper and full registration anywhere of the stolen Jewish property in Hevron, because of faulty management by both the Jordanian conquerors and the Israel Trustee," the report states. Israel Takes Over From Jordan The Israeli Trustee received control of the property in 1967 following the liberation of the Biblical homeland areas of Jerusalem, Judea (including Hevron), Samaria, and more. "It now had a historic Jewish-moral opportunity to correct the injustice and restore Jewish life to Hevron -- but it did so only partially, despite repeated requests by both the original owners and the Jewish Community of Hevron that had received power of attorney to settle most of the properties." The function of the Trustee is to act in the best interests of those he is representing, the report states, and to ensure that the property does not remain desolate. "Yet Israel constantly and systematically did the opposite... For instance, regarding Hevron property that had been consecrated to a Jewish religious trust, the Supreme Court ruled that Israel could manage it as though it owned it. At the same time, regarding the Moslem Waqf properties in Judea and Samaria, the State does not intervene at all -- even when the Waqf works in tandem with terror organizations." The report says that by allowing many of the properties to remain vacant and desolate, it is abrogating its basic obligations as a Trustee: "The Trustee/State absurdly overlooks the Arab renters' obligations, while at the same time making extra sure their rights are not harmed... thus ignoring its obligations towards both the property (by leaving it vacant and desolate) and the owners (by not letting them move in)." Tel Romeida, For Example Two Jewish-owned plots of land (Bloc 34416, plots 52 and 53) at the heights of the Tel Romeida neighborhood stand adjacent to an IDF base and Jewish homes in the neighborhood -- yet the government bans Jews from setting foot there. The land had been rented to an Arab, but the contract was stopped by the Civil Administration in 2000. The Jewish Community of Hevron, granted power of attorney by the owners, has asked several times to be allowed to rent the land. In 2003, the IDF Central Region Commander agreed -- but to this day nothing has been done to allow the Jews to move in, and it remains desolate. At the same time, the State/Trustee also does very little to stop Arab infiltration and illegal usage of the area -- whereas Jews who have tried to enter the plots have been arrested and tried. This is a perfect example, the report states, of the government's hostile attitude towards the Jews of Hevron: "These plots have all the necessary conditions -- land owned by Jews who have given official power of attorney to the Jewish Community, no Arab 'third party,' security permits, and the submission of proper requests throughout the years -- and yet despite all, the property remains desolate, in clear violation of the owners' will." Moving into the Market The area now known as the Marketplace -- the part of the Avraham Avinu neighborhood that the Jordanians turned into an outdoor market -- is undisputedly Jewish-owned. After the IDF closed down the Jordanian market because of the security dangers it presented, and after it stood desolate for seven years, and immediately after the murder of the infant Shalhevet Pass by an Arab sniper terrorist, several Jewish families moved into the storefronts and turned them into their homes. This led to a drawn-out legal battle in which the State demanded to expel the Jews. The State's main claim was that families who moved in illegally should not be rewarded. The report notes the absurdity: "In the [State's] eyes, the 'sinners' who must not be rewarded are the Jews who acted in accordance with the owners' wishes and by their request -- and not the Arabs who murdered and threw out the Jews in 1929!" Ultimately, at the end of 2005, an agreement was worked out according to which the Jewish occupants would leave, to be replaced shortly afterwards by other Jewish families who would rent the buildings. The Jews fulfilled their end of the bargain -- but Attorney General Menachem Mazuz said the State need not fulfill its side, because of "legal and political considerations." After having been thus betrayed, two families moved back in to adjacent buildings -- and were brutally and violently removed by army and police forces earlier this month. This expulsion, the report states, is a "mocking symbol of the hostility and disdain that the State of Israel has for the stolen Jewish property," from several aspects: The eviction was not necessary, as the Supreme Court had ruled it permissible, not obligatory; it was meant only to impart a lesson that 'sinners should not be rewarded' -- when in fact it was clear to all that their requests to move in had been ignored for years, leaving Jewish-owned property vacant and desolate; it was done against two families that had left peaceably on their own in the past, based on a government promise that was not fulfilled; it was tremendously violent and destructive. The properties were turned into ruins -- in opposition to the Trustee's obligation to preserve the property, and as an indication that the government meant to ensure that no Jews ever live there. It was the first time since 1929 that a synagogue had been destroyed in Hevron -- and the destroyers were Israeli soldiers and policemen. Extra-Harsh The report also notes the State's extra-harsh approach towards Jews who wish to actualize their rights to the Jewish property -- especially in comparison with the forgiving approach towards Arabs who infiltrate into these areas. For instance, a Jewish teenager was caught sleeping in one of the refurbished apartments in the market area. The police arrested him and demanded that he be distanced from the area for 60 days, claiming, "The State affirms the existence of a policy, approved by the Justice Ministry, calling for extra precautions to ensure that the Hevron market area remains empty." The judge asked the State representative about the closure order placed upon the apartments for "security reasons": "Why do these security reasons necessitate only the closing of the apartments, yet allow people to walk by there? Is it more dangerous for people to enter the apartments than to merely walk by?" The State's representative answered, "This is the judgment of the Central Commander..." However, he did not add that the order was issued by the Central Commander at the behest of the Deputy Attorney General, Shai Nitzan, for the purpose of preventing Jewish entry into the storefronts. Conclusion: End the Israeli Trusteeship! Israel's hostile approach cannot be due to its opposition to Jewish presence in Hevron, the report states: "The government of Israel has recognized, ever since a Cabinet decision in 1980, the legitimacy of Jewish habitation in Hevron -- and even anchored this right in an international agreement, the Hevron Accord of 1997." "However," the report continues, "as the Trustee of the property, Israel relates to the Jewish owners as an enemy. This is an absurd and intolerable situation for anyone who sees Israel as the country of the Jewish Nation." The writers of the report therefore call upon the State of Israel to end its trusteeship immediately, "especially given the fact that in 1995, a peace treaty was signed with Jordan -- ending the state of war between the two countries, ending Israel's status as an 'enemy' vis-a-vis Jordan, and ending the need for Israel to fill the shoes of Jordan's Trustee of Enemy Zionist Property..." "Alternatively," the report concludes, "Israel's policy makers must instruct all the government echelons to immediately stop the systematic harassment and discrimination of the owners of the stolen Jewish property... The State must first repair the damage it did in the market property, and then begin corrective reverse discrimination, leading to the restoration of dynamic Jewish life in Hevron as it was before the pogrom of 1929." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor at Arutz-Sheva To Go To Top

POLLARD'S PLIGHT. OUR PAIN Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, August 31, 2007.

This was written by Dov Hikind (NY Assemblyman, D -- Brooklyn) and it appeared in The Jewish Press [NY] August 31, 2007.

There was a surreal sense to embarking on a pre-dawn journey to visit Jonathan Pollard in the federal correction facility in Butner, North Carolina. Daylight had not yet broached the horizon, and the gray stillness of the morning at 4:45 a.m. punctuated the gravity of the day's mission. It was a restless night for me: In the last 22 years of Jonathan's incarceration, I had read countless books and articles, researched his case, and been briefed by Rabbi Pesach Lerner, the Executive Vice President of the National Council of Young Israel. And now, I was going to see Jonathan, who had spent most of his life in confinement. After many years of advocating on Jonathan's behalf, through myriad channels, I wanted to look into his eyes, be with Jonathan and feel with Jonathan. There are some moments, when I contemplate the last 25 years, that have become for me the fulfillment of my destiny, the reason I was elected to public office. It may be reflected in the eyes of a constituent, a senior citizen who was on the verge of having their Medicaid benefits terminated. And it was echoed on July 31, with the crushing sound of steel electronic prison gates slamming behind us with jarring finality in the federal institution in North Carolina. Meeting with Jonathan was humbling, and it was a full 24 hours until I could integrate and process the experience. Jonathan's faith is immutable, and his love is unfathomable. He has been disavowed, deserted, and denigrated by his beloved Israel. And yet he yearns for her embrace. Initially, regrettably, the Jewish community distanced itself from Jonathan, but his infinite love for the Jewish people has not been tempered. We were escorted into the room with an intelligence officer accompanying the four of us: Rabbi Pesach Lerner, who has done more for Jonathan than anyone, apart from his wife, Esther; Dr. Joseph Geliebter; and Wolf Sender. And there was Jonathan Pollard. We rushed to embrace, and as we hugged and kissed, the solemnity of the moment, the purity of his love, was overwhelming. It was a profound rendering of the dignity of the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim. Encased in steel, enclosed by razor-sharp barbed wire, for 2 ½ hours we spoke of what Jews have spoken about throughout the milennia: Israel, Torah, and the Jewish condition. Jonathan was fully read on my recent trip to Europe to survey the violent surge in anti-Semitism in England, France, Belgium, and Germany. His inspired analysis and grasp of the malignancy of European anti-Semitism was brilliant. Jonathan lead the conversation with an anthology of books he had read and was in the midst of reading with titles I have difficulty pronouncing. There are few minds like his, and fewer with a commitment of heart and spirit that is comparable to his. Keeping kosher in a federal penitentiary is truly a nisayon. It makes it that much more challenging that Jonathan is a Type 2 diabetic, and his condition is acute. The proper monitoring, diet, treatment prerogatives that would control his diabetes are not available to him. Rabbi Lerner bought Jonathan snacks from the vending machines, all inspected for the proper kosher certification. When Jonathan ate the offered chocolate pudding and peanut butter and crackers, one of our group commented that "this food is terrible for a diabetic." Jonathan wistfully answered, "But I'm hungry." I will never forget those words. Jonathan regularly forsakes a diet that would be better advised for his health, because of Kashrus issues. Jonathan acknowledges, "I know I broke the law, all I ask for is proportionality." The sentence Jonathan received was disproportionate and disparate to that of individuals convicted of a similar crime. Jonathan lives every moment to walk out of prison, to touch the soil of the state of Israel, feel her breath on his cheek, and be with his dear wife Esther. The 2 /12 hours vanished and our allotted time with Jonathan was over. It was a life-altering and life-affirming experience for me. I have met few people who match Jonathan's caliber of faith and commitment; it will stay with me forever. So many have risen to say that Jonathan has suffered enough. So many Gedolim. So many leaders. So many from the intelligence community. And now we must rise as a community and fulfill a mitzvah that is rarer than most: the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, redeeming the prisoner. Rav Elyashiv, Shlita and Rav Schteinman, Shlita have written letters to the President imploring George W. Bush to "grant clemency to Jonathan Pollard." James Woolsey, former Director of the CIA has said, "My view is that 20 years is enoughÄ I think the close relationship between United States and Israel as fellow democracies is also a consideration, and at this point I think he's served long enough." Former mayor and presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani has said that Jonathan's sentence was unfair and "way beyond the sentences served by other people that have been convicted of the same offense." It is our generation that has been entrusted by God with Jonathan's redemption. Perhaps for a special zchus, perhaps we need more meritorious undertakings. And as we approach the Yomim Noraim, the High Holy Days, we repeatedly beseech God in our tefillos for His mercy. We need to evoke the merits of the heavens for Jonathan's redemptionÄ. and our own. As long as Jonathan is in prison, we are imprisoned by our own failure to redeem him. We cannot rest until he is in his beloved Israel with his beloved wife. Now, through Yom Kippur, it is imperative that each and every one of us calls the White House to request the release of Jonathan Pollard. Make the call once every day between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111 and take part in the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim. In these very trying times, I would like to take this opportunity to wish you and yours a K'siva V'chasima Tova. May the New Year bring with it comfort and peace and renewed hope and promise for all the Jewish people. COLOR NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard:     JPEG -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607.jpg     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org /2007/082607.pdf BLACK AND WHITE NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607a.pdf Please call the White House for Pollard Today! 15 days to Rosh HaShana Please call the White House now! Tell President Bush to free Jonathan Pollard now! Send him home to Israel for Rosh HaShana! Telephone number: 1- 202-456-1414 or 1-202-456-1111 From Israel add your long-distance service provider code to the start of the USA number for example: 0121-202-456-1111 (Israeli codes: 001, 012, 013, 014, 018, etc) Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: LOWERING EXPECTATIONS Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 31, 2007. So, after all of the excitement and angst and fury, this is where we likely are with regard to "the peace process": According to the Post this morning, the US-sponsored summit in the fall may be only at the level of foreign ministers and may not involve heads of state at all. A major diplomat at the Russian Embassy here in Israel reported that he had been told this by US Ambassador Richard Jones. Israeli officials say they haven't been told at what level the conference will be held. It depends, clearly, on what sort of progress is achieved before the conference. Thus the push to get Olmert and Abbas to put together a pre-conference agreement -- that document stating principles. There's a move here to play it low key out of a desire to not look like idiots when nothing comes of the meeting. But an additional problem is that Saudi Arabia is less than eager to attend, and is more likely to be induced to do so if it's at a lower level. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas isn't doing too well: "A Palestinian leader who feels safer in Jerusalem, Paris and Washington than in Nablus and Jenin will never be able to deliver." Thus begins Khaled Abu Toameh's report today, citing a senior Fatah official. Seems that (and this was a surprise to me) Abbas hasn't been in Jenin or Nablus was before the January 2005 presidential elections when he was campaigning. He's referred to jokingly as the mayor of Ramallah because the only time he leaves this city is to go abroad. "A visit to Nablus or a refugee camps in the West Bank remains out of the question, mainly for 'security reasons,'" one of his aides explained. All in all, Abbas is lacking popularity and credibility. Concludes Abu Toameh, "Given the current divisions among the Palestinians, the ongoing Hamas-Fatah power struggle, the growing mistrust of the US and Israel in the Arab world and Abbas's shaky status, it is highly unlikely that the PA chairman would be able to win the backing of a majority of his people for a US-backed deal." ~~~~~~~~~~ A brief word about the issue of African refugees coming into Israel via Egypt, as I suspect this is something that's making press in the US. Some of those who have come -- as I understand it, roughly 3,000 over time -- have been kept here in Israel (where there is discussion as to what to do with them) and some have been turned back to Egypt. The situation is vastly complicated -- far more complicated than would appear at first glance -- and exceedingly painful. In a nutshell, there is the feeling that we Jews here in Israel have a moral obligation to receive suffering refugees. And that perspective tugs at my own heart, without a doubt. It comes from the gut, in terms of who we are and how we are supposed to act. But -- while I believe mistakes have been made in handling them -- Israeli officials who respond differently are not necessarily being heartless and without compassion or sense of responsibility. When one hears "African refugee" one thinks first of Darfur, and this obscures the larger issue. For it turns out that less than 1/4 of those who have come here are from Darfur (most of whom have been kept), and just over 50% are from Sudan at all. The rest are from various other parts of Africa. Word has apparently gotten out that if you can get yourself to Egypt, and then over the Sinai border to the Negev, that's a wise move. But this could result in absolutely huge and untenable numbers arriving that we are simply not capable of coping with; we are a small nation with a host of problems and an African Jewish population (from Ethiopia) that we are still contending with absorbing. We cannot accept unlimited numbers of refugees, and that message must be delivered; there is talk about building a fence so that they cannot get into Israel. Then there is a further concern -- though there has been no evidence yet that this has been the case -- that active enemies of Israel from Africa might come with a refugee population. In particular there is concern about al-Qaida, which has an African presence. Part of the problem in handling this has been Egypt's reprehensible way of dealing with the refugees. From that perspective it is easy to understand why they'd prefer to jump the border and take their chances in Israel (and why our sensitivity is necessary). There was one obscene incident witnessed by Israeli soldiers at the border who saw a refugee killed. If some refugees are being returned to Egypt, acceptable conditions for them must be assured -- and apparently arrangements have been made with Mubarak. Beyond this, it is appropriate for the international community -- the UN High Commission for Refugees and various NGOs -- to be involved here. According to an Israeli Foreign Ministry official: "Given Israel's size and limited resources, it has taken significant measures. Israel is well aware of its responsibility as a sovereign state, but we cannot address this complex issue on our own." ~~~~~~~~~~ For about a month, Arabs on the Temple Mount have been digging with heavy equipment, creating a trench 1.5 meters deep and 400 meters long that they say is needed for new electrical cables. They are doing so with the acquiescence of the Israeli government and the Israeli Antiquities Committee. Independent archeologists from the Committee Against the Destruction of Antiquities on the Temple Mount have become deeply disturbed about this and registered protest without effect. One of the most outspoken, Bar-Ilan University archaeologist Dr. Gabriel Barkai, then called a Jerusalem press conference, at which he explained that archeological ruins of inestimable value have been severely damaged by this work, while Israel is turning a blind eye. He is referring to a seven-meter wide wall that apparently dates to Second Temple times and was likely part of the Temple courts. An appeal to the High Court, to stop this work will be registered next week. The work is being done at night, which makes inspection more difficult. Why would Israel turn a blind eye? Because stopping the work would cause protest in the Muslim population and it's easier not to take them on. How despicable is this disregard for our heritage. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info To Go To Top PLEASE CALL THE WHITE HOUSE FOR POLLARD TODAY! Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, August 31, 2007. COUNT DOWN: 11 DAYS TO ROSH HASHANA It's Friday August 31, 2007 B"H, the 17th of Ellul. There are 11 days to Rosh HaShana. Please call the White House now! Tell President Bush to free Jonathan Pollard now! Send him home to Israel for Rosh HaShana! Telephone number (Monday to Friday 9AM to 5PM): 1-202-456-1414 or 1-202-456-1111 Dialing from Israel: Add your long-distance service provider code to the start of the USA number for example: 0121-202-456-1111. (Israeli codes: 001, 012, 013, 014, 018, etc.) Hours for Israeli Calls: White House telephone lines are manned from 4 PM Israel time to Midnight, from Monday to Friday. Be sure to call before (6:29 PM ) candle-lighting on Friday afternoon. [To ensure a faster response, follow the instructions for "Rotary" telephones regardless!] Your calls put Pollard on the map! The Pollard Call-In Campaign spear-headed by the National Council of Young Israel last Spring put Pollard on the map in the White House. His name now appears on the list of subjects that all the White House phone operators are given to record the number of calls. Now, with G-d's help and massive participation in the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, let's get Pollard out of there, and home for the High Holidays! Amain! Please call now! The National Council of Young Israel ad and flyers for recirculation and reprinting to encourage participation in this urgent intiative are available from the J4JP web site. Please click on the link below for the format of your choice: COLOR NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard:     JPEG -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607.jpg     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org /2007/082607.pdf BLACK AND WHITE NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607a.pdf Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com To Go To Top LEAD BY EXAMPLE Posted by Robert Turk, August 30, 2007. After today's news report that the government of Israel is prepared to relinquish control of the Temple Mount, it has now crossed a final line and must be removed by any means. The Bolsheviks that have ruled Israel for the past fifty nine years need to be stripped of their positions and tried for treason for crimes against the Jewish People. Throughout our long history as a people, we have always had traders willing to sell us out to the enemy for personal gain. Written into the declaration of independence of the United States are certain safeguards that protect its people from the abusive government. The preamble says That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. While Israel is not the United States, I say it is still a G- d given right for the people of Israel to abolish a corrupt and abusive government. As Jew's living in the Diaspora, it is our duty to help and protect our Jewish brothers and sisters in Israel from the abusive Olmert government whose intent is to destroy The State of Israel. I now call upon all Proud Jews and world Zionist organizations to put their differences aside and start making plans to help the brave " settlers " hold on to the land that our brave soldiers reclaimed. We also call on the proud and brave Israeli military to stand with those opposing an unlawful and ungodly so- called leadership. If you are strong enough make plans to go to Israel and stand shoulder to shoulder with our Brothers and Sisters. Please make plans. If you cannot go, then please make a generous donation to help defray the expense of the brave Jews who are willing to put their life on hold to stand by the land and people of Israel. I will lead by example and go to Israel as will most of our organization's leadership. If you are willing to make this historical effort, please send me an email. If you are unable to go and are willing to help defray the cost of those who want to go to Israel, please email me directly at chairman@bnaielim.org Robert Turk is Chairman of B'nai Elim. Contact him by email at chairman@bnaielim.org or call him at (860) 738-8872 To Go To Top MEARSHEIMER AND WALT FAIL TO CLEAN UP THEIR ACT Posted by Koira, August 30, 2007. This was published yesterday by Ira Stoll, Staff Reporter of the New York Sun, in www.nysun.com/article/61485. Professors John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government burst onto the national scene in March of 2006 with a Harvard "working paper" in which they wrote of the "unmatched power of the Israel Lobby." They charged, "Were it not for the Lobby's ability to manipulate the American political system, the relationship between Israel and the United States would be far less intimate than it is today.... AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress.... manipulating the media." At the time, the paper was praised by Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood and the American white supremacist David Duke, while widely condemned by the American Jewish community and a number of general interest publications, including The New York Sun. Next week, the two professors will publish a book-length expansion of their argument, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 484 pages, $26). In this latest iteration, the professors have tried to clean up their act -- but only on the surface. The "Lobby" has been revised to the lowercase "lobby." Gone in this new presentation is much of the inflammatory rhetoric -- the verb "manipulate," the term "stranglehold," the accusation that AIPAC is a foreign agent rather than an American interest group. The new version of this argument, with its stamp of approval from Farrar, Straus and Giroux, may be more acceptable for sale at a Barnes & Noble near you, for open discourse in the New York Times, on National Public Radio, and at the Council on Foreign Relations. But from beneath the surface, try though the professors may have to suppress it, what Messrs. Mearsheimer and Walt themselves define as anti-Semitism manages to poke through. The professors write that "anti-Semitism indulges in various forms of stereotyping and implies that Jews should be viewed with suspicion or contempt, while seeking to deny them the ability to participate fully and freely in all realms of society." They are at pains to emphasize that "the lobby is defined not by ethnicity or religion but by a political agenda." Then they proceed to jump in and do exactly what they say anti-Semites do. What are we to make of the professors' classification of the former governor of Vermont, Howard Dean, as a supporter of Israel in part on the basis that "Dean's wife is Jewish and his children were raised Jewish as well"? Or of the assertion that "Christian Zionists exert less impact on U.S. Middle East policy than the other parts of the Israel lobby do," because the Christians "lack the financial power of the major pro-Israel Jewish groups, and they do not have the same media presence"? Instead of the charge that the Jews or the "Lobby" are "manipulating" the press, the new, cleaned-up, book version of Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer asserts that, "If the media were left to their own devices, they would not serve up as consistent a diet of pro-Israel coverage and commentary." Left unexplained is exactly whose devices the press has been left to, if not their own. Discussing Elliott Abrams, an aide to President Bush, they quote an unremarkable passage from one of his books -- "there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart -- except in Israel -- from the rest of the population" -- and tutt-tutt, "This is a remarkable comment coming from an individual who holds a critically important position on Middle East policy in the U.S. government." Clinton administration aides who are American Jews come in for the same treatment. The authors describe Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk by approvingly quoting a Palestinian Arab who protested "negotiating with two Israeli teams -- one displaying an Israeli flag, and one an American flag." The professors protest that they are using the term "dual loyalty" not in its "earlier, anti-Semitic incarnation" but in "a neutral and nonpejorative fashion." It's an awfully fine distinction. To those with time-in-grade on this beat, there are jarring notes. What's with the notion that the Nazi Holocaust, as Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer write, "killed nearly six million Jews"? Not six million, as some but not all historians have found, but "nearly" six million, a distinction that, without discussing it, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer seem strangely careful to maintain. They claim that anti-Semitic bigotry was widespread "until recently," but minimize its current surge in Europe. Statistics are piled upon statistics to dismiss the problem of anti-Semitism in France, with no mention of the fact that France's ambassador in Great Britain called Israel a "[expletive] little country" or of the fact that the number of French Jews each year who are fleeing France for Israel has more than doubled in recent years because of the anti-Semitism . Of the anti-Semitism among European Muslims, the authors assert that "some of it" is "provoked by Israel's behavior toward the Palestinians." It's a textbook example of the error of blaming the Jews for anti-Semitism rather than the anti-Semites. Genuine anti-Semites, such as the leader of Hezbollah, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, who in 2002 said of Jews, "If they all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide," -- a quote omitted by the professors -- get stunningly favorable treatment in this book. Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer buy into the claim that Hezbollah's initial rocket attacks on Israeli towns last summer were intended not to kill Jews, but to divert Israeli attention from a kidnapping raid on Israeli soldiers. Sheikh Nasrallah preached, "death to America" and "each of us lives his days and nights hoping more than anything to be killed for the sake of Allah. The most honorable death is to be killed." These are but two more quotes omitted by the professors, who write that "it is impossible to make that case that the United States supported Israel" against Hezbollah "because it was the morally correct policy choice." They may think Israel had no moral high ground against Hezbollah -- they clearly do think that -- but to claim that such a case is "impossible to make" overstates it. If Hezbollah is practically benign, in the view of Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer, so too are Israel and America's other enemies. "Tehran has made several attempts in recent years to improve relations with Washington and settle outstanding differences, but Israel and its American supporters have been able to stymie any détente between Iran and the United States," they write. "Absent the lobby, there might already be a peace treaty between Israel and Syria." Israel's existence, they write, "is not in danger at present." Saudi Arabia, they claim, has offered to sign a peace treaty with Israel. "Remarkably, Iran has even offered to put its nuclear program up for negotiation and offered to work out a modus vivendi with Israel," they write. Israel's supporters in America doubtless wish the professors were right, but know they are not. Also apparent, even in this newly polished presentation, is the shakiness of Messrs. Mearsheimer and Walt's grip on the facts. They claim that terrorist attacks "do relatively little damage to Israel's economy." What of the fact that, amid a terrorism surge, foreign tourism to Israel declined to 718,000 in 2002 from 2.7 million visitors in 2000? They claim that "the Arabs were not attempting to destroy Israel" in the wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973, dismissing the assertions of Arab leaders to the contrary as "largely rhetoric designed to appease their publics." The implication of the qualifier "largely" in that sentence, undermining as it does their own claim, seems largely to have escaped the professors. The authors get a good ride out of the qualifier "largely" elsewhere in the book, too. "Unlike virtually every other country, Israel is largely immune from criticism on Capitol Hill," the professors write. The professors go on to name a long list of lawmakers who have criticized Israel, the country's supposed immunity notwithstanding -- Paul Findley, Lincoln Chafee, Charles Hagel, Earl Hilliard, Pete McCloskey, William Fulbright, Roger Jepson, Charles Percy, Nick Rahall. Others, such as David Bonior, are omitted. New to the book version is the claim that the Israel lobby is damaging not only American interests but also Israel's interests, a claim the authors repeat -- with a straight face -- again and again. Their concern for Israel's interests is touching, but it's a safe bet that the American Jewish leadership and the Israeli voters and elected officials ;have a more reliable judgment of what is in Israel's interests than do these two professors. The professors have their own view of American Jews, reporting with a tone of some exasperation that many of them "still believe that anti-Semitism is rife." That view is sure to be confirmed after reading this book. But one need not pass judgment on the motivations of Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer to reject their conclusions. One can even assess, as does David Remnick, writing in this week's New Yorker, that, "Mearsheimer and Walt are not anti-Semites or racists," while still finding fault, as Mr. Remnick does, with their unrelentingly negative depiction of Israel and mystifyingly rosy depiction of Israel's enemies. The professors blame the Israel lobby in America for nearly everything, from the failure of peace to break out between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs to the failure of peace to break out between America, Iran, and Syria. "In fact, the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it has long been so supportive of Israel," they write. It's all too neat -- the Israel lobby as an all-purpose scapegoat, a catch-all to blame for everything from the Iraq War to al Qaeda. As Mr. Remnick put it, "Mearsheimer and Walt give you the sense that, if the Israelis and the Palestinians come to terms, bin Laden will return to the family construction business." It's not a useful argument for Middle East policymakers, but it is an illuminating one for those concerned about the state of both the American publishing industry and higher education. The authors conclude by noting ecstatically that "In November 2006, twenty-five peace researchers in Germany called for questioning the 'special relationship' between Germany and Israel,' because of Israel's actions against the Palestinians." That relationship is about to be eroded further by the publication of this book by the German company Holtzbrinck, through its imprint Farrar, Straus and Giroux. That these authors could propound these views from prominent perches at respected American universities is a sign of a decline in standards in American higher education. During World War II, Harvard and the University of Chicago threw themselves into the effort to defeat the Nazis. In the current war, at least two professors are calling not for a defeat of the Islamist terrorists but for appeasing them at Israel's expense. This book is long but it offers not a scintilla of evidence that doing that would advance either America's security or the cause of freedom. Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: OUR PRIDE Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 30, 2007. The IDF is honoring its heroes from last summer's Lebanon War, and so some of the bravest are being featured in the media. The small sketches I offer here are evidence sure and clear of the caliber of the Israeli people. They are the best. Dr. Yehuda David, 53, an orthopedic surgeon, was on vacation when the war broke out. A major in the reserves, he hurried back and contacted the IDF. He is now being honored for his consistent dedication and self-sacrifice. He spent the entire war inside of Lebanon, carrying his 60 kg. pack -- filled with medical supplies -- on his back wherever he went; he treated some 50 soldiers. "I sign on for volunteer service," he said, "since if the soldiers are willing to give everything they can, I am also willing to give everything I can. After 2000 years in exile it is an honor to serve in the IDF." On the Friday night before one of the war's biggest battles, at Saluki, he assembled his battalion and suggested they light candles and recite the Shema before heading out to fight. ~~~~~~~~~~ Erez Ramati, also a doctor, was with his battalion at Saluki as well. He and his medics were treating the wounded from his battalion when he was informed that soldiers from another company also needed help. To get to them he had to run through an open area, directly exposed to Hezbollah fire. "There was no time for hesitating," he explained, since there were people who were wounded and they needed me. This was not about heroism or bravery but about doing what you need to do." ~~~~~~~~~~ I mentioned the other day the conference taking place under the auspices of the UN's Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. That it's turning out to be a bad scene is no surprise -- we knew it would be. B'nai Brith, which sent people from its Foreign Affairs Office, to monitor the proceedings, paints a dismal picture. "This is a conference of Israel-haters," said its director, Adam Mouchtar. What is perhaps most unsettling is that we're talking about Europeans: the European Parliament is hosting; European speakers have labeled Israel "apartheid" and called for a boycott. NGO-Monitor, based here in Jerusalem, reports that their "research has shown, non- governmental organizations funded and supported by the EU...are at the forefront of the political campaign to demonize and delegitimize Israel." ~~~~~~~~~~ Mahmoud Abbas, PA president, is not attending the conference but sent someone to make a statement on his behalf. In expressing hopes for a peace agreement with Israel, he alluded to the "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian people, which is, after all, what the committee sponsoring this gathering is dedicated to. A brief comment is in order, for the record: The Palestinian Arabs have NO inalienable right to a state. Don't be taken in on this. It's not a question of when they will exercise this right, with the right itself an acknowledged given. It simply doesn't exist, any more than the "right of return" for the so-called refugees exists. The Palestinians are a self-defined (or invented) group. I would like to say that they don't even exist as a people, but I recognize that they're created their own identity in recent decades; they've internalized it (and taught it to their children) and the world has bought it, so the argument becomes moot. What I can say is that they have no long history as a distinct people, and no long history in the land. Prior to 1948, the Jews in Palestine were called Palestinians and the Arabs called themselves Arabs. It's on the record for anyone who investigates this to see: They used to say they were part of the Arab nation or greater Syria. Many who today call themselves Palestinians came into Palestine as migrants with the influx of Jews in the years before the founding of Israel -- they came from places like Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Syria, looking for work, as Jewish development created jobs. Neither in language nor in culture are they distinct from surrounding Arabs. And while they have invented themselves and created the myth of the Palestinian people, it is a shallow thing, without deep national identity. This is why there are divisions between Palestinians groups: loyalty to clan or party comes before national loyalty. This is why they cannot get their act together -- forming a nation is not really their priority. The need to create a national identity was not intrinsic in a positive sense -- it was born in the main as a negative reaction to Jewish presence in the land. Compare this with the Kurds who have distinct culture and a strong national identity, and who long for establishment of a Kurdistan. (There is no UN committee for the inalienable rights of the Kurds, however.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday the IDF picked up in northern Gaza a 15 year old Palestinian Arab boy who had explosive devices that he was planning to use for a suicide attack. He is in custody. This is just one more instance of the terrorists making use of minors for their purposes. ~~~~~~~~~~ Not good news. Khaled Abu Toameh of the Post reports that Abbas has now appointed a special advisor on Jerusalem affairs, Adnan Husseini. This suggests that Abbas expects Olmert to negotiate the status of Jerusalem. I'll have more to say about this shortly. ~~~~~~~~~~ This isn't good news either: General Dayton, US security coordinator for the PA areas, has a peachy keen idea. He wants to institute five new Palestinian battalions in Judea and Samaria, complete with training and equipment supplied by the US (using the $80 million that's been allocated). This -- of course! -- is to strength Abbas. Does this take your breath away, as it does mine? He's been there, and done that, you see. In Gaza. And it was a colossal failure. The US is now smarting over the sophisticated weaponry and intelligence equipment that has fallen into Hamas hands because Fatah was quick to cut and run. And they want to do it again? On a bigger scale yet. What does one say about the intelligence, or the ability to grapple with reality, of someone who repeats what already failed so miserably, especially when the repeat performance, if it fails again, could be disastrous? This plan is in its early stages, and is supposed to progress slowly. If equipment is to be transferred to the PA, Israel will have to approve it. It would be foolish, I guess, to hope that our government will see so clearly the danger of this fighting equipment falling into the wrong hands and being turned on us (as ALL weaponry supplied to PA forces has ultimately been turned on us to some degree), that permission will be denied. Maybe if the IDF and intelligence forces are adamant? ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile Olmert has said that what he hopes to achieve with Abbas is conclusion of a single page agreement on principles for future negotiation. The wording would be kept vague enough to avoid diplomatic pitfalls that would be brought about by anything too specific. Said Olmert: "I believe that we want and can make decisions, but the Palestinians have a number of groups, they have no stable democracy, and there is uncertainty about the government and their institutions..." Explaining further, he added, "We will not push [Abbas] toward any declarations that will be good at noon and cause us to lose everything by evening." This means no feet to the fire, no demands for taking our terrorism, nothing that the people would object to. Doesn't take the "process" very far. This is what Olmert calls a "political horizon." Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info To Go To Top IRAQI CLERIC MUQTADA AL-SADR SUSPENDS MAHDI ARMY ACTIVITIES Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 30, 2007. This comes from Cox and Forkum Cartoons website. This cartoon was originally posted on August 1, 2004, and is in our second book Black & White World II, which can be ordered at http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000967.html along with our latest book. From FOX News: Iraqi Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr Suspends Mahdi Army Activities. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has ordered a six-month suspension of activities by his Mahdi Army militia in order to reorganize the force, and it will no longer attack U.S. and coalition troops, aides said Wednesday. The aide, Sheik Hazim al-Araji, said on Iraqi state television that the goal was to "rehabilitate" the organization, which has reportedly broken into factions, some of which the U.S. maintains are trained and supplied by Iran. "We declare the freezing of the Mahdi Army without exception in order to rehabilitate it in a way that will safeguard its ideological image within a maximum period of six months starting from the day this statement is issued," al-Araji said, reading from a statement by al-Sadr. In Najaf, al-Sadr's spokesman said the order also means the Mahdi Army will no longer launch attacks against U.S. and other coalition forces. "It also includes suspending the taking up of arms against occupiers as well as others," Ahmed al-Shaibani told reporters. Asked if Mahdi militiamen would defend themselves against provocations, he replied: "We will deal with it when it happens." The order was issued after two days of bloody clashes in the Shiite holy city of Karbala that claimed at least 52 lives. Iraqi security officials blamed Mahdi militiamen for attacking mosque guards, some of whom are linked to the rival Badr Brigade militia. To Go To Top THE IRAN DOSSIER Posted by Koira, August 30, 2007. This comes from The Weekly Standard www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/08/the_iran_dossier.asp It was posted yesterday by Michael Goldfarb, editor of www.WorldwideStandard.com Kim Kagan has produced her latest Iraq Report for The Daily Standard, this one detailing Iranian activity inside Iraq over the last 15 months. The report is the most comprehensive document on this subject I've come across, and it includes a series of maps and other images that help illustrate the mechanics of Iranian influence in Iraq. I follow this stuff pretty closely, but I've never been quite clear on exactly what constitutes the "special groups" that MNF-I discusses so frequently, who finances them, what shape they take, etc. Kagan goes a long way toward clarifying this: The Qods Force and Hezbollah trained Iraqis in groups of 20 to 60 so that they functioned as a unit--a "secret cell" or "special group." The Iraqis returned to Iraq after their training, maintaining their group's organization. Thus, each "special group" in Iraq consisted of 20 to 60 Iraqis who had trained together in Iran in how "to use EFPs, mortars, rockets, as well as intelligence, sniper and kidnapping operations." These special groups could be combined into larger organizations. The director of the Amin Allah charity coordinated "more than 200 rogue JAM members" and "ordered them to conduct assassinations on local citizens and government officials who oppose the group's illegal activities." How about the Sheibani network we've heard so much about? By August 2005, Abu Mustafa al-Sheibani had developed an extensive "network of insurgents created by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps with the express purpose of committing violence against U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq." Sheibani's group introduced into Iraq "'shaped' explosive charges," based on a model used by Hezbollah against the Israelis, and its fighters trained in Lebanon as well as Sadr City and "'another country,'" according to U.S. intelligence sources. An American military official in Baghdad explained that "the U.S. believes that Iran has brokered a partnership between Iraqi Shiite militants and Hizballah and facilitated the import of sophisticated weapons that are killing and wounding U.S. and British troops." An American Special Operations Task Force report claimed "the Lebanese Hizballah leadership believes that the struggle in Iraq is the new battleground in the fight against the U.S." Sheibani's group was estimated to include 280 fighters organized into 17 bomb-making teams and death squads. And on the effect of the surge on Iranian activities: In 2006, Coalition forces were also spread too thin to cover the lines of communication south of Baghdad. For example, only 200 soldiers from the Polish Division in Multi-National Division Central-South were stationed in Kut through spring 2007, detached from the bulk of their unit. Thus, smugglers could bring Iranian weapons without expecting interdiction along open routes in 2006. The surge of U.S. and Coalition forces, including the addition of another Division Headquarters, made it possible to begin interdicting weapons flowing along the major highways and the Tigris River. Multi-National Force-Iraq reinforced Kut with 2,000 soldiers from the Republic of Georgia, who arrived in July and August 2007 for operations that will commence in September. MND-C plans to use this brigade to search every truck coming along the highway through Kut. There's so much information in this document, it's hard to rip just a few items from the text. Still, for anyone trying to understand the role of Iranian forces in Iraq, and the complex networks the supply and sustain, "The Iran Dossier" is a must-read. Click here or on the image above right for the pdf. Download the Report from http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/IraqReport06.2.pdf Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com To Go To Top CRACK DOWN ON GAZA NOW Posted by Besa Center, August 30, 2007. This was written by Efraim Inbar and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392492694&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull). The writer is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies. Write the Center at Besa.Center@mail.biu.ac.il When the radical Islamist Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in June, several commentators concluded that since the organization's primary concern was consolidating its rule, it would try to reach a long-term truce with Israel. In accordance with this rationale, Hamas would be more flexible on a deal to free the abducted soldier, Gilad Schalit, and would refrain from attacking Israel. Neither scenario materialized. In reality, Hamas is not signaling moderation, but continuous violent struggle against the Jewish State. The organization is waging a limited war against Israel and preparing for an escalation in the conflict. Kassam rocket attacks have intensified, and work continues on extending the range of the rocket. Infiltration attempts by terrorists into Israel have also grown. Palestinian mortars have even targeted the crossing points into Gaza used for transferring much-needed food and fuel into the Strip. Additional tunnels have been dug, and arms smuggling has reached a peak since Hamas took control of Gaza. Furthermore, Hamas sends hundreds of its men to Iran for advanced training. And Hamas has significantly enhanced its military capabilities across a range of areas.   WHILE ISRAEL has recently become slightly more active militarily in the Strip, it still shows unnecessary restraint. The fears that a large-scale ground attack in Gaza might be costly in casualties are exaggerated. It's an assumption which needs reassessment. Similar arguments were voiced against a large-scale invasion of Judea and Samaria before Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, and they were proven wrong. Gaza has yet to be subjected to an Operation Defensive Shield-like military treatment, and this is why the level of violence emanating from Gaza is so high. Moreover, delay in addressing the Hamas challenge might prove more costly in the future, as our experience with Hizbullah in Lebanon has clearly shown.   STRATEGICALLY, ISRAEL'S reluctance to commit troops in battle to deal with Hamas aggression signals weakness. The widespread perception within the Arab world that Israeli society is extremely sensitive to the loss of human life invites enemy violence. It was largely this perception that motivated the Palestinian terror campaign against Israel in September 2000. The "spider web" theory propagated by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah -- that Israel's emphasis on the value of human life as well as its self-indulgent Western characteristics render it weak and vulnerable -- are also based on this view. Nowadays, in order to terrorize Israeli citizens, Gazans count on Israel's reluctance to employ land operations and attack targets in dense population areas.   ISRAELI POLICY should signal that life on the Palestinian side of the border will be invariably affected by Palestinian violence intent on deteriorating the quality of life on Israel's side of the border. Palestinian dependence on Israel for electricity and water supply should be capitalized on to impress upon the Palestinians that reciprocity is the name of the game. Israel has no obligation to the Palestinians if they are indiscriminately killing civilians and damaging valuable infrastructure. International law permits a military response, including artillery, aimed at the sources of fire, even if the fire is coming from urban areas. Israel should not hesitate to create a refugee wave by warning about impending fire on residential areas. Such tactics may result in a degree of Palestinian restraint. Moreover, the international atmosphere is very conducive to an Israeli strike on Hamas-controlled Gaza. Hamas is largely ostracized by the international community, which wants to help Mahmoud Abbas restore the authority of the PA to the Gaza Strip. Anything Israel does to weaken Hamas' grip on Gaza will be viewed with understanding. Abbas himself and his impotent coterie are quietly expecting that Israel will act to erode the control of the Hamas regime. Similarly, the so-called moderate Arab states will hardly be displeased if Hamas is weakened by Israel. The Hamas takeover of Gaza was a great shock for them as it encouraged Islamic opposition groups in their own countries.   FINALLY, the US may be expecting Israel to land a blow on the radical Islamic regime. Jerusalem failed to deliver a victory against Hizbullah in the summer of 2006 and can ill afford to be again seen as ineffective. Moreover, if the West is serious about establishing a united front against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Gaza is a good place to start. Regime change should not, however, be the goal of the inevitable Israeli military onslaught in Gaza. Israel can weaken Hamas, but it cannot impose an Arab ruler over the 1.5 million Gazans. It is beyond the power of Israel, or of any Western outsider, to influence the social and political dynamics of the Gaza Strip. Reoccupation of Gaza is, therefore, also not recommended. Israel's goal should be merely defensive -- to destroy Gazan capabilities to harm Israel. This means our temporary presence in all places where such capabilities are developed; their destruction and, after the evacuation of Gaza, systematic surgical strikes against reemerging terrorist cells. The model for Israeli military activity in Gaza should be the successful way Israel deals with the terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria. To Go To Top CAMPUS WATCH AND CALIFORNIA'S MIDDLE EAST ACADEMIC RADICALS Posted by Liz Diego, August 30, 2007. This was written by Cinnamon Stillwell and it appeared in American Thinker (www.americanthinker.com/2007/07/ campus_watch_and_californias_m.html) Cinnamon Stillwell is the Northern California Representative for Campus Watch. She can be reached at stillwell@meforum.org. After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it became painfully clear that if America was to become more engaged in the Middle East, it would need to develop a greater understanding of the area. Scholars of Middle East studies at our nation's universities were called upon to explain the religious, cultural and political dynamics of the region to students, journalists, and politicians Unfortunately, many of the leading academic lights in the field proved to be woefully unprepared for the conflict at hand and-much worse, were actively hostile to the interests of the United States and its allies. It was for this reason that in Sept. 2002, Middle East Forum director and Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes started Campus Watch (campus-watch.org), a project intended, as stated at its website, to "review and critique Middle East studies in North America, with an aim to improving them." Campus Watch has since focused its efforts on the West Coast, where no shortage exists of Middle East studies academics with problematic perspectives. Consider the following views publicly expressed by denizens of the ivory tower: "As far as I can tell, American empire is safe and secure, despite my best efforts to topple it (although Musab al-Zarqawi seems to be doing a good job in Iraq)." UC Irvine history and Islamic studies professor Mark LeVine "Israel is an 'apartheid state' and a 'colonial state,' but Hamas and Hezbollah are 'liberation movements.'" -- Diablo Valley College Middle East studies instructor Imam Amer Araim "America's military presence is metastasizing throughout the Arab world to the point of malignancy. Isn't it curious that Muslims are the ones under pressure to proclaim that their religion is the 'religion of peace'?" UC Berkeley Islamic studies professor Hamid Algar "You can't have a Palestinian state with its own rights, when you have 150,000 Jewish extremists sitting in the middle." -- UCLA history professor Gabriel Piterberg "It's about time that we have an intifada in this country that change[s] fundamentally the political dynamics in here. ...They're gonna say some Palestinian being too radical -- well, you haven't seen radicalism yet! -- UC Berkeley Islamic studies lecturer Hatem Bazian Unfortunately, such sentiments are par for the course at California colleges and universities where a culture of political correctness has allowed apologists for radical Islam to dominate Middle East studies. Instead of offering college students the historical basis and intellectual tools to help them better understand the realities of a changing world, far too many Middle East studies professors engage in indoctrination. The classroom has become merely a tool for pushing a political agenda. At the same time, students that dare to buck the prevailing orthodoxy often find themselves the victims of intimidation and suppression at the hands of their own professors and administration. Professors that diverge from the party line can also face ostracism and, at times, discrimination. In working to stem the tide of intolerance and academic dishonesty on California's colleges and universities, Campus Watch will inevitably run up against the sort of smears to which it has long been subjected. Critics often accuse Campus Watch of practicing "McCarthyism" or "censorship," but they couldn't be further from the truth. In reality, Campus Watch analyzes and critiques Middle East studies, employing specialists in the field, original research, and the largest archive of related news and information available on the Internet. Campus Watch holds no governmental power, nor does it control academic and financial decision-making at colleges and universities. Campus Watch takes no position on debates over tenure and, according to its mission statement, "fully respects the freedom of speech of those it debates while insisting on its own freedom to comment on their words and deeds." Only those who equate criticism with censorship could confuse Campus Watch with being anything other than what it is -- a participant in the free exchange of ideas. After all, rigorous debate should be the very essence of higher education. Yet in the rarified, insulated world of academia, professors arrogantly assert that they should be answerable to no one: Not even the taxpayers who foot the bill for keeping the universities running. In what other profession would such a demand for unaccountability be tolerated? Simply by shedding light on the discipline, Campus Watch is bucking that trend. Judging by the level of vitriol generated in response, its efforts are paying off. The state of Middle East studies should concern us all. And, lest one be misled, the issue at hand has nothing to do with political or religious affiliation. Rather, it's about the importance of providing students, politicians, and journalists with accurate and fair information on this most important of fields during this crucial time. The next generation deserves no less. To Go To Top IRAN MUST BE SUBDUED AT ALL COSTS! Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, August 30, 2007. To date, Western civil industrial powers, not to mention Eastern civil industrial powers, resist confronting Iran with force, deterred mostly by the consequential major disruption in oil supplies that would surely follow. The nuclear emerging Persian nemesis knows those civil nations will continue to react tepidly in response to its spinning centrifuges, applying sanctions with limited impact, lest their own oil addicted economies bear the brunt of a 'catastrophic' reduction in ever needed prehistoric energy supplies, not only from an invaded Iran but other Middle Eastern pushers likely to be involved in a terrorist inspired backlash, not to mention the unthinkable 'catastrophic' downward jolt to 'Big Oil's' balance sheets. Profit junky CEOs cannot bear even short term hardship bound to unleash the wrath of money-mad instant gratification obsessed stockholders, breathing fire and brimstone, in addition to the truly devastating collateral damage inflicted from Main Street to Wall Street as well as analogous worldwide venues. No doubt, twelfth Imam deluded fundamentalist Islamic Persian autocrats, frothing for that savior to arrive ridding the planet of the collective infidel i.e. everyone not mesmerized by their misogynistic Shiite faith, will not take a licking but keep on ticking much like the clock soon to be affixed to the fuse of a nuclear bomb set to detonate when the turbaned Dr. Strangelove cadre whimsically pushes the big hand and little hand together on the-you guessed it- number twelve, as in Imam. Could Tel Aviv be the first target in the crosshairs of those contemptuous perilously irrational characters? Nicolas Sarkozy, France's newly elected president, sees the radiating light, thus subtly, yet intrepidly, suggests his nation would not be opposed to military action directed at the mad Persians, a disastrous reaction he infers indeed to avoid a much greater disaster. Might we contrast such prescient analysis with the BBC's craven response to Al-Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper, asserting 06/27/2007 on Lebanese television "if the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight." This abominable Arab founded the pan-Arab daily in London in 1989, circulating its propaganda to about 50,000 readers, and is also a regular commentator on Sky News and BBC News. A BBC weak kneed weak minded spokesperson responding diplomatically oozed to the Jerusalem Post, "We should not automatically assume that academics and journalists from other organizations are impartial and make it clear to our audience when contributors are associated with a particular viewpoint.".... "The BBC is required to explore a range of views, so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or underrepresented." .... "The BBC will sometimes need to report on or interview people whose views may cause serious offense to many in our audiences. We must be convinced , after appropriate referral, that a clear public interest outweighs the possible offense." Hello!!! Al-Bari Atwan said he would dance if Iran bombs Israel!!! Only a worm posing as a journalist would not blast such a statement. How many times might Winston Churchill turn over in his grave listening to such despicable drivel from the wretched communications network representing the fair nation he once brilliantly led? Then again, if indeed oil is thicker than blood, we must note that British Petroleum (BP) is extensively involved in Iran's chemical and commercial schemes, as well as IRNA, a joint gas exploration venture between BP and NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company) in Scotland, thus the BBC might be a tad hesitant to indirectly step on the toes of the British Isle's superpower corporation, latter day Persia's petrol partner , prominent member of the aforementioned fossil fuel fraternity A/K/A 'Big Oil'? After all, broadcast licenses can be revoked by a retaliatory government, perhaps itself bedded down with such deep pocket corporate types involved in that heartless industry. Therefore, let us tip our berets to France's esteemed President Nicolas Sarkozy, obviously a principled leader whose soul remains fully intact! U.S. President George W. Bush, more so than the newly elected French leader, robustly denounces those 'axis of evil' leaders of Iran, yet, along with erstwhile British Prime Minister and junior partner Tony Blair, as well as a few others, belied such rhetoric by their deeds. Resoundingly toppling 'Sadist Hussein' to its west, subduing the Taliban to its east, both of Sunni ethnicity, has substantially strengthened Shiite Iran. No doubt, Hussein and the Taliban were and are despicable, more than deserved a shock and awe pounding, however, without such predators neutralizing a more perilous Persian predator, the Middle East has been transformed into an unstable emerging nuclear bastion of terror with Armageddon potential. This seemingly unintended consequence, albeit baffling to comprehend how it might not have been predicted, should force all civil Western and Eastern industrial powers as well as all vulnerable Sunni regimes to aggressively act in concert against Iran, in effect bringing its fundamentalist Shiite leaders to their knees or 'wiping them off the map', yet that is not the case. Iranian influence, in fact, continues to spread into Hugo Chavez's Venezuela for one, still not causing Bush and his cronies to dust off an expanded version of the Monroe Doctrine and pounce before the cancer further metastasizes incredulously through their neighborhood to the south. Is a continuous flow of oil so essential that the Iranian lunatics will be allowed to amass a nuclear arsenal, threaten the security of all Muslim and non-Muslim nations, especially Israel, in its continental neighborhood and beyond, also supplying terrorist proxies like Hamas and Hizbullah with the means to ignite the mother of all wars? If the answer is yes or even perhaps, century twenty-one could morph into a dark age for all mankind. 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 larose@snip.net To Go To Top ABBAS REBUILDING WAR MACHINE; EUROPEANS REJECT BIGGER UNIFIL ROLE; ANTHONY CORDESMAN FLIPS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 30, 2007. WHAT I THINK THE U.S. SHOULD GIVE ABBAS Paper shredders. Next time his forces surrender to Hamas, first destroy the intelligence files that Hamas and Iran use against everybody else. ABBAS REBUILDING TERRORIST WAR MACHINE Everything Abbas does boosts jihad. He gets Israel to release terrorist prisoners. He calls for outside arms, training, PLO troops, and exiled Fatah leaders to come in. Israel exiled them because of their terrorism. Israeli leaders think they strengthen Abbas against Hamas, which he helps more than he fights. They really strengthen Abbas against Israel, which he fights more than he helps. I think that the best way to boost Abbas would be to hoist him up a gallows. Most people are too stupid to see what Abbas and Israel are doing. Some think that Israel's leaders are too stupid to see what Abbas is doing. I think that Israel's leaders are too compromised to care what they are doing. HOW GOVERNMENT REALLY WORKS People usually accept the official version of how government works and official explanations of events. Barry Chamish doesn't. He investigates. He finds that officials are serving personal interests or dubious masters, but putting a good face on it. I recommend his books. He cites his evidence. Some of his conclusions are judgments based on enough evidence and knowledge of the people involved to posit a theory but not enough to constitute proof. Before one of his speeches, the host pressed him about proofs, and he was candid about which conclusions he had proof for. He has an entertaining but valid way of arguing by showing how ridiculous, not true to life, are some government explanations or excuses. WHY IDF RAIDS DO NOT STOP THE ROCKETS Let's review the arithmetic, again. Every day, the IDF raids Gaza. It captures or kills, say, 3 terrorists there. Then it releases hundreds of terrorists, of whom a portion resume terrorism. Even if the IDF eliminated all 3 a day, or 1,100 a year, Hamas, alone, has 13,000 armed men to draw on. Meanwhile, it controls a society that concentrates in recruiting for terrorism. Small raids are a poor but costly substitute for invading Gaza and disarming all. ARAB FAMILY EXCUSE The family of the young Israeli Muslim, who shot people in Jerusalem until he was shot dead, deny he initiated the violence. He was, they explained, a quiet fellow. The guards must have concocted a story about his seizing a guard's pistol, in order to justify their having murdered him, they asserted. Three terrorist organizations claimed to have arranged his attack (8/11). Israeli security films were screened, showing him to have seized the guard's pistol. The family was defaming the guards. Arab families express surprise that their offspring attack innocent people. They shouldn't be surprised. Their religion promotes hatred and war. They may think it is in the service of Allah, but nevertheless, their religion basically is intolerant and violent about it. Terrorist recruiters must say to vulnerable Muslim youth, a good Muslim is supposed to fight infidels. Why aren't you doing that? And so, Muslim youth suddenly go on the offensive. SNIPPING AWAY AT JEWISH SECURITY Some Muslims from the Hebron area and Anarchists Against the Wall cut about 30 yards off the security fence, before Israeli troops arrived. The vandals were not arrested (IMRA, 8/11). Crimes against national security are condoned by the Israeli government, because they are committed by Arabs and leftists, favored by the government. Imagine how harsh the arrests would be if a Jewish community, made to feel insecure by being fenced out of contiguous Jewish areas or fenced onto the low ground and being subjected to gunshots from Muslims in the hills, cut the fence! The same government and leftists who condone leftist and Arab criminality demand harsh punishment of Jews who do not cooperate in their expulsion from their own homes. The leftist argument is that Israel has a government of law, and the law must be obeyed or else. But the Left disobeys the law. CONGRESSMEN BELIEVE ABBAS Abbas assured visiting Members of Congress that he does not intend to share power with Hamas. That reassured them. They think that he is the answer to the problem, Arafat was the problem (Arutz-7, 8/15). He was Arafat's chief aide! Abbas has had negotiations with Hamas for the power-sharing that he told the Congressmen he opposed! Only naifs are reassured by jihadists. Apparently one can tell Members of Congress anything, and they'll believe it. BRITAIN STILL REDUCING ARMS SALES TO ISRAEL The British government determines what arms its private companies may sell to what countries. Its criterion for blocking arms sales is whether the arms would destabilize a region or repress human rights. It has stopped sales to various countries, mostly to Israel. It did not state why with any specificity (IMRA, 8/14). Since the Muslims are the aggressors and are arming as much as they can, any arms sold to Israel help stabilize the region. Arms sales to Israel preserve it from Islamic oppression, including in the Territories. The sale of major weapons such as airplanes, however, bear little relation to human rights in the Territories. Why doesn't Britain allow those sales? Appeasement? Revenge for having fought Britain for independence? EUROPEANS REJECT BIGGER UNIFIL ROLE Israel wants UNIFIL to be given more authority in Lebanon. One power would be to inspect towns, where Hizbullah stocks arms, and not just countryside. Another would be to open fire on Hizbullah operatives, not just fire back. European members of the UNO indicated they would vote against Israel's request. For one thing, it would be unsafe for UNIFIL (IMRA, 8/16). UNIFIL doesn't want to expand its mandate. Finding and confiscating Hizbullah rockets might prevent war on Israel, but that's no priority for UNIFIL -- firing on Hizbullah would be dangerous. UNIFIL is not in Lebanon to court danger. That might accomplish something. POPULATION DENSITY Manilla is 13 times as densely populated as Gaza, Calcutta,12 times, Cairo, 10 times, and Singapore and Hong Kong are 2 times as dense (Arutz-7, 8/15). Poor comparison: cities vs. an area that is not all urban. But people have the impression it has an urban density. It doesn't. NOT MORE HONORABLE IN GAZA "Honor killings" have increased slightly, in Gaza. Since the sentence for those found to have committed them is considerably less than for ordinary murder, some killers falsely call their crimes "honor killings." (IMRA, 8/15). The Muslim Arab sense of honor is: murder can be healthy, suspicion along justifies it, and deceit is desirable. ANTHONY CORDESMAN'S UNANNOUNCED DEFECTION Something happened to Anthony Cordesman's perspective. He is a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and Intl. Studies. He was a brilliant defender of Israeli security. The last few times he wrote about the subject, he has implicitly worked against Israeli security. In the August 16 New York Times Op.-Ed., for example, he supports the proposed US arms sale to Gulf States and arms gifts to Egypt and Israel. His arguments are debatable but reasonable. He is too bright to overlook serious points, but does. That suggests he no longer cares about Israel. He omits the crucial fact that both Egypt and S. Arabia are major enemies and neighbors of Israel, and that no country threatens Egypt. It's a serous omission not to acknowledge the risk to Israel of the arms to Egypt and S. Arabia. He claims, what I've heard before, that it's the free US arms that keeps Egypt from attacking Israel. He does not explain why that should be so. I think the free US arms keep Egypt capable of attacking Israel. He calls the bribery of Egypt keeping the peace. Some peace, if it requires bribery! TANKS OBSOLETE? Iran claims its new missile can pierce Israel's Merkava tank armor (IMRA, 8/18). Offensive measures and defensive measures have leapfrogged over each other since the beginning of warfare. Iran exaggerates its prowess. Is its tank claim true? I would not like to see industrialized countries brought down to the level of non-industrialized ones having less concern for the lives of their own troops and of innocents. U.S. VS. IRAN The Revolutionary Guards have become Iran's main army, because it is indoctrinated. It also runs many of Iran's government-owned industries. Now the US indicated that it is about to declare the Guards a terrorist organization. This declaration is intended to discourage some foreign countries from doing business with it. Some of them are expected to balk (IMRA, 8/16). The Guards were fomenting terrorism in Lebanon for years. It is difficult to imagine why the US waited so long. European countries that do business with it -- are these the ones that liberals criticize Bush for not lowering himself to their level? 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 To Go To Top TERROR'S PURSE STRINGS Posted by Bryna Berch, August 30, 2007. Seems like these days, terrorists get a cut of much of what we buy, from fake pocketbooks to a gallon of gasoline. This was an op-ed piece by Dana Thomas and it was published August 30, 27 in the New York Times (www.nytimes.com/2007/08/30/opinion/30thomas.html?em&ex= 1188705600&en=32ec0aa01c046b01&ei=5087). Dana Thomas, a correspondent for Newsweek, is the author of Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster. LUXURY fashion designers are busily putting final touches on the handbags they will present during the spring-summer 2008 women's wear shows, which begin next week in New York City's Bryant Park. To understand the importance of the handbag in fashion today consider this: According to consumer surveys conducted by Coach, the average American woman was buying two new handbags a year in 2000; by 2004, it was more than four. And the average luxury bag retails for 10 to 12 times its production cost. "There is a kind of an obsession with bags," the designer Miuccia Prada told me. "It's so easy to make money." Counterfeiters agree. As soon as a handbag hits big, counterfeiters around the globe churn out fake versions by the thousands. And they have no trouble selling them. Shoppers descend on Canal Street in New York, Santee Alley in Los Angeles and flea markets and purse parties around the country to pick up knockoffs for one-tenth the legitimate bag's retail cost, then pass them off as real. "Judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys shop here," a private investigator told me as we toured the counterfeit section of Santee Alley. "Affluent people from Newport Beach." According to a study by the British law firm Davenport Lyons, two-thirds of British consumers are "proud to tell their family and friends" that they bought fake luxury fashion items. At least 11 percent of the world's clothing is fake, according to 2000 figures from the Global Anti-Counterfeiting Group in Paris. Fashion is easy to copy: counterfeiters buy the real items, take them apart, scan the pieces to make patterns and produce almost-perfect fakes. Most people think that buying an imitation handbag or wallet is harmless, a victimless crime. But the counterfeiting rackets are run by crime syndicates that also deal in narcotics, weapons, child prostitution, human trafficking and terrorism. Ronald K. Noble, the secretary general of Interpol, told the House of Representatives Committee on International Relations that profits from the sale of counterfeit goods have gone to groups associated with Hezbollah, the Shiite terrorist group, paramilitary organizations in Northern Ireland and FARC, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Sales of counterfeit T-shirts may have helped finance the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, according to the International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition. "Profits from counterfeiting are one of the three main sources of income supporting international terrorism," said Magnus Ranstorp, a terrorism expert at the University of St. Andrews, in Scotland. Most fakes today are produced in China, a good many of them by children. Children are sometimes sold or sent off by their families to work in clandestine factories that produce counterfeit luxury goods. Many in the West consider this an urban myth. But I have seen it myself. On a warm winter afternoon in Guangzhou, I accompanied Chinese police officers on a factory raid in a decrepit tenement. Inside, we found two dozen children, ages 8 to 13, gluing and sewing together fake luxury-brand handbags. The police confiscated everything, arrested the owner and sent the children out. Some punched their timecards, hoping to still get paid. (The average Chinese factory worker earns about $120 a month; the counterfeit factory worker earns half that or less.) As we made our way back to the police vans, the children threw bottles and cans at us. They were now jobless and, because the factory owner housed them, homeless. It was "Oliver Twist" in the 21st century. What can we do to stop this? Much like the war on drugs, the effort to protect luxury brands must go after the source: the counterfeit manufacturers. The company that took me on the Chinese raid is one of the only luxury-goods makers that works directly with Chinese authorities to shut down factories, and it has one of the lowest rates of counterfeiting. Luxury brands also need to teach consumers that the traffic in fake goods has many victims. But most companies refuse to speak publicly about counterfeiting -- some won't even authenticate questionable items for concerned customers -- believing, like Victorians, that acknowledging despicable actions tarnishes their sterling reputations. So it comes down to us. If we stop knowingly buying fakes, the supply chain will dry up and counterfeiters will go out of business. The crime syndicates will have far less money to finance their illicit activities and their terrorist plots. And the children? They can go home. To Go To Top THE REAL TERROR PAYMASTERS Posted by KAE, August 29, 2007. This was written by William F. Jasper of the John Birch Society (www.jbs.org). In 1972, the Kremlin decided to turn the whole Islamic world against Israel and the U.S. As KGB chairman Yuri Andropov told me, a billion adversaries could inflict far greater damage on America than could a few millions. In the quote above, Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, head of the DIE, the KGB's little sister in communist Romania, reveals a conversation he had with chairman Andropov, the Soviet leader. "We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world," Andropov told Pacepa, "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." Gen. Pacepa, who defected to the United States in 1978, recounted this story in an August 24, 2006 article for National Review entitled "Russian Footprints." "According to Andropov," said Pacepa, "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." Gen. Pacepa explained how this was put into operation: In the mid 1970s, the KGB ordered my service, the [Romanian] 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. Likewise, Anatoliy Golitsyn, one of the most important KGB defectors to come to the West, noted in his 1995 book, The Perestroika Deception, "Under concealed Russian guidance, the Muslims of the former Soviet Union . will seek to cooperate and ally themselves with Muslims in Iran and the Arab states while Russia maintains its open policy of cooperation and partnership with the West. In this way China openly and Russia secretly will jointly attempt to swing the balance of power in their favor in the highly strategic, oil-producing Arab/Iranian areas of the Middle East." A July 1997 article by Associated Press writer Anthony Shadid provides one measure of the impact of this Soviet KGB (and ongoing Russian FSB) strategy. The AP story, "Marxism Makes Way for Islam", profiles a number of influential Marxist-Muslim intellectuals. It begins with the observation that "on the bookshelf of Adel Hussein sits an odd collection for one of Egypt's leading Islamic thinkers." Titles like Socialist Integration, On Communism, and Planning in the U.S.S.R. by leading Marxists, notes Mr. Shadid, "speak more of class struggle than the hand of God." Like a surprising number of others across the Arab and Muslim world, Adel Hussein "is a one-time Marxist and nonbeliever who has turned to Islam, part of a new intellectual generation reshaping the religion." "I benefited from Marx in both theory and practice," Hussein told Shadid, "but now, Islam is my starting point and my framework." That doesn't mean he's abandoned Marx, however. "Hussein, for instance, says his goals have not changed", Shadid reported. "But he now sees Islam, through its ability to persuade and to mobilize, as the best tool." In other words, Islam for Hussein is a means to an end, and the end is a Marxist world. Adel Hussein, says AP's Shadid, is representative of a significant number of today's influential imams and mullahs. "In a jarring twist, they are the same thinkers who a generation ago drew the ire of religious Muslims because their Marxist disavowal of God was seen as the biggest threat to Islam", Shadid reported. "Today, they are often the public face of Islam -- writing in leading Arabic newspapers, speaking at conferences and on television talk shows, enjoying the support of many younger, more political Muslims interested in their attempts to rethink Islam's relationship to democracy, minorities and the West." Evidence for the existence of an ongoing Soviet/Russian strategic plan to foment and use Islamic extremism is very extensive and goes far to explain the inordinate hatred of Muslim fundamentalists for America and the West. Not only is al-Qaeda aligned with the Kremlin (see the article "Behind Islamic Terror"), so are the other major "Islamist" terror groups including PLO/al-Fatah, Hamas, and Hezbollah (see "Who's Who In Terrorism" below). Of course, none of those groups would amount to much if not for the immense assistance they receive from Iran and Syria, regimes that were primary client-state terror sponsors for the Soviets and continue in that role for Russia under Putin. Putin continues to build Iran's nuclear program and upgrade its long-range missile program, not to mention provide Ahmadinejad's regime with all of the conventional weapons that Tehran and its surrogate terrorists can use. Likewise for the longtime terrorist-sponsoring regime of Bashar al-Asad in Damascus. In January 2005, Putin welcomed President al-Asad to Moscow and forgave 73 percent of the $13.4 billion debt owed by Syria to Moscow. Then, a couple months later, he sold Strelet surface-to-air missiles to Asad and has been showering him with weapons. Moscow Masterminds In the 2005 action film Lord of War, Nicolas Cage plays Russian arms dealer Yuri Orlov, whose merchandise -- guns, tanks, grenades, missiles, planes, bombs -- spreads slaughter and genocide across Africa. The fictional Orlov is a portrayal of the real-life Viktor Bout, a "former" KGB officer who has built a global empire with his fleet of Soviet transport planes and helicopters and his unmatched access to a bottomless supply of Soviet armaments. It would be difficult to find a war, civil war, revolution, terrorist organization, dictatorship, coup, or attempted coup in Africa, the Middle East, or Central Asia over the past decade and a half that hasn't been fueled by Bout's deadly merchandise. Viktor Bout was for years the main arms supplier for the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He subsequently became a major supplier to the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance. While operating a dizzying array of companies and shell companies out of Belgium and the United Arab Emirates, Bout has always maintained a home base and safe haven in Russia. When the Belgian government issued an international arrest warrant for him in 2002, Bout fled to Moscow. "Asked if Bout was in the country when the arrest warrant was issued, the Russian foreign ministry said no, even though Bout was giving live radio interviews from studios in downtown Moscow," note Douglas Farah and Stephen Braun, authors of Merchant of Death: Money, Guns, Planes, and the Man Who Makes War Possible. "The next day, officials grudgingly acknowledged he might be in Russia but said they had seen no evidence that he had committed any crime, and therefore could not act." According to Farah and Braun and other investigative reporters, Viktor Bout more recently has been running arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon and the forces of the radical Islamic Courts Union in Somalia. Bout's status as a private entrepreneur provides protective deniability to his bosses in the Kremlin -- including the top KGB/FSB man himself, Vladimir Putin -- but it is obvious that they are supplying him and protecting him so he can continue stoking the fires of terror and revolution that they have sparked and fed for decades. Incredibly, Western governments that verbally condemn Bout's sinister blood trade are more than willing to do business with his companies. For instance, the U.S. Defense Department has paid Bout's air transport companies millions of dollars to fly supplies into U.S. bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. As indispensable as Viktor Bout has been -- and is -- to the Kremlin's ongoing terror strategy, there are others who are even more important. One of the most important is Yevgeniy Primakov, the former KGB chief in charge of Middle East terrorism during the Cold War. Primakov has been at the pinnacle of Soviet politics for decades: Soviet Politburo member, former Russian Foreign Minister, head of the Russia Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), and Russian prime minister. Now he is Putin's right-hand man as a "private citizen." As head of the Russia Chamber of Commerce, he continues his role directing Russia's client terror states and terrorist groups while on commercial visits throughout the Mideast. In 2006, Primakov presided at the founding meeting of Russia's new forum for Muslim countries, the "Russia-Islamic World Strategic Vision Group." The new group held its first session in Moscow on March 27-28, attended by delegates from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, and 12 additional Muslim states. Putin greeted the delegates. Significantly, the "statesman" who presided at the meeting was Primakov, a renowned Arabist who played a key role in formulating the Soviet Union's ties with the Muslim world during the cold-war era. Jihadist Hatred for America Is the ongoing Soviet/Russian propaganda and terror strategy really at the heart of the militant jihadist hatred directed at the United States? The overwhelming evidence would seem to answer resoundingly in the affirmative. After all, the jihadists should have good reason to view as enemies the regimes in Moscow, Beijing, and the Commonwealth of Independent States that have killed Muslims on a daily basis. In fact, the Soviet Union murdered over one million Muslim Afghans and made over five million of them refugees. Post-Soviet Russia brutally subjugated Muslim Chechnya, killing tens of thousands of civilians and leaving hundreds of thousands homeless. The Soviet Union persecuted (and present-day Russia continues to persecute) tens of millions of Muslims in Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan. The current openly communist government of Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan carried out the Andijan massacre of 2005, slaughtering as many as 5,000 Muslim civilians, with Moscow and Beijing both publicly voicing support for Karimov's action. Communist China has carried out a decades-long ruthless persecution of its Muslim Uighar minority. Communist regimes have forbidden study of the Q'uran, publicly burned countless copies of this sacred text of Muslims, imprisoned and tortured Muslim believers, and beaten Muslim clerics and then paraded them in public humiliation. Contrast that with the Western countries, where Muslims are granted full political and economic rights, can worship freely, and can obtain a Q'uran at any library or local bookstore. Yes, the jihadists have used our military presence in Iraq to fan the flames of hatred against the United States, but how about the communists? Do the jihadists hate America more than the non-Muslim communist states because we are uniquely decadent? It is true that Western post-Christian culture, especially as seen in popular fashions and through Hollywood's ubiquitous and depraved lens, is offensive to devout Muslims (as it is to devout Christians). But Russia is not pristine by comparison. Putin's Russia boasts one of the largest pornography industries in the world, featuring the most hard-core kiddie porn. Russia's mainstream media is much more salacious than its counterparts in the United States. Russia and the Muslim-populated (but non-Muslim-ruled) countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (C.I.S.) are also notorious for forced prostitution, gambling, and the production, consumption, and export of drugs and alcohol, all of which should earn them condemnation from the militant Muslim faithful. Instead, the leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, al-Fatah, and other "Islamic fundamentalists", not only ignore the transgressions of their infidel sponsors in Russia and China and the cries of their persecuted Muslim brothers, but they regularly break bread with and publicly support the atheist persecutors of Islam. We in the Christian West should not kid ourselves -- as certain "liberals" would have us do -- into accepting the false proposition that Islam is perfectly compatible with our social-political system. It is not (see article "Religion By The Sword"). And we must not succumb to their arguments that we should accept new waves of Muslim immigrants. But neither should we allow ourselves to be further dragged into a military "clash of civilizations" (as we already are in Iraq and Afghanistan) by "Muslim" front men for our so-called allies in Moscow and Beijing. In his October 11, 2001 news conference, President George W. Bush characterized the new global conflict as "a war against all those who seek to export terror, and a war against those governments that support or shelter them." Striking the same theme, but with greater specificity, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol declared in a July 21, 2006 article, "Radical Islam Takes On Democracy, that "our focus should be less on Hamas and Hezbollah, and more on their paymasters and real commanders -- Syria and Iran." But why stop with the middlemen? The real paymasters and commanders aren't in Damascus and Tehran; they're in Moscow and Beijing, as they have been for decades. These paymasters and commanders are also patient strategists. They will not try to engage us in head-on military conflict when they can more easily wear us down by leading us into many "quagmire" conflicts with their surrogates. Who's Who in Terrorism PLO/al-Fatah. For nearly four decades, the PLO has been the largest, wealthiest, and most politically connected terrorist organization in the world . For most of that time, it was held in the firm grip of Yasser Arafat's iron fist. But Arafat was not the fierce, independent actor he posed as; he was completely dependent on the Soviet KGB and its surrogate Warsaw Pact intelligence services for arms, training, logistical support, funds, and direction. His KGB handlers included Vasali Samoylenko, Vladimir Buljakov, and Soviet "Ambassador" Alexander Soldatov. Arafat's closest friend and head of PLO intelligence, Hani Hassan, was actually an agent of the DIE, the Romanian subsidiary of the KGB. Former DIE chief General Ion Pacepa reported in a 2003 Wall Street Journal article: I was given the KGB's "personal file" on Arafat. He was an Egyptian bourgeois turned into a devoted Marxist by KGB foreign intelligence. The KGB had trained him at its Balashikha special-ops school east of Moscow and in the mid-1960s decided to groom him as the future PLO leader. First, the KGB destroyed the official records of Arafat's birth in Cairo, replacing them with fictitious documents saying that he had been born in Jerusalem and was therefore a Palestinian by birth. During the 1960s and '70s, Arafat and the PLO did not hide their Marxist ideology and openly proclaimed their solidarity with the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist Cuba, and every other Marxist dictatorship. But in recent years, as communist-backed "Islamic fundamentalist" groups like Hamas have gathered more popular support, the PLO leadership has attempted to portray itself as authentically Muslim. It has adopted more religious rhetoric and used Muslim names and symbols, even naming Islam as the official and exclusive religion of Palestine in the 2003 Palestinian constitution. Since Arafat's death in 2004, veteran PLO hand Mahmoud Abbas has tried, unsuccessfully, to fill his shoes. Hamas swept to power in the 2006 parliamentary elections (winning 76 seats to Fatah's 43), and in June 2007 Hamas' military took control of the Gaza Strip in a series of gun battles through the streets of Gaza's cities that left 120 people dead and hundreds more wounded. Three of the four so-called Quartet of Middle East peace brokers -- the United States, United Nations, and European Union -- announced their backing for Abbas and the PLO and their rejection of Hamas. The remaining member of the quartet, Russia, has been playing both sides. During the last week of July, Mahmoud Abbas visited Putin in Moscow, seeking his endorsement. Putin gave it, but didn't rule out continuing negotiations and relations with Hamas. "I want to assure you that we will support you as the lawful leader of the Palestinian people," Putin told Abbas at their July 31 meeting. Hamas The Arabic acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya, or Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas is a Palestinian Sunni terrorist organization founded in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. One of Hamas' claims to infamy is its popularization of suicide bombing as a terror weapon, pioneering in recruiting females and children as suicide killers. Although posing as the ultimate in Islamic fundamentalism, like al-Qaeda it has a curious relationship with Putin's KGB/FSB. According to a March 2006 report by Axis Information and Analysis, "At present, five of the seven biggest Hamas websites are functioning from the territory of the CIS member-states. Three of these sites use services of the Russian providers.... There are two more smaller but rather well-known websites that are functioning from Russia's territory." This is especially noteworthy since the Putin regime has clamped down on all media and Internet access by its political opposition and all unapproved parties. Hamas' Internet sites, which have been so essential in building Hamas' stature, recruiting, and propaganda prowess globally, are clearly operating with Putin's approval. Russia does not include Hamas on its list of terrorist organizations. Not surprisingly, Hamas' political director, Khaled Mashal, has repeatedly affirmed the organization's close friendship with Moscow. Mashal presides over the Hamas "Politburo," which, in name, structure, and function, is much more in line with Marxist-Leninist than Islamist thought. Mashal has led Hamas delegations to Moscow for talks with Putin and has met with Putin and Yevgeniy Primakov, the KGB's top Middle East scholar, at other forums in Khartoum, Tehran, and Ankara. Although Hamas never provided any significant aid to its fellow Muslims who were being slaughtered by the Russians in Chechnya, it did, up until 2004, offer them rhetorical support. Since 2004, though, it has urged the Chechens to "heal the wound" and surrender in the interest of "a strong and integrated Russia." Hezbollah. In Arabic, Hezbollah means "Party of God." But there is little that is godly about the group, which has exploded in size, power, and influence since first coming to Western attention by bombing the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, killing over 300 Marines. It is supported chiefly and directly by Iran and has adopted the revolutionary theology and ideology of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini. It also receives military aid directly and indirectly from Syria and Russia, as manifested by the weapons cases abandoned by Hezbollah after their rocket attacks on Israel last summer. The containers were clearly marked: "Customer: Ministry of Defense of Syria. Supplier: KBP, Tula, Russia." Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah, who has been General Secretary of Hezbollah since 1992, keeps in touch with Moscow through regular communications with Russia's Beirut embassy. This was confirmed in a 2006 interview with Russia's Ambassador to Israel, Mikhail Bogdanov. That is not the only channel by which Moscow and Beirut stay in touch. In a detailed 2005 report by Axis Information and Analysis, entitled Dangerous Liaisons: Covert "Love Affair" Between Hezbollah and Russia, author Michel Ebaz reports: Hezbollah's special operations unit ("Muntamat al-Jihad al-Islami" -- MJI or "Islamic Jihad Organization") emissaries have been active in Russia since the middle of the nineties. Residing in Moscow, Imad Hadj Hassan Salame heads this special operations unit. His men were an integral part of Hezbollah's international network for smuggling weapons to Lebanon. Yevgeniy Primakov's appointment in 1996 as Russia's Foreign Minister was a critical step in propelling the Hezbollah-KGB relationship forward. As the KGB's most experienced hand in Middle East terrorism matters, he was the perfect choice for insuring a smooth transition when the KGB transformed into the FSB. His official meetings in the 1990s with Lebanon's political leaders also provided him (and his assistant, Viktor Pasovaluk) with opportunities to meet secretly with representatives of Hezbollah. In the 2005 elections, Hezbollah and its allies in the Resistance and Development Bloc won 35 seats (27 percent) of the Lebanese parliament. Contact KAE by email at kew1@dbmail.com To Go To Top JEWS AND POWER BY RUTH R. WISSE Posted by Koira, August 29, 2007. This is a book review by Ruth Andrew Ellenson of Ruth R. Wisse's book Jews and Power (Nextbook/Schocken). It was published August 26, 2007 in The Los Angeles Times. Ruth Wisse is a professor at Harvard. Ruth Andrew Ellenson received the National Jewish Book Award for her anthology The Modern Jewish Girl's Guide to Guilt. Wisse's book has a clear message: For Jews, morality without strength leads to disaster, and today that strength is in Israel In Jerusalem this summer, to mark the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War, the city's pale gold limestone walls are covered with banners depicting an abstract outline of the Old City and the number 40 displayed triumphantly by its side. In that war, Israel gained nearly all of the territory, including the West Bank and Gaza, that has been at the center of so much turmoil -- and also claimed the entirety of Jerusalem. At night, the Old City's entrance at Jaffa Gate -- which leads to many of the holiest sites in Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- is illuminated in lights showing the same logo. See it as triumph or tragedy, it is an indisputable declaration of Jewish power that glows like a flame over Jerusalem as darkness descends. Questions and complexities of Jewish power -- in regard to Israel but also throughout history -- are explored in Harvard professor Ruth R. Wisse's challenging, erudite and penetrating book, "Jews and Power." It is a book with a clear message. For Jews, morality without strength leads to disastrous consequences, and today that strength is based in Israel. This is a book, fiercely argued and compellingly written, with an agenda: to demonstrate why Israel is essential for Jewish survival and even for the survival of democracy. Wisse asserts that to believe otherwise is an act of naiveté. She argues that when Jews place pleasing others above their own well-being, they set themselves up to be history's whipping boy. Whatever good intentions might lie at the heart of such behavior, it is ultimately an act of self-sabotage. Wisse's assertion is direct -- are questions of moral empathy and cultural survival more important than saving your children's lives? As a perfect example of this quandary, Wisse opens with an anecdote about a small Jewish boy being harassed by Nazis. He is taken inside by his mother, who tells her child, bruised and beaten, not to fight back but to be a better man -- "za a mentsh" she tells her son in Yiddish, the language spoken by most Eastern European Jews for hundreds of years until it was all but wiped out in the Holocaust. The boy's story was told in postwar intellectual circles with pride, as an example of how seriously Jews took "the injunction to be fully human" -- to place one's good behavior over one's strength. And in Judaism the idea of tikkun olam, the healing of the world, is a central tenet of faith. But Wisse sees folly in this philosophy, and does not mince words in her stern warning to those who believe otherwise. "The obligation to be decent is complicated for Jews by the knowledge that other societies feel driven to eliminate them from the world," she asserts. "Those who aspire to be decent human beings would be morally obtuse to the point of wickedness were they to retell [this] story without considering its outcome ... That little boy in Warsaw could not have done his mother's bidding, because becoming fully human presupposed staying alive." It's a bit of a jolt, but a refreshing one, to see an academic -- as a group, scholars often pride themselves on seeing every perspective as valid -- take such an emphatic stance. Wisse shows no fear in these pages in saying exactly what she thinks, and you can't help but be impressed with her chutzpah, even if you totally disagree with her. While praising the bravery of Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian president who signed the Camp David accords, she disputes the good will of his motives. "It was not out of regret for having killed too many Jews," she writes, "but with the realization that he could not kill enough to defeat them." It is that perceived deep hatred of Jews that informs many of Wisse's arguments. She even sees the ramifications of this hatred in Jewish achievement. Of the 12 Jews who have received the Nobel Prize in literature, only two wrote in Jewish languages: S.Y. Agnon (Hebrew) and Isaac Bashevis Singer (Yiddish). The others wrote in languages including English, French and Turkish. Until Israel was founded, Jews' chief power was in their resilience and adaptability in other countries -- not really a power at all -- and in the fervent hope that such achievements would make their worth irrefutable to the powers that be. Tell that to Paul Heyse, a German Jew who won that Nobel Prize in 1910. "This pride in sheer survival demonstrates how the tolerance of political weakness could cross the moral line into veneration of political weakness," Wisse observes. And, she notes, the odds only get worse from there. "An estimated 13 million Jews worldwide, about 4.5 million fewer than in 1939, try to win tolerance from more than 250 million Arabs, who have ties to more than 1 billion Muslims." According to Wisse, this is the crux of the debate among Jews over Israel. Whether to be "menschen" this time. Whether, upon being beaten up, to fight back. Herein lies the challenge of the book: What is the moral responsibility when those who have been victims gain power? Wisse would no doubt see this as exactly the type of question, while nobly intended, that has brought Jews so much tsoris ("trouble" in Yiddish) in the first place. And she does a convincing job in arguing that it is an act of hubris for any Jew to believe that Israel's security is not inexorably linked to his or her own. Yet to witness what is done in the West Bank and Gaza in the name of that security is to doubt the morality of such a stance, just as it is to see a suicide bombing at a Tel Aviv café. There is nothing amoral about having power, but how do Jews exercise power morally once they have it? "Jews and Power" makes no claim for objectivity, but it is an elucidating book. It will cause liberals to question their self-consciousness about Israel, since Wisse's argument about Jewish apologism challenges liberal ideas of victimhood. For conservatives, the book offers an intellectual understanding of what otherwise might seem to be only tribalistic loyalties. To have power may be transformative to the spirit of Judaism, so much of which has been defined by exile, but where those changes lead is still a question that burns as brightly as the lights that hang this summer over the Old City's walls in Jerusalem. Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com To Go To Top PREVENTING THE FORMATION OF A TERROR STATE Posted by David Bedein, August 29, 2007. Background The Bush administration has determined that -- in order to serve its perceived goals in the Middle East -- a Fatah-led Palestinian state should be established in Judea and Samaria. To that end, the US government has communicated to Israel the need to withdraw its presence from Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, and is committed to providing aid and military training to Fatah. This US policy is predicated on the myth that Fatah is 'a moderate' entity that can be relied upon; it is willfully ignorant of all the evidence to the contrary: That Mahmoud Abbas was a deputy of Arafat, participated in terrorist supporting activities, and continues Arafat policies to this day. That Farouk Qaddoumi, who is to the far right of Fatah politically and totally rejects concepts of peace with Israel, currently controls the Fatah Central Committee and seeks even greater control within the party. That Abbas, as PA president, has been in league with and fostered support for terrorist entities such as Hamas. The culmination of a long Fatah history of cooperation with Hamas was the unity government. While that government disintegrated, there is solid evidence of a rapprochement being established now. That the Fatah charter to this day calls for the destruction of Israel via armed resistance, and that the PLO charter calling for Israel 's destruction was never actually amended in spite of the pretense that it had been. That after the Bush Administration supplied arms, ammunition and intelligence to Fatah this past year, under the specious premise that it would fight Hamas, it was forced to watch helplessly as Fatah surrendered its entire American arsenal in Gaza to Hamas. That the PA, even under the Abbas aegis, pumps out inciteful material -- in its textbooks and via its media -- that is anti-Semitic, denies the legitimacy of Israel and praises jihad. That Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, which the US Justice Department determined in 2002 was a terrorist organization, remains a part of Fatah. Members see Abbas as their leader and Abbas serves to protect this group, even incorporating its members into PA security forces. In the course of providing assistance and support to the PA run by Fatah, the US requires no quid pro quo and makes no demands: with regard to such matters as cessation of incitement, commitment to take out Hamas, or disbanding of/or total disassociation from Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades. The strengthening of Fatah and efforts to bring about a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria in reality serve to undermine the security of Israel (and also Jordan) and bring further instability to the entire area, including Iraq. Support for the terrorist-allied Fatah gives comfort to radical fiercely anti-Zionist and anti-American forces in the region; as was clearly the case when Israel left Gaza two years ago, a pullout from Judea and Samaria would provide terrorists with control of further territory from which to operate. This is neither in the best interests of Israel nor of the United States. The Bush policy is myopic and wrong-headed. Approaches to stopping the Bush policy 1) The US Congress remains overwhelmingly pro-Israel and dedicated to helping Israel when called upon to do so. Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have expressed criticism of the Bush administration's continuing coddling of Abbas, especially in light of the collapse of the US initiative to bolster Abbas only six months ago, which resulted in the strengthening of Hamas. And the administration remains accountable to the Congress, especially to its operational subcommittees. However, because the government of Israel hesitates to challenge the Palestinian policies of the Bush administration, many members of Congress remain passive in their opposition to these policies; the truism about not wanting to be more Catholic than the pope applies here. Congresspersons are more likely to respond with vigorous opposition to the Bush policies if: they have solid, cutting-edge information on the issues; they hear from Israelis who are prepared to counter their government's passivity; and they are encouraged by their constituents to act. 2) Opinion-makers who have influence with the White House must also be approached. They too require solid, cutting-edge information on the issues and an opportunity to hear from concerned and knowledgeable Israelis. 3) Attempts must be made to alter US public opinion, which will in its turn have an effect on the White House, on Congress, and on opinion-makers. This should be done via providing cutting-edge information to key members of the press. All efforts must focus on the ways in which current policy is detrimental to US goals and best interests. Proposed Actions by our organization 1. Garnering of information. Drawing upon the services of top-notch, Arabic-speaking journalists and investigators, we will compile cutting-edge, solid documentation regarding the Palestinian Authority as a terrorist entity. As Hamas intentions remain a key to understanding the Palestinian situation, we will, from our satellite office in Sderot, monitor Hamas broadcasts coming from Gaza. 2. Sharing of this and other information. Utilizing a variety of channels, we will share acquired information with key Congressional staffers, key members of the press, and key opinion makers. To enhance efforts at disseminating the information, we will generate a website that will contain a wealth of information about the Palestinian Authority/Fatah -- both background and current, and put out a timely Internet newsletter in concise format. On a regular basis we will bring to Washington DC Israeli experts on the issues -- on the PA textbooks, on matters of security, etc. and hold briefings on Capital Hill. Additionally, we will hold press conferences to share significant information with journalists. The Center for Near East Policy Research has considerable expertise in these matters. 3. Applying appropriate pressure upon Congresspersons. We will mobilize the tens of thousands of American citizens who live in Israel -- and in particular in Judea and Samaria -- to reach out to staffers of their own Congresspersons as well as members of Congressional Middle East Subcommittees, to ask that they override Bush's coddling of the Fatah. What they will communicate is that helping Fatah is counterproductive to US interests and would only serve to facilitate an anti-American and ant-Semitic Islamist entity. This effort will be generated via Internet communication and town meetings. Americans in Israel will, in turn, be encouraged to generate support for this effort in their original communities, among family, friends and synagogues.   Budget: September 15-December 15, 2007 Three professional Arab-speaking journalists/investigators to monitor the PA media $25,000 Investigators to monitor Hamas broadcasts $ 2,000 Expenses -- stipend, travel, PR costs, etc. -- for bringing experts to Washington DC to do briefings for staffers of the Congress and for the media at the National Press Club -- in October, November and December $30,000 Writers/editors/translators to produce material based on information that has been secured, for Washington briefings and the Internet update $15,000 Technical expert to put up website and supervise the Internet newsletter $ 6,000. Administrative costs to the Center for Near East Policy Research Ltd. $ 5,000 David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency (www.israelbehindthenews.com). He is with The Center for Near East Policy Research Ltd in Jerusalem. To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: PROMOTING THE IMPOSSIBLE Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 29, 2007. And so, Olmert and Abbas met in Jerusalem yesterday. The rumors following that meeting flew fast and furious, and if one were to believe them one might be reduced to a state of rage. According to some sources Olmert agreed to share control of the Temple Mount, or, to give that control to the Palestinians, and that he concurred with the need to withdraw to the pre-67 lines. According to al-Jazeera, a document regarding these agreements was drawn up. Both sides denied this. There is talk about Olmert considering a request for PA control of three cities -- Ramallah, Nablus (Shechem) and Jenin, and for granting of "amnesty" to more wanted men. It is impossible to attest to the accuracy of all of these reports. What seems likely is that nothing in terms of the core issues was finalized and that, as claimed, only broad outlines -- principles -- were discussed. That doesn't mean Olmert wouldn't give away control of the Temple Mount, it just means he may not have had the opportunity to do so yet. (As to those "good will" gestures, undoubtedly there was talk about reducing checkpoints, freeing more prisoners, granting amnesty to others, etc. On the spot, unilaterally, Olmert would not have been in a position to do much more than say he would take these matters under advisement.) ~~~~~~~~~~ This continues to be my take: Olmert can do us a great deal of damage. He is setting unacceptable precedents and generating security risks. Additionally, just giving legitimacy to a terrorist entity is most unwise. And so his efforts towards establishing a Palestinian state at our border should be fought in every way possible; this is not a time for complacency. But at the end of the day I do not believe establishing a Palestinian state now is possible, whatever the intentions of Bush or Abbas or Olmert. Once again, the reasons why: There is no civic entity within the PA areas that can serve as the infrastructure for a state. They simply don't have their act together. The areas are without law and order, and are not under the control of the security forces/police. Fayyad admitted just days ago that as much as they want control of the cities of Ramallah, Jenin and Nablus, they are not ready to take them over yet. Abbas is incredibly weak, even within his own party. Farouk Qaddoumi, who is a right-winger opposed to peace with Israel, controls the Central Committee of Fatah and is bucking Abbas. Fatah itself is mind-blowing corrupt. There is no dynamic industry or entrepreneurship. ~~~~~~~~~~ But more significant than any of this is Hamas. Hamas control of Gaza presents the first problem. Is the PA the administrative authority for all Palestinians within Judea and Samara and also Gaza or not? Would a Palestinian state disenfranchise all those who live in Gaza? The quandary this situation poses has no easy solution. In any event, anyone who imagines that Hamas members are going to sit quietly and let Abbas negotiate peace with Israel had better think again. At the very least, they will generate terrorism and unrest that sabotages all serious negotiations. But I think they're going to do a good deal more: I think they're intending to co-opt Abbas and Fatah. There are two ways in which this can happen: through negotiations or violence. And Abbas is most assuredly aware of this. Hamas already has cells in Judea and Samaria and is eager to further weaken and then take down Fatah. The way out for Abbas is through reinstating the unity government. Just today, the Arabic daily Asharq Alawsat, cited by Israel Radio, announced that Hamas leaders have offered Fatah control of PA institutions and bases in the Gaza Strip. In return, they want the unity government and the PA parliament reinstated, and the PLO reformed (which undoubtedly means more control for Hamas). Hamas leaders declined to acknowledge this, however. And so, they're not quite there yet, but they're edging closer. Hamas actually launched a website for the national unity coalition government this week. ~~~~~~~~~~ For a clearer picture of what's happening with Hamas, see "How strong has Hamas become?" by Nick Francona of the Washington Institute: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188197180384&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas was in Amman today and, with regard to Bush's proposed November conference, told King Abdullah, "If we go to a conference without clarity on a solution and without a declaration of principles within the framework of a work plan, I don't think that the conference will be beneficial." Interesting. No slowly working things through until the PA is ready. He wants instant state. Or could he possible want to shift the blame for things not working? ~~~~~~~~~~ Well, it happened, as it was bound to: Regretfully, three Palestinian children got in the line of fire when Israel was shooting at the site of a Kassam rocket launcher, and were killed. The Palestinians, of course, use this to full PR advantage and forge fictions about Israel deliberately shooting at groups of innocent children. The Israeli response is simple: It serves our fight not a bit to hit children and we try exceedingly hard not to. As one source put it, "the army makes every effort -- sometimes beyond proportion -- so as not to hurt civilians." However, "a Kassam launcher area is a battle zone, it is their territory, and they should make sure that no child or youth approaches the area." Of course, this is not what happens. "In many cases, upon investigating the incidents, we find that civilians were killed because the terror organizations sent them to the battle zone, because the terrorists were staying among civilians or carrying out a certain activity that endangered the civilians." What the IDF source admitted is that a risk is being taken with the lives of Israeli children every time a rocket launcher is not targeted for fear of hitting Palestinian civilians: that launcher, within minutes, might send another Kassam into Sderot. ~~~~~~~~~~ Moshe Ya'alon, former chief of staff and now with the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, has written an article,"Misinterpreting the Mideast," that appeared in the LA Times. In it he examines the four mistaken assumptions that diplomats and emissaries (notably Rice and Blair) bring to their work in this region, misconceptions that stand in the way of their making progress towards achieving regional peace: "Primary among them is the idea that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a prerequisite for stability in the Mideast. The truth is that the region is riven by clashes that have nothing to do with Israel" -- Sunni-Shia, nationalist-Islamist, etc. "The second misconception is that Israeli territorial concessions are the key to progress. The reality is that an ascendant jihadist Islam believes that it is leading the battle against Israel and the rest of the West. Given this dynamic, Israeli territorial or other concessions simply fill the jihadists' sails, reinforcing their belief that Israel and the West are weak and can be militarily defeated." There is then the misconception that "the Occupation" stands in the way of an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. "In the West, the term usually means the territories Israel conquered in the Six-Day War in 1967..." However, "the heart of the problem is that many Palestinians -- Fatah and Hamas, in particular -- and even some Israeli Arabs use 'Occupation' to refer to all Israel. They do not recognize the Jewish people's right to an independent state, a right affirmed again and again in the international arena." The forth misconception is that "the Palestinians want -- and have the ability -- to establish a state that will live in peace alongside Israel. But they are not being clear-eyed. "...A corollary of this...is the belief that economic development can neutralize extreme nationalism and religious fanaticism, thus clearing the way toward peace and security." http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-yaalon26aug26,0,123089.story? coll=la-opinion-rightrail Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info To Go To Top HONOR KILLING -- KEN TIMMERMAN'S NEW NOVEL Posted by Ken Timmerman, August 29, 2007. Honor Killing will sweep away many misconceptions Americans have been lead to believe about our security, and about our enemies. Israeli intelligence picks up the departure of a mysterious cargo ship from Iran, while half-way across the world, a Muslim-American girl is found dead in suburban Maryland. The two events appeared to be worlds apart. But they were not. Major Danny Wilkens, the U.S. government's top Iran analyst, becomes convinced that the cargo ship is part of an Iranian scheme to kill millions of Americans. But incompetent bureaucrats and a broken CIA force him to go outside the system, where he puts his career and even his marriage on the line in order to stop its relentless trajectory toward America. FBI Special Agent Michael Brannigan is perplexed by the "honor killing" of a Muslim girl. But it's only when his investigation is shut down by G-girl Joanna Greary that he discovers a sordid underworld of steamy sex, corrupt government officials, and local Muslim leaders who have exploited America's loose immigration laws for terror. In this fast-paced Washington novel of spies, faith, betrayal, and lust, New York Times best-selling author Kenneth R. Timmerman tells a story so chilling that it had to be kept out of the newspapers. Is there really a spy for the terrorists who has access to the highest reaches of the United States government, including the White House? Have our intelligence agencies become so bureaucratic and corrupt they can no longer act when a clear and present danger appears? Is Iran's master-terrorist at work today, probing our weaknesses? Is the American Muslim community giving shelter to deadly enemies? Timmerman takes us from underground hide-outs in Iran to beach-side bars in the British Virgin Islands, from the port of Maracaibo to a shoot-out in Dubai. He brings us smooth Mossad operators, CIA bumblers and a Persian beauty named Aryana, who uses a computer company in California as a front for clandestine operations inside Iran. As the Iranians get ever closer to our shores, readers are in for a surprising climax that may have many of them down on their knees. Prominent Middle East analyst, author, and former U.S. government official with more than two decades of experience in the underworld of terror, Kenneth R Timmerman has shared bunkers with Muslim terrorists under hostile fire, worked with freedom fighters from Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and been held hostage in a war zone. Some of his former contacts have been gunned down by Iranian government hit squads. His most recent work of non-fiction is Shadow Warriors: Traitors, Saboteurs, and the Party of Surrender, from Crown Forum. His first novel, The Wren Hunt, was published in 1982 and acclaimed by the author of The Alexandria Quartet, Lawrence Durrell. In 2006, he was nominated for the Nobel Peace prize for his work on Iran by the former deputy prime minister of Sweden, Per Ahlmark. Contact Ken Timmerman by email at timmerman.road@verizon.net and visit the website: http://kentimmerman.com/honor-killing.html To Go To Top MOSHE YAALON WEIGHS IN AGAINST PALESTINIAN STATE Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 29, 2007. Amidst continuing diplomatic efforts to form a separate state for the Arabs of Judea and Samaria, former IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon weighs in with words of warning against the initiative. President Shimon Peres, as well, foresaw the dangers of such a state nearly 30 years ago (see below.). Yaalon, writing in the Los Angeles Times over the weekend, notes "four main misconceptions that diplomats bring with them to Israel." Primary among them is the prevalent theory that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a prerequisite for stability in the Mideast. The truth is, Yaalon writes, that the region is "driven by clashes that have nothing to do with Israel. For instance, the Jewish state plays no role in the conflict between Shiites and Sunnis, between Persians and Arabs or between Arab nationalists and Arab Islamists." Interestingly, Yoram Ettinger, an expert on U.S.-Israel relations, recently released a paper (www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123346) negating this theory as well. The former liaison for Congressional affairs in Israel's Washington embassy brings proofs from recent history showing that general Arab antipathy to Israel predates, and is irrelevant to, issues relating to the Arabs of Judea and Samaria. Yaalon lists three other mistakes spurring on the pro-Palestinian state diplomats: Misconception 1: Israeli territorial concessions are felt to be the key to progress -- when in fact such concessions simply fill the sails of ascendant jihadist Islam, which believes it is leading the battle against Israel and the rest of the West. The concessions, therefore, merely encourage their belief that Israel and the West can be defeated. Yaalon lists the reults of Israel's unilateral withdrawals from Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005: "Concerted terror wars, kidnapped Israeli soldiers, rockets fired at Israeli cities -- [which] made clear that the Mideast's central conflict is not territorial but ideological. And ideology cannot be defeated by concessions." Misconception 2: It is widely believed that Israeli sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria blocks agreement between Israelis and the Arabs of Judea and Samaria -- when in fact, "the heart of the problem is that many Palestinians... and even some Israeli-Arabs use 'Occupation' to refer to all Israel. They do not recognize the Jewish people's right to an independent state, a right affirmed again and again in the international arena." Misconception 3: Possibly most important, it is felt that the Arabs of Judea and Samaria want and can build a state that will live in peace alongside Israel. But in fact, the Palestinian Authority leaders -- specifically, Yasser Arafat and his deputy Mahmoud Abbas -- never used their powers to improve their subjects' living conditions. "Indeed," ex-Gen. Yaalon marvels, "Palestinian unemployment and poverty are worse today than they were before Arafat and his cronies assumed power in 1994." A corollary of this last misconception, Yaalon adds, "is the belief that economic development can neutralize extreme nationalism and religious fanaticism, thus clearing the way toward peace and security." David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, had a term for such believers -- including his protégé and current President of Israel, Shimon Peres: "naive Zionists." Yaalon notes that those who fit the above description must "demand that the Palestinians explain what they did with the $7 billion in international aid they received over the years... Why did Palestinian mobs destroy the Erez industrial zone, where Palestinians worked and ran businesses for decades, on the Gaza border? Why do they attack safe roads linking Gaza and the West Bank? Why is the Palestinian economy in shambles?" In fact, Peres himself, in a book he wrote in 1978 (Tomorrow is Now, Keter Publishers, Jerusalem; page 232), accurately outlined the dangers of a Palestinian state: "The establishment of such a [Palestinian] state means the inflow of combat-ready Palestinian forces (more than 25,800 men under arms) into Judea and Samaria; this force, together with the local youth, will double itself in a short time. It will not be short of weapons or other [military] equipment, and in a short space of time, an infrastructure for waging war will be set up in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Israel will have problems in preserving day-to-day security, which may drive the country into war, or undermine the morale of its citizens. In time of war, the frontiers of the Palestinian state will constitute an excellent staging point for mobile forces to mount attacks on infrastructure installations vital for Israel's existence, to impede the freedom of action of the Israeli air-force in the skies over Israel, and to cause bloodshed among the population in areas adjacent to the frontier-line." Yaalon concludes his article with this advice for Western governments and their emissaries: Instead of pressuring Israel, they must "try to persuade the Palestinian leaders to commit to a long-term strategy premised on educational, political and economic reforms that would lead to the establishment of a civil society that cherishes life, not death; values human rights and freedom; and develops a middle class, not a corrupt, rich elite..." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor at Arutz-Sheva To Go To Top ISRAEL WARNED US NOT TO INVADE IRAQ AFTER 9/11 Posted by Koira, August 29, 2007. This was written by Gareth Porter and it appeared yesterday in IPS News http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39051 Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. His latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, was published in June 2005. WASHINGTON, Aug 28 (IPS) -- Israeli officials warned the George W. Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilising to the region and urged the United States to instead target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former administration official Lawrence Wilkerson. Wilkerson, then a member of the State Department's Policy Planning Staff and later chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell, recalled in an interview with IPS that the Israelis reacted immediately to indications that the Bush administration was thinking of war against Iraq. After the Israeli government picked up the first signs of that intention, Wilkerson says, "The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy -- Iran is the enemy." Wilkerson describes the Israeli message to the Bush administration in early 2002 as being, "If you are going to destabilise the balance of power, do it against the main enemy." The warning against an invasion of Iraq was "pervasive" in Israeli communications with the administration, Wilkerson recalls. It was conveyed to the administration by a wide range of Israeli sources, including political figures, intelligence and private citizens. Wilkerson notes that the main point of their communications was not that the United States should immediately attack Iran, but that "it should not be distracted by Iraq and Saddam Hussein" from a focus on the threat from Iran. The Israeli advice against using military force against Iraq was apparently triggered by reports reaching Israeli officials in December 2001 that the Bush administration was beginning serious planning for an attack on Iraq. Journalist Bob Woodward revealed in "Plan of Attack" that on Dec. 1, 2001, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks to come up with the first formal briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on Dec. 4. That started a period of intense discussions of war planning between Rumsfeld and Franks. Soon after Israeli officials got wind of that planning, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asked for a meeting with Bush primarily to discuss U.S. intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with Bush on Feb. 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the message to the Bush administration that Iran represented a greater threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting. Israeli Defence Minister Fouad Ben-Eliezer, who was visiting Washington with Sharon, revealed the essence of the strategic differences between Tel Aviv and Washington over military force. He was quoted by the Post as saying, "Today, everybody is busy with Iraq. Iraq is a problem...But you should understand, if you ask me, today Iran is more dangerous than Iraq." Sharon never revealed publicly what he said to Bush in the Feb. 7 meeting. But Yossi Alpher, a former adviser to Prime Minister Ehud Barak, wrote in an article in the Forward last January that Sharon advised Bush not to occupy Iraq, according to a knowledgeable source. Alpher wrote that Sharon also assured Bush that Israel would not "push one way or another" regarding his plan to take down Saddam Hussein. Alpher noted that Washington did not want public support by Israel and in fact requested that Israel refrain from openly supporting the invasion in order to avoid an automatic negative reaction from Iraq's Arab neighbours. After that meeting, the Sharon government generally remained silent on the issue of an invasion of Iraq. A notable exception, however, was a statement on Aug. 16, 2002 by Ranaan Gissin, an aide to Sharon. Ranaan declared, "Any postponement of an attack on Iraq at this stage will serve no purpose. It will only give [Hussein] more of an opportunity to accelerate his programme of weapons of mass destruction." As late as October 2002, however, there were still signs of continuing Israeli grumbling about the Bush administration's obsession with taking over Iraq. Both the Israeli Defence Forces' chief of staff and its chief of military intelligence made public statements that month implicitly dismissing the Bush administration's position that Saddam Hussein's alleged quest for nuclear weapons made him the main threat. Both officials suggested that Israel's military advantage over Iraq had continued to increase over the decade since the Gulf War as Iraq had grown weaker. The Israeli chief of military intelligence, Maj. Gen. Aharon Farkash, said Iraq had not deployed any missiles that could strike Israel directly and challenged the Bush administration's argument that Iraq could obtain nuclear weapons within a relatively short time. He gave an interview to Israeli television in which he said army intelligence had concluded that Iraq could not have nuclear weapons in less than four years. He insisted that Iran was as much of a nuclear threat as Iraq. Israeli strategists generally believed that taking down the Hussein regime could further upset an Iran-Iraq power balance that had already tilted in favour of Iran after the U.S. defeat of Hussein's army in the 1991 Gulf War. By 1996, however, neoconservatives with ties to the Likud Party were beginning to argue for a more aggressive joint U.S.-Israeli strategy aimed at a "rollback" of all of Israel's enemies in the region, including Iran, but beginning by taking down Hussein and putting a pro-Israeli regime in power there. That was the thrust of the 1996 report of a task force led by Richard Perle for the right-wing Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies and aimed at the Likud Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. But most strategists in the Israeli government and the Likud Party -- including Sharon himself -- did not share that viewpoint. Despite agreement between neoconservatives and Israeli officials on many issues, the dominant Israeli strategic judgment on the issue of invading Iraq diverged from that of U.S. neoconservatives because of differing political-military interests. Israel was more concerned with the relative military threat posed by Iran and Iraq, whereas neoconservatives in the Bush administration were focused on regime change in Iraq as a low-cost way of leveraging more ambitious changes in the region. From the neoconservative perspective, the very military weakness of Hussein's Iraq made it the logical target for the use of U.S. military power. Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com To Go To Top NO PLAN TO PRESENT OLMERT-ABBAS UNDERSTANDING TO CABINET BEFORE TAKING IT TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE Posted by Barbara Sommer, August 29, 2007. This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) and it appeared on the IMRA website today. Contact Dr. Lerner by email at imra@netvision.net.il and visit the website -- http://www.imra.org.il IMRA asked the following question this morning to an "Israeli Government Official": If Prime Minister Olmert develops some form of understanding of principles with PA head Mahmoud Abbas before the international conference will the Government vote on it before the international conference? The "Israeli Government Official", returned shortly thereafter with the following reply: "There is no such plan at this point to bring it before an additional forum for further discussion." Contact Barbara Sommer by email at sommer_1_98@worldnet.at.net To Go To Top LUTHERAN SILENCE RAPPED Posted by Simon McIlwaine, August 29, 2007. This article is called "No confusion, just silence from Lutheran group." It was written Dexter Van Zile and it appeared in The Kansas City Jewish Chronicle www.kcjc.com/articles/2007/08/24/opinion/opinion/ b.kcjc.opinion.silence.lutharan.group.prt Dexter Van Zile is a Christian media analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. BOSTON -- When the General Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America met in Chicago earlier this month, it had an opportunity. It had an opportunity to express outrage over the failure of the Palestinians to take advantage of Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and show the world just how responsible they could be when Israel gave them something they've been demanding for decades -- territory of their own. Like virtually every other mainline church in the United States, ELCA has been telling the world that Palestinian violence and suffering is caused by the Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Under this logic, Israel's 2005 withdrawal from the Gaza Strip should have been met with a reduction of violence against Israel and an improvement in Palestinian well-being. The fact is rocket attacks against Israel increased after the August 2005 withdrawal. So did the suffering. In June 2007, two months before ELCA's Churchwide Assembly, the Gaza Strip was the scene of an orgy of violence during which Hamas murdered members of Fatah in the street -- in front of their wives and children. When Hamas declared sovereignty over the Gaza Strip, it reaffirmed its commitment to Israel's destruction. How did ELCA's Churchwide Assembly respond to the events in the Gaza Strip? With a robust condemnation of Palestinian violence? With a ringing expression of disappointment over the failure of Palestinian leaders to take advantage of the opportunity given to them? Hardly. Instead, ELCA's Churchwide Assembly passed a "memorial" (resolution) that called on Lutherans to consider going out of their way to buy goods from Palestinian suppliers and to explore the feasibility of "refusing to buy products produced in Israeli settlements." In other words, two months after Hamas and Fatah gunmen battled it out on the streets and rooftops in Gaza, ELCA's Churchwide Assembly laid the groundwork for a boycott of Jewish settlers in the West Bank. Kaufen Nicht Bei Juden! ("Don't Buy From Jews!) has been replaced with a Kaufen Nicht Bei Settlers! (Don't Buy From Settlers!) -- on a provisional basis, of course. (Remember, the memorial only called for "exploration of the feasibility.") Exactly who is supposed to conduct this "exploration" is pretty unclear; John Brooks, director of ELCA's News Service, declared: "We don't have a committee looking into anything. It is simply a statement of possibilities." The likely result is that the legion of hardcore anti-Israel activists in ELCA and in other mainline churches will create a list of products manufactured by Jewish settlers in the West Bank and call on well-meaning Christians to boycott these products. These activists will use the memorial passed by ELCA's General Assembly as their mandate. In short, ELCA's so-called peace activists have been rewarded for their obsession with Israel's misdeeds, their failure to call attention to Palestinian violence and their refusal to acknowledge growing levels of anti-Semitism in the Middle East. A mainline Protestant denomination has made it clear, yet again, that Jewish sovereignty and the force used to defend it is the cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict -- not the Arab policy of rendering the Middle East Judenrein. No clarifications from ELCA's News Service or admonitions from Presiding Bishop Mark S. Hanson can change this reality. The language of the memorial gives them nothing to hide behind. The memorial includes not one word that would lead extremists in the Middle East to think ELCA objects in any way to the escalating campaign of violence, intimidation and defamation they have perpetrated against Israel since the denomination's Churchwide Assembly passed its "Peace Not Walls" memorial in 2005. There is not one word of criticism of Hamas's ongoing campaign of intimidation in the Gaza Strip. ELCA, which has spent decades decrying Palestinian suffering that it blames on Israel, remained silent when this suffering could not be blamed on Israel. Rev. Bruce D. MacLaughlin from ELCA's Northeastern Pennsylvania Synod expressed doubt over the resolution, declaring: "I fear that the language we have right now confuses the Jewish community about our support for them, and it sounds like we're speaking out of two sides of our mouth." The real question is not what ELCA's Churchwide Assembly is saying to the Jewish community, but what it has to say to extremists in the Middle East who call for Israel's destruction. On this issue, there is only silence. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel (www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk To Go To Top SHARON'S LEGACY: GAZA; GOV. RICHARDSON'S CURE-ALL: TALKS; LATEST ANTI-ZIONIST PROPAGANDA Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 29, 2007. SHARON'S LEGACY The State estimates that it already has cost about $4 billion to evacuate from Gaza. Costs continue rising. None of the families ruined by that action has received the permanent housing promised by the government (Arutz-7, 8/10). The human toll was great. National security deteriorated. NO DUTCH SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST ISLAMISTS A Dutch organization helps people who cast off Islam. The founder was attacked by a Muslim youth. A Dutch legislator wants to ban the Koran for inspiring such attacks and Muslim immigration for providing the attackers. He denies that a significant wing of Islam is moderate. "...sections of the Koran 'call on Muslims to oppress, persecute or kill Christians, Jews, dissidents and non-believers, to beat and rape women and to establish an Islamic state by force.'" He wrote, "'Ban this wretched book like 'Mein Kampf' is banned! Send a signal to Jami's attackers and other Islamic radicals that the Koran cannot be used in the Netherlands as an inspiration or an excuse for violence.'" In response, a Dutch attorney filed a complaint for insulting a sector of the population, which there is a criminal offense (Arutz-7, 8/10). As I wrote, in some countries it is a crime to warn the country of its greatest current peril, however truthful one is. Why don't prosecutors apply the same law to Islamists, who regularly denounce other sectors of the population? UNIFIL MANDATE LIMITED UNIFIL is authorized to patrol northward from the Israeli border up to the Litani R. in Lebanon. The river is only 10 miles from the border. Hizbullah rockets fly further. Hizbullah is buying land just north of the river, and rebuilding its bases there, beyond reach of UNIFIL. Hizbullah then brings in Shiites to displace the Christian and Druze villagers. It bars entry to people it doesn't want. Besides thus preparing for renewed war, Hizbullah is setting up a state within a state, preparatory to taking over Lebanon (IMRA, 8/12). IRAN'S RATIONING RESPONSE TO SANCTIONS Anticipating foreign sanctions on imports of refined gasoline, Iran imposed rationing. Rationing failed to reduce consumption. Instead it led to a black market in gasoline, profiteering, riots, and looting. The government does not allow the media to discuss rationing, though it propagandizes for it. It discusses the potential benefit of rationing and not the suffering it causes (IMRA, 8/27). BLOOMBERG'S MADRASSA If students want to study Arabic, let their schools offer courses in it! There is no need for a separate school for it. Such a school is likely to become a madrassa. Its first proposed principal defended a prospective student who wore a t-shirt advocating "intifada." The proposed principal lamely excused the student as just wanting to improve New York. That phony excuse revealed the proposed principal either as too ignorant of Arabic to run such a school, or, more likely, as already getting into the jihad that the school is feared would promote. The fear is given credence by the school's advisory board having several Muslim clergymen on it. The ACLU did not recognize the church-state separation issue there, but one can imagine it suing a history school that had several Christian pastors on the advisory board (Daniel Pipes & Alicia Colon, NY Sun, 8/15, p.4). Mayor Bloomberg got mayoral control over the school system. This is how irresponsibly he acquits himself of that jurisdiction. He got taken n by the usual jihadist pretense at being moderate. He is incompetent at this, out of his depth. SOLE SALVATION IS BY MURDERERS & TORTURERS? Iran's Pres. Admadinejad said that the world's sole salvation would come from Islam (IMRA, 5/14). He heads a band of murderers, torturers, and oppressors, bankrupting his country. From such, salvation? They need salvation now. ARAB REFORMERS One recently praised the US for helping Abu Dhabi prosper. He praised Israel for certain successes (IMRA, 5/14). He did not venture to suggest that the Muslims stop considering Israel an enemy. CHINA & RUSSIA JOIN TO REBUFF U.S. China and Russia held war games with some formerly Soviet, Central Asian countries, supposedly for anti-terrorism. There were foreign observers, but the US was barred. This means the issue was not anti-terrorism but that China and Russia are working together, again, in a new Cold War. They are spending billions of dollars preparing for war, instead of curing the world's ills (8/14). Too bad our liberals don't see that China and Russia fuel and instigate strife. N. IRELAND NOT COMPARABLE TO ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT The Irish civil strife seems to have been resolved. Some people suggest that the Arab-Israel strife be resolved similarly, by negotiating with the terrorists there. The Irish solution is not a model for Israel. The differences are many and telling. The Irish conflict primarily was nationalist and territorial, but the Arab-Israel conflict primarily is religious. The Catholic Church did not support the IRA, but Islamic clergymen foment jihad. The IRA did not want to overthrow Britain, but the PLO wants to overthrow Israel. The IRA does not propose to chase the Protestants out of Ireland, but the PLO wants to chase the Jews first from the Territories and then from Israel. The IRA renounced its arms (though it may be holding back on surrendering them, in which case the issue is not resolved). The PLO and Hamas would not renounce their arms. The PLO and Hamas foster a death cult, whereas the IRA does not have suicide attacks (IMRA, 8/14). The jihadists are religious fanatics. The IRA is not. Besides, Israel did negotiate, but the Muslims believe in breaking agreements and do. People make up ill-fitting analogies. GOV. RICHARDSON: TALK ALL PROBLEMS OUT He is running in the Democratic primaries for the presidency. He wants the US to negotiate with Iran and N. Korea and find them face-saving ways to renounce nuclear weapons. He wants to negotiate with China and Russia to get peace and stability. He proposes US membership in the Intl. Criminal Court, although that court may well sue Americans and Israelis out of bias. He wants the US to get the Arabs to make peace with Israel, thereby depriving "the jihadists of their most effective propaganda tool." (The Koran is that tool.) Richardson thinks that means strengthening P.A. moderates. To reconcile with Muslims, he would close Guantanamo prison. The US should fight poverty, he says, because poverty is the basis of much terrorism. A Princeton economist retorted that poverty is found not the basis for the terrorist attacks (Ari Lamm, NY Sun, 8/15, p.6). N. Korea and Iran must have the world's craziest and most fanatical rulers. They would not renounce nuclear weapons, which give N. Korea influence and would give Iran an ability to conquer the world. Russia creates instability. I would try talking with Putin about bigger threats to him and to us in common, but he seems mired in the failed themes of the past. We have tried to negotiate with China, and got nowhere. Hankering after the Intl. Criminal Court must reflect the anti-Americanism of the radicals among the Democrats. Guantanamo is not the problem but the result of Islamic problems. The Arabs don't want peace with Israel. Someone who does not know the cause of terrorism is unfit to be President. I shudder when my friends suggest he is the best that the Democrats have to offer. I find him totally naive. EUROPEANS SETTING UP RELATIONS WITH HAMAS Britain and Italy want to help Hamas "develop" (Arutz-7, 8/14). Can't restrain themselves and their egos, thinking they can tutor Hamas (which hates them). Hamas studies them and devises tactics. The Europeans don't. Therefore, Hamas will manipulate the Europeans, not the reverse. Besides, the Europeans are so eager to seem to be world leaders and peacemakers where the US cannot get warring parties to make peace, that they do not penalize or withhold recognition, approval, and aid for long. LATEST ANTI-ZIONIST PROPAGANDA Anti-Zionist propaganda spreads like wildfire. How? (Muslims, among others, review almost every piece of news, and distort it so everything Israel does seems wrong and everything someone else does wrong seems to be "the" Jews' fault. They also review history, turning upside down the story of Zionism and jihad. They minimize crimes against the Jews and make the Arabs seem the victims of Zionism that actually benefited them. They fabricate a story of Palestinian nationalism parallel to the true story of Jewish nationalism, to deprive the Jewish people of sympathy and of justice. Theft of Jewish history.) For some time, the Arabs claimed that the formation of Israel was a catastrophe for them. Recently, the Israeli Far Left, especially Ilan Pappe, a Communist of Jewish ancestry who poses as an historian, took up the cry. Other leftists, as well as the less influential neo-Nazi web sites, publicized it. Israel's Education Minister made it part of the Israeli Arab curriculum. Thus her self-destructive multi-culturalism fosters divisiveness, not multicultural assimilation but Intifada. And from those leftists, the cry resonates among others. The claim would make Israel seem to have been founded on injustice and cruelty. The implication is that Israel should be dissolved in favor of the Arabs. Going further, people who deny the claim are called catastrophe-deniers, as if on a par with Holocaust deniers. This gives some patina of legitimacy to Holocaust denial and some impugning of its critics. The claim is false, as is anti-Zionist propaganda in general. The Arabs had usurped the Jewish homeland. Large numbers immigrated to take jobs Zionism created. The UNO proposed a separate state for both peoples (though Jordan already was a Palestinian Arab state). The Arabs refused. They wanted it all and they wanted to exterminate the Jews. They made war. They lost and ran. Why feel sorry for greedy, genocidal bigots? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/16). 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 To Go To Top POLICEMAN ASSAULTED TRYING TO STOP ILLEGAL TEMPLE MOUNT DIG Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 29, 2007. A policeman trying to stop an Arab tractor engaged in illegal Temple Mount excavations was assaulted -- and the police chief who arrived on the scene arrested no one. Officials of the Moslem Waqf (religious body) on the Temple Mount are digging there illegally, likely destroying precious artifacts from as early as the First Temple period. So say eyewitnesses and representatives of the Committee for the Prevention of the Destruction of Temple Mount Antiquities. Gideon Charlap, a top Jerusalem architect and Temple Mount expert, told Arutz-7 what he saw when he visited the Temple Mount on Tuesday: "The Arabs there are digging a deep north-to-south trench, up to a meter [1.1 yards] deep. It is being dug in the area that served during Holy Temple times as the Ezrat Nashim [the area known as the Women's Courtyard, though it was not reserved only for women -ed.]. The trench passes through three east-to-west walls, according to my calculations -- walls that probably served as separations for the Temple's offices and the like. This means that the destruction is tremendous..." "At one point during the digging," Charlap continued, "a policeman -- apparently a Druze -- tried to stop the work from going on, and actually entered the cabin of the tractor. A struggle ensued, and when the Arabs finally pushed him out, he actually stood in the trench and physically blocked the rest of the work!" "But instead of stopping the lawbreakers," Charlap related with incredulity, "he tried to 'calm down' the policeman!" Charlap said that at that point, the chief officer of the Temple Mount police station, Shai Alali, arrived on the scene. Charlap said he was unable to see how the story developed from there, "because our allotted time was over." Jews are permitted onto the site -- Judaism's most sacred anywhere in the world -- only four or fewer hours a day. Police Chief Shai Alali was unavailable for comment. Police spokesmen say they will look into the assault and illegal digging. The digging is taking place just east of the Dome of the Rock. Millennia of Artifacts -- Down the Drain Dr. Eilat Mazar, an archaeologist and a leading member of the Committee for the Prevention of the Destruction of Temple Mount Antiquities, spoke with Arutz-7's Hebrew newsmagazine about the desecration. "It is an untenable situation," she said. "Underneath the Temple Mount is a closed area, one that has barely been disturbed since the Destruction of the Second Temple. Anyone can realize that remnants of both the First and Second Temples are there, and can guess what damage is being done by the tractor. The most precious findings are just rolling around there and are available to be found -- and instead they have a tractor there! If I would try to work with a tractor at one of my digs, the Antiquities Authority would stop me immediately! With a tractor, it's impossible to make any type of careful examination of the earth and pieces being dug up." "We are a public, voluntary body that has taken upon itself to inform and warn the public about what is going on," Mazar said. "The Antiquities Authority acts as if it is fulfilling its responsibility to supervise -- but in fact all they have there is just one man watching but doing nothing. That is not supervision. It's just a deception to say that anyone is overseeing the wanton digging and desecration being carried out there against our greatest national cultural treasure." Asked if there has been any lull of late in illegal digs on the Temple Mount, Dr. Mazar responded negatively. "They have a clear goal of turning the Temple Mount into a place exclusively for Moslem prayer. In recent years, they have turned two giant structures -- at the Huldah Gate and Solomon's Stables -- into giant mosques, where none ever stood before... It is totally illegal; how can such violations of the law be allowed -- especially in such an important place for Jewish Nation? This is a top archaeological site, and the fact that it's not considered one of the Seven Wonders of the world is our fault, because we don't talk about it enough and certainly don't preserve it enough." Arutz-7's Uzi Baruch offered, "Perhaps it's because of the politically sensitive nature of the site?" Mazar answered, "Yes, it's a sensitive spot, but there's a big difference between acting wisely and delicately, on the one hand, and allowing wanton destruction and law-breaking, on the other hand. No good comes of simply turning the other cheek, trying to achieve quiet at any price, and not seeing the future. They want 'quiet now' and they want to appease the Waqf and everyone else -- everyone except for those who are concerned for Jewish culture." "The Antiquities Authority is responsible for preserving antiquities," says Dr. Mazar, "but it is not doing its job on the Temple Mount. The Prime Minister must take this job upon himself and make sure that the law is observed and that the Temple Mount remains an accessible cultural site not only for Moslems, but also for Jews and Christians." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor at Arutz-Sheva To Go To Top PERFIDY Posted by Steven Plaut, August 28, 2007. On December 8, 1983, a child named Dani Katz walked to the street outside his parent's home in the Dania neighborhood of Haifa. He was 14. His parents were Holocaust survivors. Outside the home, he was kidnapped by a group of Arabs from the Israeli Galilee town of Sakhnin who held jobs in the Dania neighborhood. They took him to a cave near Sakhnin. There they tortured him in the most brutal and horrific way imaginable. They eventually murdered him. After murdering him they sodomized the corpse. They then left him there to rot. Police unraveled the crime and arrested the five murderers, who confessed and reenacted the crimes. They were tried in Haifa in 1985 and sentenced to life in prison plus 27 years (this to prevent their being released in case of bleeding heart shortening of sentence due to good behavior.) At one point one of the judges, Avraham Beizer (since retired), asked one of perps sarcastically what it felt like "to bang the boy," and later asked whether the sandwich had tasted good. (The murderers were caught in part because they left sandwich remains in the cave.) The perp's lawyer tried to get a mistrial over that. The lawyer for the accused was far-leftist Avigdor Feldman. Feldman has devoted much of his career to defending terrorists and traitors. He defended Mordecai Vanunu (nuclear spy), Marcus Klinberg (Soviet spy), Tali Fahima (was did jail time for helping her Palestinian terrorist boyfriend plan atrocities), Teddy Katz (Ilan Pappe's student who fabricated the Tantura massacre), and others. Feldman claimed the confessions of the five were coerced. The court investigated the charge thoroughly and found it to be false. After the conviction, and after a report by two Meretz members of the government criticizing use of confessions in trials, Feldman eventually lobbied the judicial system into giving his clients a new trial, at the order of Aharon Barak, the (now retired) Chief Justice and promoter of anti-democratic judicial activism in Israel. The new trial was held in Tel Aviv District Court. The perps were briefly put back on the street. They were again convicted in the new trial. The new judges noted the long string of lies and contradictions by the accused. Feldman appealed the new conviction to the Supreme Court, and the court rejected it unanimously. Some have conjectured that the murder was an initiation rite into a terror group. Some Israeli leftist groups have been rallying support ever since for the murderers (see for example in Hebrew only: http://hagada.org.il/hagada/html/ modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=3236 see also anti-Zionist journalist Tom Segev's comments: http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/pages/ShArtPE.jhtml? contrassID=2&subContrassID=3&sbSubContrassID=0&itemNo=548288) In 1982 a female soldier named Dafna Carmon was raped and murdered outside her home Two of the murderers of Dani Katz were also convicted of murdering her. They were also represented in that trial by Feldman. Some Arab Knesset members had been lobbying for the release of the murderers. The "appeals commission" of the Justice Ministry recently recommended that the five murderers have their sentences "shortened." Shimon Peres as President made it official, which means that they will be released from prison within the next few days. The article below is called "Peres Reduces Jail Terms of Israeli-Arab Terrorists." It was written by Ezra HaLevi and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123523 See also www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/israeln/022699.html (IsraelNN.com) President Shimon Peres has decided to reduce the jail sentences of five Israeli-Arab terrorists. Three of the terrorists are serving for the brutal murder of Haifa Jewish teenager Danny Katz in 1983 and two for the rape and murder of IDF soldier Daphna Carmon in 1987. Katz, the son of Holocaust survivors, was kidnapped from near his Haifa home at the age of 15 by Arabs who worked at a nearby supermarket while on his way to visit a friend. He was beaten to death with sticks and then sodomized. He was found dead four days later in the Israeli-Arab village of Sakhnin. The men were sentenced to life in prison, plus 27 years. They will now be eligible for release in the near future following Peres's commutation. Peres made the move after meeting with Israeli-Arab MK Taleb a-Sana (Ra'am-Ta'al), who also urged him to grant a pardon to Suleiman al-Abed, who is serving time for the rape and murder of teenage Jewish girl, Chanit Kikus. Katz Family Livid Danny Katz's surviving brother Amnon lashed out at the new president Tuesday night, saying: "Peres has not even managed to warm the presidential chair yet and he's already releasing my brother's despicable murderers." Katz says that his brother's murderers have become a cause celebre in recent years for the extreme-left, who claimed that they confessed to the crime due to police pressure. The murderers were even granted a retrial based on those claims in 1999 -- but were found guilty again. Mira Katz, Danny's mother, pointed a finger at the media Wednesday morning, asking why there was no outrage at the injustice of releasing the murderers of children. "If they decided to free Yigal Amir, who murdered an old man, the media would not stop yelling about it. So why when they decide to free the murderers of youngsters are the media dead silent?" she told Army Radio. When taking office in July, Peres pledged he would seek to unite Israel's populace. Lapid Chides Hard-Left Yosef (Tommy) Lapid, former Justice Minister and leader of the defunct Shinui party chided the intellectual far-left for making an issue out of the conviction of Katz's murderers. Lapid told Voice of Israel government radio Wednesday that the murderers also were convicted of a previous killing, a fact omitted by the "intellectual left that saw the trial as a stain on the judicial system." Concerning repeated claims by leftists that the murderers' confession was forced and that there still is doubt concerning their guilt, Lapid maintained that it is unlikely that five different people would admit to a crime they did not commit. The terrorists won five retrials, including one order by the High Court. "No Jew ever received such consideration and mercy." Lapid said. Olmert Considering Allowing 'Nativity' Terrorists to Return PA Arab sources following Tuesday's meeting between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas said that the terrorists who took over Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity for 39 days in 2002 may be allowed to return to Judea and Samaria from their exile to Gaza and Europe, upon Abbas's request. The terrorists were responsible for the murder of 15 Israelis. Three elderly Armenian monks managed to flee the church at the time with the help of the IDF. One of the monks, Narkiss Korasian, described the Islamist terrorists' behavior to reporters: "They stole everything, they opened the doors one by one and stole everything... they stole our prayer books and four crosses... they didn't leave anything." The monks also told of beatings administered to several Christian clergymen held in the church by PLO gunmen. The terrorists, who were mostly Fatah men, are considered heroes among Muslims in Judea and Samaria and Abbas hopes that winning their return could increase his meager power-base. The return of the 26 terrorists would take place in October, as a gesture during the Muslim month of Ramadan. Editor's Note: A reader of the Arutz-Sheva article made this comment: 40. Peres -- the first Israeli spaceman A man for all seasons. Truely he lives on another planet. Read these and weep. Poor Israel -- why do you let this fool have power??? http://afsi.org/SHIMON/SHIMON2001/WhatShimonSays.doc http://afsi.org/SHIMON/shimon.htm http://www.gamla.org.il/english/peres/ http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2007/06/israels-new-president-in-his-own-words.html Sol, London (30/08/07) Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor at the Graduate School of Business Administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il To Go To Top SAUDI ARABIA: THE ISLAMIST CAGE Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 28, 2007. This article was written by Youssef Ibrahim and it appeared August 27, 2007 in the New York Sun http://www.nysun.com/article/61322 A former prime minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif, recently declared he was returning home to try to regain power after six years of exile -- in Saudi Arabia. The day that the monster of Uganda, Idi Amin, was removed from power in 1979, he flew to a country where sanctuary as a Muslim African leader would be guaranteed upon his arrival -- Saudi Arabia. And in 1970, immediately following the death of an Egyptian dictator, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the leadership of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood movement returned home in droves to try to Islamize their native land -- after two decades in Saudi Arabia. Thus, Saudi Arabia ever expands its fundamentalist cage. Robert Baer, a 20-year veteran of the CIA and the author of Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude, has often described the Saudis as the world's primary financiers of terrorism, the source of much of Al Qaeda's leadership, and an incubating station for radical Islam. Though such activities have come back to haunt the Saudis and their allies in America -- Islamist terror struck home in 1995, 1996, and 1998 bombings, two American embassies were attacked in Africa, and the USS Cole was bombed in Yemen in the leadup to the attacks of September 11, 2001 -- the Saudi system continues to perpetuate the model. The reason, according to Mr. Baer and other Middle East analysts, is that Saudi Arabia runs on two currencies: the riyal and Islam. Neither Saudi society nor its ruling establishment can escape: All of its constituent elements -- from business and charity to religious instruction, law enforcement, and foreign relations -- rattle inside the cage of the country's fundamentalist obsessions: The Saudi flag contains a Koranic verse. The Saudi monarch wraps his authority in Islam as "the custodian of Mecca and Medina." Saudi foreign aid is based on building fundamentalist madrassas and mosques, supporting such fundamentalist groups as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and spreading Koranic instruction worldwide. Arab and Muslim expatriate workers who have lived and worked in Saudi Arabia -- easily numbering 50 million over the last three decades -- return imbued with a model of militancy that duplicates an Osama bin Laden-style path toward jihad against their home societies. This vicious cycle mattered little when oil was cheap and the Saudis were a mere curiosity. But Saudi Arabia's power grew as it was transformed into a prime energy source in the 1970s, a huge financial influence in the 1980s, and an immense lobbying presence in the 1990s. By the late '90s, there were full-size mirror images of Saudi Arabia's stilted brand of Islam in Egypt, Pakistan, Somalia, the Philippines, Chechnya, Bosnia, and Kosovo, as well as among Muslim communities in Europe, Australia, and America. More mirror images are in the making. In one of his many interviews since leaving the CIA, Mr. Baer gave an interesting analysis of the elements that make for the creation and exportation of this model, describing Saudi Arabia as both hapless and evil. "They feel humiliated by colonialism, by the United States, by Israel -- call it what you want. They feel they are citizens or subjects of a country that has never fought a war, and yet spends so much money on defense. They're humiliated that they don't take the Israelis on, because their army is worthless. They sit around and they read the Koran. And they get on these Islamic Web sites, and they watch Al-Jazeera. And they go to the mosque." In other words, the Saudis do little except rattle around within the cage of their own fundamentalism. This deep confusion is reflected throughout the ruling family, which contains both princes who are Westernized -- in such vulgar aspects as drinking, womanizing, gambling, and wearing diamond-studded Rolex watches -- and others who leave a mosque only to enter a charity that nurtures madrassas turning out little bin Ladens. Their schizophrenia is exemplified in such global personalities as Prince Al-Walid bin Talal, a multibillionaire businessman who simultaneously invests his billions in America while funding both the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is the American chapter of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood. In the end, the Saudis are just rattling around in their cage. A society with no social project except to produce more Muslims, deeper Muslims, better Muslims, ends up as one that produces Muslim fanatics and terrorists. Now, with oil prices having moved north of $70 dollar a barrel, a lot more trouble will be coming our way out of the Saudi cage. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top U.S. POLICING ISRAELI COMMITMENT TO STOP PURSUING FATAH MEN! Posted by UCI, August 28, 2007. This was written by Barak Ravid and it appeared August 23, 2007 in Haaretz. The U.S. security coordinator for the Palestinian Authority is checking whether Israel is upholding its agreement to stop pursuing Fatah militants in the West Bank, Haaretz has learned. A senior Western diplomat said that officers from Keith W. Dayton's team have been meeting with Palestinian security officials in several West Bank cities. "This is part of the activity to help the Palestinian security forces institute law and order," the diplomat said. On Tuesday, a group of Canadian officers visited Nablus, which is considered home to the largest concentration of wanted Fatah militants. The officers met with some Palestinian security officials there. Israel has agreed to stop pursuing 178 activists of Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. Some of the activists are suspected of shooting attacks and working with Hezbollah to organize terror attacks on Israel. The team is expected to draft an opinion on the Palestinians' request to expand the amnesty list. The Palestinian security officials told the officers that the wanted men are staying at the security forces' headquarters, in keeping with the agreement with Israel. They said special committees are examining how to place them in the Palestinian police or other security forces. The agreement was reached about a month ago at the conclusion of talks between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. A joint Israeli-Palestinian team is meeting to monitor the agreement's implementation. Under the agreement, Israel said it would not work to capture the 178 activists unless it had clear evidence that they were involved in terror attacks. In exchange, the Fatah activists agreed to hand in their weapons and spend their days at the security branches' headquarters. Israel said activists who maintain this behavior for three months would receive further alleviations, including greater freedom of movement within the West Bank. Dayton's officers also are discussing the Palestinians' equipment and training needs. The U.S. intends to increase its aid for Abbas' forces in the West Bank, especially the Presidential Guard and National Security, sources told Haaretz. UCI -- The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) -- is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top ARCHEOLOGISTS SLAM AUTHORITIES OVER MUSLIM DIG Posted by Bryna Berch, August 28, 2007. The way the Israeli Jews are behaving, you'd think it was an Arab country and the Jews have no rights and get no respect or consideration from the Arab rulers. So all they can do is wail when their precious antiquities are destroyed by the Arabs, who don't want any reminders that the history of the country is almost all Jewish history. When it wasn't Jewish, it wasn't a country -- I mean that literally. After the Jews were defeated by the Romans back some 2000 years, there was not an independent state in the Land of Israel UNTIL the Jews returned in large numbers in modern times. What is wrong with this generation of Israelis? When will they take control of their country and their Holy Sites? When the relics have been pulverized? How foolish can Olmert and the Secularists-In-Control be? Even if they don't appreciate that it is Jewish history being destroyed, I'd think they'd have respect for antiquities that belonged to any ethnic group. At the very least, they ought to see the Temple Mount as a major "tourist attraction," one that isn't available anywhere else. Isn't Livni the linguistically-challenged always going on about making Israel more of a tourist attraction? These jerks don't care about the foundations of their peoplehood and they are just plain dumb about how to attract people to Israel. This was written by Etgar Lefkovits and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188197171632&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull) A group of Israeli archeologists on Monday renewed their blistering condemnation of the Antiquities Authority for authorizing Muslim officials to carry out a dig on Jerusalem's Temple Mount with tractors and other heavy equipment as part of infrastructure work to repair faulty electrical lines on the ancient compound. Israeli archeologists slammed the Antiquities Authority for permitting this trench to be dug to repair electrical lines on the Temple Mount. Israeli archeologists slammed the Antiquities Authority for permitting this trench to be dug to repair electrical lines on the Temple Mount. The work started last month on the northern section of the Temple Mount in the area of the outer courts of the ancient Jewish Temples with the approval of the Israel Police and the state-run Antiquities Authority, Israeli and Islamic officials said. Independent Israeli archeologists said that the work left a 100-meter-long and roughly 1-1.5 meter deep trench, and has damaged the site. "This is a barbaric action on the most sensitive place in archeology of the Jewish nation," said Bar-Ilan University archeologist Dr. Gabriel Barkai, a member of the Committee Against the Destruction of Antiquities on the Temple Mount. Barkai said that work carried out at the site on Monday -- which eyewitnesses say was done with an Antiquties Authority official present -- was the most damaging to date. "If this was done with the Antiquities Authority supervision it is even worse, because the crime was done before our very eyes," he added. The non-partisan group of Israeli archeologists and intellectuals from across the political spectrum has previously lambasted Israel's chief archeological body for permitting the work at the site but Monday's damage prompted them to issue their harshest criticism of the state-run archeological body to date. "It is outrageous that the Antiquities Authority is taking part in an archeological crime by pretending they are supervising the site while they are in fact witnessing the crime as it takes place," said group spokeswoman Dr. Eilat Mazar, a leading Temple Mount expert. Antiquities Authority spokeswoman Dalit Menzin declined to comment on the issue. According to decades-old regulations in place at the Temple Mount, Israel maintains overall security control at the site, while the Wakf, or Islamic Trust, is charged with day- to-day administration of the ancient compound. Jerusalem police have said that in coordination with the Antiquities Authority they had given Islamic officials approval for the work. Wakf director Azzam Khatib said that the work followed an electrical shortage in the al Aksa Mosque. The Antiquities Authority, which by law is charged with supervising Israel's archeological sites, has in the past been criticized by the apolitical group of archeologists for overlooking large-scale Islamic construction on the site which resulted in archeological damage because of the political sensitivities involved. To Go To Top ABBAS OUTSMARTING HIMSELF? ACLU INCONSISTENCY; IRAN'S ECONOMY; HALKIN SWINGS HIS HATCHET Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 28, 2007. ABBAS MAY BE OUTSMARTING HIMSELF Abbas is rigging the next election against Hamas. He will combine the vote in Judea-Samaria and Gaza. Presumably, Fatah's larger majority in Judea-Samaria would cover Hamas' smaller majority in Gaza. This assumes that Fatah would retain its majority in Judea-Samaria. Since Fatah has not reformed, its corruption and lack of services continue to erode its popularity. Hamas' brutality cost it some support in Gaza, but it has restored order and provided more services. Services are popular. Abbas may be setting his party up to lose in Judea-Samaria. He would be outsmarting himself. NETANYAHU'S BEHAVIOR IN THE PRIMARY Benjamin Netanyahu tried various tricks to maneuver his primary rival, Moshe Feiglin, out of eligibility. He did keep Feiglin from attending Netanyahu's eventual victory speech, where the defeated candidate usually endorses the victor. Netanyahu said he wouldn't consort with Feiglin and "his ilk." He wants a court's help in expelling Feiglin from the Party. Netanyahu said he wants to bring "moderates" into the party. He did not define "moderates." He, himself is appeasement minded towards the genocidal Muslims. That is extremist, to me. I think that Netanyahu shows an ominous, undemocratic tendency, which is very Israeli. Considering that Netanyahu betrayed both Israel and Jonathan Pollard at Wye, where he agreed to territorial concessions to the Muslims and dropped his insistence on getting Pollard freed for it, Netanyahu can be harmful for Israel. Barry Chamish explains that he is a tool of the US and that Peres had Rabin murdered. He used that information not to get justice but to blackmail Peres into throwing the election to Netanyahu. Ironically, had he revealed the murder plot, he would have defeated Peres legitimately. Like Sharon, however, he is not firm against jihad, and no nationalist. FRIENDS OF ISRAEL CONFUSED Supposedly pro-Israel, a man I know suggests that the US force the two sides to make peace. He who hates the Saudi-loving Bush regime would expect it to play fair with Israel? It would demand concessions that give jihad a leg up. The US can get agreements signed, but can't make the Arabs honor them. He "understands" objections to Israel from the Arabs, who'd been living there 2,000 years. The Arab invasion came about 1,300 years ago, where Jews had been living for 2,000 years. The Muslim Arabs squeezed non-Arabs, non-Muslims out. NEW FACTION IN P.A.? In Ramallah, businessmen and academicians have formed a lobbying group they hope becomes a political party. Their party would offer an alternative to Fatah and Hamas, which focus on war. The new group cares about the economy, culture, music, and sports. The only political issue it addressed was unity of the two parts of the P.A., now split between Fatah and Hamas (IMRA, 8/12). This group did not repudiate jihad. How could it? Its members are Muslims. But the group sounds more pragmatic. If it built up the P.A. economy, it would be more popular and have more money for jihad. That is my nightmare: a democratically driven and more prosperous jihad. ONE-WAY FREE SPEECH IN ISRAEL A right-wing activist, Prof. Hillel Weiss, told the Israeli colonel in charge of expelling Weiss' family from their house in Hebron that he hopes the colonel's family drops dead. It was not a tasteful way to put it, but the professor had the right to condemn the colonel. Americans call that free speech. Apparently Israelis don't. The media and Defense Min. Barak want Weiss prosecuted. The head of his university is investigating whether to fire him (although he did not do anything untoward on campus or as an employee). His problem is not what he did or said, but that he is a right-winger. Israeli left-wingers don't get into trouble for doing likewise or worse. Leftist Israeli professors and Arabs praise terrorist murder of Jews, dismantle parts of the security fence, promote boycott of Israel, and even attack Israeli soldiers. Some of the Arabs call for the destruction of Israel and engage in espionage. All that, without being denounced by the media, Defense Min. Barak, and heads of universities. Universities hire and award tenure to people who lack credentials of scholarship, but are leftist (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/11). ACLU INCONSISTENCY The ACLU draws a clear line between government and religion, except for Islam. It defended the U. of Michigan for installing footbaths in men's rooms, for Muslims to bathe in before prayer. There can be some accommodation with a religion so as not to exclude its members from participation. But ACLU gave as its primary reason for approval that the footbaths were secular, because non-Muslims could use them. As if that is just what the non-Muslims were waiting for! CAIR called objections to the footbaths "Islamophobia." It always does. Nonsense! (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/14 from Wall St. J..) Accommodating only Islam, an imperialistic religion, helps it fasten its creeping grip on our society. IRAN'S ECONOMY It isn't only US pressure that keeps foreigners from investing in Iran's oil fields. Iran increases the risk to investors by destabilizing the region. Then it offers low returns to potential high-risk investors. Some foreign observers think that low foreign investment, high inflation, and domestic gasoline subsidies that exceed revenues will enable moderates to win Parliament. Not likely. Elections are rigged by the mullahs to keep moderates out, and in any case, Parliament is subservient to non-elected mullahs. It is unlikely that the regime will fall before it acquires nuclear weapons. Suppose the regime does fall. Would it be replaced by something better than what replaced the Soviet regime? The Russian people did not question the ideology that failed. It blamed disloyal officials and outside forces for bringing down the regime. The people still like Stalin and like Putin, who is restoring an imperialist foreign policy and a fascist domestic one. The West should strive to replace the Iranian regime with one that understands what was wrong with theocracy (IMRA, 8/13 from Caroline Glick). ISRAEL AGAIN TRYING TO HAVE P.A. RUN SECURITY The last time Israel turned security for Area B, the P.A.-run area in the Territories, over to P.A. security forces, members of P.A. security forces ended up driving cars stolen from Israel. More than 32,000 cars were stolen from Israel in 1997. Israel is trying it again (Sorry, lost source). Hold on to your cars! HOW BRITAIN MUDDLED IN BASRA Britain's defeated, residual force in Basra is under siege. Its military chief claims Britain's mission was a success. His mission was to enable Iraqis to run their city. After Saddam lost, about a hundred thousand Iraqi men came to the city, unimpeded by British forces, sizeable at the time. They organized themselves into Islamist militias, again unimpeded by British forces. They took over the city, running death squads, beating unveiled women, extorting from businesses, and usurping power at universities and hospitals, still unimpeded by British forces. Some allies, the British are! Pretending not to notice, Britain returned most of its troops, imperiling the rest. Now the city is run by Iraqis, the wrong Iraqis! Israel thinks that Fatah and Egypt are its allies against Hamas. But with money from Israel, Fatah paid Hamas' troops. It is negotiating another unity government with Hamas, hosted by Egypt, which lets weapons into Gaza for Hamas (IMRA, 8/11 from Caroline Glick). Reality is difficult for rulers to grasp. ALMOST A TEXTBOOK CASE OF HATCHET JOB Just before the Likud vote for party head, Hillel Halkin commented about the two contenders, the favored Netanyahu and the challenger, Moshe Feiglin. I thought it was misleading. Bear in mind his constant appeasement towards the Muslims, when weighing his judgment. He is correct in stating that "Moshe Feiglin has no real roots in Likud and joined it only a few years ago with the open intention of staging a hostile takeover. I find that misleading, because Likud has shifted towards appeasement, and Feiglin is trying to save the country by giving it a true party opposed to appeasement and the other corruption in the political system. He may have no roots in that party, but Netanyahu (and Sharon) and others betrayed it. As Halkin puts it, "Mr. Feiglin's view on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict make Mr. Netanyahu look like an extreme dove. (I object to that new, politically correct term for the conflict, making it seem narrower and the Arabs seem the underdog in what really is the Arab-Israel conflict and jihad.). Netanyahu is a dove in office but a hawk in a campaign. It's an old political trick. Halkin should not wield a politician's tricks against his readers. One of the characteristics of a hatchet job is an overly-extreme sounding summary of someone's program, without furnishing quotes, details, or evidence. Thus, Halkin writes that Feiglin's "views are rooted in Jewish religious belief and in a religious perspective, according to which the entire biblical land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people by a divine decree that must be implemented by any and all means." By "all means?" Feiglin has not recommended genocide. The Muslims have and do. That is by "all means." Halkin's secularist approach of accommodation to Muslim demands has been tried for decades, and failed. Feiglin belongs, according to Halkin, in the National Religious Party or National Union Party, whose voters mostly are Orthodox, but he states that those parties are too small for Feiglin. Well of course they are. One can't save Israel from them. But neither are they sufficiently nationalist. Both sell out for Cabinet posts and both approve of appeasement. Appeasement is folly, as we should have learned from experience with the Nazis, Communists, and Muslims. The very firmness of Feiglin is needed to save us from the infirmity of people such as Halkin, who keep wanting to give in the Muslims, who use concessions as a basis for conquering enemies. Whether there are faults to Feiglin, I don't know -- can't tell from Halkin's generalities about him, which are condemnatory without being specific. Halkin gives himself away by condemning the religious Right as being a danger to the republic. I think Halkin is a danger. "Bigotry and religious fanaticism are M. Feiglin's natural elements." What bigotry? None cited. I think that's libel and that Feiglin is no more fanatical than secularists, as Halkin is about ceding territory to the Arabs. 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 To Go To Top ISRAEL: HOMELAND OF THE JEWS! THEOCRACY AND DEMOCRACY ARE COMPATIBLE Posted by Nurit Greenger, August 28, 2007. This essay was written by Gail Tenzer. The problem we are currently experiencing in Israel comes as a result of confusion in the minds of many Israelis, particularly those who were raised on Herzl's secular socialistic movement, as opposed to adhering to the Torah and Jewish Law. Israel was never meant to be a secular country just like any other. It was created as a homeland for the Jews. Our first challenge, therefore, is to define what it means to be a Jew. Then, we have to ask why the Jews were entitled to settle this particular piece of land as opposed to any other anywhere else in the world? In fact, prior to bringing Jews rescued from the Holocaust back to Israel, some secular Zionist leaders were entertaining establishing a new homeland in somewhere in South America or Africa (and I would recommend that current seculars should reconsider those places as a new homeland for themselves!) OK! So, now for the definition of a Jew! This is crucial! Although it is true that when dealing with discrimination, we don't define ourselves! Others do! However, as a people, within the context of a Jewish State, we must define ourselves. What do I mean? In Europe during the 1920s people were generally non-religious and by the time the Nazis came into power, many born Jews had become so secular, that they no longer considered themselves to be Jews at all. In some instances, the assimilation was so great that after a number of generations many people had no idea that they had Jewish roots. They certainly didn't define themselves as Jews. According to the Nazis, however, if somewhere in a person's past, a great-great-grandmother was Jewish, they were expropriated, forced to wear a yellow Star of David and taken away to a concentration camp to be exterminated with the rest of the Jews. Unfortunately, to this day, when someone applies to get a visa to visit Saudi Arabia, he has to fill out a form giving a genealogical history his ancestors proving that there are no Jews in the applicant's background. Apparently, we are defined as Jews, particularly by those who hate us and wish to exterminate us. On the other hand, using the same methods employed by the Saudis, it would be very problematic for us to define those born into other faiths as Jews on the basis of ancestry and as a result accord them the right of return, since we would be forced to accept most people whose last names end in ez from Spain and Latin America, for example, into Israel as Jews even though they were born for generations as Catholics for centuries since the Inquisition. So, the problem here is not to define who is or who isn't a Jew when it comes to racial, ethnic, national or religious prejudice, but rather a problem for all humanity to keep up the guard against the sort of radical xenophobia which leads to genocide, such as we are currently seeing in Darfur based on the religious intolerance of the invading Arabs Despite religious persecution, pogroms and finally the Holocaust, we clung to our Torah, customs and our desire to one day return to our Promised Land, where we finally could feel safe. In 1948, after the Nazis had succeeded in murdering 6 million of us, the State of Israel was reestablished by a UN Charter as a "homeland for the Jews"! To this day, Jews in the Diaspora still repeat daily: "Next year, in Jerusalem!" During all our years in exile, the Torah served as a constant reminder. And we passed this on to our children from one generation to another -- that some day we would return to our beloved homeland: Israel! The Torah gives us the deed to this land we call Israel -- not just any piece of land, but this particular piece of land. While attending university, I had problems with some of my political science professors who insisted that we Jews based our claims to the land on "Jewish Mythology!" This implies that the Torah is fiction, and thus, by natural deduction, our claim to the land also must be deemed fiction. There is an inherent danger in such an argument, and our enemies are using this argument well on the world stage to delegitimize us and ultimately once again attempt to run us off our land, the land G-d gave to us. The danger of turning the State of Israel into a secular nation rather than a theocracy, according to G-d's will in the Torah and His law, is that this kind of argument necessarily leads to an erroneous but convincing conclusion -- that the Arabs are right, and that we Jews came from Europe as alien invaders to occupy land that rightfully belongs to them. Unfortunately, it is precisely our own secular leaders, by denying the Torah and its validity -- thus denying the very document that gives us the Deed to the Land -- that are making the best case for our enemies! In essence, in doing so, the current Israeli leadership is in fact aiding and abetting the enemy -- anywhere else, considered to be an act of Treason. Under no circumstances can Israel be a secular pluralistic country like the U.S. So, this brings us back to the necessity of defining who is a Jew and who can legitimately claim to be a deed holder of the land. Seculars who deny the Torah are denying the Deed to the land and should not be allowed citizenship. By renouncing the Torah, they have renounced the Title and the Deed! Only those who accept the legitimacy of the Torah should be accorded citizenship and all the privileges that it entails: the right to vote and the right to hold office. Furthermore, it is quite obvious by the behavior of the secular population towards Israel's Jewish population, that they are indeed enemies of the Jews almost to the same extent as the rest of our enemies. As such, they are also enemies of the State of the Jewish people: the Land of Israel (so named by G-d in the Torah, when he gave us the land)! In this world, everybody knows that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You cannot make an argument against being Jewish and simultaneously lay claim to Jewish lands, all the while, denying the very document that gives you title to that land. As far as democracy is concerned, the laws of the Torah and democracy are not incompatible as is the case with Islam, which means to submit. The world is quite prepared to accept that not every democracy in the world has to be a U.S. style Democracy. Unfortunately, at this point, Israel apparently no longer can be considered to be a democracy. Many Israeli citizens feel that they have had their freedom of speech or written expression suppressed. Some have spent time in jail for merely saying something against a powerful politician. Given other circumstances, however, Israel, can be a democratic theocracy. In fact, although it isn't apparent, the Laws of the U.S. are based upon the Laws of Moses, which are the Laws of the Torah. So, if the U.S. can be a democracy under these laws, so can Israel. The difference, however, lies in the fact that in Israel, in order to maintain the integrity of the State as a Homeland for the Jews, all citizens must by definition be Jews. This is precisely the problem we have with the current secular leadership who are in fact behaving like authoritarian rulers rather than democratic leaders and who have made it very plain that under no circumstances do they want the State to maintain its Jewish character, nor, apparently do they personally want to be considered as Jews! They want the State of Israel, the State the world established for the Jewish people as a homeland, to lose its Jewish identity and become a nation like any other nation-state. Well, there are a number of reasons why this cannot be! It is unrealistic to believe that Israel would continue to be a homeland for the Jews so they could return from wherever they may be fleeing persecution, and from wherever they may be driven out of next, if the State loses its Jewishness! If everyone gets the right to vote, given the existing enemy citizenry that never assimilated into Israeli society, who unfortunately are in office within the Israeli government despite the fact that instead of protecting the State of Israel they are sworn to destroy it -- without the necessity of fighting any wars, within a few generations, Israel would cease to exist altogether, unless in name only! The unassimilated populations would eventually take over the political system demographically and that would be the end of Israel. Coming back to the issue of democracy vs. theocracy, the world has accepted the fact that both Saudi Arabia and Iran are theocracies! Furthermore, the experience in Iraq has led American politicians to realize that if democracies can be established in Muslim countries at all, they will be different than democracies as we know them in the West. Furthermore, the concept of the nation-state is a relatively new political system and currently is being challenged by regional treaties etc. -- seemingly morphing into something other than a nation-state. I don't know what the new entity will be called or how exactly we will define it, but national sovereignty with well-defined borders seem to be melting away to create some sort of new political animal which embraces a number of cultures, languages, religions, currencies and giving way to regional rule. Countries seem to be giving up their sovereignty and adopting rules imposed by external regional entities in the name of trade. As a political scientist and an economist, I don't believe that this is prudent or that anything good will come out of the experiment. I believe that in the final analysis, we will find that regional rule and the surrender of sovereignty to various regional trade agreements will ultimately lead to more asymmetrical wars amongst factions that are not national in nature, but perhaps ethnic, ideological or shared interests, such as what we are experiencing with terror groups, war lords that are either involved in narco-traffic, illegal weapons trade, etc.! Most of the nation-states in the Middle East are relatively new in terms of world history and as such are still attempting to develop politically. The current Israeli government is based upon a perverse parliamentary system which has to rule by consensus, forming coalitions that are always falling apart. Elections are held to vote in a political party and not an individual. The "insiders" get to pick the leaders. This has led to an oligarchy of self-serving lifetime elites who mutually protect each other -- every last one of them having participated in some corruption or another. So, under the circumstances, it is very difficult to say whether at present Israel can be considered to still be a democracy at all. This brings us to a very disturbing question: if Israel is neither a democracy and nor Jewish, and as such, is no longer a homeland for the Jews, and if it has lost all references to anything remotely connected to the Torah, then what is it? What has it become? And, why does it still exist? If it is no longer a homeland for the Jews, and the current administration wants to change the right of return for Jews, why does it exist? What is its raison d'etre? Once the world starts thinking in this direction, we are in grave danger, indeed! Because what follows is: Absolutely, the Arabs are right! These are invaders from Europe, refugees from Hitler, who invaded this land, occupied it and ....! You know the rest! Well, I think we have had enough of these corrupt secular politicians. They would, in fact, do better and appreciate life more if they would move to a European country of their choice, to Australia, or even to the U.S. One thing is certain! They have absolutely no business being in Israel. The moment they deny the Torah and deny being Jewish, they need to leave! They are "The Enemy Within" (Michael Savage)! They have no feeling for the Jewish people, their plight or an appreciation of Jewish history. In fact, they go so far as to accept revisionist history and teach it at our most prestigious universities corrupting the truth with their lies, shamelessly. They have denied their own Jewishness and it is their problem to live with whatever others in the world want to define them as. But, they have denied their Jewishness and that should deny them the right to being citizens of a Jewish State, much less the power to lead it. They cannot change the very nature of what the world intended in creating the State of Israel to begin with. Israel was created by G-d first, on the basis of the Torah -- and on the basis of His Law. It is a theocracy whether these people like it or not -- and they have no right to change it. There are lands in Israel that Jews all over the world bought and paid for with their hard earned money so as to assure that were they ever put in a position where they would have to return, they would have a home to return to. These lands are private property, which were only entrusted to the State for administrative purposes. Giving someone the right to manage your store does not give him the right to sell it or give it away! That's stealing! And for that they should have to pay. No Prime Minister, President or whatever head of state we happen to have can give an inch of land away in any negotiations in return for any consideration. These lands are not theirs for the giving! By virtue of their office they cannot give away what they don't rightfully own. Just try to do this in the U.S. and you'll see how men will come out with their weapons and shoot at the first trespasser! So, if this is G-d's land promised to the Jewish people, then G-d's Law supercedes State Law and Jews are obligated to refuse to carry out any orders that go against G-d's laws! Am Yisrael Chai! Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog: http://ngthinker.typepad.com To Go To Top HIGH HOLIDAY CALL-IN CAMPAIGN FOR POLLARD KICKS OFF THIS WEEK Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, August 27, 2007. The NCYI ad below calling on everyone to call the White House daily for Jonathan Pollard for the next few weeks during the period leading up to the Jewish High Holy Days, is going into about 20 American national, regional and community Jewish papers, this coming weekend (Aug 31st). Copies of the flyer have also been sent to Jewish Day Schools, Rabbis, community leaders. Jonathan Pollard needs your help! Please recirculate, reprint, repost the flyer. Get your family, friends, colleagues and organizations involved! Let's flood the White House with phone calls during this critical time! Tel: 202-456-1414 Tel: 202-456-1111 The National Council of Young Israel urges everyone to participate in the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, the good deed of redeeming a captive. Thank you! Rabbi Pesach Lerner Executive Vice President National Council of Young Israel 111 John Street -- Suite 450 New York, NY 10038 COLOR NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard:     JPEG -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607.jpg     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org /2007/082607.pdf BLACK AND WHITE NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607a.pdf Please call the White House for Pollard Today! 15 days to Rosh HaShana Please call the White House now! Tell President Bush to free Jonathan Pollard now! Send him home to Israel for Rosh HaShana! Telephone number: 1- 202-456-1414 or 1-202-456-1111 From Israel add your long-distance service provider code to the start of the USA number for example: 0121-202-456-1111 (Israeli codes: 001, 012, 013, 014, 018, etc) Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com To Go To Top UN ANTI-RACISM CONFERENCE TURNS INTO BASHING OF WAR ON TERROR AND AMERICA Posted by Bethany Blankley, August 27, 2007. 22% of the meeting funded by American taxpayers New York and Geneva -- The UN today launched an anti-American and an anti-Jewish extravaganza on the first day of the Preparatory Committee Meeting for a 2009 UN anti-racism conference (PrepCom). The model is the infamous anti-racism conference held in Durban, South Africa, which ended three days before 9/11. Najat Al-Hajjaji, the representative of Libya was declared the Chairperson of the PrepCom. To add to the spectacle of a Libyan Chair of a human rights meeting, Cuba was acclaimed as a Vice-Chair and the PrepCom's Rapporteur. Iran and Pakistan were elected to serve on the organizing committee's inner circle, the Bureau. Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, called the opening session of the UN meeting "a slap in the face to every state and non-governmental organization that really cares about equality and non-discrimination. American tax dollars funded 22% of this morning's meeting, chaired by Libya, and guided by Cuba, Iran and Pakistan, which also used the opportunity to undermine the ongoing fight to stop terrorism." Today, the Libyan Chairperson's opening remarks focused on the response to 9-11 as giving rise to "increased intolerance" and objected to the war on terrorism being used as "a pretext by some states." Egypt, on behalf of the African Group, lost no time in introducing "the continued occupation of Palestine" onto the agenda of Durban II, while lambasting the Danish cartoons as "incitement to racism" and denouncing "the defamation of religion." (The UN's "defamation of religion" resolutions are notorious for making mention only of Islam.) Iran -- a leading member of the UN planning committee -- lectured the world about terrorism and human rights. The diatribe included: "the pretext of a so-called war against terror, reflects the visible rise of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia throughout the world especially against Muslims. ...The visible rise of Islamophobia with its most visible upsurge in the western countries, the reinterpretation and unlawful extension of the prohibition of visible signs of religion and culture in schools, the growing debate in some countries including at the level of political leaders that headscarf is antisocial and the selective profiling of people with an allegedly Islamic appearance." Syria, another state sponsor of terrorism according to the State Department, and at the forefront of attempting to redefine anti-semitism and denying the hatred of Jews, makes clear the controlling factions' Durban II agenda: "The events of 9/11 opened the doors to new forms of racism and racial discrimination. See how countries were invaded and destroyed on the pretext of war on terrorism and other pretexts. ...This surge in racism adopted new forms: Islamophobia and against Semitic people. Durban Review Conference is an opportunity for us to face this surge." Cuba, on behalf of the so-called "Non Aligned Movement," took immediate aim at the war on terrorism as a racist exercise: "the passing of anti-terrorist legislation that provide broad spaces to arbitrariness and the exercise of public authority on discriminatory and xenophobic basis, continue to be a matter of our concern." South Africa's representative argued, "It is important to contextualize the world since 9-11 as there have been dynamic changes. ...The Review Conference should identify contemporary scourges of racism, e.g. racial profiling in the fight against terrorism; incitement to religious hatred." Pakistan, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, proclaimed Muslims to be the central victim of racism today, with Israel as the appropriate focal point for Durban II. "The most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia. It is regrettable that the world media has allowed defamation and blasphemy in this form. ... The conference should move the spotlight on the continued plight of the Palestinian People and non-recognition of their inalienable right to self-determination." Bangladesh decried the protection for "freedom of expression to the detriment of other freedoms, like religion," and objected to "Muslims portrayed in violence and terrorism in political discourse and media," and the "upsurge in Islamophobia in recent years." And this was only the opening morning of the first preparatory session. The original vision of the United Nations was "the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small" -- a far cry from the pretense of equality championed by the UN of the 21st century. "Equality will not be achieved by portraying the Jew or American as the global enemy of human rights," Bayefsky said. For more information please go to "Durban Watch" at EYEontheUN.org. EYEontheUN is the only independent UN accountability organization headquartered in New York dedicated to making transparent the UN's record on its fundamental promise -- to identify, condemn, and protect against human rights violations and confront and respond to threats to international peace and security. Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, is a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust. Bethany Blankley is with the Hudson Institute. Contact her at bblankley@hudsonny.org To Go To Top IS INDIA BECOMING A FAILED STATE ON SOCIETAL FRONT? Posted by Ranjit Singh, August 27, 2007. I don't know how much India's booming economy is benefiting the common man, but on the societal front, our governments have surely failed him. A victim to crimes of all kinds -- quarrels and riots on petty issues, rapes, kidnappings for ransom and increasing incidents of terrorism -- a common Indian is now a scared lot. If crimes, conflicts, suppression of human rights and terrorism continue unabated, India would be branded as a failed state on Societal front. Just a few days ago, on August 25th, a twin blast in Hydrabad (at Gowkul Chat Bhandar and Lumbini Park), killed 42 and injured and injured 54. Next day, police claimed to have found 19 unexploded time bombs. Though the police have not made it known how, without arresting any one, they found out 19 bombs, yet, thanks to them, the cops have saved Hydrabad from the Mumbai Bomb Blasts of 1993. Just last month, we heard the last chapter of 1993 Blasts verdict with actor Sanjay Dutt's conviction of six years rigorous imprisonment. But most probably in this Hydrabad episode, we will not hear of any conviction even after 14 years. I am predicting this as I hear the police pointing its fingers, as usual, to somebody in Bangladesh and the Pakistan's ISI. On the higher level, the politicians are busy instigating, resorting either to blame game or hate speeches. No body is pondering as to how a few people from outside, not well-versed with our geography and locations, can perform a bloodbath, without the support of a fifth column lying scattered in towns and villages. TERRORISM -- A WAR ON INDIA. INDIA, A BIG LOSER Terrorism is a proxy war and like any war, their army cannot advance without their hired and well-financed fifth column. And they have advanced very much in India. The associated Press dispatch dated August 25 counted 9 major bombings in India, with 1993 Mumbai Bomb blasts as first. This, however, does not include recurring killings in J&K, attack on our Parliament, ULFA and Naxalite activities. Another report by Shankar Raghuraman(TNN dated August 27,07) tells us that "barring war-torn Iraq", India is the top most loser in human lives in terrorist attacks. Iraq lost 3,280 lives, we, Indians have lost 3,674 lives. I am sure the journalist has not included loss of human lives due to Kashmiri, ULFA, Naxalites and Khalistani terrorism. The following paragraph by the same journalist in TOI is worth pondering. "..when we looked in detail, at the worldwide numbers, we found India not only had the highest number of deaths after Iraq, but also the highest number of terror-related incidents and the injured among all the countries (again barring Iraq) -- more than all the war zones around the globe." I will request my readers to pause and read this paragraph again and ponder. WE TALK, NOT ACT. Is it not unfortunate? It is happening in a country that boasts of the Budhha, Nanak, viveka and the Gandhian non-violence. India is a lesson in governance. Ideology is good but better than that is the legislation that reflects that ideology. Still better than legislation is its implementation but the best is implementation with justice and without profiling. Unfortunately, we have stopped at Ideology. This is our biggest weakness. NON-ACTION STRATEGIES: It is high time for the Indians to think and decide if they would like to continue with status quo or mend the situation. And if correction to ensure a life with freedom is our goal, then we will have to ensure that both the governments and the people do their duty at their respective levels. We have been watching the governments' reactions and responses to the bloodbaths done with impunity. They point their fingers to foreign hands to avoid politically sensitive actions. Simultaneously, they resort to the culture of financial support to the victims and their kins to lessen mass anger. The governments should be compelled to unearth and eliminate the terrorists' fifth column, who could possibly the loose coalitions of petty criminals, rioters and hate mongers. It is time our intelligence shall watch those living beyond means and reach the dens of the killers. The governments need to make the persons entrusted with the job of protecting the people answerable for such incidents, with ministers and bureaucrats no exception. On the peoples' front, especially the NRIs in America, we have starting seeing a heartening posture by the Muslim community leaders to come forward and condemn killings. But as I have been always suggesting, condemnation strategy by community leaders and the suspicion -- strategy by the governments will not work; they have not worked so far. The terrorists don't listen to them and even if they listen, they don't care for them. They are carrying forward their own agenda, with the active support -- paid or voluntary -- of their agents. The NRI leaders shall write back home, to their friends, relatives and religious leaders of mandirs and masjids, not to shelter the fifth column, rather expose them. And we shall not take it as profiling, as the terrorists across the border may be Muslims but their fifth columns in India will definitely be a religious mix, consisting of petty criminals, youth looking for quick bucks and their likes. By not doing so, we will be destroying the secular fabric of our society and help the communal forces to widen the already existing divide between communities. The need of the hour is a joint action by the people and governments to unearth the fifth columns of terrorists, as this seems to be the only route to put a halt to their evil design. Friendly, Ranjit Singh TWO LETTERS OF CONDEMNATION 1. "Prominent Indian-American Muslims Condemn Hyderabad Bomb Blasts" August 25, 2007 Contact person: Dr. Shaik Ubaid. Tel: (516) 567-0783 Prominent Muslim Indian-American leaders, many of them hailing from the historic city of Hyderabad in India, condemned the twin bomb blasts in Hyderabad on Saturday August 25 as cowardly crimes against humanity. The leaders of the Indian diaspora in the US expressed their heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. They demanded a thorough and transparent investigation from the Indian national and the state governments and apprehension of those who were involved in the bombings. They appealed to the Indians of all faiths to stay united and foil the evil designs of the perpetrators of bombings who wish to polarize the city and country. They announced that as always they will be joining hands with leaders of other religious communities, leftist groups, human rights organizations and other members of broad-based Indian American coalitions to show their solidarity with their Indian counterparts and to protect the pluralist ethos of India. According to the preliminary newsreports, in two near-simultaneous terror attacks, at least 36 people were killed and more than 50 injured in explosions at a crowded park and a popular eating joint. Twenty-six people died and 22 wounded when an explosion ripped through Gokul Chat Shop at Kothi locality at around 7.30 p.m., Andhra Pradesh Home Minister, K Jana Reddy, told reporters here. Six people, most of them from outside the State, were killed and 13 injured in another blast five minutes earlier in an open air auditorium in Lumbini Park near the State Secretariat in the heart of the city when a laser show was on, he said. Manzoor Ghori, Chairman, Indian Muslim Relief and Charities Dr. Shakhir Mukhi, President, American Federation of Muslims of Indian Origin Dr. Javed Akhtar, President, American Muslims Physicians of Indian Origin Dr. Khursheed Mallick, Indian Muslim Education Foundation of North America Saeed Patel, National coordinator, NRIs for a Secular and Harmonious India Habeeb Ahmed, Human Rights Commisioner, Nassau County, Long Island, NY Syed Azmathullah Quadri, Founding Chairman, ImanNet Dr. Syed Sohail Ahmed, Islamic Medical Association of North America Dr. Shaik Ubaid, Indian American Coalition for Pluralism 2. "IMC-USA condemns the multiple bomb blasts in Hyderabad, India" Date: 8/26/2007 1:31:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time From:media@imc-usa.org To: betterindia@aol.com NRI Muslims condemns the multiple bomb blasts and appeals to all communities for calm. Indian Muslim Council-USA (IMC-USA) (http://www.imc-usa.com), an advocacy group dedicated towards safeguarding India's pluralist and tolerant ethos, condemns the multiple bomb blasts in Hyderabad, A.P. and appeals to all communities to be calm and work together to dissect the source of such terror and remove this scourge of violence within India "Violence serves no cause, no religion and no community. Such barbaric acts only serve the agenda of anti-socials, fascists and extremists" Rasheed Ahmed, President of IMC-USA stated. He further added that "at times like these, the foremost need is to attend to the victims while urging the government to intensify efforts to identify the real perpetrators. It is a travesty of justice, that time and again such barbaric acts get politicized and in the process innocent people get victimized, while the real perpetrators of such terrorist activities stay at large." Rahmat Baig, Vice-President of IMC-USA stated that "it is tragic that such barbaric acts are occurring with a regularity. Only the time and place changes. We have been focusing on foreign sources and agents for a while without much success. We urge the government to investigate domestic sources as well in the light of revelation about Nanded and Malegaon blasts and incidents involving a number of fake-encounters." IMC-USA urges the State and Central Government to do its best to tend to the victims and their families. IMC-USA also hopes that a transparent and broad based investigation will be conducted to find the criminals and punish them to the fullest extent of the law. Contact: Zeeshan Farees E-Mail: info@imc-usa.org Think-Israel Editor's Note: This is an excerpt from: "Hyderabad Muslims irked by police visits to madrassas in wake of jihad bombings" Jihad Watch August 31, 2007 http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017988.php In the wake of the jihad attacks that killed 30 people in Hyderabad, Muslims are irked once again -- but not by Muslims perpetrating such attacks. No, what has really upset them are police visits to madrassas. "Hyderabad cops visit madrassas, kick off a row," from IBNLive (thanks to all who sent this in): New Delhi/ Hyderabad: The Hyderabad police have ruffled feathers by visiting madrassas while investigating the August 25 twin bomb blasts in the city. Sources tell CNN-IBN the police are searching for a man called named Mujibur Rahman but authorities refused to comment if he is a suspect in their investigation. [...] "Madrassas is an educational institution; it is open to all. Raiding a madrassas in the dead of night will send wrong signals and create communal frenzy," Moulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, general secretary of the Deeni Madarsa Board, told the Deccan Chronicle newspaper. Wrong signal? Where should they look for clues to the bombing, then? In Hindu temples? And what about this "communal frenzy"? Is that a threat? Ranjit Singh is Managing Editor of Better India. Contact him by mail at betterindia@aol.com or visit the webiste: www.betterindiausa.com To Go To Top LIVING IN THE LAND Posted by David Ha'ivri, August 27, 2007. Ha'Aretz means "the Land" -- emphasis on "the." In Hebrew, we call our country Ha'Aretz, which means "the Land." There is a specific emphasis on "the" because, for us, it is the only land. The Jewish People are commanded to observe 613 commandments of the Torah. Since many of them (more than half) can only be carried out in the Land of Israel, a Jew living outside of "the Land" can not possibly observe our faith in its fullness. In other words, living in Israel under our own government is part of our religion. After the death of Moshe, the seven nations of Cana'an who dwelt in the land were conquered by Yehoshua and his army, and the first Jewish State in Israel was born. From that moment onwards, our people lived in an independent Jewish state. Our King Solomon built the holy Temple in Jerusalem, which was the center of our religious and cultural life for nearly a thousand years. The first Temple stood on the Temple Mount in our capital city Jerusalem for nearly 500 years, until it was overrun by the Babylonians, who slaughtered many and exiled most of the survivors. Our people were marched away in chains to foreign lands in the north, and there they "sat on the rivers of Babylon and cried while they remembered Jerusalem." (Psalm 137) But they did not forget and they did not give up hope. Two and a half thousand years ago, the first Zionists rose up and returned to our land, but they faced many challenges. They were predominantly poor, the land was burnt and overrun, and newcomers had settled in parts of the land. The returnees did the best that they could and rebuilt the Temple on the Mount that was named for it in Jerusalem. The Second Temple stood for over 400 years, until it was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 CE. Even after the destruction, though, throughout history, there has always been a Jewish presence in the land, even if at times the land was scarcely populated. Most of those who survived the destruction of the Second Temple were once again exiled, and from that time on the Jewish people wandered the four corners of the earth, never forgetting our homeland and never giving up hope to return and re-establish our independent country on our land. From that time, Jewish people -- wherever they were -- prayed three times a day to HaShem to return us to our land. Over those many long and painful years, the Jewish people remained scattered and persecuted. Expelled and made refugees, running from place to place, they we were unable to regather together as a single, unified nation. However, that all started to change about one hundred years ago. From that moment, the historical miracle of the regathering of the Jewish people in our historic homeland began. After nearly 2,000 years of exile, spread out all over the world, the Jewish people began to return to our land. Jews from Yemen to India, America to Morocco, Europe to Australia -- literally from the four corners of the globe -- gathered together in the Land of Israel. Our independent Jewish State was reborn. Between the beginnings of the Roman exile until today, various armies and peoples have passed though our land. At any given point in history, the country has been controlled by the Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, the British and French Crusaders, the Ottoman Turks, the British (again), and only finally back to us. Naturally, with each passing nation and army, the make up of the general populace changed and was molded in accordance with the character of whichever marauding power was in control. Over the course of history, many Jews were killed, forcibly removed (or left of their own accord), whilst others stayed put. The demographics shifted along with the sands of time. One thing, however, remains certain: since our last exile in the year 70 CE until the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 there was no independent state on this land. There were no independent kings or governments beyond those who were representatives of foreign rulers (i.e., the Ottoman Turks or the British Mandate). There never was a Palestinian state or king or government or even people, for that matter. The "Palestinian" idea only came into being less than a hundred years ago, as a local response by Arab squatters to Zionism, the return of the Jews -- the rightful owners of the land. Gaza and the "West Bank" of the Jordan River are part of our historic homeland and were liberated by the Jewish army (the IDF) as a result of the assault by neighboring Arab countries upon the Jewish State as it existed at the time, within its "pre-1967 borders." Had Egypt, Syria and Jordan not attacked Israel in June of 1967, the "West Bank" would still be occupied by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Gaza would still be controlled by Egypt and the Golan Heights would be in Syrian hands. But at the time -- giddy with power and convinced of certain victory -- the Arab nations all thought otherwise. They were sure that the power was in their hands to "drive the Jews into the sea" and bring an end to the Zionist dream. Baruch HaShem, they were wrong. They went to war and lost. And you know what happens when you go to war and lose? To put it quite bluntly: you lose. If the Arabs would have won, how many Jews do you think would be living today in Arab-controlled "Palestine"? Today, there are many Arab residents of the Jewish-controlled cities of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem and many more. Contrast that with the fact that Jews are forbidden outright to live in any lands controlled by the Arab "Palestinian Authority." Those Jews who choose to do so are subject to all kinds of international and domestic pressures, and are often forcibly removed from those areas simply because they are Jews, whilst the government and international community coin terms such as "Disengagement" to whitewash what is a policy of anti-Jewish ethnic cleansing. Do you know that Jews are not even allowed to pass through many Arab-controlled areas? Now let the Arabs complain about apartheid against them. Our deed to the Land of Israel is the Torah itself. The incredible historical phenomenon of the regathering of our people and the rebirth of our language and culture -- all in line with the promises of the Torah and the visions of the prophets -- prove the Divine nature of our faith. David Ha'ivri, chairman of Revava, is also editor of Darka Shel Torah and Ideas in Action newsletters, and the publisher of books teaching Jewish pride and faith in HaShem. He has set a goal to put the Jewish people back on the footpath of our fathers, and build a proud and strong nation whose national policy is based on Jewish values. He can be reached by email at haivri@hameir.org or at his website: http://www.hameir.org/ This article appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7367). To Go To Top AN OPEN LETTER TO CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR FROM MAURICE OSTROFF Posted by Nurit Greenger, August 27, 2007. Though I no longer believe that we should, after the fact, go defend ourselves and explain, and explain and discuss and discuss what people like Christiane Amanpour and media outlet such a CNN will never want to accept, understand or correct, here is Maurice Ostroff's (Herzliya, Israel) PR-Hasbarah open letter to Christiane Amanpour after viewing her CNN "God's Warriors" despicably distorted Series. With kind regards, Nurit Dear Christiane Amanpour Your mammoth three-part documentary "God's Warriors" is certainly a magnum opus. And while I admire the sheer professionalism of your presentation, I do hope you will accept the following comments in the constructive manner intended. Please correct me if I err, but the program creates the impression that you do not see Islamic fundamentalist violence as more serious a threat than enthusiastic, or even zealous, devotion to Judaism or Christianity. This impression is confirmed by your responses to comments posted on CNN web site. For example in response to Regina Bowling of Charleston, who said she believes we are watching the gathering up of energy worldwide in the form of religious intolerance for the "perfect storm" of global holy war, you replied that you don't see right now the potential for global holy war. This despite 9/11, the London bombings and attempted bombings and other glaring incidents including the world-wide violence that erupted in the Danish Cartoon episode. The program also creates the impression that you believe there is no difference between God's Jewish, Muslim and Christian Warriors and that the Moral Majority and Evangelists are as dangerous as Islamic Fundamentalists. This was confirmed when you replied to Ms. Bowling that as long as people believe that only their holy book [Koran, Torah or Bible] or only their holy word matters and is relevant, then there will be no solution. (Words in parenthesis are mine). It was disappointing to find in a purportedly objective program that you injected your own views, demonstrating occasional lack of knowledge. For example when an Israeli settler said God says Jews must live in Hebron, you interjected that the West Bank was designated by the UN to be the largest part of an Arab state. Not only is this statement factually incorrect, it is out of context. May I ask whether you are aware that all Arab states rejected UN partition resolution 181 and that the West Bank was included in the area designated for encouragement of Jewish settlement by the Balfour Declaration and even endorsed in article 6 of the British mandate. In retrospect I hope you will agree that the use of the very few isolated incidents of Jewish terror attempts over the past 15 years, created the erroneous impression that a religious Jewish terror movement exists on a par with the violent worldwide jihadist phenomenon of indiscriminate death and destruction. Objectivity would require that you draw attention to the enormous difference between Islamic states which encourage terror and Israel which acts vigorously against attempts to engage in terror and where those very few Jews who did make attempts have been severely punished. The relevance of God's Warriors to the so-called Jewish lobby in the USA is flimsy indeed. It is difficult to accept your objectivity when you allow Jimmy Carter and Professor Mearsheimer to promote their controversial books that have been criticized by experts for blatant inaccuracies, without offering a balanced viewpoint from someone like Alan Dershowitz. Surely you, of all people know that the Jewish Lobby is but one of dozens of diverse influential lobbies, including the ACLU and the very powerful, well-funded Arab lobbies that are part of the Washington scene. Your repeated references to settlements as illegal are open to valid criticism. Obviously the most reliable sources from whom to seek clarification are the persons who played key roles in drafting the relevant resolution 242, namely British Ambassador to the UN, Lord Caradon, American Ambassador, Arthur Goldberg and US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, Eugene Rostow. All have agreed that settlements are legal. In an interview in the Beirut Daily Star on June 12, 1974, Lord Caradon stated: "It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967 because these positions were undesirable and artificial." Professor Julius Stone, one of the twentieth century's leading authorities on the Law of Nations concurred that the Jewish right of settlement in the territories is equivalent in every way to the right of the existing Palestinian population to live there. What must deeply concern everyone interested in maintaining Western democracy is the danger that this widely advertised documentary diverts attention from the real threat of Jihad, by equating it with non-violent religious movements. Sorely missing from the entire series is any mention of the basic motivator of Islamic violence, the incitement to hatred emanating from state media as well as openly from mosques, not only in Arab countries but under the noses of European and British governments. As human beings, can we be unperturbed by the indoctrination of infants to become suicidal Warriors as shown in an interview with a three-and-a-half year old girl broadcast on Iqra? (See video clip at http://tinyurl.com/kz5of) It is sad that in your documentary which could serve to create a genuine better understanding of the violence generated by religious zealotry, the authoritative voices of many experts in the field were omitted. Among the many who would have added authoritative insight into the subject are Brigitte Gabriel, who lectures nationally and internationally about terrorism and who has issued an Urgent Warning to the West, Professor Salim Mansur the Muslim writer and Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Western Ontario, Steven Emerson the internationally recognized expert on militant Islamic terrorism and national security and Dr. Khaleel Mohammed, the Islamic law specialist and professor of Religion at San Diego State University. I attach for your information copies of articles by the late Eugene Rostow*. Your considered response would be appreciated. Maurice Ostroff Tel. +972 9 9595 261 http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com and http://tinyurl.com/vnk9y * Read Professor Rostow's articles on the Jewish settlements here. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog: http://ngthinker.typepad.com To Go To Top IS THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM WAKING UP TO REALITY? Posted by Professors for a Strong Israel, August 27, 2007. This statement issued: August 26, 2007 Contact Benjamin Svetitsky at bqs@julian.tau.ac.il or phone 050-551 8940 Following the unsurprising failure of the "disengagement" from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria, and the expulsion of the Jewish residents from their homes, some decision makers in Israel are beginning to voice doubts about these moves. Professors for a Strong Israel reminds the public that the expulsion was always a combination of folly and injustice. Are we now seeing an awakening in the judicial system? Judge David Gadol has ruled that the Disengagement Law is no longer enforceable, and that people cannot be prevented from returning to Homesh by this law. This is a step in the right direction. We congratulate the judge, and we conclude from his ruling that actions by the army and police to prevent the return to Homesh are illegal. To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: DOSE OF REALITY Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 27, 2007. Avi Dichter, Minister of Public Security, today said on Army Radio that Egypt's failure to stop the flow of weapons into Gaza is tantamount to support for Hamas. "Any rational person -- Israel or Palestinian -- who witnesses the Egyptians' failure to act against arms smuggling can see that it is in their interest to strengthen Hamas." Well, good morning! Good to see a bit of honesty in this regard. For too long Egypt as a "moderate" state has been part of the prevailing myth here. There have been voices speaking out -- most notably Yuval Steinitz, who constantly declares that Egypt is not to be trusted -- but they have not been given the credence they deserve. When Condoleezza Rice shoved the Rafah agreement down our throats after the "disengagement," Steinitz warned that this was trouble because Egypt wouldn't carry its weight in the deal once we stopped monitoring the border: Egypt was supposed to stop smuggling of weapons into Gaza from its side of the Egypt-Gaza border. To that end, 750 Egyptian forces were permitted along the Philadelphi Route in what had been a demilitarized zone according to our peace treaty with Egypt. Now we begin to face the obvious: that it was for naught, an exercise in foolishness at best. If they wanted to stop the smuggling they could (Dichter says their intelligence is as good as ours in this area), and, in fact, they have slowed down efforts, which, Israeli officials say, is a major reason why Hamas has been able to bring in so much in the way of weapons and explosives. ~~~~~~~~~~ I had mentioned recently reports that Netanyahu was talking to Lieberman about running on a joint list in the next election. That may have seemed a good idea to Netanyahu, but as it turns out Lieberman was less than enthusiastic about it. There are ideological differences between the parties, he says, that would make joining forces impossible. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert and Abbas are due to meet again tomorrow, in Jerusalem. As Olmert persists in his dangerous and foolish policy built on air, what is there for me to say here? Comments after the meeting. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to the London-based paper, Asharq Al-Awsat, cited today in Haaretz, Israeli Arabs are attempting to mediate between Fatah and Hamas. The Israeli Arabs mentioned are with the Islamic Movement in Israel -- as its name implies, a radical group that regularly foments anti-Israel sentiment; the irony is that its members are Israeli citizens. Hamas is said to be considering initiatives that propose turning back security compounds and civil institutions in Gaza to Fatah, as a necessary precursor to reestablishing relations with Fatah. ~~~~~~~~~~ Defense Minister Barak, appearing for the first time since he took office before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said that there are signs of tensions with Syria fading. But MK Effi Eitam (NU) warned -- with considerable justification -- that we shouldn't be taken in by the calm. For Barak also testified that Hezbollah has more weapons now than it did before the war last summer. So what does it mean that Syria is "quiet" if it is sending weapons to Hezbollah at an accelerated rate? That weapons build-up is by way of preparations for renewed conflict. Our preparations for conflict, according to Barak, include: an active anti-rocket and missile system; an improvement in the IDF's maneuvering ability; an increase in the army's stamina regarding inventory and provisions; an increase in the number of training exercises using live ammunition; and the military's "long arm" -- its ability to operate deep within enemy territory. There is no doubt but that we will be in better shape when war comes again than we were last time. Whether these preparations are sufficient I am not able to say. What I do know is that the readiness to operate deep within enemy territory -- which was lacking last summer -- is critically important. As to Gaza, Barak indicated that he will give the IDF free reign to do preventative strikes. This too is an improvement over what was happening before, but still falls short of the major operation in Gaza that would require the approval of the political echelon. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hizb ut-Tahrir ("party of freedom"), an Islamist organization in Judea and Samaria, is currently recruiting thousands of people who have become disillusioned with both Hamas and Fatah. This group was originally founded in the 50s, but was dormant for some time; it has revived in recent years with a shift in the political situation. Dedicated to fostering loyalty to Islam and to the re-establishment of the Caliphate -- a unified religious state in the Muslim world if not beyond -- it advances an ideology that calls for the overthrow of Arab governments and the elimination of Israel, in order to prepare for that caliphate. Banned in many countries, it has (wouldn't you know it!) a strong and active presence in Britain. Israeli intelligence considers the group a cause for genuine concern. Col. Eitan Azani, deputy director of the Institute of Counter-Terrorism, says. "This is the factory that produces, at the end of the day, the jihadis that operate in global terrorism." ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday I wrote about a conference under the auspices of the UN's Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, which is about to be held in Brussels and which echoes Durban. It is not, I indicated, the only cause for concern. Let me here return to Durban and preparations under way for a Durban II conference to be held in 2009. It is a follow up to the horrendous conference held in Durban, South Africa in 2001. A week long series of planning meetings has now begun in Geneva to set the agenda for that 2009 conference, which is being dubbed an "anti-racism" conference. The meetings are chaired by Libya; the committee of 20 nations participating includes Cuba and Iran. Is it necessary to say more? Guess who they're going to decide the "racist" is? The governments of both Israel and the US are sending only low-level observers; activities at the conference will be carefully monitored. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info To Go To Top WHY MUST ISRAEL ALWAYS GIVE? Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, August 27, 2007. Isn't it rather curious the only nation asked to give up anything tangible in any Middle East peace negotiations is Israel? Israel's land mass is about two tenths of one percent the size of its surrounding mostly hostile Islamic Middle East neighbors, yet Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, and the eastern part of her capital Jerusalem remain on the table. Furthermore, Israel is asked to give so-called Palestinian Arabs a right of return to Israel, yet no Islamic Middle East regime offers a similar right to Jews evicted from their lands. The Quartet of presumably fair minded neutral parties, the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations, expected to facilitate in any civil peace process, has yet to mention the aforementioned obvious disparity of treatment, and is more than willing to negotiate with Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, an abominable unrepentant Holocaust revisionist, indeed publishing a thesis in 1984 asserting Zionists collaborated with Nazis in the horrific genocide so the world would give Jews their homeland out of guilt, questioned whether gas chambers were used, and suggested the number of Jewish victims was but a fraction of what is documented. When the cards are so stacked against the beleaguered Jewish State, when intangible crumbs would be offered to her in any negotiations, recognition and peace, neither of which worth the paper they would be written on, indeed terrorist groups like Hamas and Hizbullah would never accede to such basic commitments, she would be worse than a fool to participate in such disrespectful folly. Let's get real! For starters, Israel must put herself in a strong position when dealing with her rough disingenuous neighbors. For one, Iran's perilously delusional president AhMADinejad declares Israel should be wiped off the map, in effect declaring war against the Jewish State. U.S. President Bush's preemptive invasion of 'Sadist' Hussein's Iraq has set the recent precedent for invading a sovereign nation believed to be a threat to other nations. No doubt, Shiite Iran boasts weapons of mass destruction and is on the verge of becoming a nuclear power, a much more likely threat than Hussein's Iraq to Middle Eastern mostly Sunni nations, and of course a dire threat to Israel based on rhetoric alone. It would be justifiable for Israel to overtly prepare to attack her sworn Persian enemy nation, yet a more prescient strategy would be to direct her war calculations and verbal assaults selectively on the government of Iran as well as its Revolutionary Guard, concurrently fomenting an exploited Western leaning youth culture, through a versatile Mossad, to take to the streets and bring down AhMADinejad and those contemptuous mullahs pulling most of the policy strings within their troubled regime. Israel could supply weaponry to revolutionary forces, much like Iran supplies weaponry to Hamas and Hizbullah. Without a doubt, Israel must not appear weak to her adversaries, thus feisty threatening rhetoric directed at Iranian leaders, active pursuit of a policy to in fact eliminate them from power, coupled with a few menacing Israeli warplanes soaring close to Iranian territory would certainly bolster her image, sending more than a few chills down a few heretofore swaggering Muslim spines. No doubt, the enemy of my enemy can sometimes be a temporary friend of convenience. Israel should engage with Middle Eastern Sunni nations, including Saudi Arabia, and build a common defense against the mad fundamentalist Shiite Persians, leaders of the dysfunctional Middle East's most dangerous regime. Perhaps the House of Saud would consider forcing a significant reduction in the per barrel price of oil, thus wrecking havoc to Iran's economy. AhMAdinejad and his crew must be stopped now before they become a nuclear power! Israel must lead the charge! Once Israel so asserts herself she will no longer be disrespected, she will no longer be expected to give and give with no tangible quid pro quo. Her point of view will be a lead talking point in any so-called peace negotiations. Ceding her land for peace, ceding her heritage for peace, will no longer be assumed, indeed will no longer be part of any negotiated package when nations attempt to stabilize, in fact civilize the Middle East. Terms like intifada will be perceived as describing criminal behavior, thus be unacceptable in any substantive discourse. No longer will apologists clutter rational mindsets with excuses for the despicable mutated act of homicide/suicide martyrdom. A strengthened confident Israel will no longer be viewed as an occupier of poor Palestinian waifs once she asserts her unwillingness to surrender her sovereign territory, justifiably secured in 1967 in the process of defending herself against aggressive Arabs attempting to annihilate her. Israel will point to Gaza, note its chaotic state, will condemn its so-called Hamas government for failing to subdue murderers from launching rockets into Israel on a daily basis with impunity, will decry her mistake of abandoning that enclave, and will emphatically declare 'Never Again'! When Israeli leaders at last reinvent their own self-deprecating states of mind, begin to defend the essential character of the nation they were elected to steward, and demand respect from other nations, the Jewish State will shine as a beacon of strength, hope, and prosperity for this emerging third millennium. 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 larose@snip.net To Go To Top ISRAEL AGAINST THE JEWS; HEBRON: OLMERT IS RUN BY PEACE NOW BUT SOLDIER WON'T EXPEL JEWS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 27, 2007. CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES They came to an Israeli Army base in the guise of Jews. After singing with some soldiers, they talked about Jesus having been a Jew. Upon realizing that they were missionaries under false pretenses, the soldiers escorted them off the base. In Netanya, Jews have organized and go door-to-door, successfully revealing to naïve Jews that they had been visited by missionaries misleading them about their intentions. Recently, several missionaries attacked the Jewish truth squads physically. Their violence undermines their purported ideology (Arutz-7, 8/2). The sect should have been identified, so not all Christian groups are blamed for what that one does. It would be one matter if it stated its doctrine frankly. But it misrepresents itself and misleads about its doctrine being part of Judaism. Deceit does not engender trust but suspicion about the doctrine itself. P.A. POLICE AGAINST CRIME P.A. Police in Jenin apprehended and destroyed illegal fireworks, drugs, and 15 cars. IMRA remarked that the cars probably were stolen from Israel. In this campaign against crime, the police should have returned the cars (IMRA, 8/5). ISRAEL AGAINST THE JEWS The government is expelling Jews who moved into the old market place of Hebron. It offers them a deal, but they won't make deals with the government, after it tricked them the last time, to get them to leave. Now the government is moving the brutal Yassem police force to remove them violently (Arutz-7, 8/5). The government cheats Jews as much as the Muslims cheat the government. ANTISEMITIC PROPAGANDA IN ISRAELI THEATRE "The family of slain Hebron region IDF commander Dror Weinberg" went to see the state-supported play "'Hevron', which is being performed at the HaBima-Cameri theater in Tel Aviv..." "'The way they portray the settlers is exactly like the (way the) Nazis used to try to portray the Jews. They portray them as completely fanatical and without any sense of humanity, while creating emotional sympathy for Arab murderers.'" The message of the play is that serving there is unethical. Its ad suggests that the tiny Jewish settlement imprisons the Arab majority. That is imaginary (Arutz-7, 8/5). I remember a study finding that private theatres attract audiences, but publicly supported ones hardly do. The government wastes taxes that way, and subsidizes propaganda. Get government out of the arts! U.S. PERSECUTION OF ARABS An Iraqi living in the US was not allowed to board an airplane in the US until he covered his t-shirt, because that t-shirt had Arabic writing on it, although its message was innocuous (Joseph Goldstein, NY Sun, 8/10). A civil rights suit was launched. The media reported, it but some of the parties involved, especially the defendants, do not much state their version of what happened. Therefore, it is not clear who said and did what. I favor strong, purposeful measures against terrorism, Islamism, and Islam. This was not such a measure but counter-productive. It gives color to the Muslim claim of Islamophobia, although this hysterical airport reaction is minor and rare. The measure could not accomplish anything. It violated the passenger's civil rights. High time to develop a comprehensive war strategy. ARAB ATTACKS IN JERUSALEM An Israeli Arab youth attacked a security guard. In the ensuing gunfight, ten people were wounded, and the assailant was killed. "Mustafa Al Barghouthi, the secretary-general of the Palestinian national initiative, condemned the killing. "This incident just confirms the enormity of Israeli crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians." Responsibility was claimed by supposedly moderate Fatah and by the PFLP and Islamic Jihad (IMRA, 8/10 & 11). "Moderate" Fatah? I conclude the opposite. This incident is an example of the enormity of Islamic instigation against the Jewish people. I praise the killing and condemn the aggressor. To the Muslims, justice is whatever helps Islam, by whatever means. What a warped sense of justice and in behalf of a murderous cult! If there were "Zionist propaganda," it would mock the condemnation of self-defense. OOPS, BARAK THINKS ROCKET DEFENSE 18 MONTHS AWAY I thought it was pie in the sky, and it may well be, but Defense Min. Barak thinks a defense against incoming rockets can be put into operation in 18 months. It would cost $30,000 to destroy each rocket. To reduce costs, the system calculates and responds only if the rocket would strike a built-up area (IMRA, 8/9). Farmers in the field, beware! Barak refuses to distribute gas masks against Syrian poison gas, lest Syria think that means Israel plans aggression (IMRA, 8/13). How many defensive measures will he put off, for that reason? Without gas masks, Israelis invite Syrian attack, based on Syria's new strategy of bombarding the home front. EVALUATING UNIFIL Secretary-Gen. Ban is pleased with UNIFIL's "success" in Lebanon. Israel is, too, and wants to extend its mandate to patrol in towns. One sign of its success is that now the Lebanese Army patrols southern Lebanon (IMRA, 8/8). Leaders often won't admit a project failed until everybody knows it did. PM Olmert pretends it succeeded, because his regime sacrificed victory to get it started. It failed because Hizbullah rearmed and set up rocket-launchers in towns that UNIFIL doesn't, the Lebanese Army won't, patrol. Everybody looks the other way, and mistake this period of Hizbullah military build-up for peace. HAMAS SETS UP A NAVY Hamas has started a navy, though it lacks gunboats for now. It does have some ships. No doubt it is thinking up ways of attacking Israeli ships, perhaps from shore, or ways of attacking Israel by sea (IMRA, 8/9). Why doesn't Israel destroy the shore bases before they become difficult to beat? SYRIA'S PLANNED WAR Syria has been emplacing hundreds of heavy rockets, more advanced than Hizbullah's, along the Golan. They would be used to thwart any IDF advance, and could reach Tel Aviv. Syria wants to force Israel to accept its terms. For this kind of warfare, Syria has retrained all its units. It can initiate this war without going into an offensive formation, which procedure would give advance notice. Thus, it could start a war by surprise. Iran is trying to persuade Syria that Israel intends to start a war soon, and is itself persuaded that the US intends to attack Iran soon (IMRA, 8/9). The USSR falsely persuaded Syria, before. MORE ON HEBRON Responding to Peace Now petition, the Olmert regime has ordered a couple more storefront houses of Jews from their homes. A border patrol officer ordered his busload of soldiers (not under his command) to disperse the protestors. (No freedom of assembly in Israel.) The soldiers refused and threw him off the bus. Maariv reports that not 30 troops refused to assist the expulsion but hundreds refused. A movement of support is being organized. It quotes Ariel Sharon's 1994 letter urging refusal of orders to expel Jews from Hebron (Arutz-7, 8/9). I hope this is the beginning of a popular movement to stop anti-Jewish measures in Israel and to overthrow the regime before it gets Israel destroyed. 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 To Go To Top PLEASE CALL THE WHITE HOUSE FOR POLLARD TODAY -- 15 DAYS TO ROSH HASHANA Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, August 27, 2007. Please call the White House for Pollard Today! 15 days to Rosh HaShana It's Monday August 27,2007 BH 13th of Ellul. There are 15 days to Rosh HaShana. Please call the White House now! Tell President Bush to free Jonathan Pollard now! Send him home to Israel for Rosh HaShana! Telephone number: 1- 202-456-1414 or 1-202-456-1111 From Israel add your long-distance service provider code to the start of the USA number for example: 0121-202-456-1111 (Israeli codes: 001, 012, 013, 014, 018, etc) Your calls put Pollard on the map! The Pollard Call-In Campaign spear-headed by the National Council of Young Israel last Spring put Pollard on the map in the White House. His name now appears on the list of subjects that all the White House phone operators are given to record the number of calls. Now, with G-d's help and massive participation in the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, let's get Pollard out of there, and home for the High Holidays! Amain! Please call now! The National Council of Young Israel ad and flyers for recirculation and reprinting to encourage participation in this urgent intiative are available from the J4JP web site. Please click on the link below for the format of your choice: COLOR NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard:     JPEG -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607.jpg     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org /2007/082607.pdf BLACK AND WHITE NCYI FLYER: Urgent High Holiday Call-In Campaign for Pollard     PDF -- http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/082607a.pdf Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com. And visit the website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org RSS: http://www.JonathanPollard.org/rss.htm To Go To Top 'BLASPHEMOUS' BALLS ANGER AFGHANS Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 27, 2007. This was posted by Robert Spencer on Jihad Watch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017904.php). The "blasphemous ball," May 2006 version. The balls were intended as a gift to Afghan cildren I predicted that this ball would cause trouble in May 2006, although the one pictured in the May 2006 story differs slightly from the one pictured in this BBC story: the Israeli flag pictured near the Saudi flag on the May 2006 ball seems to have been removed. But that, as this story shows, has not calmed hair-trigger tempers. This is by Alastair Leithead for the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6964564.stm). A demonstration has been held in south- east Afghanistan accusing US troops of insulting Islam after they distributed footballs bearing the name of Allah. The balls showed the Saudi Arabian flag which features the Koranic declaration of faith. The US military said the idea had been to give something for Afghan children to enjoy and they did not realise it would cause offence. The footballs were dropped from a helicopter in Khost province. Some displayed flags from countries all over the world, including Saudi Arabia, which features the shahada, one of the five pillars of Islam -- the declaration of faith. The words, which include the name of Allah, are revered, and Muslims are very sensitive about where and how they can be used. As Charles at LGF says (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26818_ The_Dreaded_Balls_of_Blasphemy&only): "Sensitive," in this case, being defined as "prone to murderous rage." To show how sensitive they are to this extreme sensitivity, the BBC sensitively blurs the offensive segment of the ball in their photograph. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top GENEVA ACCORDS AND THE SET OF PRINCIPLES Posted by Ted Belman, August 27, 2007. The Geneva Accords are being elevated to government policy Eight months after the US invasion of Iraq and the announcement of the Roadmap, Yossi Beilin, the Oslo architect, and Abed Rabbo, launched their peace proposal after two and one-half years of work. It was to be known as the Geneva Accords. It was sub-titled Draft Permanent Status Agreement. Haaretz reported The plan, dubbed the Geneva Accord in tribute to the funding and support supplied by the Swiss Foreign Ministry, offers itself as a decisive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on the plan drawn up by former U.S. president Bill Clinton after the breakdown in the July 2000 talks between former prime minister Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat. Fifty-eight former presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers and other global leaders, among them former presidents Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union and F.W. de Klerk of South Africa, issued a statement expressing "strong support" for the plan. Other world leaders who voiced their backing included King Hassan III of Morocco, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Clinton. Bush reacted by saying it "is productive, so long as they adhere to the principles [to] fight off terror, that there must be security, and there must be the emergence of a Palestinian state that is democratic and free." In other words, he stuck with the Roadmap. Others like Jimmy Carter, Colin Powel, Kofi Annan and the EU jumped right in. Ministers, right-wing MKs lambaste colleagues for attending Geneva ceremony MK Yuli Edelstein (Yisrael b'Aliyah) even submitted a complaint to the Knesset's Ethics Committee against those MKs who attended the ceremony. According to Edelstein, legislators Haim Oron, Roman Bronfman, Avraham Burg, Yuli Tamir and Amram Mitzna all contravened Knesset regulations by attending the ceremony. National Union lawmaker Uri Ariel said that the Geneva Accord is worse than the Oslo Accords for Israel. According to Ariel, the actions of the left-wing MKs could be seriously damaging for Israel and its citizens. He called on Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein to set up a commission of inquiry to look into their actions. The head of the settler lobby group in the Knesset, MK Yehiel Hazan (Likud), said that those behind the Geneva Accord "should be stopped by all legal means, before their wicked plan to sell off the Land of Israel." Hazan added that the agreement is "the piracy of people who are not living in reality." These Accords were fully analyzed by the JCSS. Its assessment is worth reading now. Essentially the Accords built on the Taba talks and attempted to bridge the gaps. One was Barak's refusal to cede sovereignty of the Temple Mount. In the Geneva document Israel renounces the symbol of sovereignty over the Temple Mount. In addition, the Geneva document does not mention the right of return. This was so because after two and a half years the negotiators couldn't agree on a compromise. Opposition in Israel was so strong that the Accords disappeared from sight. The Accords are now being resurrected in the form of an agreed set of principles. No surprise there. Shimon Peres, who was behind both the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Accords is now President of Israel. If you want to know what such principles will contain just read the Geneva Accords. In effect the Geneva Accords are now being elevated to government policy. Already we are told that Israel intends to cede sovereignty over the Temple Mount. You will recall that after Arafat walked out on Camp David and Barak's overly generous offer, talks continued at Taba. The Intifadah which Arafat launched ended the process temporarily. But it was felt by the left and by the diplomats in general that the gaps preventing agreement could be bridged. So Beilin, under the auspices of the EU and Shimon Peres continued discussions leading up to the Geneva Accords. Back then, Charles Krauthammer called them the Geneva Sellout. [..] The Israeli side, however, is led by Yossi Beilin, a man whose political standing in his own country is so low that he failed to make it into Parliament. After helping bring his Labor Party to ruin, Beilin abandoned it for the far-left Meretz Party, which then did so badly in the last election that Beilin is now a private citizen. There is a reason why he is one of Israel's most reviled and discredited politicians. He was the principal ideologue and architect behind the "peace" foisted on Israel in 1993. Those Oslo agreements have brought a decade of the worst terror in all Israeli history. Now he is at it again. And Secretary of State Colin Powell has written a letter to Beilin and Rabbo expressing appreciation for their effort, and is now planning to meet with them. This is scandalous. Israel is a democracy, and this agreement was negotiated in defiance of the democratically (and overwhelmingly) elected government of Israel. If a private U.S. citizen negotiated a treaty on his own, he could go to jail under the Logan Act. If an Israeli does it, he gets a pat on the back from the secretary of state. Moreover, this "peace" is entirely hallucinatory. It is written as if Oslo never happened. The Palestinian side repeats solemn pledges to recognize Israel, renounce terror, end anti-Israel incitement, etc. -- all promised in Oslo. These promises are today such a dead letter that the Palestinian side is openly bargaining these chits again, as if the Israelis have forgotten that in return for these pledges 10 years ago, Israel recognized the PLO, brought it out of Tunisian exile, established a Palestinian Authority, permitted it an army with 50,000 guns and invited the world to donate billions to this new Authority. Arafat pocketed every Israeli concession, turned his territory into an armed camp and then launched a vicious terror war that has lasted more than three years and killed more than 1,000 Israelis. It is Lucy and the football all over again, and the same chorus of delusionals who so applauded Oslo -- Jimmy Carter, Sandy Berger, Tom Friedman -- is applauding again. This time, however, the Israeli surrender is so breathtaking it makes Oslo look rational. A Palestinian state, of course. Evacuating every Jewish settlement in new Palestine, of course. Redividing Jerusalem, of course. But that is not enough. Beilin gives up the ultimate symbol of the Jewish connection and claim to the land, the center of the Jewish state for 1,000 years before the Roman destruction, the subject of Jewish longing in poetry and prayer for the 2,000 years since -- the Temple Mount. And Beilin doesn't just give it up to, say, some neutral international authority. He gives it to sovereign Palestine. Jews will visit at Arab sufferance. Not satisfied with having given up Israel's soul, Beilin gives up the body too. He not only returns Israel to its 1967 borders, arbitrary and indefensible, but he does so without any serious security safeguards. Palestine promises to acquire and buy no more weapons than specified in some treaty annex. This is a joke. Oslo had similarly detailed limitations on Palestinian weaponry, and nobody even pretended to enforce them. Last year, a massive illegal boatload came in from Iran on the Karine A. What did the world do about it? Nothing. Today, however, Israel still has control over Palestine's borders. Under Beilin, this ends. Palestine will be free to acquire as much lethal weaponry as it wants. And on the critical question that even the most dovish Israelis insist on -- that the Palestinians not have the right to flood Israel with Arab refugees -- the agreement is utterly ambiguous. Third parties (including among others the irredeemably hostile Syria and its puppet Lebanon) are to suggest exactly how many Palestinians are to return to Israel, and the basis for the number Israel will be required to accept will be the mathematical average! This is not a peace treaty, this is a suicide note -- by a private citizen on behalf of a country that has utterly rejected him politically. That it should get any encouragement from the United States or from its secretary of state is a disgrace. Krauthammer was right then. He is even more right now. In '05, Ariel Sharon warned us of painful concessions to come. In my article, "Painful Concessions", I warned, [..] There is a progression of events here that cannot be ignored and such events are all related. First Arafat rejected Barak's offer at Camp David. At Taba additional concessions were offered but went nowhere. Behind the scene negotiations continued among the interested parties. As a result of which the Saudi Plan was "released" through the NYT in the winter of '02 and endorsed by the Arab League shortly thereafter. In July of '02, Bush recognized the creation of Palestine for the first time. During the entire year, Israeli negotiators traveled to the US many times to negotiate details of the final plan and how to implement it. This all culminated in the release of the Roadmap in the spring of 2003, just after the invasion of Iraq, which was not unrelated. One might argue that Israel would not agree to the Plan unless and until Iraq was neutered. So perhaps it is not fanciful to suggest, as Condi and others do, that Iraq was invaded to protect Israel. Finally, the Geneva Accords were signed in early '03. They served to be a little more specific then the Saudi Plan. The "peace process" is like an enormous ship traveling with great momentum to a predetermined destination. Nothing Israel can do will stop it or alter its course. While Israel continues to debate the details, the ship continues, inexorably. So long as Israel travels the Roadmap it will not be able to avoid its destination. Nor can Israel get off the Roadmap. That is not to say that Israelis would not accept an end of conflict agreement along the lines of the Geneva Accords and the Saudi Plan when the time comes so long as it includes "normalization" and no return of refugees. Then, all they will have to worry about is whether the Arabs can be trusted. For me that's a no-brainer. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com To Go To Top ENGAGE! MODERATE! SPLIT! Posted by Barry Rubin, August 27, 2007. Engage, moderate, and split -- that's the mantra for Middle East policy of the wrong-headed in many foreign ministries, newspaper editorial offices, universities, and other places where the rapidly growing international bad-ideas industry is centered. Yet nothing could seem more self-evident than these propositions. What could possibly be wrong with engaging radical forces, persuading them to change their ways, and breaking up their alliances? I'm glad you asked. Here is how these apparently obviously correct ideas are dangerous and even disastrous. 1. Engagement. Doesn't one need to talk to enemies? How else can you get them to change? Well, it depends on whom, how, and when. Here are some of the problems of just having a cozy little chat with Iran, Syria, or Hamas for example. First, what about history? If the past record shows that such efforts have failed it indicates that more such attempts are misguided and that other methods are needed. For example, the U.S. government sent numerous high-level delegations to Syria between 2001 and 2005 only to find that it was repeatedly lied to. This campaign only stopped when Syria's government murdered former Lebanese Prime Minister (and most popular politician) Rafik Hariri. As for Iran, Britain, France, and Germany spent three years engaged in diplomatic dialogue about Iran's nuclear program during which Tehran lied, broke promises, and did not fulfill commitments, all along working full speed ahead to get atomic bombs. The International Atomic Energy Agency has just announced a new timetable. Wow, that should scare Tehran! And of course this, too, will be flouted to be replaced no doubt by still another deal until the day Iran gets nukes. Second, there is the momentum of engagement. In order to enter into and sustain engagement, the Western party feels obligated -- and its radical interlocutor will keep pressing -- to provide proof of its good intentions in the form of concessions. Naturally, the radical side will give nothing since it will play the role of aggrieved party doing the democracies a favor by deigning to talk to them. As the process goes on, the Western side gives more and more while getting nothing in return. And at the end, there is no real agreement or change. The radical side doesn't have to shout out, "Sucker!" but it might as well do so. Equally, to keep talks going the Western partner feels constrained from taking tough action which might lead the radical party to walk out. If, for example, Hamas continues to commit terrorism, this would not be allowed to stop the flow of money or bring tougher sanctions since that would make them angry. Of course, if any action is taken, you can guess who will be blamed for the breakdown. This has been the story of many such engagements, for example the 1990s' Israeli-Palestinian Oslo peace process. Finally, there is how the radical side takes the engagement process as a victory, a sign that the extremists are winning and that the West is frightened and ineffective. This is precisely what the radical side's leaders say in Arabic or Persian to their colleagues and people. Meanwhile, the democratic side's credibility plummets and deterrence crashes, sparking more extremism and aggression. 2. Why is moderating the radical forces also doomed to failure? The basic answer is that they do not want to become moderate and why should they? This misconceived model is based on the view that Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and radical Islamists generally are reluctant militants, forced to be so by misunderstanding (the West or Israel isn't really so horrible and means them no harm) or a lack of alternatives. In fact, the radicals take their stance based on a blend of true belief -- a deeply felt ideology based on a powerful world view -- and ambition. This is their route to power, money, and glory; to act in a contrary manner is to be a loathsome traitor. They are not, to say the least, easily persuaded, especially by people they hate and seek to destroy. Moreover, they think they are winning, an idea enforced by many experiences and often by the eagerness of the West to engage them in the first place. Only if they believe they are losing -- after the imposition of tough sanctions and other measures -- might they consider revising their strategies and tactics. And even the massive armed force used in Iraq shows that this is not so likely. Finally, even if someone wants to become moderate there is the little consideration of being murdered by one's colleagues. Sunni moderates in Iraq cannot make a deal because it is difficult to engage in politics when you are dead. 3. Splitting. Let's examine the Syria-Iran relationship. From Iran, Syria gets: --Lots of money. --A partner who shares its radicalism and wish to overturn the existing Arab regimes, drive out Western influence, and destroy Israel. --Islamic cover for a regime ruled by non-Muslims. --An ally with parallel interests in terms of anti-Americanism, fighting Israel, supporting Hizballah in Lebanon, and Hamas among the Palestinians. --Iran pays the bill for these groups so Syria gets a free ride. --Tehran provides strategic depth, protecting Syria against any Western or Israeli attack. To believe that Syria would desert this arrangement for a dependence on the mistrusted West and abandonment of its most valuable asset -- using an alleged imperialist-Zionist threat as excuse for the regime's failures and rationale for its survival -- is foolish. And parallel arguments could be provided, given space, for Iran's need to ally with Syria which, for instance, gives it a boost over the Persian/Arab (Syria is Arab) and Shia/Sunni (Syria is majority Sunni) barriers blocking Iran's ambitions to become the region's leading power. Engagement, moderation, and splitting sure sounds like a good strategy. But it is a very very bad one. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com To Go To Top EXCHANGE OF LETTERS BETWEEN HEBRON JEWISH COMMUNITY AND CNN Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 26, 2007. This exchange took place before CNN's airing of Warriors of God. David Wilder is the spokesman of the Hebron Jewish Community. Jonathan Klein is President of CNN/USA. David Wilder writes: Following the screening of the CNN production "Warriors of G-d", including a 2 hour segment dealing with Judaism and Israel, I think it appropriate to post the following two letters, between myself and Mr. Jonathan Klein, President of CNN/USA. The two letter are, I think, self-explanatory. I must note that, following my 'revelation,' I notified a number of people who had, like myself, agreed to participate one way or another, with CNN. Some of them immediately ceased all contact with CNN and refused to take part in the program. Others decided to continue. Each person can draw their own conclusions. David Wilder Hebron From: Hebron [mailto:hebron@hebron.org.il] Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:44 PM To: 'public.information@cnn.com' Subject: Cnn production of Religion and politics -- produced by Andy Segal Importance: High Dear Mr. Klein, A couple of months ago I was approached by one of your Israeli correspondents about participating in a program produced by CNN, dealing with politics and religion in Judaism. He introduced me to Mr. Andy Segal, who is producing the program, and we had several lengthy conversations, first by phone, and later in person, here in Hebron, in Israel. Our conversations were quite open and frank -- I saw no reason to hide my suspicions about cooperating with CNN -- the network's reputation concerning Israel is less than positive. We discussed this at great length, and at one point Andy requested to center the program around Hebron and the Hebron Jewish community. Following much thought and conversations with colleagues of mine, I decided to refuse Andy's request, but did agree to participate in a more minor role in the program, basing our response to each request on its own merits. A couple of weeks ago Andy again made contact and we spoke of several possibilities. He was interested in speaking to a family which had experienced terror first-hand, and had chosen to remain in Hebron, despite their loss and the dangers involved. I decided to try to assist and introduced him to Mrs. Tzippy Shlissel, whose father, Rabbi Shlomo Ra'anan, was killed by terrorists in Hebron some eight and a half years ago. He met with her three times: first an introductory meeting, followed by an in-depth interview, and followed, earlier today, by a filmed interview and filming of the family, home, etc. So far so good. However. When we first discussed this project I asked Andy who was responsible for writing the script. He told me that he would be working on it, but there would be others involved. To the best of my recollection, my impression was that he was 'in charge' and for the most part, would determine the outlook of the script and would be 'on top' of the entire project. This afternoon, that illusion shattered when he mentioned to me that in a few months, the chief international CNN correspondent, Christiane Amanpour, would be coming to Israel and would probably also want to speak with Mrs. Shlissel. Almost in shock, I asked him what her role is in this project. He told me that she is the narrator. I asked if she would have anything to do with writing the script and was told that "I will write the first draft." "Will she have anything to do with writing the final draft?" "Yes." I then told Andy that had I known she was involved with this project I would not have had anything at all to do with it. I am personally familiar with Christiane Amanpour. A number of years ago (about 10 years ago) she interviewed me. I had the dubious pleasure to have her yell and scream at me on camera. She obviously wanted me to scream back, so as to show her viewers 'an extremist from Hebron' exploding on camera. I refused to play into her hands and answered all her questions with a relaxed, calm smile on my face. However, I never forgot the interview. I haven't been yelled at, on camera, by too many journalists. How can CNN produce an 'objective program' about Israel and religious settlers, when one of the prime elements of the program is known to be vehemently 'anti-Israel' and certainly 'anti-settlers,' so to speak? Her reputation is so blatantly prejudiced. For example: http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/ blog/2006/03/from-terrorism-to-trash-collection_28.html QUOTE: So when people ask: "Why did the Palestinian people elect a terrorist group?" The answer is because they see them as a lifeline. Each time I go to the Palestinian territory of Gaza, I am shocked by the reality on the ground. On a recent visit, I passed through a short tunnel from the First World in Israel and emerged into the Third World that is Gaza. The poverty there is among the worst in the world. Hamas officials told me they did not expect to win the election as overwhelmingly as they did. They say their main priority now is to meet the demands of the people for a better life. But that may be impossible, because Israel and the United States refuse to deal with Hamas and have already cut funding to the new Palestinian government. Posted By Christiane Amanpour, CNN Correspondent: 11:03 AM ET END QUOTE A woman who justifies and backs Hamas is going to deal 'fairly' with Jews in Hebron, or anywhere else in Judea and Samaria? She is going to present us as 'religious nuts and fanatics' who are endangering world peace. She is certainly not going to present anything that could be considered positive concerning us, our lifestyles or our beliefs. She is certainly not going to present a balanced, objective program dealing with religious Jews and Eretz Yisrael. I basically told Andy that I was out -- and wouldn't have anything more to do with the project. I put a rather large degree of trust in Andy -- I believed that he had the possibility to present an object, balanced program. However, I cannot have any trust whatsoever in Christiane Amanpour, whose reputation stands before her. Andy Segal told me that you are responsible for this project, that you initiated it. Without being presumptuous, I think it fair to demand that Christiane Amanpour be removed from this project. I cannot imagine that such a biased person could have anything to do with a project dealing with religion and politics in Israel. The results are a foregone conclusion, even before the cameras start rolling. The question is whether the program you are producing is to be an interesting objective account of religion and politics in Israel, or another CNN-produced Israel (settler)-bashing? I await your reply and hope, very much, to learn that Ms. Amanpour will no longer have anything to do with this project. Sincerely, David Wilder Spokesman The Jewish Community of Hebron From: Klein, Jon [mailto: Jon.Klein@turner.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 6:41 PM To: hebron@hebron.org.il Subject: Response to your email dated January 30, 2007 February 13, 2007 Mr. David Wilder Spokesman The Jewish Community of Hebron February 12, 2007 Dear Mr. Wilder, Let me begin by thanking you for your comments. I am sorry that the Jewish Community of Hebron has chosen not to be represented in our documentary. Our mission is to produce a program that goes far beyond what is normally seen in daily news broadcasts so that our viewers can better understand the people who risk their lives -- and their children's -- to live on land they believe is their birthright: Jerusalem and the West Bank. Our goal is not to find fault or fix blame -- but to simply understand. To that end, I believe that you are missing a prime opportunity to be heard, not only in the United States, but in 180 countries around the world, and I would ask you to reconsider. Regardless of your decision, I stand by CNN's reputation as a fair and impartial source of information. On conflicts as heated and long-standing as that between Israel and the Palestinians it is not surprising that "both sides" are at times unhappy with our reporting. We often hear that we are biased towards the other side, and that may be the surest indication of our impartiality. Christiane Amanpour is one of our most talented and prominent international correspondents, and she is supported by a team of our strongest producers. In fact Andy Segal, our senior producer, is one of the best. As you probably have discovered, Andy comes to the table prepared. He is fair, honorable and ethical -- a journalist who takes his work very seriously. He has produced a number of award-winning documentaries. Andy and his team are researching, producing and writing this documentary, and you can be assured that his reporting will shape the final program. As a spokesman for a prominent organization, I am sure you appreciate the need for others input before you represent the positions and views of Hebron's Jewish community. The same is true at CNN -- not only will Ms. Amanpour have input, but so will editors and executives, to insure journalist standards and practices are met. In the end a program like this will be fully vetted and sourced. I can honestly say that if you decide not to contribute to this program -- perhaps the fullest exploration of this issue ever seen on western television -- you may regret missing the opportunity to let millions of viewers understand your story. I hope you will reconsider your decision, but if not, you can be assured the program will meet the highest standards of journalism. Sincerely, Jon Klein Jon Klein President, CNN U.S. One Time Warner Center New York, NY 10019 Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top AL-QA'IDA'S FINANCIER IS NOW SAUDI AMBASSADOR TO WASHINGTON! Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), August 26, 2007. This is a August 10, 2005 New York Sun Editorial (http://www.nysun.com/article/18349). The links between Saudi Arabia and the September 11 terrorist attacks are not something we'd expect the desert kingdom to be trumpeting, but it has done just that by appointing one of its princes, Turki al-Faisal, as its new ambassador to Washington. It's an odd choice, to say the least. Save for diplomatic immunity, one could just as easily make an argument that Riyadh's newest envoy should, on arrival at Dulles Airport, be brought in for questioning by the authorities. Here's a brief resume: Prince Turki served as head of Saudi intelligence from 1977 until 10 days before September 11, 2001. As such, he was Riyadh's main contact with the Taliban in Afghanistan -- and thereby also with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. He admits to having met Mr. bin Laden a few times, according to "Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, From the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001," a Pulitzer-winning book by the Washington Post's Steve Coll. Mr. Coll writes that while the Saudis deny Mr. bin Laden was ever a Saudi agent, "it seems clear that bin Laden did have a substantial relationship with Saudi intelligence." The Saudi intelligence services, under the prince, also oversaw the funding of "radical Islamists in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and elsewhere," Mr. Coll reports. One such Islamist was Abdullah Azzam, who "preached stridently against the United States" and helped found the terrorist group Hamas. The prince was named in a civil lawsuit filed in 2002 by September 11 families seeking $1 trillion from alleged financiers of Al Qaeda. The lawsuit notes that the testimony of a senior Taliban official who defected, Mullah Kakshar, "implicates Prince Turki as the facilitator" of money transfers from wealthy Saudis, "in support of the Taliban, al Qaeda, and international terrorism." The lawsuit also alleges that the prince was party to a 1998 agreement between the Saudis and the Taliban. In the alleged deal, the Saudis promised not to seek Mr. bin Laden's extradition or the closing of his terrorist training camps and would provide the Taliban with oil and financial assistance, in exchange for Mr. bin Laden promising not to try to overthrow the Saudi monarchy. The prince, in his role as head of intelligence, the lawsuit suggests, "was in a position to know the threat posed by bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the extremist and violent perversion of jihad and hatred that the Saudi religious schools were fomenting in young people." The prince denied the allegations against him. But that denial has never been adjudicated by a jury. Prince Turki successfully persuaded Judge Richard Casey to dismiss the claims against him because they stem from his alleged actions when he was acting for the Saudi government, so he cannot be held accountable for them in an American court. One of the lawyers for the September 11 families, Michael Elsner, told The New York Sun that a letter has been filed with the court asking permission to appeal the dismissal. It may well be that Prince Turki was simply acting on behalf of the Saudi monarchy, but that only raises the bigger question of America's relations with the kingdom. The knowledge that 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudis and that Saudi money and religious instruction helped finance and inspire the terrorists has already put the relationship between the kingdom and America in a precarious spot. Recent reports indicate that links between Saudi Arabia and terrorism continue to this day. The Sunday Telegraph reported this week that Saudi officials admitted that two senior Al Qaeda operatives in the kingdom -- both of whom are now reportedly dead -- "made money transfers and used coded text messages to communicate with suspected terrorists in Britain before last month's terrorist attacks in London." The Telegraph reported that one of the terrorists, Abdel Karim al-Mejati, was alleged to have been behind last year's terrorist attacks at Madrid. The Telegraph also reported last week that two men arrested for the July 21 attempted bombings at London were also linked to Riyadh. Hussain Osman called the kingdom on his cell phone just before he was arrested. Muktar Said Ibrahim, according to friends cited by the Telegraph, traveled to the kingdom for a few months in 2003 for a "training course." On American soil the Saudis are propagating a "totalitarian ideology of hatred that can incite to violence," according to an 89-page Freedom House report released in January. It was based on the study of more than 200 documents distributed in American mosques by the Saudi government. Muslims are reminded that it is a religious obligation to hate Christians and Jews. They are told that they must behave as on a mission behind enemy lines while living in the lands of unbelievers. They must make money and acquire knowledge to use either for jihad against the infidels or to proselytize them. Textbooks, Freedom House reported, also "propagate a Nazi-like hatred for Jews" and "avow that the Muslim's duty is to eliminate the state of Israel." There are no signs that the princes in Riyadh are ending their support for radical Islamists and terrorism -- let alone granting women equality, introducing democracy, and all the other reforms President Bush is demanding from other repressive countries. Prince Turki's own resume reads like a checklist of the many faults Americans find in the Saudi monarchy. That the prince is the most suitable candidate the Saudis can offer for ambassador is but another reminder of why the kingdom is a prime candidate for regime change. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: INVERTED REALITY Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 26, 2007. So many articles regarding our current situation come to my attention that, as interesting and informative as many are, it would be impossible for me to recommend them all without causing my readers severe overload. Yet some are of such critical importance -- provide a perspective that is so enlightening or historically relevant -- that they beg for attention. Such a piece is one just written by Dr. Joel Fishman, who is a fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Fishman addresses "The Big Lie and the Media War Against Israel: From Inversion of the Truth to the Inversion of Reality." In his introduction, he explains: From the 1960s, inversion of truth and reality has been one the most favored propaganda methods of Israel's adversaries. One of its most frequent expressions has been the accusation that the Jewish people, victims of the Nazis, have now become the new Nazis, aggressors and oppressors of the Palestinian Arabs. Contemporary observers have identified this method and described it as an "inversion of reality," an "intellectual confidence trick," "reversing moral responsibility," or "twisted logic." Because Israel's enemies have, for nearly half a century, repeated such libels without being challenged, they have gradually gained credence. Since inversion of reality constitutes the basic principle of current anti-Israeli propaganda, it is important to understand what it is and how it works. This propaganda method is a product of Nazi Germany. It is totalitarian both in its methods, particularly the use of the paranoiac myth, and in the absolute solution it advocates. It totally denies all of Israel's claims and leaves no room for introspection and compromise. The piece that follows is sophisticated and worthy of attention. Please note the direct line from Nazi propaganda methods to the methods of Palestinians and other anti-Israel elements today. The process as described is frightening, and essentially anti-Semitic at its core. Fishman cites, for example, an article by Belfast journalist Leo McKinstry, who says, in part: "In a remarkable inversion of reality, Israel has become a pariah state because of its determination to defend itself. A grotesque double standard now operates, where murderous Arab terrorists are hailed as 'freedom fighters' yet Israeli security forces are treated as fascistic thugs. No nation has been more demonized than Israel. One recent survey across Europe revealed that Israel is now regarded as 'the greatest threat' to world peace, an utter absurdity given that Israel is actually the only democratic, free society in the Middle East. But such a finding reflects the strength of the hysterical anti-Israeli propaganda that fills the airwaves of Europe. No matter how much this anti-Israeli feeling is dressed up as support for Palestine, it is in fact profoundly anti-Semitic...." Read the full article at http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=3&DBID= 1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=253&PID=0&IID=1704&TTL= The_Big_Lie_and_the_Media_War_Against_Israel:_ From_Inversion_of_the_Truth_to_Inversion_of_Reality All of this is extraordinarily relevant today as we see growing anti-Israel attitudes within/actions emanating from the international community (about which more below). Fishman makes the point in his introduction that "Because Israel's enemies have, for nearly half a century, repeated such libels without being challenged, they have gradually gained credence." Without being challenged! It falls to all of us now to do the challenging in every venue that is possible, with great conviction and drawing on solid factual information. ~~~~~~~~~~ The European Parliament is scheduled to host this week, at its Brussels facility, a conference organized by the UN's Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. Now, it would be pertinent to begin by asking why the UN has such a committee. There is no parallel, for example, no committee on the rights of the Kurdish people, even though they are a real people whose rights have been trampled. But UN bias in this regard is old hat. The question here must be why the European Parliament is involved. Polish members of the European Parliament have declared intent to boycott the conference. One member, Bronis©aw Geremek, has written, "I saw the material prepared by the organizers... Although there is no official statement that Israel must be pushed down to the sea there, the choice of subjects and the attitude towards the problems shows that it will be a biased, conflict generating conference. Actually we can call it anti-Israeli." Another, Konrad Szymanski, said, "[The] UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People is a platform for activity of various extremists. According to the most of them Israel should disappear." NGO-Monitor in Jerusalem says this conference will be a rehash of the Durban Conference of 2001, which saw unprecedented levels of anti-Zionist rhetoric. (Fishman writes that "Durban became the scene of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli speeches and agitation of a ferocity unknown since the 1930s.") The time for complacency is past. This particular conference may be one of the most egregious, but it is hardly the only cause for concern. ~~~~~~~~~~ With regard to the terrorist infiltration over the fence in northern Gaza yesterday, the IDF is now saying that the Palestinians have learned our defense systems. This is NOT good news, although hardly surprising. They've figured out how to best manipulate our defenses, and more of what happened yesterday can be expected. I do not consider the comment of the Commander of the Northern Gaza Brigade of the IDF to be comforting: "...our operational response is currently good." I.e., at the moment we can handle them. Nor would it be sufficient, as proposed, to add sensors to enhance the 9-ft high reinforced concrete wall, built at the time of "disengagement." My response to this is the same as my response was yesterday to the matter of maximizing Arrow defense against incoming missiles. It's not just defense we need here -- not simply an ability to respond to infiltrators. We need an offensive action, big time, that will weaken the whole terrorist infrastructure. Last night the IDF arrested two Palestinians who are believed to have helped those who came over the fence. And today the authorities have in custody six Palestinian youths who were also trying to climb over the fence. They are being interrogated because of the possibility that they were being sent to gather information for another planned attack; these boys were unarmed. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Deputy Chief of Shin Bet (Israeli security) reported to the Cabinet today that Hamas leaders from headquarters abroad -- which means Mashaal and company sitting in Damascus -- have given instructions for Hamas cells in Judea and Samaria to execute a major attack with massive casualties inside Israel. Hamas is frustrated at not having been able to achieve international legitimacy and is having difficulty running Gaza; all of this plays into their inclination to step up terrorism. As might have been expected, in recent weeks smuggling of arms and explosives into Gaza has grown considerably. Since Hamas took over, 40 tons of explosives has entered Gaza, which represents a full half of all the explosives brought in since the "disengagement" almost two years ago. The number of Kassam attacks is increasing, as is the number of shooting attacks. What is also of considerable significance is that an increasing amount of explosives and weaponry is being smuggled into Judea and Samaria since Hamas took over Gaza. (This report was not explicit but it is my understanding that material goes from the Sinai via the Negev.) So, with everything else, I must ask these pertinent questions once again: When will Olmert finally give the go-ahead for the major military action in Gaza that the IDF so wants to initiate to stop what's building there? How can Olmert or Bush even think about establishing a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria when there are Hamas cells there, with increasing amounts of weapons and explosives, and with Abbas either unable or unwilling to take out Hamas in this instance any more than he took out Hamas in Gaza? The notion of a militant Hamas there in Gaza and a "moderate" Fatah here in Judea and Samaria is unmitigated nonsense. Hamas is planning to overtake Abbas in Judea and Samaria. ~~~~~~~~~~ The answer to the second question is provided by Ephraim Halevy, former head of the Mossad, writing in The Jerusalem Post on Friday. He doesn't sanction the approach being taken, he describes it: "The powers-that-be...are now embarked on a major diplomatic and strategic endeavor the like of which has never been attempted in living history. It is an effort to craft the principles of a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with the full knowledge that these principles, if agreed, cannot be translated into action-orientated implementation in the immediate future. "The political logic behind this initiative is that the clear political horizon that each and every Palestinian will be able to read and absorb will be so encouraging and attractive as to convince him/her to disavow any future use of force -- terror -- as an instrument in the struggle for statehood. Extremist Muslim groups will be marginalized and defeated by centralist-moderate forces that will assume effective control of Palestinian destiny." Does he anticipate that this will work? Indeed he does not. For this plan to succeed, Hamas would have to be marginalized and refrain from acting as a spoiler, and al-Qaida would have to be similarly quiescent. What is more, at the end of the day, Abbas and Fayyad would have to demonstrate a real, tangible possibility of creating "a viable, strong and powerful West Bank entity -- security-wise, politically and economically -- that will overshadow all its adversaries." In their dreams, will this happen! And yet Olmert and Bush and company continue to dream on. ~~~~~~~~~~ Iran has announced that it has begun production of a 2,000 pound smart bomb -- Qased, or Messenger -- that can be delivered by its aging F-4 and F-5 fighter jets in actions against its enemies. Iranian Defense Minister Muhammad Najjar said that very few nations in the world possess this sophisticated technology of guided weaponry. Clearly, this is not good news, but not as dire as it may sound at first blush. There is some question as to whether this is a legitimate announcement, as exaggerations from Tehran about its capabilities are not unusual; details regarding this bomb are not known. And, even if it is legitimate, it has been pointed out that this development is less serious than a new missile program would be because the delivery system has a limited range. The F-4 and F-5 fighter jets were provided by the US to Shah Pahlavi, who was ousted in 1979. Israel's position is that this is unsettling because it is indicative of Iran's military build-up and expansionist policies. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info To Go To Top HALF OF IDF'S NEW COMBAT OFFICERS ARE RELIGIOUS Posted by Gil Ronen, August 26, 2007. (IsraelNN.com) Half of the IDF's young combat officers are religious Jews, according to statistics published as the lead story Sunday in Ma'ariv, Israel's second largest daily newspaper. The report also says that about 40% of the cadets of the most recent Officer Course in BAHAD 1, the IDF's officer training school, were religious (this number refers to all officers, as opposed to just combat officers). "This says something very good about the sons of the religious Zionist movement," opines the writer of the piece, senior correspondent Ben Caspit. "They are becoming the IDF's backbone. Their presence in the army is several times larger than it is in the general population." "They give their entire soul" "Any way we look at it," he says, "it's about education." It is clear, he states, that "the religious Zionist movement's educational institutions continue to disseminate values, Zionism, Judaism and mission orientation. The religious youth is mission-oriented. [It sets out to] conquer the hilltops. Then to conquer the military service and the officership." The entry of the religious Zionists into the officer corps began after the Yom Kippur War, says Caspit, when Major Generals Yair Naveh and El'azar Stern entered service. "It continues with the pre-military academies, which send a sizeable percentage of their graduates to the Officers' Course." The "Hesder" yeshivas, he says -- the seminaries that combine religious study with a shortened army service -- do not contribute many officers. "They do everything willingly, with their entire soul," Caspit says of the religious Zionist soldiers. Alongside them one finds, he claims, many youths from the socialist-agricultural moshav and kibbutz movements, as well as soldiers from new-immigrant and lower-income families who see the military as a chance for upward social mobility. However, what Caspit refers to as "the First Israel" -- the middle and upper classes -- is no longer very visible among the officers. More and more of its sons either actively evade service, or opt for what he calls "a gray evasion" -- the employment of various tricks to serve less time, serve closer to home, and without endangering themselves. "They find all the ways in the world to fool the system, to see the IDF as some foreign element which is meant to curtail their personal advancement, independent thought, private ambition and other legitimate aspirations of 21st century man." Caspit sees this trend as a worrying one and calls for urgent action to raise the motivation of non-religious Israelis to serve and excel. He does not specify what this action might be. Socio-political ramifications Religious Zionists have often noted, in the course of political debates, that their youth plays a disproportionate role in the IDF, but secular Israelis have usually denied this. The article by Caspit, who is one of Israel's top journalists and the author of several books, including biographies of Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, can be seen as admission by a secular Israeli that the religious Zionists have been right on this subject. The statistics are important for Israeli society because the IDF is seen as the nation's backbone and its pride. Since the State of Israel was founded it has had five native-born Prime Ministers, four of whom were from the military: Yitzchak Rabin, Netanyahu, Barak and Ariel Sharon. Rabin and Barak both served as IDF Chiefs of Staff, Sharon was a Major General and Netanyahu had been an officer in an elite unit that was commanded by his brother, Yoni, a military hero who was killed in the rescue of passengers from a hijacked Air France jet in Uganda in 1976. Thus, traditionally, service as combat officers goes hand in hand with leadership potential. Another reason these statistics are significant is that many religious soldiers have been refusing orders to evict Jews from their homes in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. If half of the IDF's new officers are religious, this means that the refusal movement could indeed have a deep deterrent impact on the IDF and government when and if it decides to attempt additional pullouts from territory, as the movement's leaders claim. Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-Sheva. This article is archived at www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123492 To Go To Top BOOK ABOUT RETURN TO JEWISH FAITH TOPS BESTSELLER LIST IN ISRAEL Posted by Avodah, August 26, 2007. This is a news item from Arutz-Sheva (www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/132279). (IsraelNN.com) A fictional book about a secular women's return to Jewish faith is topping the bestseller list in Israel. The book Mikimi (Revive Me) is written by Noa Yaron-Dayan a secular broadcaster on Army Radio, and a television star on Channel 2 who left behind the lights and glitter of the media world a decade ago to become an observant Jew. In her debut novel, she uses her life story as the base for this fictional account of a sharp-tongued, hip television presenter who finds herself being attracted to the Jewish way of life. The protagonist, Alma, disconnects from her party life, from Tel Aviv, from the media world and begins the journey within. Alma and her secular partner, inadvertently find themselves attending the Jewish revival classes given by a follower of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav. This near-accidental encounter becomes a process of discovery that intensifies as the book unfolds -- the discovery of a brand-new spiritual world, through which everyday becomes transcendent and meaningful. But the transition to her new life is not a smooth one -- as she examines her doubts and weighs her choices every single day. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com To Go To Top CALLING ALL PRO ISRAEL ACTIVISTS TO SERVICE! Posted by Yosef Rabin, August 26, 2007. Setting the agenda! The time has come to stop the madness and go on the offensive. It is time for the Jews to set the agenda when it comes to Arab -Israel issues. We must demand that the US recognize the Jewish Peoples eternal right to Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem, including Har Habayit (Temple Mount). We must also insist that the transfer of Arabs from the Land of Israel is the true way to peace. Starting Monday, August 27th we will begin a calling campaign to 4 major Jewish organizations, the Orthodox Union, Aguudas Yisrael and Young Israel and Religious Zionist of America. When you dial say, I demand that the Jewish leadership start pressuring the US government to 1, Recognize the legality of all Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem 2, Call for the transfer of Arabs from the Land of Israel We must set the agenda now! OU National Headquarters Eleven Broadway New York, NY 10004 212-563-4000 Fax 212-564-9058 OU Washington, DC 800 Eighth Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Nathan Diament Director Tel: 202-513-6484 Fax: 202-289-8936 Agudas Yisrael Office 42 Broadway New York, NY 10004-1617 Phone: (212) 797-9000 National Council of Young Israel Office 111 John Street, Suite 450 New York, NY 10038 212-929-1525 fax: 212-727-9526 Religious Zionist of America Office 7 Penn Plaza, Suite 205 New York, NY 10001 Telephone (212) 465-9234 Fax (212) 465-9246 Contact Yosef Rabin at yosefrabin@yahoo.com To Go To Top JEWS AND ARMENIA Posted by Steven Plaut, August 26, 2007. One of the more bizarre controversies over the past few weeks has been over whether or not the Anti-Defamation League, under the helm of Abraham Fox, should denounce the "genocide" of Armenians by Turkey during World War I. At first the ADL was reluctant to denounce the "genocide," but it was coming under enormous media pressure (see /www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/ projo_20070815_bostom.2545880.html) for "hypocrisy" when denouncing Holocaust Deniers and their ilk while refusing to take a clear "moral position" on the mass deaths of Armenians during WWI. It started with a billboard campaign by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to combat bigotry and celebrate diversity ("No Place for Hate"). That sparked bitter resentment in Watertown, Mass., a Boston suburb whose 8,000 Armenian-Americans make up nearly 25 percent of the population. Local Armenians did not object to the initiative, but claimed that the ADL and its director, Abraham Fox, denied the ugly legacy of the World War I era Armenian "genocide." A gaggle of Jewish assimilationist liberals then chimed in as an amen chorus, denouncing the ADL for "hypocrisy." Some suggested the ADL was being pusillanimous because Israel does not want to upset Turkey. The rest of the mainstream media joined. Finally the ADL capitulated and issued a statement denouncing the "genocide" of the Armenians. Turkey itself phoned Shimon Peres and asked that Israel persuade the Jewish SWAT teams attacking Turkey over Armenians to cool it. The ADL fired the regional director who had triggered the mess (www.solomonia.com/blog/archive/2007/08/ adl-and-the-armenian-genocide-regional-d/). Ugly comments about Jews being indifferent to the "genocide" of others filled the web. The problem is that all those people are demanding that Jews take a "clear moral" position on a matter that is not morally clear. Yes, hundreds of thousands of Armenians died during WWI, mostly from starvation. Was that a Holocaust? It certainly was nothing like the Holocaust either in terms of the dimensions nor in terms of the actual behavior of the Turks, often bad but not uniformly so (there were also serious Turkish efforts to provide relief aid to the Armenians). Since so much pseudo-history has been written about the mass deaths of the Armenians, I am reprinting here in full the first-rate and indeed the seminal piece on the fate of the Armenians, which appeared a couple of years back in Commentary Magazine. Those who believe they know what happened are invited to read it in full and find some surprises (a bit long but worth the read!). It's called "The First Genocide of the Twentieth Century?" and can be found at http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/lewy-firstgenocide.htm The following article by Prof. Guenter Lewy appeared in the Dec. 2005 edition of Commentary Magazine, a journal published by the American Jewish Committee since 1945. The term "genocide," coined in 1944 by the Polish-Jewish émigré lawyer Raphael Lemkin, was meant to describe Hitler's then-ongoing campaign to exterminate the Jews of Europe. But Lemkin's interest in this most heinous of crimes, what he and others would define as the planned effort to destroy an entire people or ethnic group, long predated the rise of the Nazis. Raphael Lemkin The atrocities that first drew him to the issue emerged from a different world war and a different context. They were the vicious actions not of Germans against Jews in the early 1940's but of Ottoman Turks against Turkey's Armenian minority in 1915-16. Today, however, the Armenian case remains controversial in a way that the Holocaust, outside the fevered confines of the Arab world, does not. Like every one of its predecessors since the rise of modern Turkey, the current government in Ankara vehemently rejects the charge of genocide, and has exerted strong diplomatic pressure against any attempt by outsiders to place the events of World War I in a class with Hitler's Final Solution. In this, the Turks have been seconded not just by pro- Turkish apologists but by a number of respected historians, including, most notably, Bernard Lewis, the dean of American Orientalists and an expert on Turkey. Against this view is the great tide of world opinion, from the official proclamations of various governments and religious bodies to the declared consensus of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Indeed, so strong is sentiment on this question that even now, nearly a century after the fact, the issue continues to color Turkey's dealings with other nations. On September 29, the European parliament in Strasbourg adopted a resolution demanding that, as a condition of admission to the European Union, Turkey acknowledge the mass killing of its Armenians during World War I as an instance of genocide. And even beyond the issue of what happened in 1915-16 and its relevance to Turkey's political situation today, the Armenian case continues to occupy a place of precedence in the litany of all subsequent instances of mass murder and "ethnic cleansing," including most recently the killings in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Rwanda in the 1990's and those in Sudan today. No one, it should be stressed, disputes the extent of Armenian suffering at the hands of the Turks. With little or no notice, the Ottoman government forced Armenian men, women, and children to leave their historic communities; during the subsequent harrowing trek over mountains and through deserts, large numbers of them died of starvation and disease, or were murdered. Although the absence of good statistics on the size of the pre-war Armenian population in Turkey makes it impossible to establish the true extent of the loss of life, reliable estimates put the number of deaths at more than 650,000, or around 40 percent of a total Armenian population of 1.75 million. The historical question at issue is premeditation that is, whether the Turkish regime intentionally organized the annihilation of its Armenian minority. According to the Genocide Convention of 1948, such an intent to destroy a group is a necessary condition of genocide; most other definitions of this crime of crimes similarly insist upon the centrality of malicious intent. Hence the crucial problem to be addressed is not the huge loss of life in and of itself but rather whether the Turkish government deliberately sought the deaths that we know to have occurred. The Armenians have lived in the southern Caucasus, between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, since ancient times. In the early 4th century c.e., they were the first nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion. Much of their long history, however, has been spent under foreign rule. The last independent Armenian state (before the present-day, post-Soviet Republic of Armenia) fell in 1375, and by the early 16th century most Armenians were subjects of the Ottoman Empire. Under the millet system instituted by Sultan Mohammed II (1451-1481), they enjoyed religious, cultural, and social autonomy as a "loyal community," a status that lasted well into the 19th century. Though large numbers of Armenians settled in Constantinople and in other Ottoman towns, where they prospered as merchants, bankers, and artisans, the majority continued to live as peasants in eastern Anatolia. During the autocratic rule of Abdul Hamid II (1876-1909), the lot of the Armenians deteriorated, and nationalistic sentiment began to emerge. In June 1890, Armenian students in the Russian-controlled area of the Caucasus organized the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. Demanding the political and economic emancipation of Turkish Armenia, the Dashnaks (as they were known) waged guerrilla warfare against Turkish army units, gendarmerie posts, and Kurdish villages involved in attacks on Armenians. They operated from bases in the Caucasus and Persia and took advantage of eastern Anatolia's mountainous terrain. When, in 1908, the nationalist, modernizing movement known as the Young Turks seized power in Constantinople in a bloodless coup, the Dashnaks declared an end to their fighting. But the truce did not last. With Turkey's entry into World War I on the side of Germany and against Russia, the Armenians' traditional ally, the Dashnaks resumed their armed resistance. By April 1915, Armenian guerrilla activities had picked up momentum. Roads and communication lines were cut. Henry Morgenthau, the American ambassador in Constantinople, reported to Washington on May 25 that nobody put the Armenian guerrillas "at less than 10,000, and 25,000 is probably closer to the truth." Meanwhile, the Russian branch of the Dashnaks was organizing volunteers to fight the Turks on the Caucasus front. Most of these volunteers -- numbering 15,000, according to one Armenian source -- were themselves Russian subjects, exempt from military service, but some of them were Turkish Armenians who had crossed the border to join the volunteer units. Offers of help also poured in from the Armenian diaspora, from as far away as Western Europe and the U.S. In March 1915, the Dashnak organization in Sofia, Bulgaria, proposed to land 20,000 volunteers on the Turkish coast in the Armenian stronghold of Cilicia. That same month, the Boston-based Armenian National Defense Committee of America informed the British foreign secretary that it was making "preparations for the purpose of sending volunteers to Cilicia, where a large section of the Armenian population will unfurl the banner of insurrection against Turkish rule." It was hoped that the British and French governments would supply them with ammunition and artillery. Antranik Toros Ozanian Turkish fears of an internal revolt were exacerbated the following month by an uprising that took place in the city of Van. Close to the Russian border and in the heartland of historic Armenia, Van had long been a center of nationalist agitation. On April 24, 1915, the Turkish governor reported that 4,000 Armenian fighters had opened fire on the police stations, burned down Muslim houses, and barricaded themselves in the Armenian quarter. About 15,000 refugees from the countryside eventually joined the now-besieged rebels. Less than a month later, the insurgents were saved by the advancing Russian army, forcing the Turkish garrison to retreat. Whether the Van uprising was a rebellion designed and timed to facilitate the advance of the Russians or a defensive action aimed at preventing the already planned deportation of the Armenian community remains one of the points of fierce contention in the historiography of the time. [48] Commentary December 2005 When not tying down Turkish army units, the Dashnaks were of significant help to the Russian army itself (leaving aside the 150,000 Armenian subjects of the czar who served in its ranks). Deeply familiar with the rugged mountains of eastern Anatolia, the Armenian volunteers were invaluable scouts and guides. In one famous episode, the legendary Armenian military leader Andranik Ozanian met with General Mishlayevsky, commander of the czar's forces in the Caucasus, late in the summer of 1914, pointing out the routes through which the Russian army could advance on Turkey. Thus, as the Turks saw it, the Armenian people the world over had thrown in their lot with the Allied cause and were arrayed against them in a fateful struggle. Having come to consider the Armenians a fifth column, the Ottoman regime decided to take decisive measures to put an end to their treasonable actions. As Morgenthau reported to Washington in July 1915: "[B]ecause Armenian volunteers, many of them Russian subjects, have joined the Russian army in the Caucasus and because some have been implicated in armed revolutionary movements and others have been helpful to Russians in their invasion of the Van district, terrible vengeance is being taken." In the eyes of the Young Turks, however, the issue was not so much vengeance as national survival in a situation of extreme danger caused by serious military setbacks. The British had taken Basra in Mesopotamia and were moving toward Baghdad. The Allies had launched their assaults on the Dardanelles. Fearing the fall of the capital, the Turks were making preparations to evacuate the sultan and the treasury from Constantinople. Meanwhile, Russian troops were advancing into eastern Anatolia, and Armenian guerrillas were active in the rear of the Turkish army, threatening the very lifelines of the empire. Even if only a limited number of Armenians had actually taken up arms, the authorities in Constantinople understood themselves to be dealing with a population of traitors. Boghos Nubar Indeed, in the immediate aftermath of the war and at the Paris peace conference in 1919, the Armenians would make no bones about their contribution to the Allied victory. To the contrary: Boghos Nubar, the head of the Armenian delegation, asserted in late October 1918 that his people had in fact been belligerents, fighting alongside the Allies on all fronts; in particular, he wrote to the French foreign minister, 150,000 Armenians had fought in the Russian army and had held the front in the Caucasus after the Russians dropped out of the war in 1917. As Nubar would tell the peace conference on March 8, 1919, the Turks had devastated the Armenians "in retaliation for our unflagging devotion to the cause of the Allies." By means of such rhetoric Nubar was obviously hoping to win the support of the peace conference for an independent Armenia. But, the essential facts were correct as he stated them: the Armenians had indeed supported the Allies in a variety of ways. Ignoring warnings from many quarters, large numbers of them had fought the Turks, and the government, with its back to the wall, reacted resolutely and viciously. Although none of this can serve to justify what the Turks did to them, it provides indispensable historical context for the human catastrophe that ensued. There is no denying the dimensions of that catastrophe. The harsher methods employed by the Young Turks included the killing of Armenian notables in Constantinople and the eastern provinces. As for Armenian civilians, perhaps as many as 1 million were turned out of their homes. On a journey through the most inhospitable terrain, they routinely lacked shelter and food and were often subjected to the murderous violence of their government-provided escorts and the Kurdish tribesmen who occupied the route southward to Ottoman-controlled Syria. Massive numbers died along the way. Can we account for this tragedy without the hypothesis of a genocidal plan on the part of the Young Turks? Most authors supporting the Armenian cause answer in the negative. They cite foreign diplomats on the scene who, in the face of the large number of deaths, concluded that so terrible a loss of life could only be an intended outcome of the deportations. And yet such a conclusion once again ignores the immediate backdrop against which this horrific episode must be seen. If one of the main causes of the Armenian disaster was starvation, the Armenians were hardly alone in experiencing such deprivation. Severe food shortages were endemic to Turkey at the time. The military mobilization of large numbers of peasants in 1914, as well as the reckless requisitioning of their horses, oxen, and carriages, had made it impossible to bring in the harvest and left many fields untilled for the following year's crop. In the spring of 1915, Ambassador Morgenthau told Washington that the empire's whole domestic situation was "deplorable," with "thousands of the populace ... daily dying of starvation." In the late [49] The First Genocide of the 20th Century? spring and summer of 1915, the Ottoman provinces of Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria were devastated by a plague of locusts, creating famine conditions. To exacerbate matters, Allied warships had blockaded the coast of Syria and Lebanon, thus preventing the import of food from Egypt. Moreover, the food that was available in Turkey often could not be distributed. The country's few existing one-track railroads were overburdened, and shortages of coal and wood frequently rendered locomotives unusable. A crucial tunnel on the line toward Syria -- the famous Baghdad railway -- remained unfinished until late in the war. The resulting scarcities afflicted even the Turkish army, whose troops, as one German officer reported, received a maximum of one third of their allotted rations. In circumstances where soldiers in the Turkish army were dying of undernourishment, it is not so surprising that little if any food was made available to the deported Armenians. Indeed, the mistreatment of common Turkish soldiers, the subject of many comments by contemporaries, makes an instructive comparison with the wretched lot of the Armenians. Although "provisions and clothing had been confiscated to supply the army," wrote an American missionary in Van, "the soldiers profited very little by this. They were poorly fed and poorly clothed when fed or clothed at all." The Danish missionary Maria Jacobsen noted in her diary on February 7, 1915: "The officers are filling their pockets, while the soldiers die of starvation, lack of hygiene, and illness." Many had neither boots nor socks, and were dressed in rags. The treatment of Turkish soldiers who were wounded or sick was especially appalling. Those who managed to reach hospitals -- many never did -- perished in large numbers because of unsanitary conditions and a lack of basic supplies. Patients shared beds or simply lay next to each other on the floor in facilities that often lacked running water and electricity. Typhus, cholera, dysentery, and other infectious diseases spread rapidly. As Maria Jacobsen noted on May 24, 1916, a cholera outbreak in the city of Malatia was killing 100 soldiers a day. "The army there," she wrote, "will soon be wiped out without a war." The Turks experienced some 244,000 combat deaths during World War I. As against this, some 68,000 soldiers died of their wounds and almost a half-million of disease -- a ratio of non-combat to combat deaths almost certainly unmatched by any of the other warring nations. This terrible toll obviously does not excuse the treatment of the Armenians, but neither can it be simply ignored in any assessment of the general conditions against which they met their fate. Many of the Turkish deaths could have been prevented by better sanitary conditions and medical care. A government so callous about the suffering of its own soldiers was hardly about to show concern for the terrible human misery that would result from deporting a minority population rightly or wrongly suspected of treason. One of the problems bedeviling the Armenian side in this controversy is that no authentic documentary evidence exists to prove the culpability of the central government of Turkey for the massacre of 1915-16. In the face of this lack, Armenians have relied upon materials of questionable authenticity like The Memoirs of Naim Bey by Aram Andonian. The English edition of this book, first published in 1920, offers in evidence 30 alleged telegrams by Talaat Pasha, Turkey's minister of the interior, some of which order the killing of all Armenians irrespective of sex or age. But the book is considered a forgery not only by Turkish historians but by practically every Western student of Ottoman history. Similarly unreliable are the verdicts of Turkish military tribunals that in 1919-20 found the top leadership of the Young Turk regime, together with a special-forces outfit called Teskilat-i Mahsusa, responsible for the massacres of the Armenians. These trials suffered from serious deficiencies of due process; more importantly, all of the original trial documents are lost, leaving nothing but copies of some documents that were printed in the government gazette and the press. It is true that no written record of Hitler's order for the Final Solution of the "Jewish question" has been found, either. But the major elements of the decision-making process leading up to the annihilation of the Jews of Europe can be reconstructed from events, court testimony, and a rich store of authentic documents. It is doubtful that the Nuremberg trials would ever have achieved their tremendous significance in authenticating the crimes of the Nazi regime if they had had to rely on a few copies instead of on the thousands of original documents preserved in archives. Barring the unlikely discovery of sensational new documents in the Turkish archives, it is safe to say that no similar evidence exists for the tragic events of 1915-16. At the same time, a number of facts about the deportations argue against the thesis that they constituted a premeditated program for exterminating the Armenians of Turkey. For one thing, the large [50] Commentary December 2005 Armenian communities of Constantinople, Smyrna, and Aleppo were spared deportation and, apart from tribulations that also afflicted the Muslim populations of these cities, survived the war largely intact. This would be analogous to Hitler's failing to include the Jews of Berlin, Cologne, and Munich in the Final Solution. Moreover, the trek on foot that took so many lives was imposed only on the Armenians of eastern and central Anatolia, a part of the country that had no railroads. Elsewhere, and despite the fact that the one-spur Baghdad line was overburdened with the transport of troops and supplies, Armenian deportees were allowed to purchase rail tickets and were thus spared at least some of the trials of the deportation process. If, as is often alleged, the intent was to subject the exiles to a forced march until they died of exhaustion, why was this punishment not imposed on all? Similar variation can be found in the fortunes of other parts of the Armenian population. While many of the exiles were left to fend for themselves and often died of starvation, others were given food here and there. Some gendarmes accompanying the convoys sold their charges to Kurds who pillaged and murdered them, but other gendarmes were protective. In some places all Armenians, irrespective of creed, were sent away, while in others Protestant and Catholic (as opposed to Gregorian) Armenians were exempted. Many of the deportees succumbed to the harsh conditions in their places of resettlement, but others were able to survive by making themselves useful as artisans or traders. In some locations, not even conversion to Islam could purchase exemption from deportation; in others, large numbers of Armenians were allowed, or forced, to convert and were saved. All of these differences, of both treatment and outcome, are difficult to reconcile with a premeditated program of total annihilation. How, then, to explain the events of 1915-16? What accounts for the enormous loss of life? The documentary evidence suggests that the Ottoman government wanted to arrange an orderly process of deportation, even a relatively humane one, to gauge by the many decrees commanding protection and compassionate treatment of the deportees. But, leaving aside the justice of the expulsion order itself, the deportation and resettlement of the Armenians took place, as we have seen, at a time of great insecurity and dislocation throughout the country and in conditions of widespread suffering and deprivation among Turkish civilians and military personnel. The job of relocating several hundred thousand people in a short span of time and over a highly primitive system of transportation was simply beyond the ability of the Turkish bureaucracy. Many observers on the scene, indeed, saw the tragedy in this light, constantly citing the incompetence and inefficiency of the Ottoman bureaucracy. "The lack of proper transportation facilities," wrote the American consul in Mersina in September 1915, "is the most important factor in causing the misery." The German consul in Aleppo told his ambassador around the same time that the majority of Armenian exiles were starving to death because the Turks were "incapable of solving the organizational task of mass feeding." A lengthy memorandum on the Armenian question drawn up in 1916 by Alexander von Hoesch, an official in the German embassy, pointed to a basic lack of accountability: some local officials had sought to alleviate the hardships of the exiles, but others were extremely hostile to the Armenians and, in defiance of Constantinople, had abandoned them to the violence of Kurds or Circassians. Today, the stakes in this historical controversy remain high, and both sides continue to use heavyhanded tactics to advance their views. The Turkish government regularly threatens retaliation against anyone calling into question its own version of events, a threat made good most recently by its cancellation of an order for a $149-million French spy satellite after the French national assembly declared in 2001 that the killing of the Armenians during World War I was a case of genocide. For their part, the Armenians have also played hardball. When Bernard Lewis, in a 1994 letter to Le Monde, questioned on scholarly grounds the existence of a plan of extermination on the part of the Ottoman government, a French-Armenian organization brought suit and a French court convicted Lewis of causing "grievous prejudice to truthful memory." But there are also more hopeful signs, at least on the academic front. In the last several years, a number of conferences have brought together Turkish and Armenian scholars willing to discuss the events of 1915-16 without a political agenda. Turkish historical scholarship has shown signs of a post-nationalist phase, while some scholars on the Armenian side, too, now engage in research free of propagandistic rhetoric. Needless to say, such efforts have brought down accusations of betrayal, even treason, upon the heads of the offending historians; it would be foolish to expect genuine reconciliation any time soon. [51] The First Genocide of the 20th Century? All of which raises deeply troubling questions, not least about the role played by the Notion of genocide itself in perpetuating the almost century-old impasse between Turks and Armenians. For, once this charge is on the table, any sort of mutually acceptable resolution becomes extremely difficult if not impossible to achieve. As the Turkish historian Selim Deringil has written, both sides need to "step back from the was-it-genocide-or-not dialogue of the deaf" and instead seek a "common project of knowledge." If, then, we were to follow this advice, how best should we judge the Armenian tragedy? The primary intent of the deportation order was undoubtedly not to eradicate an entire people but to deny support to the Armenian guerrilla bands and to remove the Armenians from war zones and other strategic locations. For the Ottomans, painful experience with other Christian minorities during the Balkan wars (1912-13) had created extreme sensitivity to rebellion and territorial loss. Talaat Pasha, the minister of the interior, is supposed to have told the cabinet in 1915, "We have to create a Turkish bloc, free of foreign elements, which in the future will never again give the Europeans the opportunity to interfere in the internal affairs of Turkey." Ambassador Morgenthau reported being told on several occasions by Enver Pasha, the Turkish minister of war, that the government had to act forcefully against any community, however small, that was bent upon independence and was acting directly against the interests of the empire. For the human disaster subsequently endured by its Armenian population, the Ottoman regime certainly bears its due measure of responsibility, just as it does for general corruption, bungling misrule, and indifference to the suffering of its own population during World War I. And one can go further: with the benefit of hindsight, it is also possible to question whether the severity of the threat posed by Armenian revolutionaries justified the drastic remedy of even partial deportation. The Canadian researcher Gwynne Dyer may have put the case most appropriately in writing that, although Turkish allegations of wholesale disloyalty, treason, and revolt on the part of the Ottoman Armenians were "wholly true as far as Armenian sentiment went," they were "only partly true in terms of overt acts, and totally insufficient as a justification for what was done" to the Armenians. If both Armenians and Turks could accept this appraisal, even as a starting point for further discussion, they would reach an important milestone toward settling one of modern history's most bitter and longstanding conflicts. [52] Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor at the Graduate School of Business Administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il To Go To Top UNHOLY ALLIANCE SAUDI ARABIA, UNITED KINGDOM AND THE ISRAELI LEFT Posted by Ralph's Rant, August 26, 2007. My last article spoke about the Saudi Arabian involvement with the Carter Center for Peace. The previous article spoke about the British Government funding of various left wing Israeli leftist organizations. With the rising anti Israel sentiment and also growing Anti Semitic attacks around the world one does not have to look around very long to realize the answers lie with the Unholy Alliance between the Israeli and Left Saudi Arabia, and the United Kingdom. The tentacles of this alliance is worldwide and is spreading. The best way that the Saudi Government can spread their anti Israel fundamentalist opinion and hate is to spread their economic influence around the world in ways to influence public opinion such as universities where future leaders are sowed, and also foundations such as the Carter Center of Peace. Why have there been so many calls for boycotts and university actions? Well I am willing to bet that there is a Saudi money trail somewhere involved. That is my opinion. A wild opinion maybe not there are many instances where Saudi money is donated to universities and former people of power. These are links to three examples of Saudi donations. http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1402008 http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/2336 http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/9896.htm Is it possible that the source of these boycott calls may have Saudi involvement somehow? Not sure don't have proof but it would be a interesting fact to investigate. If there was no Saudi money floating around would there be less Anti Israel incitement. By the Arabs no but by the rest of the world I am sure. The British governmental funding of Israeli Leftist organizations is also increasing the anti Israel activity around the world and increasing the legitimacy of Anti Semitism in the eyes of Anti Semites both in the UK and around the world. The Israeli Leftist also bear responsibility because they some receive foreign funding and are the tools for those foreign governments meddling in internal Israeli affairs. It is up to the Jewish community and the Israeli people to expose this meddling, and also to investigate funding of the Saudi government to influence the world against Israel and expose it. Contact Ralph by email at stargate_time@yahoo.com. And visit his website: http://ralphsrant1.blogspot.com This article is archived at: http://ralphsrant1.blogspot.com/2007/08/unholy-alliance- saudi-arabia-united.html To Go To Top SHIMON PERES HAILED AS PROPHET BY RIGHT-WING ORGANIZATION -- 30 YEARS AGO HE SAID... Posted by Fred Reifenberg, August 26, 2007. Check this out and see why I've always liked this guy -- NOT! I call my accompanying art-photo Political Prezzz. It was not part of the original article. This was written by Israel Insider Staff and it appeared today in Israel Insider (http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/11931.htm). A new ad campaign of a right-leaning Israeli organization is celebrating the prophetic powers of Israel's new president. Does this augur the birth of a messianic era of peace between former rival with right-wing lions lying down with left-leaning lambs? Or are they wolves in sheep's wool? The campaign by The Jerusalem Summit lauds Peres' predictive powers of thirty years ago, when he foresaw and warned of the dangers of a Palestinian State. After a teaser with bold headlines of "Shimon Peres Prophet," the link leads to the following statement and quotation. "The following is a chillingly accurate prediction made three decades ago, by none other than Shimon Peres, the nation's newly elected president. In it he foresaw, in precise detail, the dire perils that would result if Israel were to embark on precisely the policy he himself championed and which continues to advocate with passion:" 'The establishment of such a [Palestinian] state means the inflow of combat-ready Palestinian forces (more than 25,800 men under arms) into Judea and Samaria; this force, together with the local youth, will double itself in a short time. It will not be short of weapons or other [military] equipment, and in a short space of time, an infrastructure for waging war will be set up in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Israel will have problems in preserving day-to-day security, which may drive the country into war, or undermine the morale of its citizens. In time of war, the frontiers of the Palestinian state will constitute an excellent staging point for mobile forces to mount attacks on infrastructure installations vital for Israel's existence, to impede the freedom of action of the Israeli air-force in the skies over Israel, and to cause bloodshed among the population. In areas adjacent to the frontier-line.' -- Shimon Peres, Tomorrow is Now, Jerusalem: Keter, 1978, p. 232." The ad continues with "Questions and Quandaries for the Concerned Citizen": The citizens of Israel, indeed the Jewish people as a whole, deserve, indeed should demand, an explanation for this dramatic shift in Peres's position -- from total opposition to a Palestinian state to total support for it. Of course one is entitles to change one's mind and Peres may indeed have had a change of mind. However one cannot but wonder: Why any rational individual would wish to change his/her mind from a position which proved to be so well-founded to one that proved to be so unfounded? What could have possibly induced Peres to endorse a policy which he previously rejected as too perilous to the security of the nation -- especially as all the perils he predicted did in fact materialize? Why would any responsible leader urge his people downs a path that he himself warned was disastrous -- especially as all the disasters he warned of did indeed occur? How can such conduct be reconciled with a genuine concern for the nation interest? And if it cannot, what conclusion should be drawn?" The Office of the President has not yet responded with a public comment on the annointment of the prophetic Peres. Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il To Go To Top IMPERFECT PEOPLE AND HIGH OFFICE Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDar), August 26, 2007. This was written by Shmuley Boteach and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188128148432&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull. Boteach is about to launch 'The Jewish Values Network,' dedicated to the dissemination of Jewish values in the mainstream media (http://www.shmuley.com). Last week I spent time at the Christian Broadcasting Network headquarters in Virginia with Pat Robertson, who, amid some understandable disagreements on important issues, is not only a friend but, I believe, one of the best friends Israel has in the entire United States. In discussing the US presidential race, we focused on Rudy Giuliani, who is extremely popular in the Jewish community for his stalwart support of Israel and hard line on Islamic fundamentalism -- but somewhat less so among Evangelicals, given his two divorces. Indeed, many Christians have written to me that they cannot vote for Rudy for president because of their wish to uphold family values. They wish for me to concur. I cannot. In looking at how the two communities approach a candidate like Giuliani, we can discern important differences between Judaism and Christianity. When Rudy, as mayor of New York, announced his separation from his wife, Donna Hanover, at a hastily summoned press conference without first informing her, I wrote a column stating that, as a child of divorce, I had to protest the way the announcement was handled. Couples sometimes have to split up. But decisions as to the future of a marriage should be taken between husband and wife in concert, and with the children being informed before anyone else. And yet, my criticism of Rudy's actions as a husband had no bearing on my strong endorsement of his leadership as mayor. Here is why.   JUDAISM BELIEVES two things. First, that people are flawed, and that what is important, therefore, is struggle rather than perfection (hence, the name Israel which translates as "he who wrestles with God"). My Christian brothers and sisters believe that because people are sinful they must therefore accept the grace of Christ for salvation. But Jews believe that because people are imperfect they must therefore define their own righteousness by their willingness to struggle to do the right thing amid a predilection for doing otherwise. Inevitably, we will sometimes come up short. But wrestle we must. Second, Judaism believes that we flawed people must still devote ourselves to the public good and that the idea that our mistakes should keep us from positions of leadership is not only ludicrous, but deeply sinful. Should a philanthropist who cheats on his wife not feed the poor? Should a woman who is mean to her cleaning lady not be a doctor who can heal the sick? Yes, it would be wonderful if we were all more consistent. But we must strive to do good in one area even when we fall short in others.   WHEREAS CHRISTIANITY focuses on personal salvation, Judaism focuses instead on world redemption. In Judaism, the question of personal righteousness is always subordinate to that of communal improvement. In Judaism our goodness is defined not by faith, meditation and reflection, but by good deeds. The focus is on the community rather than on ourselves. The contribution one makes to the lives of others is much more important than how perfect one is in one's own life. My Christian brothers and sisters, amid their stellar record of charity and social services throughout the world, are still often fixated on the question of whether or not they are going to heaven. In Judaism such questions, rarely, if ever, come up. The real question is: Have you left the world in a better condition than you found it? The Talmud relates the famous story of how, as Rabbi Yochanan lay on his death bed, he cried out, "I don't know where I am going (to heaven or hell)." Now, how could such a righteous man not be sure as to whether he had earned a place in eternity? The Lubavitcher Rebbe explains that his confusion was due to having never once focused on himself. What he focused on throughout his life was on doing good deeds for others, and not whether he had become personally righteous in the process.   THE OTHER reason that the Jewish community has no real issue with Giuliani's divorces are the biblical heroes to whom we look up. Christians venerate Jesus, who is portrayed as perfect in the New Testament. When Christians ask, "What would Jesus do?" they are holding up a model of flawlessness which they seek to emulate. But in the Hebrew Bible our heroes are righteous men rather than perfect gods. They struggled to the do the right thing, but being men, they did not always succeed. Abraham is faulted for his parenting with regard to Ishmael. Jacob favored Joseph over his other children. Moses, the greatest of prophets, is punished with not being allowed to enter the promised land because he failed to sanctify God to the Jewish people at a critical moment in their history. Indeed, the fact that these men were not perfect is what makes them the perfect model for emulation. Like us, they struggled to do the right thing amid an inclination do otherwise. And it was in the context of their herculean efforts to act righteously when it didn't always come naturally to them that they became role models.   FEW IN the Jewish community believe that Bill Clinton's personal failures made him unqualified for the public position of president. His betrayal, with Monica Lewinsky, of his marriage did not mean that he could not do a great deal of good for the country. On the contrary, the principal Jewish criticism of Clinton was that he did nothing to prevent the genocide in Rwanda, when, as the most powerful man in the world, there were many remedies available to him to stop the indiscriminate slaughter of defenseless Africans. Finally, my Christian brothers and sisters define a hypocrite as someone who says one thing and practices another. But Judaism argues that this is not hypocrisy, but inconsistency. The hypocrite is he who says something and does not believe it even as he says it. Few of us, thankfully, are in that category. What we are, however, is inconsistent, believing strongly in family values, but not always being strong enough to live in accordance with those values. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. To Go To Top HIT AN ARAB, GET FIRED. HIT A JEW, GET PROMOTED. Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, August 26, 2007. A policewoman filmed hitting an Arab at an IDF checkpoint last week was immediately suspended. The move has engendered disbelief amongst Jewish rights activists who have been trying for over a year and a half to suspend dozens of Israeli policemen filmed beating Jewish youths at the destruction of the Jewish town of Amona. Israeli Police Maj.-Gen. Mickey Levy, who was filmed beating Land of Israel activist Nadia Matar, was promoted in February to serve as next Deputy Commissioner of the Israeli Police Force. Absurd Justice. A civilian court has ordered an army officer to personally pay compensation. Lieutenant Tzvi Koretzky served two months in a military prison for the "negligent killing" of 16-year-old Mohammed Ali Zayd in October 2002. (Another example of the stupidity of the self-hating legal system! How many Jewish victims of Arab terror got compensation from Arab thugs?) Minister: Justice System Biased. Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann supported the right's contention that the justice system in Israel persecutes people who are not perceived as leftist enough. (It is a well-known fact that Israel's legal system, established during the Labour party dominance, is used to harass and persecute any opposition, especially from Zionists!) Pathetic Solution of Ugly Government! The Ministry of Education has decided to enable the children of Sderot to study in 'safety' by conducting all classes in the schools' bomb shelters. Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Israel would not need "a dramatic increase in USA aid" if the US and Russia stopped making money by supplying Muslim countries with weapons. So called aid is just a balancing act, to keep the business going. Please, stop doing Jews a 'favour'! UN Envoy: More Gestures to Abbas. The UN's Mideast envoy Michael Williams said he welcomes Israel's recent release of 250 Palestinian prisoners and the transfer of frozen funds to Mr. Abbas. But, he expressed concern that Israel has not taken further steps. (Ha, it is never enough! How many "gestures" Abbas has made toward peace with Israel? "Useless Nothing" at its best!) Abbas Condemns Israeli Military Action in Gaza. The PA President Mahmoud Abbas condemned Israeli military escalation in Gaza Strip, saying the recent attacks raise doubts about the Israeli government's peace intentions. The peace process, which the international community tries to revive, can not make any progress (like it is now) if the current Israeli policies and procedures continue, warned the statement. (No condemnation of rocket attacks from Gaza. Should Jews doubt PA 'peace intentions'? Only the delusional Olmert government does!) Ashkelon Gets Panic Button. The Home Front Command is allocating more than $100 million for the installation of a "panic button" system in pre-school nurseries and schools to make it easier to alert authorities in the event of a rocket attack on Ashkelon. Oil and gas pipelines and a giant electricity generating station are located in the port city. (Wouldn't the money be better spent by removing the threat of rocket attacks from Gaza permanently?) Syria Gets First Shipment of Russian SA-22's. According to Russian press reports, Moscow has begun delivering advanced SA-22 anti-aircraft missile systems to Syria. Damascus is to get between 34 and 50 of the systems, in a deal worth $900 million. Even Vikings Said Sorry. MORE than 1200 years ago, hordes of bloodthirsty Viking raiders descended on Ireland, pillaging monasteries and massacring the inhabitants. Danish Culture Minister Brian Mikkelson, who was in Dublin to participate in celebrations marking the arrival of a replica Norse longboat, apologised for the destruction: "In Denmark we are certainly proud of this ship, but we are not proud of the damages to the people of Ireland that followed in the footsteps of the Vikings." (There is no rush of apologies from the Vatican to Jews for the Inquisition and the on going anti-Jewish slur, nor regrets from UK, Spain, France, Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Austria, Russia etc for conducting pogroms, deportation of Jews and participation in Holocaust.) Quote of the Week: "How much of the (rotten) fish did you eat?" "About half the portion," "The first bite was the restaurant's fault, but the second bite was your fault!" -- Rabbi Riskin about 'Peace process'. Gaza's Public Workers Paid to Stay Home. Gaza's public employees are getting paid on one condition: Stay home. Such is the irony of life in the Gaza Strip now that Hamas militants are firmly in charge. A rival pro-Western government in the West Bank is delivering salaries to most of Gaza's civil servants as long as they don't work. (UN's money 'well spent'.) Israel Enduring High-tech Brain-drain. As a result of government cuts to research and development, more then 25,000 Israeli high-tech workers have moved to the United States during the last seven years. The same budget cuts have resulted in 10 billion of lost export revenue. (There are funds for fake anti-terror policies that do not work, but not for the future of Israel!) Aksa Martyrs Brigades will not Honour Agreements with Israel. Fatah's armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, announced it would no longer honour understandings reached with Israel, and called on its members to carry weapons. (It was expected. It did not last long, like any agreement before it!) Pass to self-Destruction. Israel's Cabinet extends the option of National Service to Arab Israelis. The Education Minister cut National Service options for Jewish girls. (The un-Jewish government made decision to train a "fifth column" to undermine and destroy Israel!) The budget that Education Minister Yuli Tamir intends to take away from female National Service volunteers who teach Zionism and Judaism in Israeli schools will be transferred to National Service programs in the Arab sector. Arabs Say 'No!' to Olmert's National Service Idea. Leaders of the Arab Israeli public said "la!" ("No!", not the first time) to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's initiative to have Arab youths perform national service. "The rights of the Arab public are not conditional on giving military services that serve the occupation". (Clearly, Arabs have never considered themselves as citizens of State of Israel, more as enemies of the state! Olmert's proposal just exposed another level of stupidity and blindness of Israel's politicians!) "Palestine: Partition and Propaganda" by David Singer US President George Bush and Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stubbornly and foolishly continue to push for the creation of an independent Palestinian State between Israel and Jordan, as Hamas and Fatah turn the proposed site for such a state -- Gaza and the West Bank -- into battlegrounds of blood, misery and privation for the Arab populations caught in their deadly crossfire. The 70th anniversary of the Peel Commission Report, released on 7 July 1937, presents a unique and impartial insight into understanding what the so-called "Palestinian problem" was -- and still is today -- really about. The Peel Commission recognised that there was an insoluble conflict in Palestine between the Arabs and Jews, necessitating the partition of Palestine into two independent sovereign states. There was no mention of a third interested party -- the "Palestinians" or "the Palestinian people" -- who also deserved a separate state. This "people" was the subsequent creation of skilful Arab propaganda in the 1950's and '60's in response to Israel's creation in 1948. The Peel Commission Report succinctly summed up the nature of the conflict in the following words: "An irrepressible conflict has arisen between two national communities within the narrow bounds of one small country. There is no common ground between them. Their national aspirations are incompatible. The Arabs desire to revive the traditions of the Arab golden age. The Jews desire to show what they can achieve when restored to the land in which the Jewish nation was born. Neither of the two national ideals permits of combination in the service of a single State." In 1937, there was no independent state called Jordan. It was then called Trans-Jordan, and it comprised 77% of the territory administered by Great Britain under the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine -- the operation of which was specifically the subject of inquiry and consideration by the Peel Commission. The right of Jews to settle in Trans-Jordan pursuant to the Mandate had been "postponed or withheld" by Britain with the consent of the League of Nations from 16 September 1922, thus restricting the right of the Jews to reconstitute their national homeland in only the remaining 23% of Palestine. (The right of Arabs to settle the West bank of the Jordan River was not "postponed or withheld". On the contrary, Arabs were encouraged by the British administration to do so!) Contact the Ceders at ceder524@hotmail.com To Go To Top ISRAEL'S SECURITY WALL IS WORTHLESS Posted by Steven Plaut, August 26, 2007. Remember how often we warned here that the "Security Wall" would not provide security unless Israel also exercised military control over the territory on the OTHER side of the wall? The Pestilinians have a new high-tech breakthrough that makes the "Security Wall" completely ineffective. It is called a ladder! This article is called "Gaza Terrorists, One Fatah, Cross Security Wall With Ropes," and was written by Ezra HaLevi. It appeared today in Arutz-Sheva www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123482 (IsraelNN.com) Arab terrorists from Gaza successfully crossed over the Gaza security wall, causing nearby Jewish towns to be put under curfew until the armed men were killed.Sunday morning, 12 more infiltrators were caught -- though young and unarmed. At least one of the three terrorists who infiltrated Saturday was a member of Fatah; all were wearing IDF uniforms and were heavily armed. The three took advantage of heavy fog to use a rope and ladder to cross the much-touted security fence, which is being replicated in Judea and Samaria due to its purported effectiveness. To date dozens of Arab terrorists have crossed under the fence, through tunnels, including the terrorists who kidnapped Cpl. Gilad Shalit last year at Kerem Shalom. IDF Golani Brigade soldiers spotted the men and engaged two of them, killing them both. One IDF soldier was lightly injured in the fighting. Local Jewish residents of the western Negev towns of Netiv HaAsara, Nahal Oz and Yad Mordechai spent Sabbath morning locked in their homes due to the infiltration. Golani soldiers then combed the Gaza side of the fence, killing two other Arab terrorists in a shootout. It was reported that two men who had been manning an escape vehicle were arrested. It is unclear whether the men were Israeli-Arabs or PA Arabs that infiltrated earlier and returned to the area with a vehicle. 'Sophisticated' Rope and Ladder Northern Gaza Region IDF Commander Gen. Moni Katz told Yediot Acharonot that the terrorists had managed to get past the security fence using a "sophisticated device" and were on their way to a vehicle driven by two other terrorists, who escaped back into Gaza during the gunfight. Katz did not elaborate on the nature of the device that allowed the terrorists to enter through the fence. It has been speculated that the means by which the terrorists breached the wall were not at all sophisticated, consisting of ropes, pulleys and ladders, according to photos published in the major newspapers Sunday. But due to the government's heavy investment in the construction of an identical fence across Judea and Samaria the facts are being kept under wraps. Katz said the men were armed with assault rifles, several clips of ammunition, hand grenades and bulletproof vests. He admitted that due to the weather and the terrorists' method of crossing over the fence, "Until the moment they opened fire we did not know it was an infiltration." Fatah and Hamas? Army Radio reported that the attempted attack was sponsored by Hamas to cause the Erez Crossing to be closed, to sabotage the exit from Gaza of a number of Fatah-affiliated university students. The Popular Resistance Committee, a joint Hizbullah-style group made up of members of Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad, said its members carried out the infiltration. At least one Fatah terrorist was involved in the attack, though he was reported to have escaped back to Gaza. Islamic Jihad Terrorist Killed Border Police killed an Islamic Jihad terrorist attempting to carry out a suicide bombing and arrested two others near PA-controlled Tul Karem Saturday. The name of the dead terrorist was Tarek Melahem. Zadik Ouda, a senior Islamic Jihad terrorist, opened fire at the soldiers, who returned fire, wounding him. He was apprehended and arrested. A border police officer was wounded during the fighting. In Jenin, IDF soldiers and Border Police killed another senior Islamic Jihad terrorist, Ala Abu al-Said and his deputy Mustafa Atik Saturday. A third, unnamed terrorist was also killed in the gun battle. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor at the Graduate School of Business Administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il To Go To Top GOD'S JEWISH WARRIORS ACCORDING TO CNN Posted by Jock Falkson, August 26, 2007. In its first comprehensive documentary on the terrorist phenomenon in the Middle East, CNN decided to cover the 3 major religions -- Jewish, Christian and Muslim. CNN's first presentation of God's Warriors which aired Wednesday, August 23, focused on the Jewish contribution. It turned out to be a pitiful search for virtually nonexistent Jewish terrorists. Amanpour and her researchers could only find this handful: Yigal Amir who killed Rabin; Dr. Goldstein who killed 29 Muslim worshippers; Another who served 7 years in an Israeli prison (whose name I missed). The blowing up of Bassam Shaka, the mayor of Nablus in 1980. Rabbi Kahane, who killed no one; And some nonentities who gave a lot of Israeli soldiers a bad time for carrying out orders to evacuate them from certain settlements. The 'rebels' used sticks and stones but killed no one. One must perhaps admire the gall of CNN in equating that pitiful number of Israelis which Amanpour has managed to dredge up with the uncounted thousands of Palestinian Arabs who undoubtedly qualify as terrorists for killing innocent Israeli civilians. Nor should we forget the hundreds of accomplices who plan, aid, abet, harbor and transport the murdering killers of our civilians. Or the millions of Muslims who glorify the killers. And the millions more who pray for Allah to exterminate Israel's Jews and wipe the Jewish state off the map." The Aipac Illusion Another of God's Jewish Warriors, according to CNN, is AIPAC*, the well known pro-Israel lobby. Amanpour is there to provide examples of the intense power of this organization which all Congressmen, she says, must obey, including the President. (*American Israel Public Affairs Committee.) While I do not take exception to the fact that Aipac has powerful friends on Capitol Hill, it is simply not true that Israel gets its way on account of Aipac's "notorious" power over the President and Congress. Entirely missing from the CNN allegation is the fact that the people of Israel and the USA hold many important and significant values in common. It should surprise no one that these underscore natural bonds of friendship. Like the fact that both share love of freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Nor do we glorify death. A majority of Muslims on the other hand love death and pursue Jihad with the fervor of zealots. Like secular education, technological progress, the never ending search for innovation, a free economy and a free press. The lack of these values have resulted in centuries of Muslim backwardness. Like disrespect for women's human rights and respect for "honor killings" and clitoridectomies. Islam cares not for government of the people by the people. What they want is a Caliphate dominated by Shariah law. Muslim states do not permit universal suffrage in the few states which permit limited voting. Our two states respect and practice religious tolerance, whereas Islam respects no other religion and wants nothing less than world domination. We respect and practice monogamy; Islam permits and practices bigamy, even child marriage. Nor do Muslim states have regard for equality before the law. Neither for women, Jews and other infidels. Nor do our two nations admire the inhuman punishments of stoning, decapitating, limb cutting and flogging. Nor do the US and Israel favor preaching and teaching hatred, and revenge by terrorist methods. (I have undoubtedly overlooked other common values.) Considering the many qualities both the US and Israel hold dear, why should anyone wonder at the friendship which has grown up between the two nations? Why Does The US Arm Israel's Enemies? AS to CNN's allegation that the power which Aipac has exercised which has resulted in US endangerment, the facts lead to quite opposite conclusions. That Congressmen and Presidents fear the power of Aipac, as the CNN documentary alleges, represents nothing more than shallow thinking. Some examples: The US has, since 1979, armed Saudi Arabia with military might far beyond its real needs. The total military aid supplied to date is over $40bn. Plus $25 bn non military aid. And still continues annually, to aid one of the richest nations on earth! Who was the enemy in 1979? Little ole Israel, with whom the Saudis have never even signed the cease fire of 1948. Did the US tremble at Aipac's ire? Or Israel's displeasure? Fuggetaboutit. The US continues to arm the Saudis and Egyptians with the most advanced aircraft and military equipment, forcing Israel to buy ever improved weaponry which will hopefully give us an edge should the Saudis, Egyptians and other Arab states decide to attack us again. The US has been arming Egypt with about $3bn annually since 1975. Who is Egypt's enemy? Little ole Israel, that's who. And Aipac's overwhelming power as portrayed by CCN's documentary matters to the US Congress and its Presidents little more than a camel's excretion. Self-interest Above All Did Aipac use its very best endeavors to prevent the Saudi and Egyptian rearming? You can bet they did. But overriding all else is the fact that the US looks to its own interests first. When the interests of our two nations converge, the champagne glasses clink. When they diverge the US doesn't give a fig for Aipac. Understandably, the US serves its own interests first. It matters little where the chips fall. US self interest always trumps Aipac and while Israel may be disappointed, she is seldom if ever surprised. One can hardly credit that CCN was not aware of this. Jock (Joshua) L. Falkson is a former South African advertising executive, now living in Israel. Contact him at falkson@013.net and visit his website: http://breasy.com/israeldefender/ To Go To Top IRAN ON U.N. ANTI-RACISM COMMITTEE MEETING IN GENEVA 27 AUGUST. A UN TRAVESTY AGAIN Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 25, 2007. A TRAVESTY ... The UN.. when does their lease expire in Geneva and in NYC? And the Taxpayer is as usual taken to the cleaners to fund this Travesty called UN ...... How much lower can the UN sink beneath its own weight of hypocrisy, oil for food scams, corruption, etc? This is simply another in a long list of reasons why we should have NOTHING to do with the UN.... What next? The Taliban on the panel!? As Goebbels said..... The charges and accusations (racism, e.g.) have to be constant, they have to be endlessly repeated, and (as per Goebbels) fact-truth-logic (or even the practice of the accusation by the accuser) do not matter with propaganda. Goebbels said that the only thing that matters is that the propaganda be effective and that the "stupid masses" believe it...... It's because the world is changing fast, good is becoming evil, evil is becoming good, and the grand plan played by Islamics around the globe has the world postured and practically convinced the West is the "racist", if not "Satan" himself. Our collective dhimmitude is allowing the table to turn. What "was", "is" no more. Iran on anti-racism committee Islamic Republic selected by UN for 'leading position' to plan anti-racism conference This was written by Yaakov Lappin and it was published in Ynet News (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3441314,00.html). Islamic Republic selected by UN for 'leading position' to plan anti-racism conference Despite its numerous calls for Israel's destruction, and repeated denials of the Holocaust, Iran has been selected by the United Nations for a leading position in a committee that will plan the 2009 UN World Conference against Racism. The planning committee, which will meet for the first time in Geneva on August 27, will be made up of an inner circle of 20 UN member-states, to be headed by Libya. The decision to include Iran in the committee has been slammed by UN watchdogs. "As a UN spokesperson against racism, Iran will invert totally the message and mission of the United Nations," Anne Bayefsky, senior editor of the New York-based Eye on the UN, said in a press release. "Iran is now poised to wrap itself in a UN flag as a lead agent of the next global conference against racism, Durban II," she added, referring to the 2001 UN conference on racism held in Durban, South Africa, which saw unprecedented levels of anti-Zionist rhetoric and calls for Israel's destruction. Speaking to Ynetnews, Bayefsky said that "the leading exponents of anti-Semitism, whether directed at Jews individually or the Jewish people and its state generally, continue to be provided a global platform at the UN. This is but one example of a broader phenomenon." "Eye on the UN has found that in 2006 the UN system as a whole directed the most condemnations for human rights abuses against specific states -- first towards Israel and fourth towards the United States. Iran was lower down on the list of UN human rights concerns," Bayefsky said, adding: "And yet the US taxpayer continues to pay a quarter of the bill for activities which demonize Americans and Israelis on a global scale." A spokesperson for the UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights confirmed to Ynetnews that "Iran is one of 20 States who are members of the bureau of the Preparatory Committee," but added that "Iran does not occupy a leading role." When asked how a state which openly denies the Holocaust could find itself in such a role, the spokesperson said: "The Preparatory Committee is an inter-governmental body, meaning States were chosen freely to sit on the Prep-Com. It is the Member-States who decide." 'UN body hijacked again' Bayefsky explained that the structure of the UN's Human Rights Council has effectively been taken over by the countries of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), allowing Iran and Libya access to key roles. "The states were selected by the UN Human Rights Council and the Council is controlled by the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The majority of seats on the Council are held by the African and Asian regional groups and the OIC has a majority of seats on each of these groups. Western states do not have the votes to block this outrage and it is another example of the hijacking that has occurred of the UN's lead human rights agency," she said. Reacting to the statements of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of the Geneva-Based UN Watch organization, said that the UN had failed to explain how Iran had ended up on the planning council. "I think they are basically dodging the question," Neuer said. "To ask why Iran should be a member, and then to be answered that Iran is a member, is not an answer," he added. "This conference is turning into a wolf in sheep's clothing. The United Nations' government and diplomats do not think the way regular people think. They treat every country equally and do not use common sense principles. That attitude is contrary to the UN charter, which says members who act contrary to the charter's principles of supporting peace should be expelled," Neuer explained. "According many diplomats, this will be a fiasco in the making. And it should be noted there are African states that care about legitimate issues concerning racism and want those to be addressed. It's a shame that the Islamic states are intending on subverting this conference as they have done with the Human Rights Council and numerous other UN bodies," Neuer added. "The High commissioner (Louise Arbour) has to speak truth to power. The high commissioner should express her concern that once again a leading human rights entity at the UN is being headed by Libya with Iran in a leadership position, whatever the UN may say. It undermines any last vestige of moral credibility," he said. 'Israel's options limited' Asked what his advice would be for Israel on how to deal with the conference, Neuer said: "There is a limited amount of options for Israel. The analogy is to the UN General Assembly, where the numbers speak for themselves, and there is not much Israel can do to prevent certain resolutions." "The key thing is to work on Western states like Canada and the Europeans. Israel has to be vigilant, has to closely monitor diplomatic developments, and needs to engage with its Western friends and to make sure that the Europeans stand firm and refuse to appease the extremists," Neuer added. According to Bayefsky, "Israel needs to point continually to the dangerous role played by the UN in undermining the welfare of the Jewish state and its people. The veil of legitimacy of the organization as a leader in human rights protection must be lifted." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com To Go To Top FROM ISRAEL: FOILED Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 25, 2007. Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) Early today two terrorists -- intent on a major "martyrdom" operation -- managed to infiltrate into Israel from northern Gaza but were shot and killed before they got far. The sort of infiltration they achieved was highly unusual, as there is a fortified fence across the area. Almost certainly with assistance from one or more persons on the other side, they utilized sophisticated equipment and relied upon a heavy fog in the area to help them slip through. Dressed as IDF soldiers, they were carrying explosives and a variety of weapons. It is believed they were headed for a Negev town. I never receive news like this without a prayer of gratitude that what might have been was averted. Incidents such as this one keep us mindful: They're out there, they're still trying to get us. ~~~~~~~~~~ Looking northward with regard to defense, Israel is expanding the deployment of its Arrow missiles. Anticipating that the next war -- whether with Syria or Iran -- will involve a huge onslaught of missiles, the Air Force has decided to place the Arrow -- which is capable of intercepting all of the operational ballistic missiles in Iran and Syria -- in a larger number of locations. A newer Arrow -- the Arrow 3 -- is currently under development; this missile intercepts incoming missiles at a higher altitude than the current missile. Additionally, a new, advanced version of the Patriot, which takes out lower altitude missiles, is to be put in place to serve as a third layer of defense. Additionally, the Defense Ministry recently made inquiries to the Pentagon regarding two American-made missile defense systems -- the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) and the Aegis. Reportedly, there is heightened coordination -- with exercises being held -- between our forces and US forces in preparation for the possibility that the US might transfer equipment to Israel. My (layperson's) take: This preparation is, in one respect, reassuring -- we would be remiss if defense weren't being prepared to the maximum. But we'd be sorely mistaken in imagining that with this in place we are "protected." The key lies in offensive capability, about which, of course, nothing is being said. May it be as thoroughly prepared as our defenses. ~~~~~~~~~~ Returning to the political front... Binyamin Netanyahu, head of Likud, has reportedly approached Avigdor Lieberman, who heads Yisrael Beitenu, about running jointly in the next election. Netanyahu, eager to unify right-wing forces and looking to strengthen Likud with the Russian immigrant population here, has offered to save slots for Yisrael Beitenu on the Likud list. Lieberman was at one time associated with Likud. No agreements have been reached yet. Sources close to Netanyahu say that he is not willing to save slots on the Likud list for those who bolted from Likud for Kadima and are now thinking of returning. These individuals would have to take their chances in the Likud primary. There is considerable ambivalence within Likud about taking back those who walked away in favor of Kadima: suffice it to say they are neither respected nor trusted. ~~~~~~~~~~ From Arab news sources comes the report that Abbas definitely does not intend to run again for PA president when his term is over in less than two years. Abbas is embroiled in heightened tensions with Farouk Qaddoumi; he currently controls Fatah's Central Committee, which is rejecting Abbas's moves. Put simply, Abbas grows more and more impotent. Qaddoumi is most definitely not a "moderate" -- he declined to come to PA controlled areas with the signing of the Oslo Accords, preferring to stay in Tunis because he was against any peace treaty with Israel. His control within Fatah is a sign of things to come. With this comes indication that Salam Fayyad is being promoted by the US as a replacement for Abbas -- but resented by many within Fatah precisely because he is the "US candidate." ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, regarding Hamas... According to a London-based Arabic newspaper, al-Sharq al-Awsat, cited by YNet, Ghazi Hamad, spokesman for Haniyeh, has resigned his position because of his feeling that it was a mistake for Hamas to take over Gaza. He believes that Hamas should be making moves toward reconciliation with Fatah.