HOME Featured Stories August 2008 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Yehoshua HaLevi, August 31, 2008.

Sunset on the beach at Habonim Nature Reserve on Israel's central coast

Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT:
Sabra is the Hebrew name given to a native-born Israeli Jew and also the prickly pear cactus, which grows abundantly throughout Israel, although, ironically, it is not a native species. The dual meaning of the term is meant to imply that Israelis, like their flowering namesake, feature a thorny and abrasive exterior that conceals a sweeter, gentler interior. Whether true or not about our native population, this photograph reveals the contrasting personality traits of the Sabra plant by juxtaposing the "softer" flowering side against the "harder" thorny spines. It would be impossible, I think, to depict in a photograph the plant's inner sweetness, so portraying it as it flowers is the best approximation. Over the years, I have become addicted to using back light — light which shines from the rear of the subject toward the camera — because of how beautifully it enhances the color and texture of flower petals. I brought this image home following a mid-August hike last summer near Beit Shemesh. I was very surprised to find anything flowering in the parched, brown hills amid the summer heat, but cactus thrives in the desert as well as the country's greener areas under some very difficult conditions. Not unlike Israelis, whether born on native soil or not.

Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Jonathan Spyer, August 31, 2008.

In recent weeks, a number of prominent Fatah figures have suggested that their movement might abandon its commitment to a "two-state solution" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and return to the pre-1988 demand for Israel's replacement by a single state in the area between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.

They claim that Israeli policy in the West Bank is forcing them to reconsider their commitment to partition. In fact, though, what used to be known as the "democratic, secular state," and is now called the "one-state solution," has been the end-goal of modern Palestinian nationalism for the greater part of its history. Its reemergence into prominence should come as no surprise. It is the natural product of Palestinian nationalism's characterization of the conflict.

The one-state solution is depicted by its adherents as a non-ethnic, non-nationalist alternative to the ethnic nationalism represented by Israel. Israel, according to Virginia Tilly, a prominent Western supporter of the one-state idea, rests "on the discredited idea, on which political Zionism stakes all its moral authority, that any ethnic group can legitimately claim permanent formal dominion over a territorial state."

This formulation is dishonest. Ahmed Qurei and Sari Nusseibeh, two of the prominent Palestinians with apparently growing sympathy for the one-state idea, are also members of an overtly nationalist movement emerging from a distinctive Arab and Muslim cultural context.

The Palestinian Authority in its constitution describes the Palestinian people in ethnic and religious terms, as "part of the Arab and Islamic nations." This document declares Islam as the official religion of the Palestinian state, and cites Islamic sharia law as a "major source for legislation." Thus, whatever argument the one-staters have with Israel, it isn't based on a principled objection to ethnic nationalism. But then, why is this claim of the "non-national," civil rights nature of the one-state demand being made?

The reasons for the conceptual lack of clarity at the root of the one-state idea are both pragmatic and conceptual. Pragmatically — an open, public commitment to the denial of the other side's national rights would be counterproductive. It would upset the Europeans and Americans, who largely foot the bill for the Palestinian national project.

It is apparently hoped, however, that rebranding Fatah-style Palestinian nationalism using the language of the U.S. civil rights movement of 50 years ago might cause at least some observers not to notice that the one-state solution coincidentally involves the disappearance of a legally constituted Jewish state, and the consequent termination of the right of self-determination of Israeli Jews. In other words, despite its non-ethnic, non-nationalist basis, the one-state solution also includes the full realization of the program of Palestinian nationalism.

This attempt at obfuscation is fairly ludicrous. On the conceptual level, however, the current revival of this idea is of greater interest. It shows the extent to which mainstream Palestinian nationalism continues to see the conflict with Israel as one between a project of colonization and a liberation movement.

Despite the short period of ostensible commitment to partition in the 1990s, Palestinian nationalism did not undergo any revolution in thought, toward reformulating the conflict as one between rival national groupings that each possess a basic legitimacy. This, of course, was the formulation of its supposed partners on the Israeli left.

But this idea found and finds no echo among the Palestinians. Fatah remains convinced that the conflict is one between a usurping, colonial entity and an indigenous resistance movement. This explains the ease with which plans involving the disappearance of the Israeli Jewish collectivity can be dreamed up. The Rhodesians in southern Africa, the pieds noirs in Algeria — all of them disappeared. So why should their local equivalents imagine their fate to be any different? In this interpretation, the denial of the national rights of Israeli Jews by turning them into a minority in an Arab and Muslim state is no denial at all, because belonging to a historically illegitimate collectivity does not confer rights. The trouble is, of course, that Israeli Jews are neither Rhodesians nor pieds noirs. They therefore decline to play the role allotted them in the thinking of Fatah.

Should Fatah actually elect to return to its old militant stance of 40 years ago, it will be transformed into a less religious and less serious imitation of its Islamist rivals. The most likely prognosis, though, is that this will not happen. In real life, Fatah leaders fear Hamas more than they fear Israel, and in any case they are deeply embedded in a type of patron-client relationship with the West. Thus, the period ahead will witness a tide of verbiage, vague threats and accusation, readily recycled by Fatah's friends in Western academia and the media.

Fatah turned down chances at partition, ultimately because its leadership never fully freed itself from the conceptual straitjacket of the one-state solution. The movement is now threatening to retreat further back down the road it traveled in the 1990s

Dr. Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya Israel.

This article appeared today in Ha'aretz.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 31, 2008.

According to a Friday report by Ben Caspit in Maariv, subsequently carried in The Jerusalem Post, Arutz Sheva and elsewhere, a decision has been made by the Israeli government to hit Iran if need be.

Israel, it is being reported, made the critical decision three months ago and is now preparing a military strike on Iran that would be activated whether the US approves or not. If the situation is not resolved by 2010 — through an internal coup, sanctions that are genuinely effective, or military action by the US — Israel will proceed.

Currently, the US is prepared to provide defensive weapons, but will not assist in making it possible for us to hit Iran — has not, for example, provided necessary codes for flying over Iraq.


The report describes action to promote sanctions with teeth that has been taken by Ephraim Sneh, a former deputy defense minister who recently left the Labor party. He is pushing a total international embargo on spare parts for Iran's oil industry and a complete international boycott of Iran's banks.

Sneh wrote to both US presidential candidates outlining this plan, which would have to be undertaken within the next 18 to 24 months, and which would cause the regime to topple. It would. however, require recruiting all of Europe to be on board with this — as partial participation does not constitute effective sanctions. Thus, as good as this plan might be on paper, we should not hold our collective breath waiting for this to happen.

Last week, Sneh visited Austria and Switzerland, which have both announced plans for major investments in gas and oil fields in Iran. As he listened to his hosts describe their plans, he replied, "What a shame, for Ido will set fire to all of it." Ido is Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan, Commander of the Israel Air Force, who would be in charge of carrying out the air strikes on Iran.

"Investing in Iran in 2008," Sneh told the Austrians, "is like investing in the Krupp steelworks in 1938, it's a high risk investment." He reported that his hosts turned pale.

Could it be that talking tough and forcing a new reality might do the trick? European leaders would have to perceive their economic dealings with Iran as ultimately not being in their own narrow best interest. As Sneh said, "Talk of the Jewish Holocaust and Israel's security doesn't impress these guys." Plans — made public — for Israeli air strikes on Iran might be useful in this regard.


Iranian officials, responding to talk of an attack on their facilities, warned in al-Quds al-Arabi that they have supplied Hezbollah with longer range missiles that would be unleashed if we or the US were to hit Iran. This is supposed to be the "surprise" that Nasrallah has been referring to recently.

But security analyst Maj.-Gen. (res) Yaakov Amidror says he doesn't believe this is the case:

"This is nothing new. Hezbollah has had these missiles — such as the Zilzal, which can reach Tel Aviv — for years. I don't think Hezbollah received longer-range missiles, but they are stockpiling more of the same."


According to the Post, the Arab states unequivocally oppose a strike on Iran.

I found this interesting because I sat just weeks go with an Arab-speaking Israeli investigative journalist who told me of the on-going animosity between the Sunni Arab states and Shia Iran, which is seeking to overtake them. According to him, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, in particular, have been annoyed at Bush for softening his stance on Iran. The opposition to a strike may be a public stance only.


Let me return here to the issue of a possible signed agreement between Israel and the PA that might be secretly pushed through in a matter of weeks or days. There is an enormous amount of disinformation afloat, with responses that sometimes verge on the hysterical — perhaps understandably, given the seriousness of the issue.

In a nutshell: The story circulating is that Olmert is pushing to get something on paper before September 17, the day of the Kadima primaries. He would still hold his position after that, but only as a caretaker prime minister until a new government is formed — he would lack the authority to act on something as major as this. (Never mind that — in the face of the multiple investigations he is dealing with — he is currently lacking the authority as well.)

Olmert's "problem" is that the PA and Israel are still too far apart to finalize a deal. The sticking point being discussed most often is Jerusalem (although there is surely similar discord on the matters of "return" of refugees and borders).

Some sources have it that Olmert is pushing for a vague document that simply outlines what has been agreed on so far and can serve as the basis for a shelf agreement to be activated later. But according to Haaretz, Olmert's latest wrinkle on how to resolve differences and allow something to be signed is this:

There would be general framework signed now. But with a five year time-table for completing negotiations on Jerusalem, which would take place under an "international umbrella" with various parties able to "bolster" — though not impose — an agreement. His conceptualization is that in an international venue, with a number of nations privy to discussion and putting in their thoughts, there would be a "mellowing" on both sides and an inclination to come to terms. On the one hand, it would give the very weak PA backbone, and on the other, would coerce our public into accepting something that already had international sanction.

My conceptualization is that it is an obscenity.

To propose involving international parties at any level with regard to our heritage, our security, and our sovereignty is a disgrace of the first order. We have here a prime minister — and I write this with a deeply heavy heart — who cannot, or chooses not to, speak for and protect our heritage, our security and our sovereignty.


Nor am I alone in voicing this opinion. Shas head Eli Yeshai (who could take apart the coalition if only he would lead his faction in resignation) declared that Olmert had no legal or moral authority to make such a deal.

"The leadership of the Palestinian Authority is virtual. Any agreement with them will be the basis for more terror. It is clear to everyone that Jerusalem's fate cannot be negotiated like it was a currency, and certainly not with international participation."

Foreign Minister and Chief Negotiator Tzipi Livni is also greatly unhappy with what Olmert is trying to do. She sees attempts to accelerate the negotiation process as a huge mistake:

"We must not let the pressure of time cause us to make one of two grave mistakes: To try and bridge the wide gaps [note please: there are "wide" gaps] in a manner that will lead to a collapse, or to compromise on issues critical to Israel just to achieve results."

I here reiterate my opinion that a precipitous agreement signed by Olmert would seriously damage Livni's chances of putting together a coalition that would allow her to be prime minister after the Kadima primary. She has to be fiercely opposed to this. (I note however, that, in due course she might well make concessions that are similar.)

Public Security Minister Avi Dichter expressed anger that Olmert was proceeding without the backing of his Cabinet — without even informing his ministers. Said Dichter:

"...in light of the security-related circumstances, and even more so the political ones in which Olmert is about to step down and Abbas's term ends in four months' time — we cannot repeat the mistake from the [Israeli-Palestinian] talks at the Taba Summit in January 2001 and create a problematic standard for future negotiations that will be lead by Olmert's successors."


But what of the PA? Once again, they are likely to be our salvation. No, it should not be this way. And yes! we must work to have leaders that protect our interests. But this is how it seems to be now.

For some time PA negotiators have been expressing great reluctance to sign anything that is vague and incomplete. Chief PA negotiator Ahmed Qurei said, just over a week ago, that "We either agree on one package that includes all the issues, or we don't agree," and Abbas aide Yasser Abed Rabbo has declared that they "will not accept any partial deal like a framework or shelf agreement,"

Most recently Abbas has said that the proposal for negotiating Jerusalem over five years represents an incomplete deal that would leave him weakened.


And then we have this, which represents a major stumbling block in negotiations from the PA side:

Rumor of late has had it that Rice is back-tracking on Bush's commitment — made in a letter to then PM Sharon in 2004 — regarding our right to retain major settlement blocs, and that Olmert is ready to go along.

But that's not how Nahum Barnea tells it in today's Yediot Ahronot. In conversation with Barnea, a "senior US government official" is reported to have said the following:

"...In her last visit ten days ago Secretary of State Rice heard opposition to the Israeli settlement blocs remaining in the area of the [West] Bank from the Palestinians. They said that this impairs Palestinian movement. We told them that this is a problem that has to be dealt with, but the settlement blocs would remain. We made it clear to them that they must understand the reality: no Israeli prime minister can abandon communities where tens of thousands of Israelis live."

I would suggest that the rumors originated with Palestinian sources, who implied that Rice agreed with their position. This serves as a prime example of how convoluted and complex this entire situation is, and how prone to misunderstandings.


Summing up more definitively, there is this, from Saeb Erekat, PA negotiator:

"The gap between the Israeli and Palestinian positions still exists. This is especially true with regards to all the final-status issues: Jerusalem, borders, refugees, settlements, water and security. Therefore, I rule out the possibility that there would be an agreement or a written document this month.

"We are not in a bazaar or a market. We are talking about rights and we must ensure our rights in any agreement."

Along with the core issues, Erekat is looking for return of "detainees" (i.e., terrorists) to Judea and Samaria, removal of the security fence and of checkpoints, and the opening of closed PA institutions in Jerusalem.

The simple fact is that the more hungry Olmert has acted to reach an agreement — an abysmally bad negotiating stance — the tougher the PA demands have become. The PA presumably wants a state. Why should they not be petitioning us?


Olmert and Abbas met today, presumably for the last time before the Kadima primary. There was no press conference following, so it can be assumed nothing was resolved. It can also be assumed that Olmert used this opportunity to push Abbas to consider his plan, even though officials are denying that Olmert is pushing in this direction. Their claim is that the goal is still the end of 2008.

According to Mark Regev, Olmert's spokesman, "significant progress had been made in the talks" but "there are still considerable gaps between the two sides."


It was anticipated before the fact that Abbas would be requesting the release of more prisoners, and indeed that turned out to be the case, although no details are forthcoming and Israeli officials are saying no promises have been made.

Actually, a PA official had claimed that Israel has agreed to release Barghouti, Fuad Shabuki, who was involved with the Karine-A weapons ship, and Abdel Aziz Dweik of Hamas. And that Abbas would be demanding as well the release of Ahmed Sa'adat, connected to the assassination of Rehavam Zeevi, and hundreds of others. All of this was to strengthen Abbas, according to this official:

"It's better for all if Barghouti and the Hamas officials are released as a result of our efforts and not through a prisoner exchange with Hamas. Hamas is hoping to score points by releasing Fatah and Hamas prisoners in return for Gilad Schalit."

One needs a strong stomach to deal with this. Competition as to who gets credit for securing the release of more prisoners, with some perverted notion that if we are willing to give prisoners to Hamas to secure Shalit, we have to also do something to make Fatah look good.

The bottom line is that Hamas will seek prisoners in return for Shalit no matter what, and in fact, will demand more if we keep giving to the PA without a quid pro quo. (see more following)

In response to these claims, an Israeli official has said that "the release of Barghouti is not on the table today." But he also said that the release of 198 recently is not the end.

Haim Ramon is now convening a committee to decide on 450 prisoners to be released to Hamas for Shalit, but Asharq al-Awsat has cited Hamas officials who say the price is now over 1,000.

I imagine we now have to wait for the other shoe to drop, as Olmert announces what he he is willing to do for Abbas next.


One thing has been announced: Olmert reprimanded Abbas for meeting with Samir Kuntar during his recent visit to Lebanon. "You're not supposed to meet with killers," he told him. Not supposed to if he's a moderate, but this is an indication of Abbas's true inclinations.


A very solid reason (among many!) to not even attempt to complete negotiations by the end of 2008: Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin has reported to the Cabinet that when Abbas's term as president ends in early 2009, there is a good chance that political turmoil will ensue. The "rift between Palestinian factions is so deep it will be nearly impossible to hold an election."


Coming soon: Comments on Gov. Palin, McCain's choice of VP candidate.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, August 30, 2008.

This was written by 'Abd Al-Karim Shweiki and Michael Friedson and published Wednesday, August 13, 2008 in The Media Line


[Ramallah and Jerusalem] Publication on Tuesday by the Israeli daily Haaretz of details of Prime Minister Olmert's peace offer to the Palestinians triggered a rush of assertions and denials playing out in media. Senior Palestinian officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to disclose the information "on-record" have confirmed to The Media Line that Israel has asked the Palestinians to agree to an Israeli annexation of 7.3% of the West Bank; while the Palestinians would receive 5.5% from land located between Gaza and Hebron in addition to an another 2% for use as a safe passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The officials said the offer came in meetings between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmud 'Abbas and in meetings between the two sides' chief negotiators for final status talks: Ahmad Qurei' and Tzipi Livni.

The officials said that Israel asked to annex three blocs of communities located in post-1967 territories, including the Jerusalem suburb of Ma'aleh Adumim, Gush Etzion south of Jerusalem, and the city of Ariel in the Samaria region. The Palestinians agreed in principle only to the annexation of Gush Etzion and rejected the other two blocs outright.

"Agreeing to annex Ariel and Ma'aleh Adumim would mean separating the West Bank into four parts and this is totally unacceptable by us. We informed both the Israelis and the Americans about our position," one senior official familiar with the negotiations told The Media Line.

According to that official, Israel was clear in its demand for annexing 7.3% of the West Bank while as the Palestinians agreed to only 1.8% in the form of a land-swap.

The official also revealed that according to the Palestinian proposal, the Palestinians agreed to Israeli retention of Givat Ze'ev and Neve Yaakov in the Jerusalem area, but not Har Homa.

The official said, "We still don't know exactly the areas that Israel wants to annex. It is true that we had seen maps, but [they were] not complete. Maybe Israel wants to annex east Jerusalem, which is 2% of the West Bank"

The official also revealed that Israel wants the safe passage between the West Bank and Gaza Strip to remain under the Israeli sovereignty. "If it will be under the Israeli sovereignty, then why to include it under the swap deal?" the official asked.

According to the official, American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is trying to bridge the gaps between the two positions and these efforts will top the agenda when she returns to the region on August 20th.

According to the Palestinian source, the Israelis appear content to cede the Jordan Valley — once considered non-negotiable — in exchange for adequate "security needs" that include early warning systems and patrols of the borders by the Israeli army. Not surprisingly, the Palestinians were agreeable to the former, but oppose any physical Israeli presence. They did, however, counter with the suggestion of an international force modeled on the UNIFIL presence on the Israel-Lebanon border.

Another major point of departure is the demand by Israel that the Palestinian state be demilitarized. Israel insists that the existing Palestinian security apparatus along with its current weaponry is sufficient for the proposed state — a position the Palestinians reject.

While the issue of a Palestinian right of return for those who left their homes when Israel became a state in 1948 remains contentious, it appears that Israeli negotiators have gone beyond an absolute rejection of the idea. According to the officials who briefed The Media Line, Israel has offered to allow the return of a limited number of Palestinians based on a formula of family unification. Models for compensating refugees have apparently been discussed, with Israel demanding compensation for Jewish refugees who fled Arab countries.

'Abbas spokesman and adviser Nabil Abu Rudeina said, "there is still a wide gap between the two positions on the issue of land and I can confirm that none of the final status issues is closed so far."

Abu Rudeina did not refer directly to specific details in Prime Minister Olmert's proposals, but said, "The Palestinian side will only accept a Palestinian state with territorial continuity, with holy Jerusalem as its capital, without settlements, and on the June 4, 1967 boundaries."

Palestinian negotiator Dr. Sa'ib 'Ariqat insists that the Palestinians have not received any such detailed proposal from the Israelis. "At no time was any 'detailed' or package proposal ever presented to the Palestinians, either by Prime Minister Olmert or any other Israeli official." 'Ariqat said.

Erekat emphasized the need to achieve a comprehensive solution that includes the creation of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital and a "just and agreed upon solution to the refugees." He stressed that serious negotiations are taking place but said there still remains ''wide gaps'' between the two parties.

But nevertheless, senior Palestinian officials confirmed to The Media Line that 'Abbas did, indeed, hear these ideas from Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Qurei' similarly heard the same proposals from Israeli Foreign Minister Livni.

'Abbas and Olmert have met a number of times since President Bush's Annapolis conference in November 2007; and Qurei' and Livni have held dozens of sessions.

The Palestinian officials stressed that while the meetings have included discussions of final status issues such as borders, refugees, settlements, water and bilateral relations, the matter of Jerusalem has not been discussed, primarily because of Olmert's delicate political position vis-à-vis the Shas party. Ruled by rabbinic dictate, Shas has threatened to leave the government coalition if Jerusalem is discussed.

Yet, 'Ariqat insists that, "It was agreed with the Israelis in the presence of the Americans that there will be no agreement until everything is agreed upon. This means reaching an agreement on all the final status issues including Jerusalem which will be the capital of the Palestinian state."

The Palestinian officials maintain that if Olmert wants an agreement in-hand before he leaves office, he will have to open negotiations to include the issue of Jerusalem.

Palestinian negotiator Qurei' is reportedly demanding that the U.S. certify in writing exactly where negotiations now stand as a safeguard against talks returning to square one as the result of an Israeli — or Palestinian — governmental collapse.

"'Abbas Visits Lebanon"
News Item

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud 'Abbas is in Beirut on the second day of a two-day visit. Atop the agenda is the conditions under which 400,000 Palestinian refugees are living in 12 Lebanese refugee camps. 'Abbas is expected to tell Lebanese officials of the need for improved living conditions and greater ease in finding jobs. Violence is also reportedly becoming more and more frequent in the camps. But absorbing the Palestinians into Lebanese society is not an option for 'Abbas. He has re-stated his opposition to "the resettlement of Palestinians in Lebanon." He maintains that "the Palestinians have the right of return [to Israel] and this is an issue we are discussing with the Israelis."

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Taverna, August 30, 2008.

This was written by Sonia Scherr and it appeared asn an intelligence Report of the Southern Poverty Law Center
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=952 The original article contains links to several related videos.


Hate on California and Oregon Campuses

Amir Abdel Malik Ali, who spoke at the University of California, Irvine, this spring at the invitation of the Muslim Student Union, trotted out a series of anti-Semitic canards. (Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism)

Half a century ago, American institutions of higher education nationwide had quotas sharply restricting the number of Jewish students allowed to enroll. Today, those quotas have ceased to exist — along with the school-sanctioned discrimination they embodied. But while anti-Jewish sentiment no longer receives the blessing of university officials, it hasn't been fully eradicated from campuses. "Many colleges throughout the United States continue to experience incidents of anti-Semitism," states a 2006 report from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "This is a serious problem which warrants further attention."

In terms of numbers alone, the problem may seem small. An audit by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which fights bigotry, found that 94 anti-Semitic incidents were reported on U.S. campuses in 2007 — a number that has remained fairly stable over the past few years and represents only about 6% of known occurrences last year of harassment and vandalism targeting Jews. But such incidents tend to affect campus communities disproportionately, often resulting in very public controversies and bitter disputes between students.

College campuses are particularly susceptible to anti-Semitism that originates in certain sectors of the far left. This source of anti-Jewish sentiment often begins with condemnation of Israeli policies and devolves into derogatory statements about all Jewish people. Although criticism of Israel does not typically amount to anti-Semitism — and many critics of the Jewish state are unfairly accused of bigotry — in some cases those who denounce Israel also cross the line into denigration of Jews as a group.

According to the report from the federal civil rights commission: "On many campuses, anti-Israeli or anti-Zionist propaganda has been disseminated that includes traditional anti-Semitic elements, including age-old Jewish stereotypes and defamation. This has included, for example, anti-Israel literature that perpetuates the medieval anti-Semitic blood libel of Jews slaughtering children for ritual purpose, as well as anti-Zionist propaganda that exploits ancient stereotypes of Jews as greedy, aggressive, overly powerful or conspiratorial."

In addition, bigoted speakers who are spurned elsewhere can end up finding a platform on campuses, which are understandably reluctant to bar the expression of even highly offensive views. "Racists and demagogues have ably exploited schools' commitment to free speech, cloaking their propaganda in the guise of academic freedom," states a 1997 ADL report about anti-Semitism on campus. "They have two objectives: hooking the country's future leaders on the ideas they preach, and generating mainstream media coverage through the controversy that inevitably erupts over particularly incendiary events."

The Intelligence Report took an in-depth look at two different examples of modern-day anti-Semitism on college campuses (neither of which occurred in the classroom or was sanctioned in any way by university officials). In both cases, legitimate concerns about Israeli treatment of Palestinians found expression alongside anti-Jewish canards and Holocaust denial. During appearances on public university campuses in California, two Muslim clerics have espoused anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Sept. 11 and asserted that Jews control the media and other powerful institutions. Several hundred miles north, a discussion group seeking justice for Palestinians has morphed into a haven for white supremacists that's brought a string of Holocaust deniers to speak at the University of Oregon.

At a California university, two Muslim speakers go beyond criticism of Israel into outright anti-Semitism

IRVINE, Calif. — At a speaker series titled "Never Again? The Palestinian Holocaust," it was no surprise to hear denunciations of Israel.

But students who attended the weeklong event this spring at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) were treated to more disturbing rhetoric when two of the speakers trotted out anti-Semitic canards blaming Israeli Jews for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The speakers, Imam Mohammad al-Asi and Amir Abdel Malik Ali, also asserted that Zionist Jews control the media, financial institutions and the U.S. government.

UCI's Muslim Student Union invited the two men to campus as part of its annual speaker series, which has featured a line-up of critics of Israel. This year's event coincided with the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state's founding and featured nine speakers, several of them Jewish, who lambasted Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

But al-Asi and Ali went beyond criticism of Israeli policies and ventured into outright anti-Semitism during speeches that drew from 100 to 200 people, many of them Muslim students.

Although pro-Israel advocates sometimes questionably accuse critics of Israeli policy, especially Muslim critics, of being anti-Semitic, both Al-Asi and Ali seem to have repeatedly crossed the line from lambasting Israeli policy to promoting bizarre anti-Jewish conspiracy theories of the sort typically favored by neo-Nazis, as well as by giving voice to loathing for all Jews as a people.

As Al-Asi put it in a previous speech at UCI: "We have a psychosis in the Jewish community that is unable to co-exist equally and brotherly with other human beings. You can take a Jew out of the ghetto, but you cannot take the ghetto out of the Jew."

"Mr. Ali and Mr. al-Asi are part of a speaking circuit that regularly makes appearances at California campuses beyond UCI and has done so for many years," said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. "It's troubling because they embrace anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, glorify violence against civilians, promote antipathy toward democratic institutions and introduce fabrications that go unchecked — not because they have political views critical of American policies, Israel or Zionism."

In fact, between the two of them, Ali and al-Asi have spoken at more than 15 colleges, including San Francisco State University; Sacramento State University; California State University, Long Beach; University of Southern California; University of California, Santa Cruz; University of California, Berkeley; University of California, Los Angeles; Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif.; the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Portland State University in Oregon, and York University in Canada.

Orchestrating 9/11

Al-Asi and Ali spoke twice during their respective visits to UCI on May 12 and May 15: once outdoors in a busy area of campus and once in the evening at UCI's student center.

Al-Asi is a member of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought, a think tank that advocates "the assertion of Islamic values in public and political life."

Writing in the February 2007 issue of the group's magazine, Crescent International, al-Asi cited a single example of an anti-Arab comment from an ultra-Orthodox Israeli rabbi and came to this conclusion: "Considering the sort of behavior and attitudes coming from Jewish religious figures, it is rather less surprising to see the actions of a secular Jewish state. This is precisely what qualifies Yahud [Arabic for Jews] for displacement, dispossession and depression. That is why they have been stamped with shame, mortification and the wrath of the Almighty."

Ali leads the Masjid al-Islam mosque in Oakland, Calif.; the mosque is part of the As-Sabiqun movement, which advocates "the establishment of Islam as a complete way of life in America."

Echoing a rumor popular in far-right circles, both Ali and al-Asi claimed during their most recent visits to UCI that Israeli Jews orchestrated the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In response to a question just after he'd left the podium, al-Asi claimed that five Israeli citizens — suspected members of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency — were filming the World Trade Center as the attacks took place.

"That's one indicator that somehow these people had some type of inside information that something like this is going to happen," he said. "Or else they wouldn't be there with their video cameras taking pictures of this event in progress."

Although five Israeli citizens were arrested shortly after the attack — and one of them reportedly had a camera with pictures of the burning World Trade Center — the FBI found no evidence linking the men to the terrorist attacks. They were deported to Israel because of immigration violations.

Al-Asi also implied that Jews who worked in the World Trade Center had received advance warning of the attack and that the media had launched a cover-up. "They [the Jews who died] don't come up to be the same proportion of the people who live in New York or the people who are of the Jewish faith who work in these buildings."

Al-Asi managed to connect this contemporary conspiracy theory to the age-old stereotype about Jews and money. Because the Twin Towers housed financial institutions, he said, lots of Jews must have been employed there. "Jews, generally speaking, they don't work as trash collectors and, you know, hard labor jobs. Many of their jobs have to do with white-collar positions — and especially when it comes to finances."

It's not the first time al-Asi has suggested that Jews working in the World Trade Center stayed home on Sept. 11. Speaking at the National Press Club in October 2001 with members of the New Black Panther Party, an anti-Semitic black separatist group, al-Asi asserted that Israeli Jews perpetrated Sept. 11 because they wanted the United States to share their feelings of insecurity. "There's 4,000 to 5,000 Israeli Jews who were supposed to be in those two buildings on Sept. 11," he said in a news conference aired on C-SPAN. "After the dust settles, we ask how many of these 4,000 to 5,000 were killed in this tragedy? And they can only confirm there was one death and three to four injured. Did they know something we didn't know, and if they did, we want answers: Why didn't they go to work? ... Where were those 5,000 and why are you covering up these facts?"

Making a Myth

Ali expresses similar views. As a small group gathered around him after his noon speech at UCI, he said that Carl Cameron of Fox News tried to expose the "truth" about Sept. 11 in a news report. "He named those people who were there celebrating that the buildings were coming down, and how they were Zionist Jews, and how they were arrested and how they were let go. So the story was taken off," Ali said. "The Zionist Jews were behind it. Mossad [the national Israeli intelligence agency] was behind it."

During a speech at UCI last year, Ali told the same the story about Mossad agents rejoicing as the World Trade Center collapsed. He also said Zionist Jews perpetrated the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 as well as 2001. "They do things to make people think it's Muslims, when it's actually them behind the scenes," he said.

The rumor about Jews avoiding the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 was unwittingly started by the Jerusalem Post; an article in the newspaper's online edition said the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem knew of 4,000 Israelis believed to be in the vicinity of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon when the attacks occurred. This information was soon twisted into the myth that 4,000 Jews failed to show up for work on Sept. 11. According to the U.S. State Department, which issued a report refuting the rumor, various estimates show that Jews made up 10% to 15% of those who died in the World Trade Center — a figure that tracks closely with the estimated 12% of New York City residents who are Jewish.

The Muslim Student Union, which brought the speakers to campus, didn't respond to two E-mails requesting comment for this article. But the group's spokeswoman, Nida Chowdhry, told the Irvine student newspaper, New University, that "we're trying to foster dialogue and truth. If we found out that something was incorrect, we would change it. Promoting falsehood would be against my faith."

Cathy Lawhon, a spokeswoman for UCI, noted that the university does not sponsor the speakers. "Their views are not reflective of what is heard in any classroom or any other venue on campus," she said. She said the university provides forums to encourage civil discourse and understanding among students, including "Difficult Dialogues," which aims to promote discussion about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and related issues through courses, lectures and other events throughout the year.

Jewish Control

As for al-Asi, he argued that he couldn't possibly be anti-Semitic because Semites include Arabs such as himself. During his evening presentation at UCI in May, he blamed "Zionists" for controlling public opinion to such an extent that people equate anti-Semitism with hatred of Jews. "You have a monopoly over money, but you're not going to have a monopoly over ideas," he said. Even though Jews comprise roughly 2% of the U.S. population — and less than 1% of the world population — al-Asi implied that they dominate everyone else. "I don't like to use the word, but Muslims and Christians are outsiders," he said. "We're not Jews."

Al-Asi also claimed that several Jewish government officials secretly hold Israeli citizenship. "If we have officials in the United States government who owe their allegiance to Israel before the United States, we'd like to know about it, especially when they are occupying some of the most sensitive positions in the government," he said. "And I'll just give you one example: Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security, a department that has about 185,000 employees. This person is a dual citizen. He's an Israeli and an American. ... And how many other dual citizens do we have in this country who owe their allegiance to Israel first and the United States second?"

But the U.S.-born Chertoff is not, and never has been, an Israeli citizen. "He is an American citizen and that is the only citizenship he has ever had," said Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner.

Likewise, Ali has said many times during campus visits that Jews control the media. He has falsely identified as Jewish both media mogul Rupert Murdoch and Flemming Rose, the Danish newspaper editor who published controversial cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammad.

In a May 2006 speech at UCI, Ali said: "Rupert Murdoch: Zionist Jew. Zionist Jew owns Fox News. They say that it's anti-Semitic if you say that the Zionists control the media. You better get out of here. Old Rupert is a straight-up Zionist Jew. He is. Put that on Fox News. Rupert Murdoch is a Zionist Jew."

Even when a questioner told him after his most recent UCI speech that he'd gotten his facts wrong about Murdoch and Rose, Ali was undeterred: "They're definitely Jewish. They're Zionist Jews. What's the other question? The media. Yes, Zionists do control the media."

"I just wanted to make sure you're not backtracking," said the questioner.

"No," Ali replied, "I'm not backtracking at all."

On an Oregon university campus, a left-wing discussion group takes a giant leap to the extreme right

Nearly 15 years ago, a longtime pacifist and retired professor in Eugene, Ore., started an informal group whose stated aim was to "provide information and points of view" on "war and peace, militarism and pacifism, violence and non-violence." He named it the Pacifica Forum, after a San Francisco area supper club that discussed similar issues.

Now, the group he founded appears to have forsaken its left-wing origins and made a giant leap to the extreme right. Over the past 10 months, Pacifica Forum has brought a veritable Who's Who of leading Holocaust deniers to speak at the University of Oregon, including Mark Weber and David Irving. "Pacifica Forum acts as if it's striving to become a West Coast stop on the white supremacist speaker circuit," opined the local newspaper, The Register-Guard, in June.

Indeed, the group has created a stir in this college town known for its vibrant arts scene, stunning scenery and liberal politics. Local media outlets have covered the Pacifica Forum extensively, dozens of people have protested the group's speakers, and the University of Oregon president condemned the racist and anti-Semitic rhetoric of a Pacifica Forum attendee. While fewer than 10 people (besides reporters and monitors) usually attend the group's weekly meetings at the University of Oregon campus, much larger crowds have turned out to hear the group's speakers.

"They've truly escalated," said Hal Applebaum, executive director of Hillel, a Jewish campus organization, at the University of Oregon. "They hide behind issues of free speech and claim it's important to hear what these people say. They lend legitimacy to speakers who have been discredited and widely condemned by almost everybody who's taken a look at their stuff."

Community activists fear that white supremacists are seizing control of the group and using it to recruit others to their cause. "It's not just the programming. It's the atmosphere, where expressions of anti-Semitism and racism and homophobia are acceptable — not only acceptable but warmly regarded," said Michael Williams, who has helped organize protests of the group's speakers.

But Pacifica Forum attendees see themselves as a persecuted group committed to free speech and the discussion of taboo topics. "Especially after we experienced — beginning five years ago — efforts to shut us down, we became devoted to free speech," said Orval Etter, the 92-year-old founder and chairman of Pacifica Forum. "We felt that the speakers needed to be heard in this community in order for the community to be better informed about public affairs in general."

Etter denied that the group has been overtaken by white supremacists. Rather, the group's loose structure (it has no bylaws or board of directors) enables people with diverse viewpoints to participate in the group, he said. As for the allegation that Pacifica Forum is anti-Jewish, "If you rub a substantial number of Jews the wrong way, you're anti-Semitic," he told the Intelligence Report. "In that sense, I have to admit that the forum and I, in particular, are anti-Semitic."

The Flirtation Begins

Orval Etter is an emeritus professor of planning, public policy and management at the University of Oregon, a musician who received an award for his support of the arts in Lane County, and a pacifist who was a conscientious objector during World War II and afterward worked for a national interfaith peace organization. He started Pacifica Forum in 1994.

Etter is outspoken in his belief that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians constitutes a "holocaust." Not surprisingly, the programs presented by Pacifica Forum on the Middle East have long been sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. But programs that went beyond criticism of Israel into anti-Semitism, particularly Holocaust denial, have also been part of the forum's mix, Williams said. "Until [early 2005], the forum was mostly older people, often more or less progressive but naïve in the sense that they were often unable to distinguish between anti-Israel and anti-Jewish positions, expressions and programming," Williams said.

Between 2003 and 2005, three organizations that had sponsored Pacifica Forum dropped the group due to concerns about anti-Semitic programs. One organization, the Eugene Fellowship of Reconciliation (an interfaith peace group), cited a Pacifica Forum presentation given repeatedly on the anniversary of Kristallnacht in which Etter uncritically summarizes a book by Ingrid Weckert, a German Holocaust denier who claims that "world Jewry" perpetrated the nationwide 1938 pogrom that destroyed the property of German Jews.

Despite losing its sponsors, Pacifica Forum wasn't homeless for long. Etter and former University of Oregon sports information director George Beres created the Campus Civil Liberties Circle, under whose sponsorship they were able to reserve free space on campus for Pacifica Forum. For about a year beginning in early 2005, Pacifica Forum largely turned its back on anti-Semitic programming, significantly increased its attendance, and drew people with more political savvy than before, Williams said.

Then Etter met Valdas Anelauskas, a Lithuanian immigrant who describes himself as a white separatist and racialist, at a talk Etter gave on the imprisonment of Holocaust denier David Irving in Austria. Etter invited Anelauskas, who lives in Eugene, to present a series of lectures on "Zionism and Russia" beginning in May 2006.

An Unsavory Friend

In his lecture series, Anelauskas argued that Jews perpetrated a greater genocide than the Holocaust during the first half century of Communist rule in the former Soviet Union. In one speech, he proclaimed that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which describes a supposed Jewish plot to take over the world, was not the Tsarist forgery that experts say it was; on the contrary, he said, reading it "makes one's flesh crawl." In his first lecture on "Zionism and Russia," Anelauskas said: "There are many good people and also many bad people in every nation, but after many years of my experience and research, I came to the conclusion that among the Jews, for some reason, there is a much larger percentage of bad people than among others." Anelauskas dedicated at least one of the lectures to Germar Rudolf, who was imprisoned in his native Germany for Holocaust denial.

Etter was impressed by Anelauskas's talks. "They were quite well-documented and in those lectures I didn't sense any clear anti-Semitism," he said. Neither did Dawn Coslow, a regular Pacifica Forum attendee, mother of four, and non-traditional college student. "We were spellbound by the amount of facts being offered us," she told the Intelligence Report.

But others say the lectures represented a turning point for Pacifica Forum. "Anelauskas began attracting people for whom anti-Semitism was the message they wanted to hear," Williams said.

Etter has acknowledged that Anelauskas has made some clearly anti-Semitic remarks in conversations with other Pacifica Forum attendees. He said he was greatly upset by the poor documentation in a talk that Anelauskas prepared on Martin Luther King Jr. The lecture — which Anelauskas cobbled together from Internet sources and gave to Pacifica Forum attendee Jimmy Marr to edit and deliver — vilified King as a "moral leper and communist dupe" with a penchant for deviant sex. Identical claims have been made by the white supremacist right for decades.

This February, Anelauskas posted a comment on the website of the student newspaper, the Oregon Daily Emerald, in response to a column that expressed support for the war in Iraq. "Even if the author's name wasn't Deborah Bloom, after reading your opinion piece in the Emerald (Feb. 7) there is no doubt that it was written by someone who is Jewish," he wrote in part. "Because only from people of that peculiar tribe can we expect such Talmudic hatred for humanity. There is even a famous saying that wars are the Jews' harvest." The Daily Emerald reported that its editor-in-chief decided to take down the post because it constituted hate speech.

Anelauskas declined a request for an interview. "I hope that one day you will end up, as the communist KGB did, in the dustbin of history," he E-mailed the Intelligence Report.

Enter the Heavyweights

About a year after Anelauskas' talks, the Pacifica Forum invited Mark Weber to speak. Weber is the director of the Institute for Historical Review, a leading Holocaust denial group that maintains a scholarly veneer, and once belonged to the neo-Nazi National Alliance. Weber was supposed to talk about "the Israel Lobby," but that didn't stop him from taking aim at Jews as a group. "Jews view non-Jews in a distrustful and even adversarial way," Weber told the audience of about 70 last Nov. 3. "Throughout history, Jews have time and again wielded great power to further group interests that are separate from, and often contrary to, those of the non-Jewish populations among whom they live."

Then came Irving, who has achieved notoriety since losing a libel suit he filed against an American historian who called him a Holocaust denier (the British judge in that case famously labeled Irving "pro-Nazi"). The poster advertising Irving's appearance on June 9 praised him as a "legendary British historian and martyr for free speech" and stated that he would speak about "political imprisonment in modern Europe." But Irving — who once said that more people died in the back seat of Sen. Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than in the gas chambers at Auschwitz — devoted only part of his talk to his legal troubles and spent the remaining time on revisionist history, mostly an effort to exonerate Hitler.

During the question-and-answer session, he claimed that the Jews, not the Nazis, were to blame for whatever might have happened to them during World War II. (Irving generally steered clear of the term "Holocaust.") That's because of the "networking [they do] for their own benefit at the exclusion of non-Jews. Non-Jews don't network with the same intensity. And this was undoubtedly a contributing factor in what we now call the Holocaust." Not only that, but the Jews can expect another "tragedy" in this country if they don't change their behavior, Irving said. "The Jews in the United States are now beginning to occupy the same positions or predominance in the lucrative, wealthy professions and so on that they occupied prior to Nazi Germany, which caused their tragedy," he told about 70 people.

Etter, who attended both talks, contends that Irving and Weber are legitimate historians. "I'm not aware that he's made statements against Jews," Etter said of Irving. "If he's made statements that are critical of Jews, it's not because they're Jews, it's because of what they've done or what they've said."

A pamphlet written by Etter in 1998 and distributed at a Pacifica Forum presentation complained that the term "Holocaust denier" ostracizes and silences people who contend that certain claims about the Holocaust are exaggerated. In his interview with the Intelligence Report, Etter said he thinks those exaggerations include the number of Jewish victims. "I admit that there were some bad things done to Jews during World War II, but I don't believe that everything they claim is truthful," Etter said.

The parade of speakers who share that view has continued. On June 24, about 40 people attended a talk by Pacifica Forum speaker Tomislav Sunic, who only three days earlier had addressed the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) at its national "leadership conference" in Sheffield, Ala. Sunic, a writer and white nationalist, had previously spoken to the Washington D.C.-area chapter of the CCC and the Institute for Historical Review (at least twice). He appeared on the "Political Cesspool," a white nationalist radio show, and was interviewed extensively for David Duke's Internet radio program. Sunic and the former Klan boss (whose latest book is entitled Jewish Supremacism: My Awakening to the Jewish Question) commiserated about Jewish domination, low birth rates among people of European ancestry and discrimination against whites. "Especially in these multiracial cities, like L.A. or Washington D.C., I'm losing my eye contact," Sunic confessed to Duke. "I'm sort of afraid even of raising my head and looking at people right in their eyes because I know they may not be of my species."

Exodus: Fleeing the Forum

The number of people attending Pacifica Forum meetings is less than half what it was two years ago — and it's mostly a different crowd. Among those who left were Mariah Leung and Jack Dresser, who regularly made factual presentations on Israel and Palestine as well as on other topics related to war, peace and justice. "A small group of attendees with a 'white separatist' preoccupation was attracted to the forum and started attending regularly," they wrote in an opinion piece posted on Pacifica Forum's website. "While never part of forum sessions, e-mailed views about 'race-mixing,' 'blood consciousness,' 'miscegenation that tears down civilization and pollutes good races' and 'the genocidal war against our own race' began to proliferate."

Dresser, a former Army psychologist during the Vietnam War, told the Intelligence Report that after the Anelauskas lectures, he spoke to Pacifica Forum attendees about the psychology of racism and its consequences, showing photos of lynchings and anti-Jewish Nazi propaganda posters. "Since Pacifica Forum is a public forum, Mariah and I had no objection to attendance by the self-described 'white separatists' and even entertained some hope of modifying their views," he E-mailed. "However, we could not allow them any control of programming in a forum with which our names were regularly associated. Orval declined to exclude their influence in programming decisions and we thereupon formally dissociated ourselves."

The community has spoken out strongly against the spate of anti-Jewish and racist speakers. The Anti-Hate Task Force — a broad-based community organization sponsored by the nonprofit Community Alliance of Lane County — organized protests before the speeches by Weber, Irving and Sunic. The week after Weber's lecture, about 80 people attended a symposium where four University of Oregon professors spoke about the Holocaust, said David Frank, dean of the university's Honors College.

For its part, the university has continued to allow Pacifica Forum to meet on campus. "The university is committed to free speech, and Pacifica Forum's use of the space does not reflect a university position on topics that they present," said university spokeswoman Julie Brown. Still, in a spring letter to his colleagues at the University of Oregon, university president Dave Frohnmayer condemned Anelauskas' anti-Semitic rant against the student newspaper columnist and called the presentation on Martin Luther King "unabashedly racist."

All of this has Etter convinced that his group is being unfairly smeared — and he knows who's to blame. "The way Jews in this town have treated the forum, I must confess that I'm being impelled quite against my wishes to see in the Jewish community a lot of unsavory behavior," he lamented.

"So I've undergone a transformation somewhat in the direction of becoming an anti-Semite."

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 29, 2008.

Israel's Defense Min. Barak long has promised a major invasion of Gaza. His statements show he never meant it. I think he was deceiving the public. Israeli officials have a record of making false, defense-minded self-portraits. Here is Dr. Aaron Lerner's verbatim analysis of Barak's statements:

If Israeli forces did go into Gaza, Barak said, "afterward we would have to achieve a truce, and we would have to deal with the same parties as before."

"Even if Israeli forces stay there two years and destroy the Hamas regime down to the last office and the last activist, in the aftermath [Israel] is controlling another people against their will, and the Palestinian people, when they compare the two, will choose Hamas ... and not those who talk peace," he said, referring to the moderate Fatah, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas. ["Moderate?"]

That's "talk peace" — not "make peace".

And Barak believes that if Israel destroys Hamas that the Palestinian street will choose Hamas over Fatah.

Does he think that the Palestinian street will choose Fatah over Hamas if Israel allows Hamqs to continue and grow stronger?

Question: What does Mr. Barak think should be the primary objective of the Government of Israel (hint: he is minister of "defense"). Ehud Barak apparently thinks that the primary objective of the Government of Israel is to get the Palestinian public to support Fatah.

And while he himself demonstrated in his failed negotiations with Arafat that it is hardly a foregone conclusion that even a deal that includes reckless Israeli concessions will satisfy the Palestinians, it would also appear that he accepts the assertion that a necessary condition of any Israeli strategy/plan is that it ultimately leads to the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state come-what-may.

But is it indeed reasonable to insist that a necessary condition of any Israeli strategy/plan is that it ultimately leads to the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state come-what-may?

A sovereign Palestinian state is at best a "means" rather than and "ends" for Israel.

Israel has goals: survival, development, Olmert's goal that Israel be "a fun place to live in", etc.

One may think that a sovereign Palestinian state would help Israeli attain these goals, but it isn't itself a goal.

Barak now argues that it doesn't matter how strong Hamas gets now as a result of their exploitation of the ceasefire because even before the ceasefire (thanks to the smuggling that has taken place since Israel's retreat from Gaza) "Everyone knows that when the truce was declared, there were already hundreds of Grad missiles there."

Again — that's Defense Minister Ehud Barak. A man boasting a military career. Saying with a straight face that there is no difference between Hamas having hundreds of missiles that can reach as far as Ashkelon and Hamas having thousands that can reach Ashkelon and hundreds that can reach Ashdod and beyond. Not to mention an army that has been able to exploit the ceasefire to openly engage in large scale training exercises, build fortifications, underground launching position, dig tunnels, extensively plant mines and otherwise transform the Gaza Strip into a giant killing field against Israeli troops.

By the way — does the fact that Hamas already has " hundreds of Grad missiles" in the Gaza Strip weigh in as an argument that Israel should wake up and do something already, or, as DM Barak seems to contend — as an argument for Israel to surrender?

What is really going on?

Is this really what Mr. Barak thinks or is he simply jockeying for a position on the Left end of the Israeli political spectrum in anticipation of elections?

One thing is clear: Mr. Barak has sent a message to the world that the ongoing smuggling into Gaza and strengthening of the Hamas army isn't really a big deal as far as Israel's Minister of Defense is concerned.

And if Defense Minister Barak doesn't give a damn — why should the world?

Expect the same with regard to Hezbollah in the north (IMRA, 8/10).


Pres. Bush had the right idea. Don't deal with Arafat — corrupt, unpopular, undemocratic [and anti-American]. Then Bush abandoned the idea

Natan Sharansky believes in a peace process, provided that the Arab side has a civil society. Otherwise, Hamas will take over.

Foreign countries gave Arafat hundreds of millions of dollars, "to strengthen him." He stole the money. This alienated his people, who turned to Hamas. [Israel still makes concession to the P.A., to strengthen it. Israel repeats this mistake.]

Israel withdrew from Gaza without demanding concessions. That strengthened the more extreme element there, which claimed to have forced Israel out. This supposed "strengthening" focuses on who rules, rather than on how. Result: Since September 2000, "...122 killed in the streets (suspected collaborators), 41 by capital punishment, 34 honor killings, 48 stabbed to death, seven beaten to death, 258 killed under mysterious circumstances and 818 cases of gunfire. So far no one has been charged let alone tried for any of these unlawful killings."

"Where is the international outrage..." as P.A. leaders wreck their own society?

Bassem Eid says that when he accused Israel of human rights violations, he won foreign approval. When he monitored P.A. violations the same way, he won foreign disapproval. They thought he was undermining Arafat and Abbas, whom they expected to make peace with Israel (IMRA, 8/12). Fanatics don't make peace.


People criticize Pres. Bush's firm foreign policies, but his reversals cause his failures. He reversed his policy of opposing terrorism in the P.A., and now subsidizes the P.A. and seeks it independence, while it attacks Israel. He denounced Syria tyranny over Lebanon, then upheld the Syrian dictator. He won applause for vowing to help dissidents, but then ignored them. He assured Japan he would take away N. Korea's nuclear weapons, then offered to let N. Korea keep them. After threatening Iran, he now lets it proceed.

Obama, too, promises anything, then betrays his promises. He promised to keep Jerusalem undivided, then reneged. He tells some audiences he will withdraw from Iraq by schedule and that he will talk with Iran unconditionally, but tells others it depends on Iraqi conditions and says Iran has to meet certain preconditions. Obama and Bush pander for applause. Flip-flops sacrifice credibility, something a great power needs (Michael Rubin, MEFNews, 8/12). Georgia found this out the hard way.


I went through college before they went mad. We did hear of some juvenile hazing and panty raids. Then came the 1960s, when college students might riot without knowing the issue.

Now, leftist intolerance is rife at our dumbed-down colleges, as much from faculty as from students. The earlier students grew up chronologically, and joined the faculty. They disseminate ideological intolerance immune to much challenge, and let the students engage in violence and antisemitism or at least intimidation.

College has turned from a process of opening minds, as during the Renaissance, to closing and hardening minds, as in a totalitarian society. The good citizens of the US and other Western countries pay for this perversion of their children.


Some hundreds of Jews from war-torn Georgia have taken refuge in Israel. Most probably will stay, welcomed as they are. They will not be kept in camps, as are refugees in many other places. This is another example validating Zionism. The Jews must have a country of their own.


Georgia acted cocky, challenging Russia. Were the intelligence services of the US, Israel, and Georgia unaware of Russian capabilities and US limitations, or did they advise Georgia of them and Georgia disregarded the intelligence? How Georgia fell into the Russian trap. Ukraine must be worried, now.

Apparently, Putin quietly reformed the Russian military so that it wouldn't blunder as it had in its prior two wars, in Afghanistan and Chechnya. The US media had quietly stopped reporting on Chechnya, so I didn't realize that Russia finally prevailed there.

How did Georgia not have its air force on alert, so at least it could meet the Russian bombers rather than let its own airports get bombed without a fight?


No. 15988 reported Haaretz' haste to blame Israel for whatever it is accused of, before investigating. Actually, the Arabs are likelier to have done it, and usually are shown to have done it, but by that time, the media forgets it, so Israel is left with a poor reputation and the Arabs escape censure. Same thing for IDF acceptance of blame for bombings and Prime Ministers' apology. Psychosis!

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

Posted by B. Taverna, August 29, 2008.

This was written by Terry Milewski and it appeared appeared in CBC news (Canada)

Terry Milewski is a senior CBC reporter based in Vancouver and has been with national television news since 1980. A parliamentary reporter in his early years, Milewski became The National's first permanent Middle East correspondent in 1986. Prior to being posted in Vancouver, he was the Washington correspondent for CBC-TV News where he reported on the United States, Central and South America, the Caribbean and Europe.


Close your eyes, and you'd swear you were in Tehran. The tinkle of the santur, the whiff of Persian kebabs, the dancers chattering in Farsi ... It's Persian Night!

But open your eyes and you'll see the old banknotes with the shah's picture pinned up in the kitchen. You're in the last place you'd expect to find a celebration of Iranian culture: Mahane Jehuda.

Jews from Iran celebrate Persian Night in Jerusalem. (CBC)

Mahane Jehuda is the old Jewish Market in Jerusalem — a little more trendy nowadays, with cappuccino bars squeezed in amongst the fruit and vegetable stands. But Persian Night? In Jerusalem? While Iran's president threatens to wipe Israel off the map?

In truth, it's not so strange. Since the time of Darius the Great, there have been ties of blood and history between the two nations that are now, 2,500 years later, on a collision course. Some 60,000 Jews from Iran live in Israel and they don't forget the old country, where many still have family. So it's natural that they gather often to enjoy Persian food and to sing along with their favourite Persian songs.

Should Israel strike?

But it's not just the Iranian Jews who are intensely interested in all things Persian. Israel, and the world beyond, is debating the looming question: should Israel strike at Iran's nuclear facilities before the mullahs get the bomb?

In Mahane Jehuda, on Persian Night, the prevailing view seems to be, no — but America should! Why, people want to know, does the world think it's only Israel's job to stop Iran going nuclear?

"Why Canada not bombing Iran?" asks one celebrant. "Why is America not bombing Iran? Only Israel — why?"

Of course, nobody is bombing Iran, yet. But Israel is creeping inexorably to a decision — and many experts say time is running out. In one or two years, they say, an Iranian nuclear device may be ready and it will be too late to stop it. Israel's new F16s — called F16Is — have been fitted with bigger fuel tanks to increase their range and Israeli missile defences are being upgraded.

An Iranian Cross-Country Checkup

What to do to avert this nightmare? Many governments — including those of Israel, the U.S. and Canada — take this question to Menashe Amir.

Amir is the voice of Israel in Iran — but he's much more than that. Governments call for his advice because, on Israel's state-run radio, he's been broadcasting daily to Iran, in Farsi, for 48 years. He's been at it ever since he immigrated to Israel from Iran and, for the past 15 years, he's also been hosting a fascinating Sunday call-in show. It's a kind of an Iranian version of the CBC Radio program Cross-Country Checkup, with a twist: it's broadcast from outside the country.

Iranians can call a number in Germany, so that they're not seen to be calling the "Zionist entity," and they're rerouted to Amir's studio, where they can vent. Once you understand what they're saying, it's a revelation.

Amir's Iranian callers don't just condemn their own government. They pour out their admiration for democracy, for America — even for Israel. On a recent show, the first caller had this to say: "Long live the people of Israel, who have so much freedom and democracy that they can prosecute their prime minister."

Actually, Ehud Olmert hasn't been prosecuted yet. But it could happen. And Iranians aren't shy about applauding Israel's democracy — or lamenting Iran's lack of it. One pleads, "Come and help us overthrow this regime." Another asks, "Why do we need an atomic bomb? For what?"

West needs to wake up

In an interview with CBC News, Amir said the West has failed to understand the Iranian threat. He believes the regime is opposed by most Iranians but is consumed by an apocalyptic vision: the triumph of Shia Islam [also known as Shiite] over the world.

Western governments, he says, don't see that, for the Iranian mullahs, the destruction of the Jewish state is just a step along the way. Everyone knows that Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, called for Israel to be wiped off the map. But Amir points out, "On the same day, in the same speech that Ahmadinejad called for wiping off Israel from the map, he added that the destruction of Israel is the first step of our final confrontation with western civilization."

Amir says the regime dreams of a new caliphate — an Islamic empire spanning the globe. He adds, "I want to tell you one more thing that the western countries don't understand or don't take it serious — and that's the item of the Mahdi, the Shiite Messiah. And they believe that once the Mahdi comes, the whole universe will convert to Shiite Islam."

The technology factor

What scares Israelis even more is that this fundamentalist world view is married to high technology. Iran recently sent a rocket into space to mark the birthday of the Mahdi — a 9th century imam known to Shias as the "last imam." When Iranian TV covered the launch, the reporter didn't forget to add the obligatory phrase when mentioning the Madhi: "May Allah hasten his return."

Amir says the rocket sent a message. "They have the money, the missiles, they are seeking to have the nuclear bomb and the life of humankind is not important for them. I want to mention what Rahim Safavy, who was the chief commander of the revolutionary guards in Iran, said a few days ago: 'We shall win and you, the westerners, shall lose because we gave 200,000 victims, martyrs, in eight years of war with Iraq and we have 300,000 disabled and injured in this war — and we don't care about it. But you, the westerners, are afraid to give 4,000 or 5,000 thousand victims and casualties, so the final victory will be ours.' "

But Amir says the Iranian people don't share the regime's messianic vision. He says most would support an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities and even rise up against the regime.

"Iranians are totally a different nation — a peaceful, polite, moderate people who want a good life, who adore the United States, who respect Canada, who like western music ... But the regime in Iran doesn't feel like they're Iranians. Mostly, firstly, they think they are Shi'ite Muslims and they have to work for the sake of Islam and not for the sake of Iran — and they are sacrificing the Iranian interest for the sake of Shi'ism."

Prepare for the worst

But not everyone shares Amir's view on the fragility of Iran's government.

One who does not is Shabtai Shavit, who ran Israel's legendary spy service, the Mossad, from 1989-96. Shavit, who's now a security consultant, says the notion of Iranians overthrowing the regime in the wake of an Israeli strike is a fantasy.

Still, Shavit agrees with Amir that Israel must not assume that the regime will act rationally. "We have to make our decisions according to the worst-case scenario: They're going to have the bomb," Shavit says. "They're going to pursue ... an unrational way and they're going to use the bomb. If this is the case, then I don't have any other choice but to pre-empt it."

Amir says his Iranian callers believe Israel has an obligation to act.

Their message, he says, is rooted in history. "They claim the Israelis and the Jews have a historical debt to the Iranians because, 2,000 years ago, Cyrus the Great came, freed Jews from Babylon and he sent them back to their country to build again their homeland ... Iranian listeners say, now that's the time you pay us back. Please come and help us to get rid of this regime."

Suddenly, Persian Night in Jerusalem doesn't seem so strange.

What Iranians are saying

A sampling of calls from Iranians, recorded and translated from Farsi by CBC News at Menashe Amir's Jerusalem studio:

'Long live the people of Israel, who have so much freedom and democracy that they can prosecute their prime minister.'

'Islam only exists for [Ayatollah] Khomeini. They've ruined the people's lives ... they've brought dictatorship. Khomeini, [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad ... with the oil income from the country, they live in their palaces while we live under the poverty line. What Islam? ... We don't want to live under tyranny ... why can't we have a good life?'

'First of all, come and help us overthrow this regime and then we can have a referendum. But first we have to overthrow the regime — without violence.'

'Our people know the regime and they know their bad intentions ... unfortunately, the governments of Europe aren't doing anything because they're only worried about their economic interests.'

'For what purpose do the people of Iran need nuclear weapons? The people of Iran should demand bread, water and freedom and they should shout it out. Why do we need an atomic bomb? For what?'

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 29, 2008.

Since Rice's visit earlier this week, there are suggestions that the pace of our negotiations with the PA have accelerated and that something secret is being cooked. Rice apparently proposed "new ideas" before she left, that included some notion of giving the Palestinians part of Jerusalem but allowing us to remain for up to five years — which simply delays and does not solve the problems inherent in any division of our city.


That our government is not to be trusted in this regard — that Olmert would like to go out in what he imagines to somehow be a blaze of glory because of what he will have managed to "achieve" in spite of his legal difficulties — I do not question for a moment.

The issue is what is realistically possible. My take remains that the sides are in great likelihood simply too far apart to achieve a comprehensive agreement. Abbas has rejected out of hand a partial agreement that, for example, tables the issue of Jerusalem for later. And Barry Rubin has pointed out that Abbas "is not moderate on the Palestinian refugees' right of return, which is very close to his heart." This is an issue, says, Rubin, on which neither side is ready to comprise.

There are some concessions that Olmert or Livni might make in secret that would not even play with the government — would not garner the approval of the Cabinet, never mind the Knesset. The question is at what point Olmert might sign something and what the legality of it would be if there were no Cabinet approval.

Right now it seems that this is a time for extreme vigilance and appropriate action, such as is deemed most effective, without hysteria.

Olmert is scheduled to meet with Abbas again on Sunday.


I would like to share one statement by Livni from the press conference she held with Rice, which demonstrates clearly Livni's deviousness:

"...we need to also remind ourselves where we stood only a year ago, when we faced terror attacks, when the situation in Gaza Strip led to a kind of an understanding that there was no hope for peace.

"We launched Annapolis process. We are now — there is a dialogue between Israel and diplomatic leaders on the Palestinian side. There is hope for peace...And I think that sometimes there is a need to remind ourselves that we changed the situation, the atmosphere, the situation on the ground."

How far afield she has gone with this, mixing apples and oranges with essential dishonesty. The cessation of terror attacks from Gaza has nothing whatsoever to do with our negotiations with the PA. While she might like to give this impression, most clearly Annapolis didn't bring relative quiet to the people of Sderot and environs.

What changed "the situation on the ground"? A very questionable and very tenuous ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza. Does this increase hope for peace? Quite the contrary. Hamas is stockpiling weapons toward the day when they intend to hit us. Hard. No "hope" here, but rather our failure to respond effectively and a weakening of our deterrence.

So, here we see why Olmert and Livni support this foolish ceasefire: It provides a semblance of quiet that they expect will give them a political advantage: See what we have achieved!



I would suggest that Livni — who is now the solid frontrunner over Mofaz for position of Kadima leader in polls — would like to give the impression of doing something that increases our possibility of peace, but would not want to actually reach the stage of having signed something. For this would mean that her concessions — which would be unpalatable to many — would be made public. If you remember, when there was a proposal for an interim document that would show what each side had agreed to so far, she was pushed for not putting anything in writing too quickly, for this very reason.

Similarly, it suits Abbas to give the appearance of working productively towards "peace." This not only keeps Rice happy, it garners him additional financial support from the Europeans. But signing off on an agreement that includes concessions by the PA is something else all together. Not only is Hamas on the edge of taking him over, large parts of his own Fatah party would not be on board.


More after Shabbat.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, August 29, 2008.

This was written by Daniel Ashkenazy and it appeared today in Ynet News

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3589331,00.html Daniel Ashkenazy is an educator and writer living in Jerusalem.


Israel's current government system no longer viable, must be changed

One upon a time when Israel was a brand new democracy its sclerotic political system worked reasonably well. Today with expanding population, power concentrated in the hands of a few, and the coalition hijacked by interest groups, the party list system of government has ceased to be viable.

With an election on the horizon, the need for real political change is urgent. I am not talking about whether we should elect Kadima, Likud or Labor, but rather, a real political change that would drastically alter the way we choose our leaders.

The current political system is a farce. We do not choose our leaders, have no direct input into the choice of candidates, and our Knesset does not attract the best to represent our interests.

Imagine this: It is election time in Israel. The political parties have candidates representing all districts in the country. There are real debates on issues affecting citizens in each constituency and you actually know the name of the candidates running for office. Imagine actually having a direct say in who you personally elect as a member of Knesset and choosing among individual candidates. In most parliamentary democracies this is how it works. The electoral districts elect a representative to the Knesset and you don't vote for an unknown and unrepresentative slate of individuals.

Why reform our political system in Israel? There are many pundits on all sides of the political spectrum in this country who falsely believe that our current electoral process is democratic. This erroneous assumption is based on misconceptions of the democratic process and a desire to perpetuate the corruption in government. It is coupled by fear of losing power when in fact the opposite is true. A democratic country must have a legislature that is responsible, accountable to the people, and representative of the people. In the words of John F. Kennedy, "a government of the people, by the people and for the people." Our current Israeli political system fails to achieve this ideal.

In order to achieve true democracy we need to make our politicians directly responsible to the electorate not through a political party list chosen by delegates at a convention, but rather, directly through the people. The best way to achieve this is a parliamentary system in which the country is divided into electoral districts based on demographics and regional topography. However it is understood that ethnic and religious disparity in Israel must be taken into account and in many instances the distribution of seats will automatically take this into consideration.

36 Torah sages

We can easily divide the country into eight regions: Golan, Galilee, Jerusalem, Binyamin, Gush Etzion, Shomron, Negev and Tel Aviv/Dan. Each of these areas should be divided into electoral districts which elect one representative or a block of representatives to the Knesset. The voters would have a direct say in who represents their district in the Knesset.

The US republican system is not viable for adoption by Israel because the country is too small. Our goal must be to simplify rather than complicate our system. Therefore, the solution should be based on the British parliamentary model. The system works well in Canada both nationally and provincially.

My proposal for electoral reform in Israel is a bicameral system with two houses of legislature. The first a form of senate elected proportionally and the second similar to what is now the Knesset. The Senate would consist of 100 members. Thirty six would be Torah sages from all Orthodox streams of Judaism in Israel. The two chief rabbis would sit in the Senate for the duration of their term. Eighteen rabbis would be selected from both the ultra-orthodox and National-Religious camps.

The remaining 64 members would ideally be academics or respected leaders of the Israeli community elected in a manner similar to the current system but based on regions rather than a party list. The president would be selected from among the senate.

In conclusion, such electoral reform would ensure a more democratic system of government in Israel, allow for less abuse of power and greater accountability of our elected officials by the public. The reforms would permit us to choose who represents our interests and values; most importantly, the parties would truly become nationally based organizations with formulated policies on social, religious, economic and national security interests.

Let's work together towards a ground breaking revolution in Israeli politics to ensure a better future for our state, ourselves and our future generations. After 60 years of independence, a government on the thin edge of democracy no longer suits our needs.

Fred Reifenberg was born in Germany, and grew up during the Hitler period. In 40's he moved to NY. He is veteran of the Korean War. Currently, he lives in Israel, where he enjoys harmonizing with nature, and photographing nature in its many wonderful forms. He creates a variety of abstracts, combining photography and graphics. Contact him by email at fred343@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Women in Green, August 28, 2008.

This is a Jerusalem Post Editorial, published August 28, 2008.


Sigal Barda lived in the Gaza Strip community of Elei Sinai for 15 years. Her husband is a policeman, which tipped the scales three years ago in their decision to cooperate with the authorities during the disengagement. She also did not want her children to be traumatized by a forcible expulsion.

Policemen arrest an anti-disengagement protester. (Ariel Jerozolimski)

From the start, the Bardas cooperated with the system — unlike some settlers who initially refused to play any role in facilitating their removal.

Yet even for the Bardas, not much went right. There was nowhere to put them up initially; and promised housing in Kibbutz Or Haner never materialized.

The Disengagement Authority, known as Sela, charged with relocating and rehabilitating as many as 10,000 evacuees from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria, haggled over every aspect of compensation — as if the Bardas were out to exploit the state. Even the monthly cost of warehousing their possessions was deducted from their compensation package.

They were eventually put up in a trailer at Kibbutz Karmiya, pending the construction of new homes at Moshav Talmei Yaffe. These have not materialized because of bureaucratic snafus, and the kibbutz has repeatedly tried to eject them and other evacuees.

Barda says she "never imagined that law-abiding citizens, who lost everything one day through no fault of their own, would encounter such hardheartedness. For three years we have existed without hope in cramped, temporary accommodations, with Kassams fired at us from the ruins of our destroyed homes. We did our share. Why can't the state live up to its obligations?"

SELA WAS to have served as a central clearinghouse for the evacuees, a multi-service agency that would cut through the red tape so families wouldn't have to run from one ministry to another for assistance as they tried to rebuild their lives.

Unfortunately, Sela did not have the clout it needed to get the job done. Of an estimated 1,667 families removed from Gush Katif, 1,405 remain in transitory lodgings. Only seven of 24 projected new settlements are reportedly under construction. And only 50 of 400 farmers received some kind of land to work, and few are back in business. Of 3,500 working people, 822 remain jobless. Most others earn a fraction of their previous income. Independently employed entrepreneurs went broke. Communities which strove to resettle together are still unable to do so.

As early as 2006, the state comptroller reported that Sela was "a crushing failure." Today, the comptroller supports establishing a state commission of inquiry into the treatment of the evacuees, a step recently approved by the Knesset Control Committee.

MISSION not accomplished, Sela has been slated to be disbanded by the end of 2009. It is being closed at the request of the Finance Ministry to save money, and legislation to that effect is included in the 2009 budget. Whatever contracts and agreements are still pending with the evacuees, and with the regional councils or communities into which they are to be absorbed, had better be concluded by the end of 2009 or they will be passed to another governmental body.

Its faults notwithstanding, Sela was at least an address for the uprooted settlers. Now they will have to take their problems to various ministries — Housing, Agriculture, Welfare, Health and Justice, to name a few. The argument has been made that, at this stage, these ministries might actually be better positioned to deliver where Sela could not. Perhaps.

If the Treasury will not salvage Sela and give it the wherewithal to finish the job, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert needs to immediately direct each ministry to appoint an ombudsman to be responsible for disengagement issues — someone on the inside who knows how to get things done. That should be implemented sooner rather than later for a smooth transition.

There also needs to be an official in the Prime Minister's Office to keep the big picture in view and coordinate the work of the various ministries involved.

On August 22, 2005 this newspaper editorialized against the "institutional callousness, bureaucratic run-arounds and official hardheartedness" facing those who lost their homes in disengagement's wake. Out of simple human decency and for the sake of the political system's credibility, the travails of the uprooted must end.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This was a reader's comment to the original article:

4. You have no right to pass the blame to Sela or make excuses for them — the Jerusalem Post supported the "disengagement" disaster

So take some responsibility. You can start by admitting that you were wrong — admitting that what was done to our own people was nothing less than a crime. You can criticize the whole media industry in Israel for aiding and abetting this crime. You can follow that up by criticizing the mentality that led to the disaster in the first place. And the disaster isn't merely that we evicted and expelled our own people and turned them into refugees — look at what we did to our own country! Until you admit this terrible crime and disaster, you have no right to criticize.
Y. Kreminsky — Israel (08/28/2008 11:37)

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, August 28, 2008.

Russia-wrassling while a war rages

The moment I arrived from Paris to Russia, war broke out, as a few close friends hastened to tell me on my Blackberry the millisecond I set foot in St. Petersburg. It made for interesting travel conversation. And tested the limits of once-ago glasnost and perestroika: Some were up to the contest; some were not.

Amazing how far-away-ness dims one's need to be up on every single thing, but did get into political discussions of the US presidential campaign, and of the lack of evidence of Jewish contributions to the Russians, monuments, signs, houses of worship and so on in the church — and cathedral/monastery/nunnery-rich landscape of Russia. They all seem to go very, um, vague, when one asks.

Strange for them to be so protective/proud of these obscenely gilded, artifact-choked venues of belief, when they have been so routinely atheist for so blatant a time. Not so strange was their instinct to defend Mamma Russia in the face of the world's sound condemnation of Russia's seemingly obvious aggression — whether to 'warn the US not to overstep with reference to the Baltics joining NATO against their former patron,' or for other Putinesque/KGB reasons we might not learn until some Muscovite historian scrivens the sorry details for us far observers and it's carried in the Times Literary Review.

No matter the 'war,' now presumptively laid tentatively to rest. Prices are astronomical. Billionaires abound — prices reflect an alarming casualness with poor people needing basics. Cars, and consequent pollution, smog up the works. Don't drink the water, either. Kvass, though, is good. Despite its supposed non-alcohol content. Like drinking rye bread with a stomach ache.

Food is tasty, though ham and pork saturate every menu and meal and restaurant. I can now read in Russian, speak a few key phrases, and pretend I am part of their orgy of success of late — though the elderly babushkas (I saw hardly any old men anywhere) (one beggar, in Moscow, lay on the cobblestones of Red Square, surprisingly unechoed anywhere in the metro or the other streets) are still not rich, do menial work, are under-available — they close whole wings of the Hermitage, e.g, because there are too few 'watchers' to sit and keep guard over the priceless Surrealists and Impressionists and so on) and are still the backbone of neighborly nosiness and keep-to-yourself-ism.)

The subways are something. The escalators down to the subways are also something. I counted three whole minutes' of descending. During the War, they were deep enough, and safe enough, to be bomb shelters for the citizens. They are a knockout. But I still prefer Singapore's.

The young women are dressed to kill, with expensive high heels and high-high skirts, made-up to the nines, ensembles learnt from our glam mags and movies, but finessed a la Russe. They make our favorite actresses look dowdy, overweight and ugly by comparison. Still, the minute they are married or something, they resemble the Russian stereotypes of eld.

Dachas are big and eye-peeling. Yachts are in evidence along the Volga and Neva and Dvir, and the stores, such as GUM, are packed with goods from Italia, UK and France and the US — designer labels that cost a year of wages for the smallest bit of frou-frou.

Everyone has their hand out for bloviated prices, and the capitalist-phantasm is well-entrenched on the once-austere streets of most of the cities. There is disgust for even the attempt to bargain. Service industry is an alien term here; they are still at the ABCs of accommodating others. They are not very good yet. After a few days, they will reluctantly smile.

Embarrassment and fast-footwork over the Georgian enterprise, most people offhandedly telling one the "Georgians started it," despite the reality. People are quick to point out ethnics such as Kazakhstanis and Uzbeks, and their faces (and bodies) are distinguishable from the 90% mainstream Russians.

Russia is not the place it was. Flowerbeds adorn many a lawn, the dachas are summer's hideaways for many, marriages are everywhere — I saw a minimum of 3-5 weddings a day in every place my foot set down. Even though divorce is a 50% discount of all marriages: Padlocks of all sorts and sizes attached to trees and gazebos and railings are supposed to ward off dissolution of marriages — not cheap ones, either — but don't seem to do the magic they are invested to guarantee. Flats in St. Petersburg and Moscow are about $350,000 to several million, though they are mostly old and feature unshielded 40-W bulbs in dingy spaces. St. Petersburg is a northern Venice of gorgeous interlacing canals they fail to spackle with night lights for picturesque photographic yield. Of course, this is summer. It gets to -40F or so in the winter, so maybe their first thought isn't festooning the canals with light-bulbs.

Sashayed around St. Pete, Yaroslava, Pushkin (the village), Uglich, Magornyi, Zagorzki and a few other places. That last is like a more interesting Vatican, frankly, with Russian Orthodox monks and high priest eminences in black headgear and skirts, and even a few nuns dressed similarly, walking among the faithful.

I was grateful for the many Russians seeking to pray to JC, frankly, as they represent another bulwark against the frightening juggernaut of Islamism run amok. I saw a number of hijab'ed women in Zagorski, strangely. In St. Pete, when I attended "Swan Lake" — playbill 500 roubles! thank you very much, not purchased — there were a few entire tiers of the refurbished and glittering theatre occupied by Muslim theatre-goers, I was surprised to note. The ladies wore large kerchiefs worn the way Russian bubbas used to (and still sometimes do), and few wore the hijab as we know it — but they were seated and snapping illicit telephone photos of the proceedings all the while, with their men seated near them. My travel companion, not that fluent in things English, whispered to me, "Mushrooms! Mushrooms." She meant Muslims. It did seem odd to see them in a place where barefaced women went en pointe in diaphanous tutus and low-cut bodices.

Muslims in Russia constitute 8% of the population. That is the second-largest bloc of ethnics in the nation, after the Russian, which is 85% or so. Wait a few years for the flare-ups of ungovernable "We wants!" from this ever-flare segment.

My Blackberry refused to connect to those contacts I needed to speak with in the rest of the world, though I had prudently paid for a chip enabling international calls. I fell into Dead Zones, apparently, every other hour. Not only did an official Russkie telephone lady inform me that the number I wanted was wrong (it wasn't) in Russian, but my email reception would go doggo for days on end. Nonetheless, there was comfort in carrying the leather-clad Blackberry, in case it suddenly came to life with the latest in Obamessiah's chosen acolyte VP or the running tally of dead or wounded in Ossetia by my gruff hosts. When the email did rouse itself to buzz in on vibration mode, my fellow writers overseas expressed concern, lest I too get blown away, as had four journalists thus far, even young as the war was.

In Zagorzki: Lots of women and children (some men) kissing fetishes, crosses, coffins with saints' blackened and hairy remains, icons, polished sarcophagi in all these ensembles of religiosity and prayer. Tiny girls wore kerchiefs, like their mums, as they whisked along the cobbles and prayed for blessings. As many tourists as anywhere except the Kremlin. Thousands of believers, speaking many tongues, snaking into this exotic onion-domed chapel or that. In one sacristy, a five-pronged rough choir of elderly ladies sang in atonal sonorousness. In other 'holy places,' the choirs were extraordinarily beautiful, a capella, of course, and gave reason for the popularity of Gregorian chants in the musical canon. I was bewitched. But I did not buy their CDs ($50!) for remembrance.

I arrived on an "Apple holiday" of sorts up there. Priests blessed apples that, once consumed, spread the benisons to one's intestines and whatnot. For lunch, my restaurant not far away served me an apple, my order being "fruit plate," instead of ice cream. It was blemished, ungainly and not particularly enticing as a dessert. What made it most amusing, though, was the huge worm-hole in the side not facing me on my plate.

I smiled and pointed to the black hole, and the waitress, in Cossack-red dirndl with rickrack (alas, polyester; I asked to see one outfit with a view to purchase) brought me one equally pulchritude-challenged, but lacking a readymade home for a creepy-crawly. I could not quite bear to bite into it, but thought it might be blessed, since this was the day for Apples Being Blessed, so took a nibbly gnaw for the blessing of it. Nyet. Nada. Nichi-voh.

The icons and paintings and gilt on every surface and ceiling and door are of course a treasury beyond counting, though it left me wondering why the serfs and kulaks and peasants had to visit their money while they starved in humble earthen huts and so on. While Catherine the Great gave platters of 18-carat gold away to her lovers as a knick-knack. Excess is a pallid account of the treasures of these obscenely wanton and spoilt czars and czarinas. Luckily, their penchant for assassinating and beheading each other, higgledy-piggledy, to ensure proper lineage and sovereignty occasionally relieved the populace of a few too-jarring rulers. Modern Putin, though, they seem to like quite a bit.

The dollar has been rising steadily, and is now a good 12% higher than at August first. So foreign tourists will stop buying up our cities, and our taxes will rise to make up the shortfall. Wall Street is slack, people losing their glossy jobs and tax-paying tickers, and Bloomberg will be looking for sources of revenue very soon, to hear tell the current mess.

There was more, politics and expected arguments, but this is the more readily accessible.

Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in China on the university level. She can be contacted at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 28, 2008.


Why don't the Arab states integrate the descendants of Arab refugees, as Israel integrated the Jewish refugees from Arab states, instead of perpetuating their statelessness, dependency, resentment, and hope for entering Israel?


"What other facts and views might I find out about, if I got a variety of sources?"

A friend of mine meant well, when she used the phrase, "poor Palestinians" for that most vicious of ethnic groups. After I described what they do to host countries where they have influence, she realized she did not know much about the issues. I had told her some of that, a few years ago. Apparently, the occasional enlightenment doesn't stick as well as the week-by-week propaganda in the NY Times and similarly biased magazines. Those are media that don' t ask questions like the one the Arabs don't ask. Most of my friends don't realize how narrow is their perspective on this and other issues.


Russian aggression against Georgia, ostensibly in behalf of Russian-inspired separatists there, probably seeks to rebuild the USSR. Putin blunders in wanting more territory to rule and in attacking a Christian country while the great strategic danger to Russia is from internal and external Muslims. For that he has no solution.

I'm waiting for my liberal friends to condemn Russia for aggression. They criticized their own country over much lesser matters. Let's see whether they have perspective or self-hatred.

Many Jews went to Georgia, during the Babylonian captivity in the 6th century BCE. This means that they came from the ancient country, Israel, which had primarily 10 tribes plus Levites. Therefore, 10 tribes are not entirely "lost."


Now that Hamas has crushed Fatah and the clans, it exercises total control over Gaza. A tight control it is. I think that this means that Israel, which recognizes the unacceptability of Hamas but not of Fatah, cannot simply make a deal covering Gaza, with someone in the Judea-Samaria part of the P.A.. Either Israel makes a deal just for Judea-Samaria or it takes over Gaza and roots out Hamas, and then makes a comprehensive deal. (I oppose deals, Arab sovereignty, and Israel territorial concessions. I favor Zionist settlement.)


In announcing that it has opened a crossing in Samaria to P.A. trucks, the IDF stated, "In accordance with the political echelon, the IDF will continue making every effort to maintain the daily life of the Palestinian population not involved in terror, while using all means at its disposal to act against terror infrastructures in order to protect the citizens of the State of Israel."

"In accordance with the political echelon" means that the Olmert regime keeps sacrificing Israeli security in behalf of the P.A. economy and convenience (IMRA, 8/9).

Nor does it improve the life only of those Arabs not involved in terrorism. Terrorists and their families benefit from the freer movement of vehicles carrying goods and people, as much as do others. Most of the Muslim population, all indoctrinated, that has any money donates to the terrorists or at least favors them.


The Foreign Ministry of Israel declared: "Israel recognizes the territorial integrity of Georgia and calls for a peaceful solution." (IMRA, 8/10.)

Israel doesn't recognize its own territorial integrity. Its government wants to part with the Golan and parts of Jerusalem, as well as cede its preeminent claim to the Territories. Nor will it get a peaceful solution while it lets Arabs build up forces for aggression and while it hampers Jewish residents in the Territories and in Israel, instead of adopting policies that encourage the Arabs to depart.

Georgians again find that the US encouraged them as an ally, but doesn't stick with them when they are attacked. That's an old story.

Georgia appeals to the "international community" for succor. That's a good one. We Jews experienced the lack of an international community, though not all of us realized it. Russia deserves censure.


It took two years of negotiations for Israel to overcome antisemitism at the Universal Postal Union, part of the UNO, and gain membership on its governing board. The government hailed this as a triumph and a possible harbinger of further progress at the UNO (Arutz-7, 8/10).

That this is considered great progress says a lot about how un-great is the UNO.


The two major suppliers of arms to Georgia are the US and France. israel invested a lot in Georgia and provided some of its arms. Israel fears that Russia resents that, and may sell more arms to Israel's enemies. In reaction, Israel is embargoing further arms shipments to Georgia, as Georgia pleads for more ammunition (IMRA, 8/10).

Why wouldn't Russia resent the US and France for major arms supplies to Georgia, not just Israel for minor supplies?

Russia has not shown much restraint in arming Israel's enemies, just as the USSR didn't. Israel's embargo seems unnecessary and cowardly. What do I know of diplomacy? But shouldn't Israel figure out what may happen, before it establishes a policy?


Israel finds Hamas' training of children in counter-terrorism horrible, and publicized it.

Realizing this shows Hamas up in a poor light, Hamas countered with a photograph that it alleges shows Israeli children involved in terrorism. The photograph was of an Israeli family at a weapons display. There was nothing in the photograph that showed terrorism or children's involvement (IMRA, 8/11).

Why didn't the Western media publicize it, too?

Jewish children don't train in terrorism. The Jews are civilized, the Islamists are not.

I don't know about now, but when Arafat ran the P.A., he had Islamist-military summer camps for Arab children. Nevertheless, the West called Fatah moderate. How can Fatah be moderate for having done the same things that Hamas is called extremist for doing?


Iraq raised its subsidy of oil going to Jordan from $18 per barrel to $22 (IMRA, 8/12).

This continues Saddam's policy. Interesting. Of course, the price per barrel rose by more than the $4 rise in subsidy.

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

Posted by UCI, August 28, 2008.


Momentous negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians are taking place virtually unnoticed while we are preoccupied with United States elections.

A lame duck United States administration, very low in popularity polls, and an Israeli Prime Minister leaving office under a cloud of suspicion for corruption should not be making far-reaching Middle East policy decisions that will bind the next heads of State. Almost unnoticed by the media, the map of Israel is being dramatically altered.

The State Department with steady pressure from Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is overseeing the demise of Israel. Twenty-two Arab countries are pushing for yet another Arab state to be carved out of the one and only tiny State of Israel. This is a recipe for Israeli self-destruction. Under the cover of U.S. presidential convention hoopla, Israel's future is quietly and surreptitiously being determined.

Please take a few minutes to send this important Urgent Action Alert to Prime Minister Olmert and the Knesset Members. Copies will also be sent to President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Rice, and the White House Jewish desk.

This below is a background article "Rice Visit: PA State Closer than Ever". It was written by Hillel Fendel and it appeared August 26, 2008 in Arutz-7


(IsraelNN.com) Negotiations between Israel and PA continue at a "crazy" pace, agreement on dividing Jerusalem is "closer than ever," and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is pushing for a nearly-complete agreement on a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria by January. So reports Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily (WND).

Secretary Rice, completing a visit to the region today (Tuesday), has been pressing Israel to sign a document by the end of the year that would divide Jerusalem. Rice says Israel must agree to a Palestinian state capital in Jerusalem — Israel's own capital — and a full Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Despite official Israeli government denials, Jerusalem is thus very much on the negotiating table. The Shas Party, which has said it would quit the government if Jerusalem were to be negotiated, remains firmly in the government coalition.

The Rice Compromise: Israel Remains in Jerusalem for 1-5 Years Klein quotes top diplomatic sources involved in the talks as saying that Rice has been pushing for a "compromise" between Israel and the PA that would involve Israel's withdrawal from eastern Jerusalem, including the Old City, within one to five years.

The Israeli team, led by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, is willing to conclude an agreement on a Palestinian state by the end of the year, but wants to leave talks to decide the fate of Jerusalem for a later date. The PA team, however, wants a deal by January on all core issues, including the Holy City.

The Rice compromise, the sources told WND, asks Israeli leaders to bend and agree to promise sections of Jerusalem to the PA — but not to actually withdraw before one to five years have passed. U.S. President George W. Bush would then, just days before his term in office ends, issue an official letter guaranteeing U.S. support for the agreement.

High Intensity Talks

WND's Klein quoted an unnamed Palestinian Authority negotiator saying that the intensity and frequency of Israeli-Palestinian talks in recent weeks have been "crazy," and that the sides have been meeting on a daily basis, usually at the highest levels. The negotiator further said Jerusalem is being discussed by both sides, and that the two teams are "closer than ever" on coming to an agreement on the status of the city. "This claim was verified to WND by other diplomatic sources involved in the negotiations," Klein wrote.

Reports of the past few months say that the Olmert-Livni negotiators are prepared to give up well over 90% of Judea and Samaria, as well as land for a "safe passage" between those areas and Gaza. This, despite the results of the withdrawal from Gaza three years ago, which include the takeover of the area by Hamas and incessant rocket attacks on nearby Israeli areas.

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

Posted by Joanna Whitney, August 28, 2008.

As a supporter of Israel, I eagerly tuned in to coverage of the Salute to Israel@60 parade. Even as I enjoyed the celebration of Israel by those who love her and listened as Jews from all walks of life extolled her, all I kept thinking was "why aren't you there?" As a Gentile, I cannot claim the promises of the Law of Return and make aliyah myself and I am envious of Jews because they can. So it's difficult for me to understand why they don't. If I had the opportunity to speak to those individuals I would say:

Many generations of Jews hoped, cried, and prayed for the opportunity that you dismiss everyday — the chance to live in the land that G-d Almighty gave to the Jews for an everlasting possession. They said "Next Year in Jerusalem". They hoped for a return to the Land, to be restored to Jerusalem, to prepare the way for the rebuilding of the Temple, and, finally, for the Messianic redemption.

How many Jews fled from harsh conditions and through difficult terrain just for the chance to work the Land, to drain the swamps, to return Eretz Yisrael to its former glory? How many have died to protect the people, land and nation of Israel once it was restored?

You quote Hebrew phrases, perhaps you speak the language regularly, even fluently. Well, you're one step ahead of your ancestors who might not have known Hebrew, or your fellow Jews around the world who struggle to learn it.

Some of you have visited Israel, some have visited many times. But why aren't you staying? You say that as a Jew who have such pride in Israel. Then cast your lot with your Jewish brethren as they live the unpredictable, sometimes frightening, sometimes frustrating, but always interesting daily life of an Israeli.

I especially speak to those who recognize Hashem's hand in this restoration. He has given you a special gift and you barely take it off the shelf.

Why? Because America is your new Promised Land? Why must you wait for persecution to come before you'll recognize your destiny and return to your land? It grieves me to say this, but persecution WILL come, just as it always has — in all times and in all places around the world. Need I provide examples? The most obvious — European Jewry never thought it would happen there either. But they didn't have the options you have. The borders were closed to them. Not only are they open to you, but with such help as has never been seen before: Nefesh B'Nefesh, ulpan, special welcoming committees, etc.

Yes, getting accustomed to a new country and culture is challenging under the best of circumstances. But there has never been a better set of circumstances.

Perhaps, as a Gentile, I have no right to speak of such things. Indeed, I worry that my words have come across as harsh our out-of-line. But it's out of love and with a sense of urgency that I now override my own hesitancy. I hope that even one person will take these words and make them happen in their own life. If that happens, my writing them will not have been in vain.

Contact Joanna Whitney at z4zion@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, August 28, 2008.

In today's energy dependent world, fossil fuels drown man's humane instincts as well as his sanity. Darfur continues to be awash in the blood of hapless Black Africans; raped, tortured, and murdered by Omar al-Bashir's Arab janjaweed terrorists; enabled by a weapon's supplying Chinese government more endeared to Sudanese oil reserves than the lives of human beings. Europe's feckless leaders pacify Vladimir Putin in the process of virtually annexing a militarily vanquished Georgia lest the KGB agent morphed to autocrat tighten the valves on ever needed Russian oil. Oil-rich Iran continues building a nuclear infrastructure while the outer world huffs and puffs, not willing to aggressively confront that terrorist financing regime by demanding it cease spinning its fissile material producing centrifuges lest it blockade the Strait of Hormuz thus the unimpeded flow of the vicious viscous substance so cherished by an addicted industrial world.

There you have it! No presumably civilized industrial democratic or non-democratic nation is willing to confront dictators that guarantee their oil supplies, no matter what they do. Oil uber alas! Moral authority has lapsed into a comatose state, shrouded by an energy source predating man by eons yet still controlling his addled brain. Of course it's more complicated than that. Immense profits are generated from this primeval energy source for suppliers and refiners intensely motivated not to kill their golden goose. Superpower America indeed cannot afford to lose the petrodollar status that guarantees the value of its challenged currency, thus cannot afford to have oil substantially replaced by a climate friendly humanity friendly alternative fuel. Drill, drill, drill, is one U.S. presidential candidate's motto, forcing the other candidate to weaken his anti-oil stance. Alas, fossil fuels so permeate economies, both corporate and national, even though their generated revenues finance terrorist operations worldwide, even though their generated heat trapping fumes melt the North Pole and Greenland catastrophically, there is little chance these pernicious cycles so perilous to mankind's way of life, so perilous to his moral fiber, will cease anytime soon unless there is a spectacular awakening.

The tiny nation of Israel, especially imperiled by terrorist organizations financed by oil revenues, especially imperiled by oil-rich Iran's ever progressing nuclear capabilities, has much to gain by catalyzing that spectacular awakening, saving man from his own self-destructive behavior. Therefore, why not invent a cost effective rechargeable battery capable of powering automobiles at all speeds independent of gasoline? Focus Israeli brainpower on this invention as if life on earth depended on it. Furthermore, such batteries could be exported to the United States, perhaps in an exclusive trade deal, to help revive an ailing automobile industry, thus begin to wean a challenged superpower off of its petrodollar dependency as it begins to churn out battery operated vehicles thus begins to reestablish an ever shrinking manufacturing base. Such a joint U.S. Israeli venture could rival other less than favorable ventures in progress say between Russia and Iran and someday China and Sudan, not exactly comforting to the West. The clock is ticking, let's get going!

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Shoshanna Walker, August 27, 2008.

This comes from the Samson Blinded website


The international law on tendering to the occupied populations' needs is questionable. Even in the recent history, the Allies didn't supply water in the occupied German territories, but let Germans do the job. In the moral theory of war, an occupying power should not repress or murder civilians, but otherwise is not obligated to assist them. Indeed, such assistance would have been an unrealistically high burden during wars. The benevolent treatment of the surrendered population is very different from actually providing for it. An obligation to provide for only applies to interned population and POWs, and even then is scarcely adhered to. The population in general is free to go on with its normal life after surrender.

In the case of Gaza, there is no surrender. The official, duly elected ruling party of Gaza — Hamas — rejects ceasefire, and the level of hostilities launched from Gaza clearly defies the notion of surrender. Indeed, Hamas routinely proclaims its hostility toward Israel.

Egypt doesn't provide water or the necessary amount of electricity for Gaza, even though a brotherly Arab population resides there.

Gaza can do without Israel's water — an exceedingly scarce resource, so scarce that Israel routinely resorts to water rationing and stops irrigation of public parks and even new trees at Jewish farms. True, restricting the unlimited water supplies to kibbutzim, the leftist darlings, would go a long way to solve the water problem, but cutting supplies to bad Jews should be the next step after refusing supplies to our professed enemies among Arabs. Let them build desalination plants, as Israel does, and use expensive desalinated water, as Jews do.

There is no moral or legal reason for Israel to supply Gaza with water and electricity.

Israel must stop water supply to Gaza.

Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, August 27, 2008.

This was written by Moshe Kempinski, author of "The Teacher and the Preacher", is the editor of the Jerusalem Insights weekly email journal and co-owner of Shorashim, a Biblical shop and learning center in the Old City of Jerusalem.

Where does one find the real Israel?

How we see ourselves determines how others end up seeing us. If you believe that you are as insignificant as a grasshopper in someone else's eyes, then you necessarily believe that he can crush and subdue you on a moment's whim.

We live in a world where reality seems to be determined to prove our insignificance. Falling prey to that can prove to be very dangerous. A leadership that loses its sense of self or its vision could lead to disaster anywhere, but much more so here in the spiritual center of the world.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert declared, following the terrorist bulldozer incidents, that retaining Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel would lead to more terrorism: "Whoever thinks it is possible to live with 270,000 Arabs in Jerusalem must take into account that there will be more bulldozers, more tractors and more cars carrying out attacks." US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently told Palestinian officials that she would pressure Israel against initiating any Jewish construction in eastern sections of Jerusalem.

Furthermore, on a different issue, the Israeli cabinet held three separate votes and decided on the release of over 200 prisoners, including two prisoners with "blood on their hands." The "others" include 26 people who were sentenced to terms of 10 to 16 years for attempted murder, like shooting attacks or bombings. According to Olmert, "Releasing prisoners as a gesture does not attest to weakness, but rather is a sign of strength." And Mark Regev, Olmert's spokesman explained, "We want the Palestinians to understand that we want to live with them in peace. We are ready for historic reconciliation."

Is it any wonder, then, that our enemies speak in gloating and glowing terms of their ongoing march towards victory?

This was clearly evident when one saw the glee and posturing of the Palestinians when the terrorists were released. It is also evident when Palestinian spokesmen declare that Jerusalem is not "that important for the Jews."

The bottom line is that both the Arab world and the world in general can smell weakness and defeatism. They sense that the Israeli leadership see themselves as grasshoppers facing menacing giants. It is that weakness that each of them, for their own reasons, would like to exploit. The Arab world would simply want to destroy Israel in their unfolding violent messianic fervor. The Western world would like to pare Israel down to a more manageable size. A smaller, weaker Israel could be better managed and thereby more easily controlled.

Based on the public Israeli face that the world sees, they are right. Yet, the public, official Israel is not Israel. It lacks the vision, faith and determination of the real Israel. It lacks the hesed and compassion that has characterized Israel from its birth in Abraham's tent. The public face of Israel lacks the courage and sense of sacrifice that has kept this people alive through thousands of years of persecution.

Then where does one find the real Israel?

One had a glimpse of the real Israel in the battlefields of Lebanon. One can be inspired by the vision of the real Israel if one ventures into the settlements of Judea and Samaria, or the farms and villages of what is termed "the periphery" of this country.

Yet, the most powerful component of Israel's survival and power is in the compassion of its people. It is in the quality of hesed, or loving-kindness, that is so clearly juxtaposed with the selfishness of its political leaders.

That, then, is the secret that separates weak men like Prime Minister Olmert from courageous men like Major Ro'i Klein. That is the stuff that makes up the character of the young settlers on the hilltops — so different than the character of "yes-men" like Tzipi Livni and Sha'ul Mofaz. That is the essence of the Divine attribute that runs through the veins of the "real Israel" and that seems to be so lacking in the present leadership of this country.

"Olam chesed yibaneh" — "The foundation of the world is loving-kindness." (Psalms 89:3)

Those who have learned the secret that giving of oneself is the greatest source of inner strength are the ones who will have the courage to build and refashion the world. Those whose focus remains on receiving are doomed to forever live a life victimized by the turns and twists of reality.

"Many are the sorrows of the wicked; but he who trusts HaShem, loving-kindness shall surround him." (Psalms 32:10)

This past week, as I was descending the steps of the Jewish quarter to pray my afternoon prayers at the Western Wall, I heard loud and exuberant singing. The song I heard was called Ivdu Et HaShem Be'simcha, "Serve G-d With Joy". As I turned the corner, I saw many buses parked in the Western Wall plaza, which hid from me the throng of people who were singing with such excitement and passion.

As I entered the Western Wall plaza and walked past the first bus, I saw hundreds of young people singing and dancing. A little less than half of them were in wheelchairs, or on the shoulders or in the arms of the other half of the group. Regardless of the severity of some of the handicaps that were so evident on the bodies of many of

These young people have been empowered by loving-kindness. these young people, their faces and especially their eyes reflected complete freedom and happiness. Regardless of the physical difficulty that those who were accompanying the more challenged youngsters must have experienced, they seemed to fly above and around the wheelchairs with angelic powers.

These were buses of the Kav Lachaim ("Life Line") organization. The stated goal of the organization is "to help every sick child in Israel recover easily and quickly, and to offer chronically ill children and their parents a broad range of services and activities which include outings, entertainment, books, medical counseling and financial support."

Organizations such as Kav Lachaim dot the landscape of Real Israel. The volunteers of this group and the physically challenged children with them represented the true strength of this country, regardless of their age or their limitations.

These young people have been empowered by loving-kindness and they, as opposed to our leadership, will not see themselves as grasshoppers. These faithful young people, like many others throughout the country, have become giants; and it is before them that the evil designs of our enemies will fail.

Contact Avodah by email at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by B Taverna, August 27, 2008.

This was written by Denis MacEoin and posted on his website:


I've just finished proof-reading my forthcoming academic book, The Messiah of Shiraz. Weighing in at just under 800 pages (with the index to come) it's going to be sold in hardware shops as a doorstop. Deathless prose it may be, but it's filled with transliterations from Arabic and Persian (dashes over 'a's, 'i's and 'u's, dots under a whole range of consonants), so going through it checking for errors has left me squinting and drawing sharp breaths.

But out of all that verbiage, one thing and one thing only has stuck in my mind. This is a short passage that includes two quotations relating to events that took place after the 1852 assassination attempt on the life of Nasir al-Din Shah, the Iranian monarch who reigned till 1896. George Curzon called him philo-uxorious, meaning that he had a lot of wives. After a trip to Paris, he made his harem dress in tutus and, given that most of these ladies were, shall we say, large of stature, the results were, let's just say, spectacular. But that's not why someone tried to kill him. First suspicions fell on a militant sect, the Babis, who form the main topic of my book. Some Babis were killed, others imprisoned, but a combination of reports by European travellers and diplomats gave rise to the myth that there had been a serious massacre. Later histories by members of the Baha'i religion (who have their roots in Babism) perpetuate this myth. Here's the passage that stood out for me:

According to a later writer, the 1851 killings were 'a blood-bath of unprecedented severity,' 'a holocaust reminiscent of the direst tribulations undergone by the persecuted followers of any previous religion,'and 'the darkest, bloodiest and most tragic episode of the Heroic Age of the Baha'i Dispensation.

This is strong stuff. One wonders why, if it was the equal of the worst things suffered by the followers of any religion, a holocaust no less, an unprecedented severity, we didn't all read about it in our school history books. Actually, the tally of Babi dead was 37. Believe me, I have conducted extensive researches on all cases of Babis killed between 1844 and 1852, and 37 is correct.

Well, this is just exaggeration by a writer who was no stranger to the genre, but in recent years he has found himself in good (or not so good) company. Since the 1980s, the 'Palestinian Holocaust' has become a badge for left-liberals everywhere, a rallying cry for the Islamic world, an internet 'reality' that could have stepped out of Second Life, a cause for much wringing of hands, a matter for public lamentation, a summons for vindication, a justification for 'retaliatory' violence, an explanation for Palestinian intransigence and failure, a texture woven through the cloth of Arab policies, an incantation ringing out in Islamic sermons, on the voices of little children, in the streets and suqs, a banner waving beside the Palestinian flag.

Enough with the purple prose. The Palestinian Holocaust never happened. We are living in the real world. We are, if you like, living in history, and history has no record of a Palestinian Holocaust.

But let me take this beyond mere assertion. The term 'Holocaust' as applied to the Palestinians is derived directly from the same word in English, corresponding to the Hebrew Shoah. Writing in Arabic or Farsi, the word is hulukast (with three of those long-vowel dashes on the vowels, neatly avoiding any Arabic, Persian, or other term that might have been more appropriate.

So, the Palestinian 'Holocaust' is modelled on something that happened in Europe, the slaughter of some 6 million Jews by the Nazis before and during the Second World War. Of the reality of the Jewish Holocaust, there can be no doubt. It is recorded lavishly in the memories of survivors, on film, in photographs, and, above all, in mile after mile of German, Russian, Hungarian, Polish, and other archives, archives whose multitudinous files contain vastly more evidence of murder and bestiality than the police records of any country on earth. No other crime or set of crimes have been so meticulously recorded.

In face of this overwhelming evidence, many Muslims — notably the Iranians — have joined forces with a much smaller number of right-wing extremists (and not a few on the far left) who flatly deny that the Holocaust ever took place, who insist there were no gas chambers and who would have it that not a single Jew died as a result of Nazi brutality. Or who argue that the Nazis looked after the Jews well, and that it was disease, not lethal gases, that killed them. Better still, never content with one explanation when three or four will do, they argue that the Holocaust was a dastardly Zionist plot, a conspiracy between Nazis and Zionists to imprint the deaths of Jews on the world's conscience in order to guarantee the creation of Israel once the war was over.

This denial — egregious, sickening and degenerate as it is — matches claims that there was, that there is, a Palestinian Holocaust. No Jews died, but, hey, look at the slaughter of the Palestinians by the Jews. It also matches the transparent nonsense that Israel is a Nazi state and, what's more, a Nazi state built on that non-existent Holocaust.

It does not need saying that no serious person would fall for any of this, except that so many have. The Palestinian Holocaust, a vast massacre for which not a shred of evidence exists, is passing fare at polite middle-class dinner tables, it is fodder for intellectuals of a certain ilk, it passes for historical fact among well-educated people who find it easier to sneer than read a book of properly-researched history.

Why has this happened? Why has history been stood on its head, and, with it, terminology? If I call Israel a Nazi state, am I not obliged to demonstrate this by reference to Israeli doctrines, policies, and actions that parallel those of the German National Socialist Party? If I pontificate about a Palestinian Holocaust, am I not bound to cite places, dates, and numbers? And since there are no such facts to bandy about, just as there are no Israeli apartheid laws, what do I have to do? All it seems to take is repetition. Say it often enough and people take it in and give it shelter, a lie big enough to choke them.

Some of these moral degenerates, like Ilan Pappé, say they aren't interested in facts, that it's the progressive argument or something, whatever it's called, that counts. But as every criminal knows when he's dragged to court, the facts will grind you down. However much you fudge and cover, slip and slide, a good barrister will wear you out, because there will be demonstrable facts to expose your lies.

Beneath the surface (though not far beneath) is an abiding anti-Semitism, a moral failing that drives its exponents to lies. Far-right groups like Stormfront have no compunctions about being anti-Semitic. They aren't ashamed of it, in fact they're proud to be Hitler's successors. But what about the European and American left? Not all the left, not all the liberals, but a large body who are not really liberal at all. After the Holocaust, it became a shameful thing to speak ill of Jews and, for some time, to condemn Israel. But there gradually came into existence a new kind of left-winger, someone for whom everything Western was anathema. So, America is the devil, the UK is the devil, Israel is the devil, imperialism, colonialism, and all the rest are part of Satan's attack on the poor and wretched of the earth. One problem, of course, for this approach is that you have to turn a blind eye to Islamic imperialism (especially the late, great Ottoman empire), or Arab and Turkish slavery, and all those other things the non-Western world has been responsible for. That means re-writing history, and that's the direction chosen by leftist intellectuals. Israel has been of particularly value for this, allowing liberals to cry 'I'm not anti-Semitic, I'm anti-Israel'.

The antidote to these arguments may be found in a remarkable book by Bernard Harrison, The Resurgence of Anti-Semitism. Harrison's an academic philosopher, and his analysis of this problem about anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism is outstanding. Slowly, painstakingly, he subjects articles, individuals, and arguments to a critique to which they have never been subjected before. His discussion of Tom Paulin alone makes the book worth buying.

Rather than digressing into his complex arguments, I'll leave this post here and possibly return to it another day.

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Herb and Miki Sunshine, August 27, 2008.

This was written by Rav Meir Kahane and it was published in the Magazine of the Authentic Jewish Idea, Spring 5744-1984,


The news that at least 20 Israeli soldiers were sentenced and jailed for refusing to serve in Lebanon and/or the territories, comes on top of the sentencing by a military court of four soldiers for the "crime" of "excessive force" against the Arab rioters in the territories. They both emerge in the context of the horrendous Kahan Commission report. The entire scenario adds up to one of the slow but efficient destruction of the Israeli Defense Forces as an effective and moral force in the defense of Israel against the extermination.

The only weapon our enemies possess to destroy the superior forces of the I.D.F. is the one of internal corrupting or the Jewish soul. The rot of propaganda aimed at questioning the moral and ethical stands of Israel has begun to bear fruit and we are witness to the same inner destruction of the Israeli army and sense of self-confidence in the justice of the Jewish cause, as occurred in the United states over Vietnam. And that which occurred to the United states — today a paper tiger unable to screw up the courage to take any kind of a military stand that calls for deep sacrifice — slowly builds up in the Jewish state that lost its Judaism, then its Zionism and, today, thanks to the anarchists of the Liberal-Left, its very belief in itself.

When one fights the enemy, let it be clear that the purpose is to destroy him. The alternative is just as clear: He will destroy you. War is not immoral, per se; at times it is a mitzvah, a commandment, hence the Jewish concept of milchemet mitzvah, a war of obligation or commandment. To destroy evil is a commandment. To defend Jewish lives is a commandment. To defend the territory of the Land of Israel is a commandment. To destroy those who humiliate and desecrate G-d's name is a commandment.

And not to understand this is to guarantee that we will lose our wars because we have lost our sense of real justice and the righteousness of our cause. The Kahan Commission is only the latest and worst of the blows but the price is not new. For year, Israeli soldiers have been held back and punished when attempting to use the only language that rioting Arabs understand. Tens of Israeli soldiers have died, needlessly, as the result of the gentilized concept of "tohar haneshek" (purity of arms) that forced them to fight without airpower or artillery because civilians were in the area. Let it be clear; the civilians were enemy civilians.

One can see the handwriting on the crumbling walls. The gentilization of Israel breeds a lack of faith in its own righteousness. The IDF will fall victim to all the gentilized conceptual trash that destroyed the U.S. The lesson is clear. The real Jewish enemy is the Hellenism within the gates. Destroy it.

Herb Sunshine is a lawyer, qualified to practice in U.S.A. and Israel. He and his wife Miki live in Jerusalem. Contact them by email at sunshine.h@012.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 27, 2008.

This appeared in Arutz-7

(IsraelNN.com) The Israel police and IDF have issued orders banning three Jews from their homes in the Shomron region for three to four months. The explanation: "Your presence in the area represents a danger to the public order."

Various press reports state that the reason for the temporary expulsion is that the three might "disturb the Arab olive harvest." However, one of the three, Akiva HaCohen of Yitzhar, told IsraelNationalNews that this has nothing to do with the truth. "The olive harvest season begins only at the end of my four-month expulsion," he said.

The head of the Shomron Regional Council, Gershon Mesika, said, "The police are too easy on the trigger finger."

The other two newly-homeless Jews are David Libman and Meir Bretler of Adei Ad, 20 miles north of Jerusalem, though Libman has not yet been actually handed the orders, as the police do not know where he is. The three will not be permitted to be in the Shomron for the next four months — three, in the case of Bretler — because of the unspecified dangers the police claim they present.

HaCohen says it has nothing to do with "dangers," but rather with "solidarity." "I am of the strong opinion," he told IsraelNationalNews, "that the reason they got me is because of a pact that was recently made among the various Shomron towns called 'Mutual Responsibility,' which states that whenever the army or police come to evict Jews from a hilltop or town, the Jews of all the other towns and hilltops in the area do what they can to stop it — even if it is only by standing in an intersection and reciting Psalms or holding signs. The General Security Service (Shabak) seems to think that I'm involved, and that's why they have given me these orders."

"Not a Personal Problem, but National"

HaCohen and his wife have three children, aged 4.5 and down. Asked what he plans to do for the next four months and whether his family will join him, he said, "The issue here is not a humanitarian one for me and my family, but rather a national one. The authorities' weak point is that they can't take it when we show solidarity with each other."

They have until Friday to leave home, or four more days if they file an appeal — which they do not think will be successful. The IDF Office for Public Complaints can be faxed at 03-569-9400.

Farming Plans Down the Drain

HaCohen said that he established a hilltop community outpost near Yitzhar, not far from Shechem (Nablus), and that it now has four families. "I'm also a farmer," he said, "and I am about to plant a grape orchard of ten dunams (2.5 acres) following the end of this Shemittah year [during which planting is not allowed by Jewish Law — ed.] a few weeks from now. In addition, I also market flour, and if I disappear for four months, my market will be gone."

Protests by Council Head, Legal Forum, Yesha Council

Shomron Council head Mesika, apparently in response to the press reports about the olive harvest, said, "It is sad that Arab olives are more important than the lives of IDF soldiers." He then explained: "The police have not issued any such orders to left-wing activists who demonstrate in Bal'in and endanger IDF soldiers — but they are quick to do so when it comes to Arab olives."

"This is a grave blow to civil rights of Israeli citizens," Mesika said. "It only happens vis-a vis one side of the political map."

Itamar Ben-Gvir, an activist of the Jewish Front, bemoaned the fact that unlike in previous cases, "the three are not even allowed to remain in their homes and not leave. They must leave their homes altogether."

The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel released this statement: " If there is evidence of a crime, those suspected must be tried — but not restricted in this arbitrary manner. This is an intolerable blow to civil rights that must be stopped. It is not rooted in any law, but is rather given solely to the arbitrary decision of the military commander [O.C. Central Command Maj.-Gen. Gad Shamni] in the area."

The Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria similarly protested the decision.

Hillel Fendel is senior news editor of Arutz-7. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 27, 2008.


Israel trained the Georgian forces that Russia is attacking. Putin may bear a grudge against Israel for that (Barry Chamish, 8/9).

Russia is said to be selling Iran its main defensive system against aerial attack. Israel claims to be developing a device that neutralizes that system. Israel warns Russia that if it goes through with the sale, Israel would neutralize the defensive system and inform the world. That would compromise Russia's own defense and deter foreign countries from buying Russia's defensive system (IMRA, 8/8).


She sees the dangers as other countries seeking nuclear weapons (IMRA, 8/8).

That is a danger, yes. But first the danger is that Iran would launch the nuclear weapons at Israel and Europe and eventually the US.


That's not what he says. He's idealistic and imagines he is building a fine new state. However, Dr. Aaron Lerner analyzed his interview, and finds that he is building up an enemy of Israel and of peace.

Dr. Lerner concludes that Dayton's reassurance to Israel is that if the P.A. gets from negotiations what it wants, Israel has nothing to worry about from the P.A. military he is training. That is no reassurance, for the P.A. won't get everything it wants, because it wants everything. Therefore, it would use the force against Israel.

[I don't interpret what Dayton said that way.] Dayton hardly mentioned terrorism, because the new P.A. force does not pursue terrorists, only ordinary criminals. [Therefore, it is not against jihad. Therefore it won't make genuine peace, when it ends up with an army Dayton trained.]

Dayton's judgment is clouded by his being surprised at the P.A. collapse during the Hamas coup in Gaza. In addition, he said he now thinks it was a mistake for Congress not to provide the P.A. with more arms before that coup. But the arms that the US did provide were given up to Hamas! [The P.A. was so infiltrated, disorganized, disunited, and demoralized, that it hardly fought Hamas. Should Dayton be demoted for not having perceived that even after the fact?]

Dayton would like Israel to evacuate from Judea-Samaria, leaving P.A. forces in charge [until Hamas overthrows them]. Who then would combat terrorists?


Muhammad allowed churches and synagogues to stay in the Arabian Peninsula. He barred temples of polytheists from Mecca, Medina, and another holy area. In modern times, however, churches and synagogues were barred from the Peninsula. More currently, all the Gulf countries except S. Arabia allow churches, just as the West allows mosques.

A leading S. Arabian expert said that when Christians and Jews recognize Muhammad as a legitimate prophet in their faith, then S. Arabia should allow churches in its country (IMRA, 8/7).

Typical Muslim Arab thinking: raise a non-sequitur to divert from the problem, which is the non-reciprocity of temple building between the West and S. Arabia, and attempts to gain influence over other religions. He is asking other religions to change their beliefs, before he would tolerate them. Their beliefs are none of his business; he should be tolerant regardless.


The Islamist party took power in Turkey, because the many small parties failed to get enough votes each for parliamentarian representation. As a result, the Islamist party won 1/3 of the votes but got 2/3 of the seats.

The party platform disavowed is previous totalitarian goals. Once in, however, it hacks systematically at the constitutional ropes binding democracy. The prime minister is high-handed within his party. When constitutional challenge arose to the regime's illegal acts and proposed banning it, government prosecutors falsely alleged a plot by the secularists to stage a violent coup. The actual terrorism they cite is by Islamists and evidence is faked. The government extensively spies on opponents. Indictments are vague about who committed which crimes and whether there are crimes, referring to "incitement," an accusation common in dictatorships such as Syria and S. Arabia [and Israel!].

Earlier, the Islamist government started filling the civil service with Islamists, dedicated, as in banking, to institute Islamist practice. The government seized one media group and bribed others. The regime put its civilian at the head of the military council. It passed a law requiring judicial candidates to take an oral test it administers, and inquires into their views. It prosecutes secularist judges. Its new judges reversed all decisions against Islamists. The government expanded the powers of police, who now persecute and mistreat. Unfortunately, the party has become more popular (Mideast News or Forum, 8/8). An earlier analysis attributed this to the rise of the rural population compared with the Istanbul population. Lessons: Never trust Islamists; avoid rule by a party with 1/3 of vote.


Britain opposes Jewish residency in Judea-Samaria but wanted to build a relationship with Jews from there. When its Israeli embassy planned to celebrate its queen, and Arabs objected to Jews from Judea-Samaria being invited, the embassy blacklisted those Jews.

A patriotic Israel retorted that the only colonial movement in the area is the P.A.'s attempt to colonize Israel (IMRA, 8/7).

If Israel were a self-respecting Jewish state, it would publicize British occupation of Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, until Britain rescinded its blacklist.


Another "Popular Palestinian Conference," featuring anti-Israel propaganda, is planned. There will be workshops such as how to inject the Arab view into US high schools, presenting the Palestinian Arabs as victims of Israel, aided by the US. They accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing and Nazi-like acts. One speaker argues that off-campus criticism of Middle Eastern Studies is persecution and that the US makes Arabs political prisoners. But they are convicted of terrorist crimes, not for their politics.

Some of their radical scholars advocate a "one-state solution," i.e., Arab take-over of Israel, characterized by pathological hatred of Jews, persecution of Christians, imposition of Islamic law, indoctrination of children, and clan and terrorist violence within and without [and ethnic cleansing of Jews]. Some of them admit the Muslim violence, but blame it on Israel and the US as having provoked it. If they would stop blaming others, they would find the fault theirs and solutions up to them. It was they who created the Arab refugee problem and then refused to resolve it (Middle East Forum, 8/9). Muslim oppression, neglect of business law, and needless strife have caused some hundreds of thousands of Arabs to flee.

Israel is guilty of ethnic cleansing, too. It expelled almost 10,000 Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria. It encourages Arabs to build illegally in Judea-Samaria and on Jewish-owned land, and discourages Arabs from staying there. Nazi-like acts by the Arabs abound, for they admire the Nazis. Islam, at least as practiced by the Arabs, is a religion of hatred, violence, and imperialism, so it is unfair to blame Israel and the US for Muslim terrorism. Israel is the victim, here. The State Dept. is anti-Israel, but gets no credit for this from the Arabs.

Vicious liars lack scholarly integrity. They don't belong on college staffs.

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

Posted by Eli E. Hertz, August 26, 2008.

Much controversy is being generated as to Minister Tzipi Livni's ability to lead Israel. She advocates honesty and accountability, but when it came to handling Resolution 1701 those principles may have left the room.

She insists that the outcome of the resolution is in Israel's favor, but anyone who reads the fine print can clearly see its futility.

Is it ignorance, or blatant lies? You decide.

1. Livni: "Security Council Resolution 1701 is an Israeli achievement"

Facts: Adopting Resolution 1701 under Chapter 7, would require the aggressor to comply with its provisions. This was a clear goal of Israel that did not materialize.

Under international law, Resolution 1701 which was adapted under Chapter 6, is at best a declarative statement that lacks the legal authority or enforcement power whatsoever. All the rest is wishful thinking, and the results on the ground will attest to it.

Hesham Youssef, chief of the cabinet of the Arab League Secretary-General speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly simply stated: "The resolution is issued under Chapter 6 rather than Chapter 7 of the UN Charter ... [This] is a diplomatic achievement" of the Arab League. In other words, the Arab League welcomes the weakness of the resolution which lacks enforcement power to "ensure implementation" of Resolution 1701.

Unable to have the resolution adopted under Chapter 7, Livni invents a new Chapter when she claims: "We got 7 minus" a statement which is injudicious and fundamentally wrong. There is no room in international law for a loose interpretation of the Charter, and "7 minus" is not a recognized provision in international law. (if its not 7, its 6)

Livni (and Olmert's) claim that the cease-fire that brought the fighting to a halt, is somehow indicative of a success, either militarily or diplomatically, is erroneous. The Government of Israel failed to protect its citizens — unable to stop the daily barrage of Katyushas landing on northern and central Israel. With nearly a million Israelis displaced, Israel's urgent need for a cease-fire was obvious. If the war would have kept going at its pace, Israel would have suffered the greatest military humiliation in its history. And as the Wall Street Journal noted: "Israel has nothing to show for its 1701 Resolution"

2. Livni: "A decision was reached by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense to approve the start of a military operation and just as it was starting to go into action late Friday [ August 11 2006 ] we began to strengthen the resolution and return it to the level at which we felt it should originally be."

Facts: John Bolton, who was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Second Lebanon War, rejected Livni and Olmert's version of the failed ground offensive during the war's final days: "The Israeli military operation did not play a role in the talks on drafting the UN Security Council Resolution 1701."

It appears that Prime Minster Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, and Defense Minister Peretz — all in concert — failed to this day "to come clean" and with clarity, explain to the nations' families and soldiers what precisely was the "improvement" attained as a direct result of the IDF expansion into Lebanon on August 11, 2006 — a move that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers, and many more wounded.

3. Livni: "We wanted to ensure that this embargo would be enforceable and substantive, preventing the transfer of arms ... to Hizbollah. ... Now the embargo is part of the UN resolution and the terms and formulation of this article are acceptable to Israel and express our opinion — a proper embargo."

Facts: Resolution 1701 never even mentions the word embargo and does not set-forth an enforcement mechanism or any enforcement power. It seems as though the Minister did not read the resolution.

4. Livni: Israel "Will be getting UNIFIL with a completely different mandate, which includes the right, the option and the authority to use force when required."

Facts: UNIFIL — a Paper Tiger — is not authorized to use armed force or to impose in any forceful manner the implementation of the recommendations of UN Resolution 1701. UNIFIL's right to use force is strictly limited to self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Major-General Alain Pelligrini [France] then the Force Commander of UNIFIL made it clear: "The disarmament of Hezbollah is not the business of UNIFIL."

With the Israeli election in sight, Tzipi Livni, a senior member of the Israeli Cabinet, cannot escape her shared responsibility for the outcome of the Second Lebanon War, and in particular the failed UN Security Council Resolution 1701.

Leadership is all about responsibility.

Unless otherwise stated, Livni's statements are taken verbatim from her briefing to reporters following Israel's acceptance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, 13 Aug 2006.

For more on Res'n 1701, go to

Eli E. Hertz is president of Myths and Facts, Inc. The organization's objective is to provide policymakers, national leadership, the media and the public-at-large with information and viewpoints that are founded on factual and reliable content. Contact him at today@mythsandfacts.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, August 26, 2008.

This was written by Ari Rabinovitch and it comes from Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSLP27939120080826?feedType= RSS&feedName=scienceNews&rpc=22&sp=true

The video is at http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=89631&newsChannel=scienceNews


HAIFA, Israel (Reuters) — paralyzed for the past 20 years, former Israeli paratrooper Radi Kaiof now walks down the street with a dim mechanical hum.

That is the sound of an electronic exoskeleton moving the 41-year-old's legs and propelling him forward — with a proud expression on his face — as passersby stare in surprise.

"I never dreamed I would walk again. After I was wounded, I forgot what it's like," said Kaiof, who was injured while serving in the Israeli military in 1988.

"Only when standing up can I feel how tall I really am and speak to people eye to eye, not from below."

The device, called ReWalk, is the brainchild of engineer Amit Goffer, founder of Argo Medical Technologies, a small Israeli high-tech company.

Something of a mix between the exoskeleton of a crustacean and the suit worn by comic hero Iron Man, ReWalk helps paraplegics — people paralyzed below the waist — to stand, walk and climb stairs.

Goffer himself was paralyzed in an accident in 1997 but he cannot use his own invention because he does not have full function of his arms.

The system, which requires crutches to help with balance, consists of motorized leg supports, body sensors and a back pack containing a computerized control box and rechargeable batteries.

The user picks a setting with a remote control wrist band — stand, sit, walk, descend or climb — and then leans forward, activating the body sensors and setting the robotic legs in motion.

"It raises people out of their wheelchair and lets them stand up straight," Goffer said. "It's not just about health, it's also about dignity."


Kate Parkin, director of physical and occupational therapy at NYU Medical Centre, said it has the potential to improve a user's health in two ways.

"Physically, the body works differently when upright. You can challenge different muscles and allow full expansion of the lungs," Parkin said. "Psychologically, it lets people live at the upright level and make eye contact."

Iuly Treger, deputy director of Israel's Loewenstein Rehabilitation Centre, said: "It may be a burdensome device, but it will be very helpful and important for those who choose to use it."

The product, slated for commercial sale in 2010, will cost as much as the more sophisticated wheelchairs on the market, which sell for about $20,000, the company said.

The ReWalk is now in clinical trials in Tel Aviv's Sheba Medical Centre and Goffer said it will soon be used in trials at the Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute in Pennsylvania.

Competing technologies use electrical stimulation to restore function to injured muscle, but Argo's Chief Operating Officer Oren Tamari said they will not offer practical alternatives to wheelchairs in the foreseeable future.

Other "robot suits", like those being developed by the U.S. military or the HAL robot of Japan's University of Tsukuba, are not suitable for paralyzed people, he said.

Contact Avodah by email at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, August 26, 2008.

This article was written by Seán Gannon, chairman of Irish Friends of Israel. It was published August 15, 2008 as an Opinion piece in the Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/ 2008/0815/1218747921606.html

Mr. Gannon makes the bizarre term "Collective Punishment" accessible and understandable.


ON MAY 27th, 1942, the Deputy Reichsprotektor of Bohemia and Moravia,

Reinhard Heydrich, was assassinated by the Czech underground as he drove to his office in Prague.

In an effort "to make up for his death", the SS rounded up the residents of the nearby village of Lidice. Some 200 men were immediately executed. The women were sent to Ravensbrück concentration camp where most subsequently died;80 per cent of their children were gassed at Chelmno in July.

Two years later, a partisan bomb killed 33 members of an SS police battalion as it marched through central Rome. In reprisal, the city's Gestapo chief, Herbert Kappler, ordered that 10 Italians be executed for every dead German. The following day, 335 people were taken down to the Ardeatine Caves and shot in the back of the neck.

Such were the type of atrocities that the framers of the Fourth Geneva Convention had in mind when they outlawed "collective punishment" in 1949. Article 33's stipulation that no person "be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed" refers to the active imposition of criminal penalties in reprisal for another party's guilt.

Therefore, its constant invocation by critics of Israel in the context of its lockdown of Gaza represents little more than a cynical exploitation of the language of international law, part of a well-established strategy which seeks to de-legitimise Israeli security detail by defining it in terms of policies properly opposed by all right-thinking people: "apartheid" (the security fence); "war crimes" (the targeted killing of terrorist leaders); even "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" (almost every IDF operation).

For example, the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign claims that Israel's rather erratic restrictions on electricity and motor fuel exports to Gaza constitute "collective punishment" and a violation of international law.

However, the legality of economic sanctions in conflict situations is enshrined in the UN Charter despite their unavoidable impact on civilians. The UN embargo against Saddam Hussein's regime caused enormous suffering among ordinary Iraqis while its sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban had what the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs called "a tangible negative effect" on the lives of innocent Afghanis. Yet no one accuses the Security Council of imposing "collective punishment".

Furthermore, although the Fourth Geneva Convention does not technically apply to its conflict with Gaza (which is neither a high contracting party nor, despite Israel's control of its borders, Israeli occupied territory), Jerusalem is fully compliant with its requirements. The convention does not obligate the supply of goods and services to enemy populations (Israel rightly declared Gaza a "hostile entity" in September 2007) other than "essential foodstuffs, clothing and tonics intended for children under 15, expectant mothers and maternity cases". The 1977 First Additional Protocol does not list electricity or fuel among the "other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population", for which transit must be facilitated. In any case, even these can be embargoed where there are serious grounds for believing they will be intercepted by enemy forces. And although this is obviously happening in Gaza (Hamas seized 14 truckloads of Red Crescent relief last February and has been repeatedly accused by the Palestinian Authority of diverting fuel destined for Gaza's power station and hospitals to its own private depots), Israel continues to allow the transfer of hundreds of tonnes of aid into the territory each week.

Israel's travel ban on Gaza students with overseas scholarships has also been described as a form of "collective punishment". Condemning this policy on these pages, the former director of the Irish Fulbright Commission, John Kelly, highlighted the case of seven Fulbright scholars whom he suggested were denied permission to travel to the US to study because three of them were affiliates of Gaza's Islamic University, a Hamas stronghold linked to a number of recent terrorist offences. Three of the 14 Fulbright scholars who applied to leave Gaza this year were indeed refused for security reasons. But the central issue is not whether such students pose a risk in themselves but whether access to an overseas college education represents "an exceptional humanitarian cause" for which Israel should break its legitimate blockade. As the universal right to an education does not extend to higher studies, it clearly does not.

This is undoubtedly a tragedy for the hundreds of students in receipt of foreign university fellowships barred from leaving Gaza, and Israel is presently reviewing its policy and examining applications on a case-by-case basis. But ultimate responsibility for the plight of those denied permission to travel lies not with the Jerusalem government, but with their own Hamas rulers who, in waging an indiscriminate terrorist war against all Israelis, are the region's real perpetrators of "collective punishment" crimes.

EDITOR'S UPDATE: For more on the Fulbright scholars from Gaza, see below.

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, August 26, 2008.

This was written by Dean Godson. who is research director of Policy Exchange Think Tank. It was published July 15, 2008 in The Times (UK)

"It is increasingly hard to draw a line between the agendas of the violent and non-violent" — Dean Godson


Who says that Islamists can't learn a trick or two from the West when they have to? Take a glance at the glossy brochure of Islam Expo — billed as Europe's "biggest Islamic cultural festival" — which ended at Olympia yesterday. You could be forgiven for thinking that you were looking at the catalogue for the forthcoming Boden sale that comes to the venerable London exhibition centre in a few weeks' time.

Visitors to Islam Expo would have wtnessed such innocent activities as an Islamic arts and crafts workshop for under 12s, live Islamic storytelling performances and lute-playing and poetry recitals in the pomegranate and date gardens.

The old Comintern would have instantly recognised the first rate tradecraft involved in organising all this. Just as Moscow and its allies knew how to organise a "popular front" to draw non-communist progressives and liberals into their orbit of influence, so some Islamists have honed a keen sense of how to present a non-threatening face to the West and to the many hundreds of decent, apolitical Muslims who turned up for a family day out.

But behind the cultural soft power of Islam Expo, there is political hard power, and some of it comes in quite raw, unpalatable forms. The organisers gave floor space in the exhibition section to the genocidal regime in Sudan (festooned with pictures of happy-looking black Africans) and to the "Cultural Section" of the Iranian Embassy (representing an aspirant genocidal regime) and the Algerian junta (no spring picnic on human rights).


* New board of imams to tackle extremists
* British Muslims plan a summer vision
* Muslim refuses shake, loses prize
* Imams to teach in state schools to tackle extremism

This perhaps becomes less surprising when one examines some of the directors of Islam Expo. All oppose al-Qaeda violence, but they are anything but moderate Muslims. They include Azzam Tamimi, a supporter of Hamas suicide bombings in Israel and an admirer of Ayatollah Khomeini.

Consider also the views of one of the expo's speakers: "Prof Zaghloul al Naggar, professor of geology and director of the London-based Markfield Institute of Higher Education has rightly told IslamOnline that many Westerners — some of them homosexual — convert to Islam in order to appeal to Islamic communities and spread sinful behaviour among Muslims, thus shaking their belief," according to the allaahuakbar.net website.

No wonder Hazel Blears, the feisty Secretary of State for Communities, decided last week that this was not a place where any minister should be seen. Most of her Muslim colleagues in the Labour Party backed her, including the MPs Sadiq Khan and Khalid Mahmood.

But another minister, Shahid Malik, MP for Dewsbury, had other ideas and sought to attend in a personal capacity. He was persuaded not to attend Islam Expo only with the greatest difficulty — after heavy pressure from his departmental chief at International Development, Douglas Alexander, the Chief Whip and the Cabinet Secretary, who invoked Cabinet Office guidelines on engagement with Islamic groups.

Ms Blears is probably the member of the Cabinet readiest to uphold a strict interpretation of those criteria. She has also dealt vigorously with senior officials whom she believes have been naive in their approach to Islamist-friendly groups.

But policing the boundaries of respectable discourse is hard work. While ministers were forbidden to go, the Foreign Office-funded British Satellite News was publicising an entirely positive image of Islam Expo for overseas consumption.

This time the Government has had a narrow escape from the political Islamists of Islam Expo.

Its relief must be compounded by what has happened over the past 48 hours to Alex Salmond. Scotland's First Minister has landed himself in serious trouble over a grant of £215,000 given to the Scottish Islamic Foundation, which is headed by one of his advisers, Osama Saeed. Other Muslim groups in Scotland are upset by what they see as favouritism to the best-known political Islamist in the Scottish National Party.

Mr Saeed, an SNP parliamentary candidate and also a speaker at Islam Expo, has described Hamas suicide attacks as "martyrdom operations" and has supported the creation of a modern caliphate, or pan-Islamic state. The row could cost the SNP victory in the Glasgow East by-election next week.

The fashionable take on deradicalising angry young Muslim men is that only political Islamists, such as Mr Saeed, have the credibility to stop them going over the deep end. This reasoning is doubtful. The opposition of political Islamists to al-Qaeda violence in the West does not mean that they are actually friends of the West. Rather, they know that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

The boundaries between violent and non-violent Islamists deserve greater exploration. Are non-violent political Islamists part of the solution or, as figures such as Hazel Blears and David Cameron increasingly suspect, part of the problem?

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 26, 2008.


I received a solicitation for contribution from candidate Barak Obama. It was repetitive, promised without commitment, and comprises entirely generalities not wholly benign:

"social and economic justice," "greater prosperity and a brighter future,"

"change this country and transform the world,"

"overcome the forces of fear and division that the other side has made a central part of their campaign,"

against "the narrow, special interest-driven politics that has stopped us from meeting the serious challenges we face,"

"the agenda offered by John McCain is nothing more than a continuation of the failed policies of the past,"

"Change in an economy that rewards not just wealth, but the work, and workers who create it." (He means the change would reward wealth, work, and workers.)

"Change is a health care plan that guarantees affordable coverage to all who want it."

"And change is ending a war in Iraq that should have never been authorized and never been waged and that distracted us from winning the war against al-Qaeda."

"We owe our country a better future. We owe our children a better future."

Obama's agenda features the failed policies of appeasement, of a welfare state, of excessive spending, of high taxation, and of racism. Yes, his campaign is the divisive one, insinuating that a vote against him is racist and blaming our problems on successful corporations instead of freeing corporations from regulations that keep them from being successful for their workers. Obama, like Clinton, would deprive workers of the secret ballot for union recognition, leaving them subject to union intimidation. Both parties favor special interests, as the subsidy-bloated budget demonstrates.

The Iraq war has done much to discredit al-Qaeda. The broader problem is the globalization of jihad. Obama, tied to the past, fails to realize that. He has no modern plan to reduce medical costs. His only way to reduce them is by fiat, which puts doctors out of business. How is that good for medical treatment? He never heard of organic food and alternative medicine? That political blindness is non-partisan, not just his.


Four thousand Jews from Gaza began demonstrating, in a campaign to return to Gaza. They vowed to return to their houses (IMRA, 8/7).

All those houses were demolished. They mean they want to return to their community sites and rebuild.

I approve their purpose, but would place their communities alongside Israel. That way, none would be isolated. Contiguity would provide security for both the renewed communities and for Israel. Israel easily could annex them.


Another Gazan rocket landed in Israel. [There must have been a few dozen, by now.] Israel warned Hamas that further violation of the truce would force it to take forceful means. Dr. Aaron Lerner comments that he has heard that before. These warnings are empty threats.

He suggests that while the world focuses on the Olympics, Israel take unpopular action against Hamas and other enemies. He suggests that Israel jam communications with the ships seeking to break through to Gaza in support of what amounts to a Muslim Arab right to murder Israelis, and do something to the ships (IMRA, 8/7).


Hizbullah's proclaimed next step is to gain anti-aircraft weaponry. It attempted to get a delivery from Russia via Syria, but Israeli diplomatic efforts thwarted this. Israel issued a warning that it would not stand for such a build-up. Dr. Aaron Lerner notes that Israel speaks loudly while carrying a small stick. Israeli threats have become a substitute for military action (IMRA, 8/7). IMRA noted that while Hizbullah's strategic danger to Israel has grown, Olmert & Livni claim that Israel is safer. In other words, those Israeli chickens claim that the sky is not falling.

Let us hope that 40,000 Hizbullah missiles do not fall from the sky onto Israel.

Is the new warning to Hizbullah like those issued almost daily to Hamas during the couple of years that Hamas built itself up into a strategic threat to Israel?


A Jewish customer of the Home Center Chain in Israel discovered that the store secretly offers Arabs a discount. He asks, suppose the discount were for Jews.

Upon receiving protests, the corporation claimed that it periodically offers discounts to various ethnic groups. More protests were lodged over that admitted discrimination (IMRA, 8/7).


Democrats praised Bush's reversal over Iran's nuclear program. He cancelled the precondition that Iran cease its nuclear enrichment. This undermined three Security Council resolutions. Whereas Democrats perceived the change as greater flexibility, Iranians saw it as greater weakness and validation of their defiance. They intend to use the time they gain to finish their quest. It's a serious quest, inasmuch as Iran spent 70% of its hard currency on nuclear and other military programs [while its economy suffered from that diversion of funds].

Some Iranian leaders not supposed to be hardliners urged the regime to pretend to be interested only in electricity from nuclear power while proceeding clandestinely with military usages.

An Iranian military chief urged the regime to disregard American deadlines hereafter. A new US president might impose one, but Iran may not believe him. That is dangerous. Bush's blunder makes a military confrontation likelier for his successor.


Sec. Rice announced the coming of peace between Israel and the P.A.. Abbas refused to recognize Israel's right to exist (IMRA, 8/8).

He is not saying he is ready to make peace with Israel. He is saying that Israel has no right to exist. How can he ever make peace with Israel, which he considers illegitimate? Rice is unrealistic. She either engages in wishful thinking or deceitful pronouncements.


An Israeli organization successfully opposes American missionary work in Israel. It claims that the missionaries react violently but complain to the State Dept. that the Israelis were violent. The State Dept. publishes the complaints without checking with the Israelis (Arutz-7, 8/8). Malicious busybodies.

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

Posted by Bryna Berch, August 26, 2008.

These two essays were written by Dr. Joel Fishman, a Fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and Chairman of the Foundation for the Research of Dutch Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is author of "Ten Years Since Oslo: The PLO's 'People's War' Strategy and Israel's Inadequate Response," Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Jerusalem Viewpoints No. 503, 1 September 2003 and coauthor (with Efraim Karsh) of La Guerre d'Oslo (The Oslo War) (Paris: Editions de Passy, 2005). Dr. Fishman is carrying out research on political warfare, particularly media warfare and propaganda.

Once upon a time, there were clear-cut partitions in destabilization techniques. There were military groups sponsered openly by governments. They were clearly identified by uniform. On the other end of the spectrum, there were operators trained in covert activities, who received orders very rarely if at all once they were on the job. They were usually instructed how to communicate with "headquarters" as needed.

But now there are so many ways to communicate, so many internet-, pod-, and email-based instruction manuals, that deep moles or even amateurs who share the ideology can go it alone. Of course, it increases the chances of success with previous training. The point is that it is difficult to tell the difference between trained operators, moles designed for specific missions, self-starters, revolutionaries who are acting out, mates in an isolated cell and those, who, in Daniel Pipes words, wake up one morning suffering from sudden suicide syndrome.

In the first essay, Joel Fishman examines the loner: "If we examine the recent examples of terror in Jerusalem in light of the principle of 'lone-wolf' terrorism, it is possible to appreciate how apparently isolated events could be linked, even in the absence of an organization or a leader."

The article was an Op-Ed item in Arutz-7
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/8143 Mr. Bennett Ruda of Elizabeth, NJ, provided valuable information for this essay.

The second essay is called, "Bad Manners At The Hebrew University" It appeared on IsraCampus
http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/ Editorial%20-%20Joel%20Fishman%20-%20bad%20manners.htm


1.  "Lone Wolf: Connecting The Dots"
Joel Fishman  

A new kind of terrorism

On Tuesday afternoon, July 22, Jerusalem experienced another act of terror when a citizen of eastern Jerusalem commandeered a bulldozer in order to use it as a weapon against innocent civilians. The media initially reacted by calling the attack a "copycat" crime, modeled after the attack on Jaffa Road in downtown Jerusalem on July 2, when another eastern Jerusalem driver deliberately plowed a bulldozer into vehicles, including a passenger bus, murdering three and injuring dozens of people.

The police labeled the perpetrators of the latest and the previous bulldozer attacks as terrorists acting on their own. In a brief article entitled "The Myth of the Lone Terrorist" (Makor Rishon, July 4), I argued that it is impossible to know whether the terrorist acted on his own and that one cannot separate acts of terrorism from their perpetrators' environment, the long-term influence of incitement to hatred and violence. If we take into account the murder of eight students at Jerusalem's Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva on March 6, which, according to the police, was also perpetrated by a lone terrorist, and the shooting of two policemen on patrol near the Lions' Gate on July 11, it is clear that we are confronted by a series of individual acts of terror and not random events.

Does this mean that we are now facing a new kind of terrorism which apparently takes place without a leader or an organization? Perhaps we are. Recent reports published in the United States have examined the problem of "lone wolf terrorism," "lone wolf extremism," or "leaderless resistance."

According to Wikipedia, "the 'lone-wolf' terrorist usually shares an ideological or philosophical identification with an extremist group, but does not communicate with the group he or she identifies with. While the 'lone-wolf's' actions are motivated to advance the group's goal, the tactics and methods are completely conceived and directed by the 'lone-wolf' without any outside command or direction. In many cases... the 'lone-wolf' never even has any personal contact with a larger group. Because of this, lone-wolf terrorism poses a particular problem for counter-terrorism officials, as it is considerably more difficult to gather intelligence on compared to conventional terrorism."

According to the Anti-Defamation League, Alex Curtis, a white supremacist living in San Diego, articulated this method, which may have existed beforehand without a proper label. Curtis advocated disengagement from underground racist organizations in order to evade the criminal justice system. An article on the ADL website, which appeared in July 2002, states that Curtis "envisioned a two-tiered hate movement in which 'divisive and subversive' propaganda would be widely distributed and would guide a revolutionary underground. This underground would consist of 'lone wolves' — racist warriors acting alone or in small groups who attacked the government or other targets in 'daily' anonymous acts.' Curtis saw himself as a propagandist sowing the seeds of a racist revolution...."

Furthermore, writing in the Washington Post (June 2005), retired FBI informer Mike German held that Timothy McVeigh, who carried out the Oklahoma City bombing (19 April 1995), is the classic example of the "lone wolf." His act of terror killed 168 people and injured hundreds. According to German, "'lone extremism' is not a phenomenon; it's a technique, a ruse designed to subvert the criminal justice system. McVeigh acted as a lone extremist and was trained to do it this way.... But his act of lone extremism was part of the ongoing conspiracy that continues to inspire violent attacks to this day.... It is a matter of connecting the dots...."

Similarly, Eyad Kishawi, a Palestinian activist living in San Francisco, published a manual in January 2006 which called for a boycott of Israel and proposed a new strategy of political warfare. Kishawi recommended that the efforts of anti-Israel activists be de-centralized in order to avoid the reach of the American law enforcement agencies and "Israeli extra-judicial and illegal activities." Notably, he emphasized the need for individual initiatives. It is not such a big step to take this principle — as applied to political activism — and transform it into a tactic of terrorist warfare. In fact, Kishawi's approach is essentially the same as the "lone-wolf" terrorism of the white supremacist Alex Curtis.

If we examine the recent examples of terror in Jerusalem in light of the principle of "lone-wolf" terrorism, it is possible to appreciate how apparently isolated events could be linked, even in the absence of an organization or a leader. Indeed, there is a cultural connection between ongoing incitement and specific acts of terror. Therefore, it is necessary to deconstruct the cultural environment which incites individuals to perform crimes of hatred.

Some positive measures would include sustained police action, rebuilding the education system, rewriting of school textbooks, and censorship of the sermons in the mosques. Further, there must be heavy penalties both for those who incite to violence and those who perpetrate terrorist acts. Those in charge of safeguarding the security of Israeli civilians must find new means — and resourcefully apply the old ones — to break the links of the chain that connect religious and political incitement with those who act according to the principles of "lone-wolf terrorism."

In addition, the State of Israel must insist on exercising its sovereignty in the capital and throughout the country. Otherwise, it will face a situation similar to that which prevails in France and other European countries where there are "lost territories of the Republic," districts and neighborhoods which the local residents have rendered inaccessible to the law enforcement authorities. Ultimately, Israel must vigorously enforce the law of the land everywhere within its borders if it intends to protect its citizens and assure its continuity.

These are readers' comments to this article.

4. Residents, not citizens
Yehoshua Friedman, Kochav Hashahar (31/07/08)

The Arabs are not and do not want to be residents of our city and our country. They consider themselves members of the Arab nation and wish to replace Israel with another Arab state. The "lone wolf" is part of the phenomenon of electronic retribalization which causes the terrorist to receive his "orders" subliminally from the mass media. No chain of command is needed. Far from being an independent individual, he is the opposite, a hive-mentality killer insect. The West is retribalizing into the global village, but the Arab, who never individualized in the first place, is ahead of us on the curve by virtue of having been behind all along. This insight is an adaptation of McLuhan's Understanding Media.

5. The only answer, "No Arabs, No Terror"
Harvey (Chaim), London (31/07/08)

How these words from Rabbi Meir Kahane still reign true. We don't even need to kill them, just get them out. Regretably we are paralysed with too much PC, to face the truth, we have made their lives are more valuable than ours, WHY!

7. Good analysis and good suggestions, BUT it's too late.
Michelle, Vancouver (31/07/08)

Although your suggestions are wise, they are several decades too late. Why? Because if there's one thing we have learned all these years is that Arabs and Jews cannot live together in Israel.

It does not matter what method the Arabs use, whether organized or lone wolf terrorism, it all has the same goal: to terrorize Jews out of their land.

It's too late for re-educating them. It's too late for pacifying them. And it's too late and costly to keep on policing an exploding population.

Their message is loud and clear: they want Jews out of Israel and they will use every means, violent and otherwise, to achieve that end.

You can't live like this forever. You need peace for the future generations.

There is only ONE way to safeguard the lives of the Jews of Israel and that is to arrange for the humane relocation of the Arabs. All of them.

8. The ignorance is staggering!
Mike, Vienna, VA (31/07/08)

What the author is describing has a proper name. It's called a Marighella Insurgency. The doctrine has been around for over 40 years and is extremely well known. Marighella's model has been used by everyone from ALF and RAF to Greenpeace. It's amazing that the author perceives it as a new invention.

P.S. The idea that some form of "better education" will suddenly turn Moslem squatters in Eretz Yisrael into model citizens is even more ridiculous than the rest of the aricle. Moslems are Bnei Amalek. The Torah is clear regarding the means to render them "good".

9. Marighella's slightly different IMHO
D. Ashley, Mercaz Marlaz (01/08/08)

From Marighella's well-known tractate: "...the urban guerrilla cannot reveal his activity to anyone, since this information is always and only the responsibility of the revolutionary organization in which he is participating." And "The highest level of preparation for the urban guerrilla is the training camp for technical training." And "In order to function, the urban guerrillas must be organized into small groups." And "The organization is... within a general command that also participates in attacks..." And "...the enemy encourages betrayal and infiltrates spies into the guerrilla organization..." And "The guerrilla who suffers from this sin tries to solve the problems of the revolution by actions in the city, but without bothering about the beginnings and survival of other guerrillas in other areas. Blinded by success, he winds up organizing an action that he considers decisive..."

10. To #9: Doctrine is the skeleton around which the body...
Mike, Vienna, VA (01/08/08)

of a real movement is built. With the appearance of the internet and strong encryption, the Resistance Coordination Committee can be virtual. For example, usenet bulletin boards have been used for the purpose. There are many variations on Marighella's basic theme.


2. "Bad Manners At The Hebrew University"
Joel Fishman
8 August 2008
Translation of original Hebrew version that appeared in Makor Rishon 8/8/2008

On Thursday afternoon, July 31, I attended the graduation ceremony which took place in Mexico Hall of the Hebrew University on Mount Scopus in Jerusalem. At this medium-sized gathering, the Faculty of Humanities of the University awarded diplomas to students who had successfully completed the Master of Arts degrees. When I came to this event I was looking forward to a pleasantly but slightly dull afternoon.

At the beginning of the ceremony, the public was asked to stand for Hatikvah, the national anthem. While the audience was singing, I turned around and saw something incongruous. Several rows behind me, sat a group of students who by their body language and defiant looks communicated that they chose to distance themselves from the public. These were Arab students. For the sake of honesty and truth, I must add that I learned afterward that this group was not entirely representative, because there were some Arab students who did stand for Hatikvah.

Although I had heard reports of this type of offensive behavior on the part off minority students at Yom Ha'Shoah commemoration ceremonies at the University, this experience was new to me. Had I not seen it myself, I would not have raised subject. Therefore, I apologize in advance if I refuse to pass over this incident in silence. Although many Israelis hope for understanding between Jews and Arabs, nothing good can come from an environment of incivility and hatred. Please do not dismiss my first person account by calling me a right-wing extremist, a reactionary, a racist, a fascist, a Nazi, an "Enemy of the Peace," or "a friend of Hamas." I am none of the above and refuse to be intimidated by those who resort to totalitarian epithets. What happened at the University is a legitimate subject for discussion.

The first logical question to ask is: what message did these individuals wish to convey? Basically, there are two levels of meaning. First of all, they publicly expressed their contempt for a national symbol, in this case, the national anthem Hatikvah. Secondly, they openly demonstrated their contempt for the general public whose feelings they were bound to offend. It was a calculated affront. It is not that these people did not know how to behave; through their actions they chose to transmit a provocative and hostile message to their hosts and to the audience.

Although in all likelihood I shall not meet the offending individuals again, I still wish to send a response. This gesture is an example of bad manners. People who behave offensively have no place in good company. They belong on the street. If I entered a Church, I would take off my hat. If I went to a mosque, I would remove my shoes. When, for example, President Bush recently visited Jerusalem, the audience stood respectfully through both the American and Israeli national anthems. It is a simple question of common sense and mutual respect. Jews have a term for this tasteful and considerate behavior, derech eretz.

Participating in rituals of social graciousness is not necessarily an expression of friendship or closeness. Such rituals of civility and politeness ease social contacts and make relations easier for all concerned. There may be Israelis who would not care to have Arabs in their midst, but the Hebrew University received all of its guests hospitably. Furthermore, the University has gone to great lengths to accommodate the Arab minority. No one asks these students to show gratitude for the fine educational opportunities they have been given. They do not have to become Zionists, and, if they don't care for us, that's fine too. But there is simply no justification for crude and illmannered behavior.

There is another way of looking at the matter. Several decades ago, Uri Loubrani, David Ben Gurion's advisor on Arab affairs, made a statement which was considered to be particularly unenlightened. He declared that "It might have been better if there were no Arab university students. If they remained hewers of wood it might have been easier to control them." Although his message was disagreeable, Loubrani made an important point. The well-educated malcontents are the most dangerous because they can do far more harm. They will lead the war against the State and seek regime change. In contrast, terrorists and bulldozer drivers cause less damage.

Therefore, we must ask: what possible interest does Israel have in producing more of these academic malcontents — like those who were so badly out of place in Mexico Hall — and arming them with the intellectual weapons they need to wage war against the State of Israel and Israeli society?


To Go To Top

Posted by Saul Goldman, August 26, 2008.

This is by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and it appeared in Jewish World Review
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney090308.php3 JWR contributor Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. heads the Center for Security Policy.


Listening to her critics, one might think that John McCain's chosen running-mate is a complete ignoramus when it comes to matters of national security. In fact, Sarah Palin's background in Alaska, including most recently her service as that state's governor, suggests that the judgment of the Republicans' candidate for Vice President with respect to this portfolio is likely to be substantially better than that of either Barak Obama or Joe Biden.

Consider the following factors:

  • Gov. Palin has spent much of her adult life dealing with matters long central to the Alaskan experience and now of surpassing importance to the nation as a whole — namely, energy security and how we can provide for it. Having managed her state's department responsible for oil and gas exploration and exploitation, having negotiated a long-delayed natural gas pipeline through Canada to the Lower 48 and having been married for nearly two decades to a blue-collar worker in Alaska's North Slope oil fields, she knows more about the subject than all three of the others on the two parties' tickets put together.

    If Gov. Palin can bring to bear her insights into the need for expanded, yet environmentally sensitive drilling, including in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) — together with an appreciation of the need to introduce fuel-choice in our transportation sector, the object of the bipartisan Open Fuel Standard Act introduced in both the House and Senate shortly before the August recess — she will demonstrate unsurpassed leadership in what is, arguably, the single most important national security challenge of our time.

  • Napoleon is said to have declared that "Geography is destiny." That certainly is true of Gov. Palin. Her state is adjacent to Russia, a nation that has in recent years demonstrated a rising aggressiveness towards its neighbors. The targets are not just the relatively weak and formerly enslaved countries on its littoral like Georgia — the scene of a bloody invasion last month aimed at toppling the elected government there. Moscow has also conducted simulated strategic bombing runs with Soviet-era long-range, nuclear-capable aircraft. These offensive missions are designed to penetrate U.S. northern air defenses in a manner reminiscent of the most provocative of Kremin behavior during the Cold War.

  • As it happens, the best of those defenses — including a squadron of America's state-of-the-art interceptors, the F-22 Raptor — are stationed at Elmendorf Air Force Base near Anchorage. Governor Palin would not only be intimately familiar with that facilities' vital role in protecting U.S. territory. She would also appreciate its importance in the projection of American power in Asia and beyond as much of the nation's long-range transport aircraft supplying our military operations around the world transit through Elmendorf. Every Commander-in-Chief should have such insights.

  • Speaking of geography, Alaskan territory is also along the trajectory of ballistic missiles launched eastward out of Stalinist North Korea. For that reason, among others, Alaska's Fort Greely was selected as the site for the principal U.S. ground-based defense against such missiles.

    As that state's governor, Sarah Palin would know more by osmosis — if nothing else — about the necessity for U.S. anti-missile systems than either Messrs. Obama or Biden. In fact, the Democrats have reflexively opposed such defenses and promise to starve them of funds if elected. Opinion polls suggest that the support missile defense enjoys among Gov. Palin's Alaskans is shared by strong majorities of their countrymen elsewhere. Her judgment versus Sen. Biden's on the question of whether America should be protected against present and growing missile-delivered threats will be one of the highlights of the vice presidential nominees' debate.

  • At present, one can only infer Sarah Palin's grasp of the danger posed by today's principal enemy: adherents to the brutally repressive and seditious program the Islamists call Shariah, a program they seek to impose worldwide through violent means and "soft jihad" (including, Shariah-Compliant Finance, influence operations, subversive proselytizing and recruitment in our mosques, prisons and military, etc.) A tangible indicator of her views, however, is the enlistment of her eldest son, Track, on the anniversary of 9/11 last year and his imminent deployment to Iraq. His mother — like the loved ones of millions of other servicemen and women — has had to confront directly and personally the prospect of making the ultimate sacrifice for their country in the face of such evil.

In short, America is only beginning to get to know Sarah Palin. As we do, she will have plenty of opportunities to illuminate her views on national security. One thing is already clear, though: By virtue of her home state and its unique role in America's energy, defense and power-projection and thanks to her own public sector service and that of her offspring in the U.S. Army, it is not only wrong but foolish to portray her as totally unprepared to contend with the epochal foreign and defense policy issues we are confronting.

If anything, Gov. Palin's personal story and qualities that are clearly resonating with millions of Americans across the political spectrum — her intelligence, scrappiness, integrity, common sense and deep-seated faith — when combined with her real-world experience in Alaska, suggest that she will prove to be better equipped than her rivals to deal with the dynamic and increasingly ominous national security challenges of our times.

Rabbi Saul Goldman is Rabbi at Temple Aliyah, Coral Springs, Florida. Contact him by email at gold7910@bellsouth.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, August 26, 2008.

This was written by Moshe Feiglin.

"And you shall drive out the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein; for I have given the land to you to possess it. But if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those that you let remain will be as thorns in your eyes, and as pricks in your sides, and they shall harass you in the land in which you dwell. And it shall come to pass, that as I thought to do unto them, so will I do to you." (Parshat Masei — Numbers 33: 53, 55, 56)

This Torah portion provides us with the most realistic political plan that exists. The State of Israel must foster a reality in which the entire Land of Israel is in the hands of the Nation of Israel. It must not allow any part of the land to remain in foreign hands. If we give our land to foreign peoples, we will lose our own hold on the land and will eventually be forced to leave. Any political plan or solution that does not take this fact into account is nothing more than an illusion. (Muslims and Christians claim that they believe in Jews G-d and Torah. Well, why do they delibarately ignore G-d's commandment? And, why does the self-hating Jewish leadership disobade it as well?)

Playing Israel as a Pawn. Russian president Dimitry Medvedev's honeyed words of reassurance to Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert in a call he made to Jerusalem on Wednesday, Aug. 20. It is just another game! At the Black Sea resort of Sochi, Syrian president Bashar Assad told reporters on Thursday, Aug. 21, that he is considering a Russian request to deploy missiles in his country in view of Russian-Western tensions.

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

The international laws relating to national territorial integrity and sovereignty of others is applied to every country other than the superpowers. They just ignore them by applying a 'national security' or 'humanitarian' spin! Occupation of Tibet by China, invasion of Iraq by the US and military action by Russia against Georgia only a few examples from a long list of bullying! Memorial for Victims of 1929 Hevron Massacre. A ceremony in memory of the 67 victims of the 1929 Hevron Massacre was held on Tuesday evening in the ancient Jewish cemetery in the city. In late August of 1929, Arab mobs in Jerusalem began targeting Jewish neighbourhoods in violent attacks. Within a short time, Arabs throughout the rest of the Land of Israel were rioting, lynching and perpetrating massacres against the Jewish population of towns such as Hevron, Tiberias, Tzfat and Motza. In Hevron, where the rolling pogrom arrived on August 23, 1929 (17 Av 5689), Arab residents of the city murdered 67 of their Jewish neighbors in one day. (All of this was done with the knowledge of, deliberate complacency and even encouragement from the British in order to prevent Jews from taking over the Palestinian mandate, with was created in 1922 by the League of Nations to accommodate the creation of the Eretz-Israel!)

Jordan the Fake Partner in the Fake Peace Process. Jordan frees 4 prisoners transferred from Israel. The four were found guilty in 1990 of killing IDF soldiers in two separate attacks within Israel's borders and sentenced to life imprisonment but transferred last year to serve out their time in the kingdom.

Lack Manpower to Evict Arabs. The police have turned down the most recent court order to evict the Arab squatters from Jewish owned Jerusalem property because of riots they expect will result. Police said they don't have the men for the job. (But there was plenty of manpower and recourses available to forcefully remove 8,500 Jews from their homes in Gaza!)

Clear Objective of the Enemies. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday advised the leaders of European countries and the US not to yield to Israel's demands and never count on its support because "We will witness dismantling of the corrupt regime [Israel] in a very near future." (No hidden agenda, just an unambiguous animalistic desire to destroy the Jewish state!)

Quotes of the Week:

"Get it all on record now — get the films — get the witnesses — because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened" — General Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, after he found the victims of the death camps. He ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead. — There are bastards who are denying Holocaust now and who did not learn the lesson and have been committing and facilitating genocides around the world!

Political Stupidity Makes No Sense. The Israeli government's decision to release 199 terrorists, including two convicted murderers of Israeli civilians, has angered the Shin Bet and other organs of Israel's security apparatus, according to a source from the general security service.

Gaza Crossings and 'Poor Palestinians' Game. Israel has closed its cargo crossings with the Gaza Strip again, following a rocket attack on southern Israel that violated a truce. Israel and Hamas have been 'observing' a truce [Hudna] since June. But Gaza terrorists have sporadically violated the deal by firing rockets and mortars into Israel, sabotaging reopening of the borders crossings, in spite of the Hamas' claim that Gaza residents heavily depend on the crossings for basic goods. (Spokesman for the United Nations Relief Works Agency, Christopher Gunness, complained that limited fuel supplies in particular were hampering people in their daily lives. — How the rocket attacks from Gaza effect Jews in Israel? This he does not care about!)

Look Who is Talking. A senior leader of the Islamic Hamas movement, Osama al-Muzeini, on Thursday said the Israeli commitment to ceasefire agreement between Israel and Gaza terrorists "is weak". (Hamas has announced several times that it is considering end ceasefire, but enemies of Jews do not care about 'little' lies about peaceful intentions made by enemies of Israel!)

Hypocrisy of the 'Loaded' Headlines:

"Syrian envoy to UN: Olmert's planned resignation could affect peace talks..." — What peace talks? It should have said "pretence of ... peace talks" — that is actually what all parties have been doing!

Europeans Cultivated Islamic Terror. Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga revealed that the government of Italy agreed to allow Arab terrorist groups freedom of movement in the country in exchange for immunity from attacks in Italy. Cossiga wrote that the government of the late Prime Minister Aldo Moro reached a "secret non-belligerence pact between the Italian state and 'Palestinian resistance' organizations, including terrorist groups," in the 1970s. (It was a beginning of Islamic insurgence in the West and many European countries 'protected themselves from Islamic terror by allowing it to flourish, because at the time it was directed mainly against Israel/Jews!)

Al Qaeda in Israel. A Bedouin from Be'er Sheva was indicted for plotting a suicide attack with the help of Al Qaeda, as the terror group's influence grows in Israel. Fake Nation Nightmare. by Steven Shamrak.

According to all reputable anti-terrorist experts, negotiation with terrorists is bad practice. It gives them legitimacy and encourages the raising of the level of terror. The aim of terrorists is to destabilize society and facilitate the change of public opinion in support of their cause, whatever it is, regardless of its legitimacy.

Basque, Tibetans and Kurds have legitimate national claims. All of them have historical connections with their land, as well as the language, cultural and national heritage. In spite of this, neither Spain, France, China, five Central Asian countries, nor the United Nations have made any attempt to address their grievances. Strong legal and military measures are used to discourage any independence tendencies.

The idea of 'Palestinian people' was born in the middle of the 1960s after Arab states realized that it was impossible to destroy Israel using military force. The plan for the destruction of the state of Israel through political maneuvering, propaganda campaigns and diplomatic arm-twisting was drawn up and put into action.

After forty years of well-designed and persistently executed plans, the 'Fake Nation' is becoming real in the minds of many. Even Jews, exhausted by Arab terror and desperate for at least an illusion of peace, began to lean toward the idea. It has only become possible due to the weak and complacent leadership in Israel and the lack of understanding of the real goal of Islam by the Western leaders.

It is time to return to basics, scrutinize the facts of history and wake up from this mesmerizing nightmare!

Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehoshua HaLevi, August 25, 2008.

Sunset on the beach at Habonim Nature Reserve on Israel's central coast

Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT:
The world is flat, or so it would certainly appear looking through my 12-24 wide-angle, digital zoom along Israel's central coast at HaBonim Nature Reserve. And because it really is flat, or at least the part of the earth that the camera is concerned with, it takes a bit of effort to compose an image that does justice to the beauty of this stretch of rocky shoreline. The best landscapes, especially those which lack dimension, are shot from high ground to increase image depth. In this location, however, my lateral movement was restricted in order to include the many pools spread out across the foreground. The best I could do was step up onto a rock about one foot off the ground. That helped raise the horizon line a little higher above the line where the rocks meet the water, but that thin strip of sea adds substantial depth to the image. I brought home my share of crashing wave shots, but none evoked the feeling of warm summer evening, relaxing in the sand, nothing to do but watch the sun go down.

Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, August 25, 2008.

This was written by Hugh Fitzgerald and it appeared today on Jihad Watch.


A poster at Jihad Watch recently asked: "My big question is this: What does Israel have to do with dhimmitude or the West?"

Answer: Everything. Israel is part of the West, and the West would not be the West without Israel's contribution to that West.

Israel, or the Jews, lost their land (as did so many other non-Muslim and non-Arab peoples) during the Muslim conquest of the Middle East and North Africa, in which islamization was accompanied by arabization. (In some places, however, such as Iran, that arabization was seen for what it was: cultural and linguistic imperialism that convinced so many of those conquered that they were "Arabs" or would have to become "Arabs" in order to be "Muslims.") Yet many Jews managed to start returning to build a Jewish Commonwealth, many decades before the Mandate for Palestine was created by the League of Nations. They continued to return, with great difficulty, during the period of the Mandate as well, despite a largely unsympathetic British mandatory authority that did not abide by the terms of the Mandate. See Article 6 of the Mandate, for example, which required the Mandatory power to "facilitate close Jewish settlement on the land."

And other Jews, survivors of the death camps, also came to join the effort. Nearly a million arrived from where, in the various Muslim Arab lands, they had been subjected to mistreatment and endured insecurity as dhimmis (as did all the non-Muslims under Islam).

The Jews of Israel, at least the 50% of the population that came from Arab countries, are no longer willing to live as dhimmis, and will not return to that status. The Jews who were the descendants of those who left the Land of Israel to go further afield, into Europe, are only now beginning to learn about what Islam is all about — as is the rest of the Infidel world, and not a moment too soon.

And they, and the rest of the West, and the rest of the non-Western Infidels, will begin to recognize, in larger and larger numbers, that the war that is today being made on Israel is merely a classic Jihad, and always has been.

It has been obscured, partly by the artful use by Muslims of islamochristians among the "West Bank" Arabs (Hanan Ashrawi, Naim Ateek, Michel Sabbah, etc.), to promote the Islamic agenda. But it has mainly been obscured by the careful creation of that utterly phony "Palestinian" identity that so much effort was put into "constructing."

See, for example, Mahmoud Darwish for one careful "constructor" who, before the Six-Day War, used to declare that "I am an Arab" and then, presto-chango, stopped saying that and after that war spoke of himself to Westerners only as a "Palestinian." He and others did this for reasons that Zuhair Mohsen incautiously spelled out to James Dorsey in an interview for the Dutch newspaper Trouw.

The Jihad against Israel is conducted through qitaal, conventional combat, and also through terrorism, as well as through diplomatic and economic pressure, and propaganda. The works. There may be differences on questions of timing and tactics between the Fast Jihadists of Hamas and the Slow Jihadists of Fatah, but there is no difference at all on the ultimate goal: Israel, as a place where Jews can live on land once possessed by Muslims, and not live as dhimmis, must cease to exist. That's it. No other outcome for Muslim Arabs — save for a handful of the most intellectually and morally advanced — is tolerable.

And the Jihad against Israel received a lot of attention — though it is seen not as a Jihad but as the Arabs wanted it to be seen, as a "struggle of a tiny people, the "Palestinians," etc., against an "occupier" and so on. This propaganda campaign began even before the OPEC trillions arrived, and before Muslim millions had foolishly been allowed to settle in the Western countries, and before Western technological advances (audiocassettes, videocassettes, satellite television, the Internet) were appropriated by Muslims — who were incapable themselves of developing such things — in order to spread further the message, the full deadly message, of Islam, to the farthest corners of Dar al-Harb, because the entire world, you see, belongs to Allah and to his people.

That's what Israel "has to do with dhimmitude and the West."

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

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 25, 2008.

What shall we call it? A lot of hot air? Declarations "signifying nothing"?

Barak said that Labor would resign the coalition if the budget were unsatisfactory. Shas ministers said they'd leave if child allowances weren't increased. Olmert said he'd fire those ministers who voted against the budget. I see none of these things happening, at least yet.

After I wrote at midnight last night, the budget negotiations continued, way into the night, until a budget that a majority of the Cabinet would accept was arrived at. A razor thin majority: 13 for and 12 against, with Haim Ramon abstaining.

The majority was achieved when members of Kadima — Avi Dichter, Ze'ev Boim and Ruhama Avraham-Balila — and members of the Pensioners Party — Rafi Eitan and Ya'acov Ben-Yizri — who had been opposed were convinced to go along.

The seven ministers of Labor voted against, as did the four ministers of Shas.

It is worth noting that the single Kadima holdout was Shaul Mofaz, who accused Livni of caving under pressure for political reasons. Said he:

"Whoever wins the Kadima primaries will obviously have to bring about a new budget. It's a pity that the budget passed due to 'political' reasons."


That there is politics involved is indisputable. The Post reports that the five ministers whose reversal allowed the budget to be passed have been promised additional funding for their respective offices.

But, in spite of Olmert's carrying on, it's not all politics. There are genuine issues, primarily whether emphasis must be on social issues (and the economy) or on defense. Ironically, while the US economy is floundering, ours is vigorous, and there is concern that it not be sabotaged by a huge budget deficit. Similarly, there are genuine social issues to be attended to — welfare and education.

But in the face of what we are likely to be confronting in our north, as well as in Gaza — not to mention what may be involved with Iran — there is a solid argument to be made for putting defense spending first. This becomes an existential issue — not just for the nation, but also for individual soldiers in the field who require the best of training and equipment. If our nation is not properly defended, all the rest becomes moot.

Said Labor Secretary-General Eitan Cabel on Army Radio:

"...making this a political issue is a mistake. For the first time in a long time, Labor ministers presented a position, backed it, and did what they should have done in light of the harsh and bad budget proposal...This was not a political battle but a moral issue."


Right now the vote has gone with a smaller allocation to defense and an eye towards the economy. Child allowances were not increased.

Olmert has no need to fire anyone, no matter his threats, because he achieved what he sought. Shas, which is always threatening, is unlikely to leave. And Labor? They'll have to answer for why they remain in the government, if they do.

The bottom-line reality here is that it will be months before this comes before the Knesset for final approval. There will, presumably, be a Kadima primary before then. And it is not only Mofaz who believes many changes are likely to be made in this budget before it is actually finalized. There are those arguing that we can't do justice to everything without allocating additional funds on the basis of anticipated economic growth, and permitting some deficit.


We let out 198 prisoners today in order to "bolster" Abbas.

Before they went on their way, they were all required to sign a document pledging never again to be involved in terrorism. That always blows me away. Has there ever been a terrorist who, though longing to get back into the violence, has declined to be involved because of signing such a document? Is there anyone anywhere who actually believes that this is how a potential terrorist might be dissuaded?

After the signing they all went to Ramallah for a joyous celebration.

And Abbas? He said that:

"There will be no peace without the release of all Palestinians imprisoned in Israel,. We will not rest until the prisoners are freed and the jails are empty...They all have a place in our heart, but there is a special one, senior brother Marwan Barghouti and the leading brother Ahmad Sa'adat, whom we hope to see soon."

Barghouti, the big-time Fatah Tanzim terrorist, is serving five life sentences for his part in killing Jews. And Sa'adat is a leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and was a mastermind of the assassination of Israeli Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze'evi.

The Palestinians were so happy about what we had done that some handful of them, at least, stoned an Israeli bus outside of Ramallah today.

So, why did we bother? Is this all for Rice?


The secretary of state has arrived here now — her seventh trip since Annapolis — and is conceding that an end-of-the-year peace deal is extremely unlikely. However, she is committed, she says, to continuing to promote small increments. She's sounding a tad more realistic.

On her agenda, with the "peace process" are both Syria and Russia.


Exceedingly important with regard to the Palestinians is a piece by Daniel Hannan. a member of the European Parliament, in the Telegraph (UK), "EU aid to Palestine is funding the conflict."

"...it is becoming increasingly clear that overseas aid is arresting a political settlement in the region. Palestinians receive more assistance, per capita, than any other people on Earth, and live in one of its most violent spaces. The two facts are connected.

"The idea that aggression can be buried under a landslide of euros sounds reasonable, but it is based on a false premise, namely that political violence is caused by economic deprivation.

"...None of this [stability, civil order, etc.] will happen, however, as long as Palestinians remain trapped in the squalor of dependency."

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2008/08/22/ eu_aid_to_palestine_is_funding_the_conflict


I want to backtrack here for a moment and mention what I should have written about before: Mike Huckabee — former governor of Arkansas and former Republican candidate for president — was here visiting us this past week. What a marvel he is in terms of understanding our issues: the dangers of a Palestinian state at our border, the insanity of dividing Jerusalem. Would that more US leaders "got it" the way he does.

For a five-minute interview with him from IBA news on Israeli TV, see:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/Page/VideoPlayer&cid= 1194419829128&videoId=1219218628887


On orders from Defense Minister Barak, 300 police and Shin Bet forces on Saturday night raided the Al Aksa Institute offices of the Islamic Movement in Umm al-Fahm, which served as headquarters for the northern branch of the Movement. The offices were shut down, computers and documents were seized and some bank accounts were frozen after Al Aksa was named an "unlawful organization" because of evidence that it had connections to Hamas.

The point of connection with Hamas was found to be "The Union of Good," an umbrella organization (a front) for Hamas foundations that was outlawed in Israel but operates in Europe and elsewhere.

Mazel tov! Anyone who follows the actions of this Israeli Arab organization, the Islamic Movement, has long understood that they are up to no good. Just the day before the raid there was a major rally in Umm al-Fahm because Al-Aksa mosque on the Temple Mount was said, again, to be in danger. "With blood and fire we'll redeem Al-Aksa," cried Raed Salah, head of the Islamic Movement's northern branch.

Guaranteed we haven't heard the last from them.


Jeff Daube, who is heading a new Israeli office for ZOA, wrote a piece in the Post last week concerning potential security measures for Sderot — via the US Nautilus/Skyguard system — that have not been seriously considered yet.

This eye-opener is well worth reading:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1219218600703&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 25, 2008.

(IsraelNN.com) A lawyer for Yitzchak Herskovitz, a septuagenarian resident of Kiryat Arba and owner of property in Jerusalem, said Sunday his client will sue Jerusalem police for failing to execute court orders to evict Arab squtters from his property.

Herskovitz had hoped to have his Jerusalem property freed of Arab squatters by last week, as the court ordered, but the police said they don't have the men for the job.

Baruch Ben-Yosef said his client's motion to sue is a desperate step to force the police to fulfil their legal obligations to execute court orders.

"The police have systematically denied my client of his rights," he told IsraelNationalNews. "The court has repeatedly ordered them to evict the illegal squatters from his home, but they have always come up with some excuse not to fulfil that order. Maybe being forced to pay a large sum of money will get them to move."

Fearful of Riots

Herskovitz, a septuagenarian formerly of Los Angeles and now of Kiryat Arba in Judea, bought property in southern Jerusalem in 1992. He has never been able to take possession of it, however, because of Arab squatters living there.

The police have turned down the most recent court order to evict the Arabs because of riots they expect will result. They promise to carry it out within several weeks — or several months.

Though the feisty and colorful Mr. Herskovitz has legal title to the property, located near the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Gilo (Jewish) and Beit Tsafafa (Arab), a clan of Arab squatters says it is theirs. Their claims have alternated between "we received it when the original owner defaulted on a loan" and "we bought it from him."

Jewish People Could Lose Sovereignty

Meanwhile, the Arab squatters continue to live, rent-free, on the property Herskovitz bought 16 years ago but has still not merited to move into. He is not giving up the fight, though: "I have interests here — but the Jewish People have an even greater interest in this case. If the courts do not enforce this order, it is very likely that this entire area will simply become Arab. When you lose the ability to enforce the law, you lose sovereignty — and the Jewish People are in danger of having that happen right here, in Jerusalem!"

Courts Rule in Herskovitz's Favor

In 2004, after handwriting and document experts testified that the Arabs' documents were fraudulent, the Jerusalem Magistrates Court ruled in Herskovitz's favor. The Arab clan appealed the ruling in the Jerusalem District Court, which also ultimately ruled in Herskovitz's favor. The squatters then tried another tactic, and in 2006, they sued for ownership of the property. The court has not yet ruled on this claim — but has given a hint of its position by issuing an interim order for the squatters to post bond and pay past rent, or else face eviction.

Arabs Didn't Pay, Court OKs Eviction, Police Say Not Now

The Arabs did not pay rent or post the bond, and the District Court ruled, once again, that they can be evicted. Herskovitz, in accordance with accepted procedure, applied to the police to carry out the eviction order — but the police turned him down.

Adv. Yaakov Golbert, representing Herskovitz's interests in the foreclosure and reclamation of the party, told IsraelNationalNews what happened: "A police lawyer called me yesterday [Tuesday], and said that the police simply don't have the manpower for the job. They're afraid of riots, and soon [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza] Rice is coming to the region, and soon it will be Ramadan, etc. etc. But she promised over and over that for sure before the High Holidays [nearly six weeks from now — ed.], they will do it."

Police Ask for Long Delay

The lawyer was actually more generous than an official police letter to the court. The letter stated, "The eviction is a very sensitive, on behalf of a Jew living in Hevron [sic; he actually lives in Kiryat Arba — ed.], and the property is located in [an Arab neighborhood]. It should also be noted that the eviction was set for approximately a week before the onset of the Ramadan month... In my estimation, the [police] deployment for the eviction will be very intensive, because of the expectation of riots after the eviction — and it will lead into the Ramadan fasts. Similarly, it will involve the deployment of many policemen on the day on which U.S. Secretary Rice is expected, which will make it very difficult... Based on this, we ask for a flexible eviction order beginning from Oct. 5, 2008 until Feb. 1, 2009."

"Not only are they refusing to do it now," an astounded Herskovitz said, "but they even want to put it off for several months! ... And how can the police lawyer make a promise [to Golbert] that they will do it before Rosh HaShanah, when the days before Rosh HaShanah are still in the month of Ramadan?! How can I believe them?"

Asked if he has any recourse against the police position, Golbert said, "Most unfortunately, no. If the police explain that they can't carry it out, then the court will believe them, and that's that."

Possibly Herskovitz's latest suit against the police will get them to change their mind.

Herskovitz sees it differently. "The police are simply bucking a court order," he said. "They have made this into a soap opera and a circus. I would like to believe them when they say they will do it in a month — but it's very hard for me to do so because of how they have stalled and pushed this off so many times in the past, and because of what they are 'promising' now."

Hillel Fendel is senior news editor of Arutz-7. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by LEL, August 25, 2008.

This was written by Andrew L. Jaffee at www.netwmd.com.

This article was cross-posted at netwmd.com, NeoConstant, and IsraPundit


U.S. financial assistance to Israel can be a contentious topic, even when discussing foreign policy issues using accurate information. Very often, opponents of Israel use wildly exaggerated, even fabricated "facts and figures" and extremely hyperbolic language to disparage the Jewish State — even claiming the U.S. has been pushed to the verge of bankruptcy by supporting Israel. The obfuscations about U.S. aid to Israel have been bothering me for a very long time, so I decided to research the numbers myself and compare my findings to the figures advanced by hysterical critics of Israel.

For example, an anti-Semitic publication, which so innocently calls itself the "Washington Report on Middle East Affairs" (WRMEA), claims that American taxpayers have paid "$3 Trillion" for supporting Israel. WRMEA tries to blame Israel for 1) rising oil prices, 2) the cost of both Iraq wars, 3) and American job losses, and has published articles with Protocols-of-the-Elders-of Zion-style headlines like "Israel has had in place a shadow government in Washington" and "Will the State Department Remain Israeli-Occupied Territory?"

Here I'll show how exaggerations by groups like WRMEA are not even close to reflecting reality.

Bear with me as I run the numbers and document my findings.

The preliminaries
$1,000,000,000 = $1 billion
$1,000,000,000,000 = $1 trillion
2007 aid to Israel: $2.5 billion (ref, ref)
2007 U.S. GDP: 13,543.330 billion (ref)
2007 U.S. Federal Budget (receipts): $2,415,852,000,000 (trillion; ref)

Running the numbers
$2,500,000,000 / $13,543,330,000,000 = 0.00018 * 100 = 0.018%
In other words, U.S. aid to Israel is 0.018% of one year's U.S. GDP
$2,500,000,000 / $2,415,852,000,000 = 0.00103 * 100 = 0.103%
In other words, U.S. aid to Israel is 0.103% of one year's U.S. federal budget

U.S. Bankruptcy?

How exactly is aid to Israel "bankrupting" the U.S.? U.S. businesses (and workers) exported $128 billion in goods to Israel from 1989 to 2007. That's more than double the aid provided to Israel during the same period. Granted, Israel exported products to the U.S., and I could provide balance of trade numbers, too. Should we deny Americans the products they wish to purchase from a loyal ally? No.

I'm still not sure how the U.S. is being "bankrupted," especially given economic performance:

U.S. GDP was $9,953 billion in October 2000 and $14,201 billion in January 2008.

Monthly unemployment rate during the same period averaged about 5.1% — a tad lower than during Clinton's years. Pretty good for an industrialized/Western nation.

CPI (inflation) has averaged 3% like it has for almost a century.

Aid to Egypt

Strange, I haven't heard many claims that U.S. aid to Egypt is bankrupting America.

Christian Science Monitor (2004): "All told, Egypt has received over $50 billion in US largesse since 1975."

Examples of U.S. aid to Egypt:
2002: $2.0 billion
2003: $2.2 billion
2005: $1.8 billion
2006: $1.8 billion

Aid to the Palestinians

I haven't heard many complaints about U.S. aid to the Palestinians. Indeed, those complaining loudest about aid to the Palestinians say that America is not funneling enough money to the West Bank and Gaza.

From Reuters: direct U.S. aid to Palestinians in 2008 will be $550 million; plus $148 million through the UN; plus $228 million in loan guarantees.
$550 m + $148 m + $228 m = $918 million in 2008

From the Congressional Research Service (CRS) — U.S. Assistance to the Palestinians:
1999: $85.034 million*
2000: $75,000 million*
2002: $72.000 million
2003: $134.484 million
2004: $74.558 million
2005: $274.400 million
2006: $150.000 million
2007: $50.000 million (CRS)

*Note also: "... the U.S. Government committed to provide $500 million over a 5-year period (FY 1994-FY 1998) for a program of assistance to the Palestinian people ..."

Let's total it up: $2333.476 million =~$2.3 billion in aid to the Palestinians. Not bad for two "governments," the PA under the PLO/ Fatah and PA under Hamas, sworn to the destruction of our ally Israel.

Total Aid to Israel

Israel has received $100 billion in U.S. aid since 1949 according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS); $80 billion according to the Harvard Israel Review. The CRS numbers "only" differ from WRMEA by $900 billion. The Harvard University figures contradict WRMEA by "only" $920 billion.

Sadly, such wild exaggerations are hurled in Israel's direction constantly. Those people who support the Jewish State find themselves constantly defending Israel not only from hyperbole, but from bold-faced lies.

Contact LEL by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, August 25 2008.

Why have Ehud Olmert and Condoleezza Rice become the driving forces instrumental in releasing caught, convicted and jailed Terrorists? Some have Jewish blood on their hands; many failed in their murder attempts, so by the grace of G-d, they do not have blood on their hands. (?) These Terrorists are welcomed back into the Terrorist armies of Hamas and Fatah with parties. What was their purpose in bring killers and planners of murderous Terror back into action against Israel, against America and against all non-Muslims (whom they call 'infidels')?

Both Olmert and Rice know that 50% minimum of released Terrorists re-join their former Terrorist organizations. Jail is their higher university. They come out better trained to hate and kill Jews.

Olmert and his Kadima Cabinet vote repeatedly to release convicted Terrorists. Rice just arrived in Israel to further press Israel to surrender vital Jewish heartland to Mahmoud Abbas whose Fatah organization still operates in the mode established by Yassir Arafat. They Talk-the-Talk to the Anglo Media so the donor money keeps flowing in and talk the hate-filled Islamic language of the Jihadists (holy warriors for Islam) to the Muslim Arab world so they know it's a trick.

When we hear from Olmert, he covers over his perfidy by telling all that he is 'merely' releasing convicted Terrorists who did not have blood on their hands. Blood on one's hands means that you have actually reached your victims and bombed, stabbed or shot them.

Olmert, in the role of the slippery politician, excuses those tried and convicted who either planned to kill or were not successful in killing their victims this time and are somehow 'innocent' or at least worthy of release.

Each freed Terrorist adds to the growing armies of committed Terrorists. Olmert and Rice have become both recruiters and enablers to assist Terrorists to re-join Allah's army against 'infidels' (all non-Muslims).

Olmert and Rice serve the same masters.

Rice and Bush serve Saudi Arabia and Wahhabi Islam. They attempt to appease the entire Islamic world.

Olmert, Livni and Barak serve the Bush-Rice agenda so they too serve and appease the same Islamic world.

While Rice serves the Bush oil interests and his legacy, Olmert has become a 'Quisling' by betraying Israel's vital interests in security for the Jewish nation.

Clearly, as in the Nuremberg Tribunals for the Nazis, criminals were gathered up and tried for crimes against humanity and the Jewish people, in particular. The Nazi leaders who were caught and tried were correctly judged guilty and hanged. Of course, most escaped Justice, with the assistance of the Church, the Red Cross and some U.S. diplomats who were tied into German businesses — not unlike today's pro-Arab State Department and the American multi-national oil companies.

Let there be no statute of limitations for Olmert, his Kadima Cabinet and all those who have, with malice aforethought, made decisions that put all the people of Israel at risk of death and/or maiming. Many Israelis have been murdered or maimed with the connivance of a series of disreputable governments who have released their killers. [Note the research piece listing released Terrorist murderers and their victims, according to Nadav Shragai — following.]

People who kill others or assist in planning murder should never be free of their crimes. When Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) was working for Arafat for 40 years as his top companion, assistant, financier, and collaborator he gathered the money to pay for the massacre of the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. So doing made him a confirmed murderer — even if he didn't pull a trigger or throw a bomb. This is the same Abbas who Olmert is assisting, at the demand of Rice.

Should Abbas and/or Olmert be tried and, if found guilty, hung for their crimes against the Jewish people?

There is no statute of limitations for murderers, their collaborators nor their paymasters.

There should be no forgiveness, no pity, only retribution.

Those who murder and those who knowingly assist, protect, fund should pay a penalty all the days of their lives.

In time, whether man or G-d imposes the penalty, may these inhuman monsters live their remaining days and nights in pain. When they finally die, may their bones be scattered and find no rest in any afterlife.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).
Contact him at winston@winstonglobal.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 25, 2008.


You know that Hamas attacked the Hilles clan in Gaza. It defeated the clan, sending dozens of clansmen fleeing to...Israel. Here is what I make of the strategies involved.

In the name of unity, and rather than face down Hamas, Fatah let Hamas men infiltrate P.A. security forces. the P.A. focused intelligence gathering on Israel, whom it declared the enemy, instead of Hamas, its actual, belligerent enemy.

During the coup, the compromised and uncoordinated security forces hardly resisted. Fatah did not join them. Neither did a couple of Fatah-affiliated clans. Those clans probably felt themselves well armed and impregnable. They didn't take a chance by opposing Hamas, then.

Hamas bided its time. It captured heavier weaponry from the P.A. security forces, and accumulated more from smuggling. Then it picked off the Hilles clan, now without allies, especially by virtue of its having abandoned them when they were under attack.

The lesson is to honor one's alliances while one has allies. Benjamin Franklin put it, we'll all be hanged separately, unless we hang together.


My guest started in with the usual nonsense about Bush being stupid, having lied us into a war, and McCain being too old-fashioned to recognize a new world order that he should negotiate with. I challenged them on certain of those propositions. Next time I will do it more aggressively, though politely:

I see it differently. Obama reflects the old world order, is more stupid, and he and his Party lie about the war's origin and results and everything else. He is old-fashioned in imagining that negotiating with fanatical totalitarians can resolve conflict and lying that Bush didn't try. That was the way the West approached the Nazis, Communists, Islamists, and N. Korea. Appeasement failed. Obama is too stupid to realize that his proposals failed and too stupid to realize that we are in another world war. He and his associates falsely accuse Bush of lying about the war and about having lost it; we are winning. He either is too stupid to think we can walk away from the world war or lying about it. They are lying about Bush wantonly eliminating our civil liberties and themselves being the answer, while Obama wants extensive government controls over our economy that would eliminate many freedoms as well as our prosperity. (Sen. Clinton is worse in that respect.) Many voters, unfortunately, prefer candidates who promise easy solutions that politicians can't deliver.


Israeli political parties have adopted primaries. Likud requires joining it at least a year before voting in primaries and to pay an annual fee. Kadima requires a one-time payment, allowing immediate voting in primaries. As a result, Kadima registration forms are contracted out for last minute enrollment. The sincerity or integrity of such membership is dubious. The party is not democratic (Shimon Shitreet, Kadima candidate for party chair, IMRA, 8/7).


Many foreign volunteers help Israel and Israelis. Foreign Jews feel reunited with the Jewish people. "There are hundreds of options when it comes to volunteering in Israel. For information regarding all volunteer opportunities in Israel, go to the National Council for Volunteering in Israel's Web site, ivolunteer: http://www.ivolunteer.org.il/Eng/Index.asp?CategoryID=156." (IMRA, 8/).

Many foreign people also volunteer to help the Muslim Arabs harass Israelis.


When Israel finally raids Iran's nuclear weapon facilities, it could set of a general war. Israel would have enough fronts to confront, without Hamas' Gaza. Therefore, Israel should knock off Hamas, now. Israel would keep a military presence in Gaza, to provide intelligence and prevent renewed buildup.

Israel gets almost as much bad publicity from each of its minor raids as it would from a major one. Minor raids also risk the possibility of foreign intervention and don't resolve the problem. Therefore, it may as well undertake a comprehensive attack, offering swift resolution. The longer Israel procrastinates, the stronger Hamas becomes, the longer and costlier the war with it, and the more civilian casualties that the press deplores (IMRA, 8/7) when the civilians are not Jews.


In discussing whether Sunni Al-Azhar U. of Cairo should establish a branch in Shiite Iran, the argument was used that Muslims should unite, inasmuch as it is under threat of annihilation (IMRA, 8/7)

There is no such threat. Those Muslims either are lying or are hysterical. They are the aggressor, but play the victim. If only the rest of the world were more alert to their intention, which is world conquest (and, in the case of the Islamists, as the Koran teaches, the annihilation of the Jews)!


He sent a thoughtful response to one of my articles. [He didn't identify it by its number.] Here I continue the discussion.

1. Steve observes that the usual reaction would have been just to arrest the 9/11 plotters, but Pres. Bush emphasizes preventing the next attack. Some liberals don't understand the originality of the Bush doctrine, which endorses some preemptive attacks.

Thank you, Steve. You show that the Bush Administration understands the new world order, not Obama. The new order is a broad, continuing jihad, popping up here and there, as the Islamists organize. They already are at war, which they have declared. Why exempt them from counter-attack? Why wait for them to get and utilize terrible weapons?

In a sense the Bush doctrine is not pre-emptive, but selects new fronts in the ongoing world war. Steve supports that with the explanation that the terrorists have a network, so their next attack may come from a variety of places. This is something that liberals, busy calling Bush stupid, do not grasp.

2. Posting a transcript of a 2002 Bush press conference, Steve notes that whereas private investigators spend a decade hunting a murderer of one innocent, Bush lost most of his interest in tracking Bin Laden after six months.

If may not be good public relations by the Administration, but it is good policy. This is a world war with many fronts, as Bush explained at the conference and Steve did, too. Don't over-emphasize al-Qaida.

3. Steve reprinted in bold some of Bush's deplorable wording: Bin Laden is a "fellow," who commits "youngsters" to their death; Bush hoped PM Sharon is concerned about the loss of "innocent" life; people lament the loss of life of "young children on both sides of this issue."

Let me elaborate. Bin Laden is a mass-murderer; calling him a "fellow" makes him seem normal. His troops are of all ages, not just youngsters for whom one might feel sorry about their exploitation by Islamists. Of course Sharon was concerned about innocent lives, but the notion of their being innocent and on both sides of this issue appears to equate them. The Arab Muslims involved indoctrinate most of their children at an early age; many of them work for terrorists and almost all endorse them; they hardly are so innocent. More important, the Islamists deliberately attack innocent children; Israel, in self-defense, does not, but war not being an exact science, does kill some. That is the fault of the aggressors both for starting the war and for exposing their children by fighting from amongst them, partly for children to serve as human shields and partly to gain the misguided type of sympathy like Bush's. He meant to be decent about it, but that gives an advantage to an ideology and people at least as depraved any other totalitarian force, such as Nazism and Communism

4. Steve points out that Saddam wasn't much involved with al-Qaida, though other state sponsors of terrorism were. Iran presents a more immediate threat and Pakistan shelters al-Qaeda. Nevertheless, Pres. Bush considered Pakistan an ally against terrorism, is merely negotiating with Iran, and helped establish terrorist entities in Lebanon and Gaza, while deeming S. Arabia a friend of our country. Steve's point is that the US should have focused elsewhere than Iraq.

Yes and no. Steve is accurate, but Iraq acted impressively as if it had weapons of mass-destruction. I believe it did. It isn't fair to judge Bush on the popular notion that it didn't, which is hindsight. Iraq also violated the Security Council Resolutions meant to keep it harmless. It was getting the money to rebuild its military and get out from under UNO sanctions. Therefore, under the Bush doctrine that sees an Evil Axis ranged against us, it made sense to war on Iraq. I agree with Steve that Iran should have been included. I likewise was shocked that the US did nothing about Pakistan and was deluded so long about Pakistan. The Administration did want to try to change the regime in Iran, but the State Dept. sabotaged that policy. Problem is, the US does not have the forces to fight on two or more fronts, even against non-great powers. If Bush were a leader, he would have addressed that lack of might. [Sen. McCain does want to enlarge the military.] If Bush were consistent, he would not help some terrorist entities. I think he is confused. The State Dept. must hate Israel too much to care enough about the danger terrorists pose to the US.

I think that Bush has abandoned the Bush doctrine, after being criticized so much and so bitterly and rather successfully if not truthfully by the Democrats and the media. If Israel weren't so incompetent and its rulers so defeatist, it could have destroyed Hizbullah and Hamas and the PLO and perhaps the Syrian regime.

5. The Administration realized, to some extent, the changed nature of terrorism. Islamists seek to damage (prelude to world conquest) more than to get publicity. Most Administration critics fail to realize that terrorist organizations enjoy state sponsorship. Good point. [Arafat's PLO had secret Soviet sponsorship before getting if from the US and Israel.]

6. Bush explained to America that the terrorists threaten our freedom and way of life. Liberals missed that point. Then the Administration confused the country and itself by trying to distinguish between Islamists and other Muslims. It fails to make a proper distinction. [I think there is less of one than Bush thinks.] [This is like the false distinction made between "extremists" and "moderates.] The Administration meets with Islamists as if allies. It is confused, as when it calls Abbas a man of peace, Abbas, who congratulated baby-killer Kuntar on his release from Israeli prison. My conclusion: like a diamond, our leader is flawed, but his opposition is totally cracked.

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

Posted by Hands Fiasco, August 25, 2008.

This was written by Herb Keinon and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1219218626424&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to arrive on Monday in another attempt to advance the Annapolis process and produce some kind of Israeli-Palestinian document before the end of the year.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni greets US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice as Rice arrives for a meeting at the
Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem. (Photo: AP)

Israeli diplomatic officials said Saturday night that if Rice was trying to get the Israelis and Palestinians to agree on a document to be presented at the United National General Assembly in mid-September spelling out what the sides had already agreed upon, she would be unlikely to find an ally in Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

Rice is scheduled to meet with Livni on Tuesday morning.

According to the officials, Livni is keen on getting Rice to ditch the idea at the present time, concerned that such a document might complicate her Kadima Party primary race as it would likely highlight concessions Israel would be willing to make on land, and might indicate that talks on Jerusalem have been taking place.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the officials said, was not opposed to such a document coming out at this time, though he still believed that it was possible to reach a more comprehensive agreement with the Palestinian Authority this year, with the issue of Jerusalem pushed off to a latter date.

US diplomatic officials denied that Rice was trying to produce some kind of document now to bring to the UN General Assembly meeting on September 18.

Israeli officials, however, said the General Assembly would be a perfect platform for presenting such a document, and would also be a convenient location because the Middle East Quartet — made up of the US, Russia, the EU and the UN — was scheduled to meet on the sidelines to discuss the diplomatic process.

Israeli diplomatic officials said there had been no indication that the composition of the Quartet would change, despite the tensions between the US and EU with Russia over the Georgian situation. One of the issues that was originally expected to be discussed at the September Quartet meeting was an international meeting on the Middle East in Moscow, as a follow-up to last November's Annapolis Conference.

Rice, who was last in Israel in June and has been here more than 20 times during her tenure as secretary of state, is scheduled to have a dinner meeting on Monday evening with Defense Minister Ehud Barak at his Tel Aviv residence.

On Tuesday morning she is set to meet Olmert for breakfast, followed by a meeting with Livni. Israeli officials said that chief PA negotiator Ahmed Qurei would likely take part in that session as well.

Rice is then scheduled to go to Ramallah for talks with the PA's President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salaam Fayad. She is set to leave later that day.

Israeli diplomatic officials said that while the Russian-Georgian crisis, and Syria's interest in taking advantage of the situation to acquire advanced Russian missile systems, were likely to be discussed during the visit, Rice's focus would remain on the Annapolis process.

EDITORS' NOTE: Here's a random sampling of readers comments. It's amazing how focused they are. Clearly, they are as likely to believe in the tooth fairy as in the "Peace Process." Why is the Bush-ed Rice clinging to it?

32. the ANNAPOLIS process???
Is she also going to revive Disco? And if (glory be!) they 'produce some kind of document' everything will be ok! This bona fide lunatic shouldn't be allowed to feed herself.
dan — usa (08/24/2008 18:20)

37. Rice past its time can give you fatal food poisoning
If you leave rice out for more than a day it spoils and can kill you. Everyone but Israel knows this.
Israel — (08/24/2008 19:32)

40. The only "solution": 23 states for two peoples and one wannabe people.
Nobody can count past two apparently Check your facts: Jews living in what is now Israel were called palestinians until 1948. This paper was aptly called the Palestinian Post and it wasn't run by A-rabs
Jonathan — Native Jewish Land (08/24/2008 20:15)

43. Rice returns: The Annapolis Accords are dead on arrival: No Gaza-Hamas State
Other than a postmortem analysis of the Annapolis failure to 'push' for a two-state final solution, Rice is wasting her adventures in diplomacy. The Gaza-Hamas Palestinians are in designated sync with the 'audacity of hopelessness.' Similiar to the Oslo Accords, the Annapolis process was tragically flawed in its prescription for a sustainable 'peace' with a terrorist border state. The false premise of a two-state status requires a quick suffocation.
Jo Ellen Davey Cohen — The USA (08/24/2008 21:10)

47. Rice works for the Saudis
Since 2004, her foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East have primarily benefited the House of Saud — not America and certainly not Israel. She knows where her bread is buttered and who will look after her in retirement. Where are Walt and Mearsheimer to expose this fraud? Oh, I forgot; they're on the payroll as well.
FinanceDoc — UK (08/24/2008 21:49)

50. Rice has a lot of nerve.
Olmert has no popular support. Abbas can't deliver milk in a bottle, much less peace to the Jews. Livni is a place holder until new elections are held. The idea that unpopular leaders in their waning time in office can sign a piece of paper and bring peace to an intractable conflict is absurd.
Ronald — United States (08/24/2008 22:00)

55. Condoleeza Rice
Condoleeza should stay at home rather than trying to create more messes elsewhere in the world. Sadly to say our dismal State Department is particularly adept at making a mess of everything it touches! The last thing Israel needs is any kind of a Palestinian state!!
C. Cannon — USA (08/25/2008 03:38)

56. You're Her Last Failure
Kosovo,Gaza,Leb,Georgia,,Iran, Russia and now you. I like Condi but she should be managing a College not Sec of State. Behind her travel the Dogs of War which erupt in violence everywhere she goes. Pray Obama isn't elected because he definately is a "sleeper" and will put Mad Allbright into Condi's job. .Until they lay their weapons down and declare (like a brave and wise American Indian Chief once said),"We will fight no more", there will never be peace. Condi, take your talent as a "Russian Expert" who speaks fluid Russian and go to Russia — before the whole world is engulfed in flames.
DK — us (08/25/2008 05:33)

Contact Hands Fiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, August 25, 2008.

"They [UNIFIL] should be much more proactive — more aggressive in going after Hezbollah — in detecting [and] identifying arms depots.

They should be going in there, not just relying on Lebanese armed forces to do so, who often work in collusion with Hezbollah...The UNIFIL soldiers were not sent there to give out chocolates to children or write traffic tickets. They were sent there to carry out a mandate which was very clearly defined, and they are not [doing so].

By not doing it, they may be laying the groundwork for the next flare-up." — Israel's UN ambassador Danny Gillerman's parting interview — The Jerusalem Post, 25 July 2008

"If some ministers spoke less of [UN Security Council] Resolution 1701 that brought nothing but peace and quiet to the north, we wouldn't be seen as weak." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the Cabinet meeting 17 August 2008

The major achievement of UNIFIL is that uniformed Hezbollah troops don't march around waiving their weapons at reporters (and for that matter, in front of UNIFIL forces) south of the Litani River.

That doesn't mean Hezbollah troops aren't in there. Just that they are not wearing uniforms.

That doesn't mean Hezbollah doesn't have weapons there. Just that they don't show them in public.

That doesn't mean that Hezbollah hasn't upgraded and expanded a vast network of launchers, bunkers and other positions south of the Litani River. Just that under the "see no evil" principle, UNIFIL isn't actively searching considerable sections of the area south of the Litani River for these things.

These days DM Ehud Barak is criticizing 1701 but it is exclusively for domestic consumption and his remarks are seen more as a way to attack FM Livni than to actually have an impact on the situation.

Right now the Olmert-Livni strategy appears to be to hope that Hezbollah never attacks — or at least not until after the elections.

But hope is hardly a strategy.

The situation in Lebanon requires a serious, concrete, game plan to bring about the achievement of what 1701 should have accomplished.

A plan that puts Israeli officials — across the board — on the same page vis-a-vis UNIFIL, 1701 and Israel's very just demands to rectify the situation.

But can foreign-minister-Kadima candidate Livni afford to tarnish what she sees as her major achievement (1701)?

The opposite should be the case.

After all, Livni continues serving today as foreign minister and as such should be playing a key role in addressing this challenge.

It should be made clear that in the upcoming campaigns (Kadima primaries and national elections should she lead Kadima) she will be judged, first and foremost, for what she did to rectify the post-1701 situation.

Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Zwick, August 24, 2008.

Now that Secretary Rice is visiting Israel again, there is increased pressure on Israel to "freeze settlement activity" and disband Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. This article by Eugene Rostow from 1991 is still relevant today.

Eugene V. (Victor Debs) Rostow (August 25, 1913 — November 25, 2002), influential legal scholar and public servant, was Dean of Yale Law School, and served as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under President Lyndon B. Johnson.

"Resolved: Are the settlements legal? Israeli West Bank policies"
By Eugene W. Rostow
The New Republic, October 21, 1991

"The British Mandate recognized the right of the Jewish people to "close settlement" in the whole of the Mandated territory. It was provided that local conditions might require Great Britain to "postpone" or "withhold" Jewish settlement in what is now Jordan. This was done in 1922. But the Jewish right of settlement in Palestine west of the Jordan river, that is, in Israel, the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, was made unassailable. That right has never been terminated and cannot be terminated except by a recognized peace between Israel and its neighbors. And perhaps not even then, in view of Article 80 of the U.N. Charter, "the Palestine article," which provides that "nothing in the Charter shall be construed ... to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments.... "

Assuming the Middle East conference actually does take place, its official task will be to achieve peace between Israel and its Levantine neighbors in accordance with Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. Resolution 242, adopted after the Six-Day War in 1967, sets out criteria for peace-making by the parties; Resolution 338, passed after the Yom Kippur War in 1973, makes resolution 242 legally binding and orders the parties to carry out its terms forthwith. Unfortunately, confusion reigns, even in high places, about what those resolutions require.

For twenty-four years Arab states have pretended that the two resolutions are "ambiguous" and can be interpreted to suit their desires. And some European, Soviet and even American officials have cynically allowed Arab spokesman to delude themselves and their people — to say nothing of Western public opinion — about what the resolutions mean. It is common even for American journalists to write that Resolution 242 is "deliberately ambiguous," as though the parties are equally free to rely on their own reading of its key provisions.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Resolution 242, which as undersecretary of state for political affairs between 1966 and 1969 I helped produce, calls on the parties to make peace and allows Israel to administer the territories it occupied in 1967 until "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" is achieved. When such a peace is made, Israel is required to withdraw its armed forces "from territories" it occupied during the Six-Day War — not from "the" territories nor from "all" the territories, but from some of the territories, which included the Sinai Desert, the West Bank, the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: From 1966 to 1969, Eugene Rostow served as Under Secretary for Political Affairs in Lyndon B. Johnson's government, the third-highest ranking official in the State Department. During this time he helped draft UN Security Council Resolution 242, one of the most important Security Council resolutions relevant to the Arab-Israeli conflict. To read both articles that Rostow wrote in the New Republic click here.

Rostow wrote about the politics of the situation. There are, however, strong legal arguments that by international law, the territories — Gaza, Judea and Samaria (aka West Bank) — belong to the Jewish State. Ergo, the settlements in the territories are clearly legal. Read for example Shifftan's article, Shusteff's article and in particular, any of Howard Grief's articles, for example this one.]

Israel Zwick is editor of CN Publications (www.cnpublications. net). Contact him at editor@cnpublications.net or israel.zwick@earthlink. net

To Go To Top

Posted by Jenny Weisberg, August 24, 2008.

Shalom! Immerse yourselves in a magical minute of a Jerusalem Shabbat.


Chana Jenny Weisberg, JewishMom.com


Or, to bypass You Tube

Contact Jenny Weisberg by email at jenny_weisberg@yahoo.com

To Go o Top

Posted by IsraCampus, August 24, 2008.

This was written by Joel Amitai and it appeared as an Editorial in IsraCampus
http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/ Editorial%20-%20Joel%20Amitai%20-%20Yael%20Koren.htm

Joel Amitai is an independent researcher and filmmaker. Reach him at jamitai40@gmail.com.


"As an Israeli-born Jew, that my family survived the Holocaust, it's an incredible pain, and very difficult for me," proclaims Yael Korin in this video, "to keep watching Israel committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes against the Palestinian people, and now the Lebanese people."

Yael Korin, an immunologist at the UCLA medical school, speaking here at a rally against the Second Lebanon War in Los Angeles on August 12, 2006, is introduced as a member of the far-Left Women in Black. Korin's Los Angeles branch of the organization describes itself here as supporting "the right of Palestinian refugees to return [to Israel]"-recognized by all Israeli governments, Right and Left, as a formula for Israel's destruction.

Korin goes on to tell the gathering: "What we need to remember is that Israel is born in a sin, 1948 the al-Naqba ["catastrophe" in Arabic] was a war of ethnic cleansing, of grabbing land by force and cleansing it from its inhabitants, the Palestinians...Israel consistently and persistently have been continuing this strategy, continuing grabbing more land, 1967 the whole historic Palestine... Israel wants land but it doesn't want the people on the land, the Zionist ideology is calling for a state of Jewish people only...."

She goes on to explain that Israel is now applying this same "strategy" to southern Lebanon, where it wants to grab the land and the water sources, and so it has to be gotten out of southern Lebanon totally (something that, in the real world, Israel was actually all too glad to do on its own).

In the telling of this self-professed daughter of Holocaust survivors, then, Israel in 1948 — at the same time it was already absorbing tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors — was already behaving monstrously, a savage juggernaut of land theft and ethnic cleansing. Indeed Korin's Israel is in some respects worse than Nazi Germany, which, while exterminating certain populations, didn't try to ethnically cleanse, for instance, Poland of all Poles or France of all French. But for Korin's version of the "Zionist ideology...calling for a state of Jewish people only," this would be too moderate.

So for Yael Korin, 1947-1948 was not the story of the UN Partition Plan (accepted by Israel, totally rejected by the Arab side) or of seven Arab armies massing to strangle Israel in its cradle, but rather of the newborn state of 600,000 Jews, fresh Holocaust memories and all, actually seeking war with the surrounding Arab world in a vicious land-grab. In 1967 there was no Nasser and no Soviet Union, in 2006 there was no Hizballah; it was all Israeli avarice and racism. A Jewish state that "consistently and persistently" behaves this way for sixty years running is not actually different from what Hitlerian doctrine would have expected of it — pure evil and a menace to other peoples; Korin's and the Mein Kampfian views of Jewish collective goals and behavior are strikingly similar.

Yael Korin has been propagating this sort of vicious tripe during years in which there have been numerous deadly terrorist attacks on Israeli Jews by people who have the same emotions that she flaunts and incites: rage against Israel and Israelis and a yearning for the Jewish state's destruction. Indeed, Korin's sympathy for exterminatory passions toward Israel and Israelis could not have been more explicit than on March 27, 2004, when she spoke, having donned Arab garb for the occasion, at a rally outside the Israeli consulate in Los Angeles to protest Israel's assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin — the Hamas leader responsible for the murders of over three hundred Israelis including many children.

Korin was there at the consulate again on October 17 that year — this time to protest "Israel's latest assault on Gaza" amid demonstrators carrying signs saying "Stop Use of U.S.-Supplied WMDs on Civilians" and the like — again, the clear and emphatic link between supposed Israeli behavior and Nazi-style mass-murdering behavior. Korin and a fellow speaker at the rally had "returned days earlier from Palestine, where they had frequently joined Machsom Watch," an Israeli women's organization that harasses Israeli soldiers doing difficult and lifesaving anti-terror work at checkpoints. Korin "said she doesn't want anyone to do to another people what was done to her parents" — again that fundamental, recurrent confusion in someone who announces herself as a Jew and dresses as an Arab, who can't seem to process the notion of post-1945 Jews as victims and so instead turns them into Nazis.

Not surprisingly, Korin's sympathy for Palestinian terrorism doesn't stop with Ahmed Yassin and Hamas. Just recently she signed a petition for the release of Sami Al-Arian, the University of South Florida computer scientist convicted in 2006 of aiding Palestinian Islamic Jihad. That organization's charter calls for the elimination of "the Zionist entity," the establishment of an Islamic state "from sea to sea," and "Jihad against the Jewish existence in Palestine" — right after Yael Korin's twisted heart.

In addition to Women in Black, Korin is listed here by Al-Awda (the Palestinian Right to Return Coalition) as a "founding member of the Campaign to End Israeli Apartheid, Southern California." Attach any vicious terminology to Israel — "born in sin," "war crimes," "ethnic cleansing," "apartheid" — and Yael Korin is there to endorse and propagate it. Her pathological loathing of Israel and Israelis, if not literally murderous (and that is an open question), certainly encompasses identifying with those who do murder Israelis en masse. Psychologically speaking she is a frightening phenomenon of reality-distortion and evil, exploiting her democratic freedoms to spread her message of incendiary hatred.

Contact IsraCampus at www.IsraCampus.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, August 24, 2008.

This was written by Hillel Fendel, senior news editor at Arutz-7. It appeared today at Arutz-7


(IsraelNN.com) Dr. Uri Davis, who has often termed Israel an "apartheid state" and refused to serve in the IDF, converted to Islam about a week ago and married a Fatah activist in Ramallah. The conversion ceremony involved two oaths in which Davis recognized Allah and the Muslim prophet Mohammed. Davis said he plans to follow the laws of Islam, but not devoutly.

The conversion took place in a Moslem religious court in Baka el-Garbiye, an Israeli-Arab town just outside northwestern Samaria (Shomron).

Davis's lawyer explained that the Arabs of the Palestinian Authority know him for his great sacrifices on behalf of the "Palestinian problem" and the "realization of their rights." He noted that the consent of the Arab woman and her family to the marriage to a Jewish activist is an "admirable social development."

Just two months ago, David took part in an Arab-sponsored "Haifa Conference," billed as "defend[ing] a secular democratic state in historic Palestine." A summary of the conference written by Yoav Bar states that the Conference "was our moment to raise our heads from the exhausting daily struggle and promise ourselves and the world that the suffering of the Palestinian people may be brought to an end and there can be a bright future for everybody in Palestine after we get rid of the racist Zionist disorder."

Bar himself, an initiator of the Haifa Conference, is an Israeli member of the political bureau of Abnaa el-Balad — Sons of the Land, a secular movement that seeks the return of all Arab refugees, the abolishment of Israel as a Jewish state and the establishment of a Palestinian state in its place.

Dr. Davis gave one of the three Hebrew speeches at the Conference; the others were delivered by Yehuda Kupferman of the "Committee for a Secular and Democratic state in the Whole of Palestine," and Dr. Anat Matar, a leading supporter of the rights of Palestinian prisoners and the rights of Israeli youth to refuse to serve in the IDF.

Davis, who has described himself as an "anti-Zionist Palestinian Hebrew," has been advocating support for Palestinian issues for over 40 years, and was arrested more than once on charges of illegal activities in this connection. He is a founding member of the Movement Against Israeli Apartheid in Palestine, is a former member of the Executive Committee of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, and is actually an Observer Member of the Palestine National Council.

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerusalem Issue Brief, ICA, August 24, 2008.

This is Vol. 8, No. 8, issued today. It was written by Nadav Shragai, the author of At the Crossroads, the Story of the Tomb of Rachel (Jerusalem Studies, 2005); The Mount of Contention, the Struggle for the Temple Mount, Jews and Muslims, Religion and Politics since 1967 (Keter, 1995); and "Jerusalem is Not the Problem, It is the Solution," in Mister Prime Minister: Jerusalem, ed. Moshe Amirav (Carmel and the Florsheimer Institute, 2005). He has been writing for the Israeli daily newspaper Ha'aretz since 1983. His previous studies for the Jerusalem Center include "Jerusalem: The Dangers of Division — How to Meet the Demographic Challenge without Subtracting Arab Neighborhoods" (Hebrew, 2008; English, forthcoming); "The Latest Damage to Antiquities on the Temple Mount" (February 2008); and "The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case" (December 2007).


  • The Israeli Cabinet approved on August 17 the release of almost 200 Palestinian security prisoners as a "goodwill gesture" to Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas. The list includes several prisoners "with blood on their hands," who, by definition, were involved in the murder of Israelis.

  • According to an informal estimate by Israeli security bodies, about 50 percent of the terrorists freed for any reason whatsoever returned to the path of terror, either as perpetrator, planner, or accomplice. In the terror acts committed by these freed terrorists, hundreds of Israelis were murdered, and thousands were wounded.

  • Israel freed 400 Palestinian prisoners and five other prisoners in return for Elhanan Tannenbaum, who was held captive by Hizbullah, and for the bodies of three soldiers kidnapped on Mount Dov. According to Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Tzahi Hanegbi, from the date of the deal on January 29, 2004, until April 17, 2007, those freed in the deal had murdered 35 Israelis.

  • An investigation by the Almagor Terror Victims Association in Israel revealed that at least 30 of the terrorist attacks perpetrated since 2000 were committed by terrorists freed in deals with terror organizations. Many were freed in the framework of goodwill gestures because they were defined by Israel as "without blood on their hands." The bloody swath cut by these terrorists claimed the life of 177 persons, with many others wounded and made invalids.

Another "Goodwill Gesture"

In anticipation of the return to the Middle East of U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Israeli Cabinet approved on August 17 the release of almost 200 Palestinian security prisoners as a "goodwill gesture" to Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas. The list includes several prisoners "with blood on their hands," who, by definition, were involved in the murder of Israelis.

Since 1985 the State of Israel has freed over 10,000 Palestinians who were serving prison sentences for hostile activity or terror actions, and this resulted in the murder and death of hundreds of Israeli citizens. Some of the Palestinian terrorists were freed in the framework of deals with terror organizations that involved the exchange of a few isolated Israelis who were taken captive by the terrorists, for hundreds and thousands of terrorists. Another portion were freed in the framework of what were termed diplomatic "goodwill gestures." Sometimes the terrorists were freed because their prison terms had been concluded or shortened.[1]

According to an informal estimate by Israeli security bodies, about 50 percent of the terrorists freed for any reason whatsoever returned to the path of terror, either as a perpetrator, planner or accomplice. In the terror acts committed by these freed terrorists, hundreds of Israelis were murdered, and thousands were wounded.[2] In the case of the Jibril deal in 1985, the Israel Defense Ministry determined that 114 out of the 238 who were released returned to terrorism. During 1993-1999, 6,912 terrorists were freed in the wake of various diplomatic agreements, and 854 of them (12.4 percent) returned to terrorist activity, carried out terrorist attacks, murdered or planned to harm Israeli citizens, and were reincarcerated.[3]

Israel freed 400 Palestinian prisoners and five other prisoners in return for Elhanan Tannenbaum, who was held captive by Hizbullah, and for the bodies of three soldiers kidnapped on Mount Dov. The deal was transacted in Cologne, Germany, on January 29, 2004. According to the information provided by Knesset member Tzahi Hanegbi, the chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, from that date and until April 17, 2007, those freed in the Tannenbaum deal had murdered 35 Israelis.[4]

A comprehensive investigation recently conducted by the Almagor Terror Victims Association in Israel revealed that at least 30 of the terrorist attacks perpetrated since 2000 were committed by terrorists freed in deals with terror organizations. Many were freed in the framework of deals, understandings, or goodwill gestures because they were defined by Israel as "without blood on their hands." The bloody swath cut by these terrorists claimed the life of 177 persons, with many others wounded and made invalids. These statistics have been informally confirmed by security officials.[5]

Victims and Murderers

Dr. David Applebaum, head of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Shaarei Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem, and his 20-year-old daughter Nava, were murdered by a suicide bomber on September 9, 2003, when they went to Café Hillel on Emek Refaim Street in central Jerusalem. Nava was to be married the next day. The murderer, Ramez Sali Abu Salim, from Rantis, northwest of Ramallah, had been freed from an Israeli prison in 2002. He was rearrested a few months later, but was freed again on February 20, 2003. Seven months later he was sent by the Hamas command in Ramallah to commit a terror attack in the heart of Jerusalem.

Also killed in this terror attack were Alon Mizrachi, 20; Gila Moshe, 40; Yehiel Emil Toubol, 50; David Shimon Avizdris, 51; and Shafik Yihya Karem, 22, from Beit Hanina. An additional 60 people were wounded.

The famous Marwan Barghouti, who is serving five life sentences in Israeli prison for five acts of murder, was arrested for the first time in 1976 for hostile activity. After being freed, he became one of the leaders of the first intifada in 1987. Arrested again by Israel, he was expelled to Jordan. Permitted to return in the framework of the Oslo agreements (1994), he became the general secretary of the Fatah organization on the West Bank. With the start of the second intifada, Barghouti became the leader of the Tanzim, which was responsible for many terror attacks against Israelis. Some were carried out under the name of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. In April 2002 he was arrested, placed on trial, and in May 2004 he was convicted of five acts of murder. The prosecution waived 21 additional murder charges and 33 other charges.[6]

Sheikh Ahmed Yasin was first arrested in 1983, after guns were seized in his home. He was sentenced to 13 years in prison for holding weapons, establishing a military organization and calling for the liquidation of the State of Israel, but was freed by Israel 1985 in the framework of the Jibril deal.[7] In 1987 Yasin established and headed the terror organization Hamas. In 1989 he ordered the killing of Palestinians suspected of collaboration with the IDF and the Israel Security Agency, and he subsequently commanded the kidnapping and murder of two Israeli soldiers. For these crimes, Yasin was given a life sentence. He was freed in 1997 as part of an agreement between Israel and Jordan after the botched assassination attempt by the Mossad on Khaled Mashaal in Jordan. After his release, Yasin resumed preaching violence and terror, and the IDF and the Israel Security Agency reported to the government that Yasin was involved in planning terrorist attacks on the operative level. On March 22, 2004, he was killed by missiles fired by Israel Air Force combat helicopters.[8]

Freed Murderers Kill Again

Abdullah Abd Al-Kadr Kawasme was originally arrested in 1988, following the murder of policeman Nissim Toledano, and was exiled together with 400 Hamas and Jihad activists. Upon his return to Israel, he was imprisoned and charged with membership in Hamas and involvement in hostile terrorist activity, and was released in 1994. He was responsible for many terrorist attacks including the infiltration into the community of Adura on April 27, 2002, where four people were killed, including five-year-old Danielle Shefi. Kawasme was also responsible for the infiltration of the community of Carmei Tzur on August 6, 2002, in which three people were murdered; two suicide bombings carried out in tandem in Jerusalem on May 18, 2003, in which six people were killed and 20 wounded; and a suicide bombing in Jerusalem in June 2003 in which 17 people were killed and 105 were wounded. Kawasme was killed by the IDF on June 21, 2003.

Karim Ratteb Younis Awis was serving a life sentence for causing the death of a collaborator, but was released in a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians. On November 27, 2001, he dispatched two terrorists who opened fire on civilians at the central bus station in Afula, murdering Michal Mor and Noam Guzofsky and wounding an additional 84 people.[9]

Nasser Abu Hameid, who had been given five life sentences for the murder of five collaborators, was released in September 1999 in the framework of the Sharm el Sheikh Agreement. After the outbreak of the second intifada, he was documented mutilating the corpses of IDF reserve soldiers Vadim Norzitz and Yossi Avrahami. In December 2000 he murdered Binyamin and Talia Kahane near Givat Zeev. In February 2002 he was involved in plotting the terrorist attack in which policewoman Galit Arbiv was murdered in Neve Yaakov, and he commanded the murder of Gadi Rejwan in the Atarot industrial zone in northern Jerusalem. In March 2002 he was responsible for a terror bombing at the Seafood Restaurant where Eliyahu Dahan, Yossi Havi, and policeman Salim Barakat were murdered. In December 2002 he was sentenced to seven life terms for the murder of seven Israelis and was convicted of 12 counts of attempted murder and additional crimes

Abbas ibn Muhammad Mustafa Alsayd was released in 1996 after three years in prison for directing disturbances in Tulkarm. He was responsible for many terror attacks and in September 2005 he was convicted of murdering 35 people and wounding hundreds in the terror attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya on the eve of Passover, March 27, 2002, and at the HaSharon Mall in Netanya on May 18, 2001.[10]

Matsab Hashalmon was released from jail as part of the "Tennenbaum deal" on January 29, 2004. Three months later he recruited suicide terrorists Ahmed Kawasme and Nissim Jaabari, who blew themselves up on August 31, 2004, on two buses in Beersheba, killing 16 civilians and wounding scores of others.

Iyad Sawalha headed the military wing of Islamic Jihad in Samaria. He was imprisoned for two years for his involvement in the murder of collaborators and was freed in 1998 in the wake of the Oslo Accords. On June 5, 2002, he was responsible for blowing up a bus at Megiddo junction where 17 people were murdered and another 42 were wounded. On October 21, 2002, he was responsible for detonating an explosive-laden jeep near a bus at Karkur, leaving 14 people murdered and scores wounded.

The list of freed terrorists and their victims goes on and on.

Israel's Dilemma

The Victims of Arab Terror International has appealed many times to the High Court of Justice against the freeing of terrorists, but all the petitions have been rejected. In one of the petitions (High Court of Justice case 914/04), Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levi expressed the dilemma that he finds himself in as a justice and as an Israeli citizen when confronted with the freeing of terrorists, and their reversion to the path of terror.

This is not the very first time that by virtue of agreements it signed, the State of Israel frees terrorists who sowed death and destruction in our midst. After every such prisoner release, the hope reverberated in many hearts that this time a change would ensue and those freed would no longer return to the path of terror and could possibly even serve as ambassadors for disseminating the idea of peaceful coexistence. It would seem that there is no need to elaborate to what extent this hope was in vain, and it might be more fittingly defined as a false illusion. If we needed further proof that those freed were not intent on peace, one can find it in the bloody events that have accompanied us since October 2000. Many of those whom Israel had in the past set free participated in these horrific events. These incidents have taken their toll in human life, sometimes as an everyday occurrence, and altered the lives of the wounded victims' families from top to bottom. I saw myself forced to concur with the decision of my colleagues, and with trembling hand I added my signature, and with the sole hope that beats inside me, namely that those who adopted the decision and have a complete picture before them and whose shoulders bear the responsibility to ensure the safety and security of Israeli citizens were persuaded that the decision that they adopted was the correct one, despite the terrible risk involved for all of us in the freeing of the miscreants.[11]


Hundreds have been murdered and many more wounded in terrorist attacks perpetrated by terrorists who have been freed from Israeli prisons.

There needs to be a change in the "rules" that have crystallized in recent years where thousands of terrorists are released in return for isolated kidnap victims. This will limit the damage, for fewer freed terrorists will be free to return to the path of terror. One should not pay any price in order to bring about the release of kidnap victims or captives.

Furthermore, the terrorists that Israel frees in return for captives should not be freed into the West Bank, but abroad, as was done in certain cases in the past. This will make it harder for them to injure residents of the State of Israel.


1. From a discussion with a military source.

2. From a discussion with a military source.

3. According to a senior figure in Central Command.

4. Confirmed by Knesset member Tzahi Hanegbi to the writer.

5. For further details, see the full investigation on the Almagor Terror Victims Association website www.al-magor.com/39719/

6. The security report, the reports of the Almagor organization, and the verdict and sentence handed down against Barghouti.

7. The Jibril deal involved an exchange of captives that took place on May 21, 1985, between the Government of Israel headed by Shimon Peres and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine General Command, a terrorist organization headed by Ahmed Jibril. In the framework of the exchange, 1,150 prisoners and security detainees who were imprisoned in Israel were freed in exchange for the return of three Israeli captives: Hezi Shai, Yosef Grof and Nissim Salem, who had been taken captive by Jibril's organization at the time of the First Lebanon War. The deal was supported by all the ministers in the Israeli government, both from the Labor Party and the Likud, with the sole exception of Yizhak Navon. Hundreds of Palestinian prisoners were freed in the territories and most of them, as almost all the security bodies concur today, constituted the backbone of the leadership for the first intifada that erupted three years later.

8. From newspaper reports and a security report summing up the incident.

9. From the sentence of the military court in Beit El, file 3478/02: "The crimes for which the accused is paying the penalty today, demonstrate that the gesture extended to them was not justified and that it led to the killing of additional innocent citizens. The danger posed by the accused was clear after he had already been convicted of murder in the past. The need to keep them at a distance from human civilization forever was also self-evident. After his release, the accused demonstrated that the gesture was unjustified and the steep price for this was paid by many Israeli families."

10. The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center report on the terrorist attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya from March 2004, as well as a report by the Almagor organization.

11. High Court of Justice 914/04, Victims of Arab Terror International against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 2004 (1) pp. 781-783.

The Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) is dedicated to providing a forum for Israeli policy discussion and debate. The publication is available from Jerusalem Center for Policy Affairs, http://www.jcpa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Mendel Siegel, August 24, 2008.

To: George W Bush; US Department State; Condoleeza Rice; Richard Cheney

Subject: US refuses to sell planes to Israel

Dear Mr Bush, Mr Cheney, and Madam Rice,


I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MUDDLED POLICIES OF THE US GOVERMENT! I read here that the US is fearful of selling airplanes to Israel lest they use them against TERRORIST Iran. In another release, I read that we are going to supply TERRORIST Hizbullah with arms! Is this the way the US maintains friendship with its ONLY ally in the Middle East? What is going on in the White House and the State Department? Have Gates, Baker and company caused this attempt to gain favor with TERRORIST states? After the COMPLETE FIASCO on the part of the United States with regard to Georgia, I fear that your intelligence services are sadly lacking and you are seeking advice from the wrong quarters.


Mendel Siegel

Contact Mendel Siegel at mendelofjerusalem2@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 24, 2008.

Budget is always connected to politics, but this time around it seems more so than usual — because of the instabilities of our current situation. As I write this, after midnight Israel time, the Cabinet, after 12 hours of deliberation, is deadlocked on budget issues. This has the potential to bring down the government. Whether it actually will, remains to be seen.

A key issue is cuts demanded of the Defense Ministry, which Barak is fighting for all he's worth (which, in this instance, whatever the politics, I do not fault him for). Tension between Barak and Olmert is exceedingly high, with Barak threatening to quit if his ministry doesn't get the funds it needs and Olmert threatening to fire him if he doesn't vote for the budget.

Then there's Shas, which is opposed to a budget that doesn't increase child allowance sums, a key issue for its haredi constituency with its large families.

So convoluted are the issues at present, that there have even been suggestions from Labor that Finance Minister Roni Bar-On is sabotaging his own budget in order to bring down the government for Livni's sake.

Stay tuned...


So it will be an Obama-Biden ticket...

Joe Biden is getting mixed reviews here. Viewed as a friend of Israel in many regards, he is, none-the-less causing concern because of his positions on Iran (which may also give us a hint as to how he might position himself with regard to Iranian proxies Hezbollah and Hamas).

In 1998, Senator Biden was one of only four senators to vote against the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act, a bill designed to act against foreign companies or other entities that sent Iran sensitive missile technology or expertise. In 2007, he was one of only a handful of senators to oppose the bipartisan 2007 Kyl-Lieberman Amendment labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. In a December 2007 debate, Biden said "Iran is not a nuclear threat to the United States of America." On MSNBC's "Hardball," Biden said he "never believed" Iran had a weapon system under production.


Oh joy! Condoleezza Rice is due here tomorrow afternoon.

During her visit of just over 24 hours — during which time she will meet with Barak, Olmert, Livni, possibly joined by Qurei (as Livni's negotiating counterpart), and then Abbas and Fayyed in Ramallah — she is expected to check on the state of, and attempt to advance (i.e., push) "peace negotiations." She is reportedly seeking a document that states what each side has agreed to so far and where differences remain, in order to demonstrate that progress has taken place. There are rumors that she wants this not just by the end of the year but almost immediately so that it can be presented to the opening session of the UN on September 18; US officials are denying this.


According to Israeli officials cited in the Post, Tzipi Livni, our chief negotiator, is opposed to such a document and hopes to dissuade Rice to forget it. Her concern is that it would make it harder for Kadima to win an election.

Got that everyone? Livni doesn't want the nation to know what she has already verbally agreed to, as the people would not be happy about it.


Just a brief mention here of the "Free Gaza" ships, which came into Gaza yesterday. The ships carried a group of over 40 left-wing "activists" with an agenda that conveniently ignores Hamas terrorism; they claimed to be intent on "breaking the Israeli blockade of Gaza." While Israel was entirely within its rights to stop the ship before it reached the Gaza port, a decision was made to let them through as long as it was known that they were not carrying weapons. That decision was based on the awareness that the group would have promoted a PR free-for-all had they been stopped.

Hopefully more details soon, and a bit more background.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by B. Taverna, August 23, 2008.

This was written by Rabbi Levi Brackman and it appeared in Ynet News
www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/ 1%2c2506%2cL-3586207%2c00.html

Rabbi Brackman is executive director of Judaism in the Foothills, and is the author of Jewish Wisdom for Business Success.


Al-Jazeera shown the door by local US democracy

Despite what some on Left may want us to believe, average working class, right-leaning American is neither xenophobic, anti-Semitic or intolerant

On Thursday night I came to a Golden, Colorado City Council meeting to ask them to consider our request to place a menorah in downtown Golden this coming Hanukkah. But a much larger controversy was boiling.

Only 20 minutes drive from Democratic National Convention host city Denver, al-Jazeera had asked Golden City Manager, Mike Bestor, if he could help them meet and interview Golden residents. With the support of Golden Mayor Jacob Smith, a special barbeque celebration was arranged for al-Jazeera reporters at the home of Golden City Manager Mike Bestor.

This created an outcry from Golden residents who were opposed to the perceived preferential treatment given to al-Jazeera journalists. There was standing room only at the Council Meeting last night. Grown men who had served in the US armed forces choked with emotion as they described how al-Jazeera's reporting had helped to embolden our enemies and serves as a propaganda machine for the likes of Osama Bin Laden, Hamas and other terrorists who kill American citizens.

United States army and navy veterans and others stood up one after another demanding that al-Jazeera not be given what they termed as "red carpet treatment" by the City of Golden.

Of course there were some who felt that it was a good idea to treat even those who blatantly help the enemy of the United States with more love than is offered to our allies.

After every one had finished talking the Golden City manager, Mike Bestor, had his turn to explain his position, amazingly he told the audience that he had made a mistake and would therefore be withdrawing his barbeque invitation to al-Jazeera. There was loud applause when he finished speaking. The people had spoken and the elected officials were forced to listen and back down.


This was an amazing example of how the silent majority in the United States have the ability to show laser sharp moral clarity. This was a moment where the average person was galvanized to stand up and say that we will not allow privileges to be given to those who aid and abate terrorists.

But what I found even more insightful was the following. Those at the meeting who supported the al-Jazeera barbeque invitation insinuated that their opponents were bigoted and intolerant of others different than themselves. One speaker even called the veterans and those who agreed with them xenophobes.

But if that was the case one would have assumed that they would have opposed my request to place a menorah in Golden City Center. But instead, after I had finished my speech before the council asking them to consider placing the menorah in Golden, the loudest applause came for the United States army veterans. And after the meeting was over many who had spoken against the al-Jazeera barbeque approached me and voiced support for the menorah proposal.

For me the greatest moment of the night was not just the amazing display of local democracy in action. The most heartening part of the entire evening was the reaffirmation to me that, despite what some on the Left may want us to believe, the average working class, right-leaning American is neither xenophobic, anti-Semitic or intolerant.

Thankfully however, they are on the whole very realistic about the threats posed by the likes of al-Jazeera and the terrorists which they help and support. It is this American realism that gives me hope in the face of the potential Iranian nuclear threat and the ongoing terrorism threat posed by al-Qaeda, Hizbullah, Hamas and others.

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, August 23, 2008.

J4JPnews clarification — August 24, 2008

Senator Joseph Biden, new running mate for Democratic presidential candidate Obama Barak, stated his position on Jonathan Pollard in a 2007 interview (with Shalom TV). When asked about Pollard, Biden said, "... There's a rationale in my view why Pollard should be given leniency. But there is not a rationale to say what happened did not happen and [he] should be pardoned..." These comments are now being widely re-reported in light of the breaking news on his candidacy for Vice President of the United States and largely misunderstood. J4JP offers the following clarifications:

1) Senator Biden's comments support Clemency for Pollard
Jonathan Pollard is not seeking a pardon.
Pollard has never asked for a pardon.
Pollard is seeking clemency.
Clemency is what Senator Biden refers to when he speaks of "leniency."

2) Clemency vs. Pardon — what's the difference?

A pardon, in American legal terms, wipes out the crime. It virtually erases the history of the crime. A pardon restores full constitutional rights to an American citizen, as if he/she had never committed a crime. This explains why Senator Biden replied: "... there is not a rationale to say what happened did not happen and [he] should be pardoned."

Clemency, unlike a pardon, does not wipe out the record of the offense; it essentially readjusts the sentence. Clemency can be expressed as a reduction of sentence, and/or as a commutation to time served.

Jonathan Pollard has never sought to erase the fact that he did indeed transfer classified information to Israel and in doing so, broke the law. He has never denied this. Pollard has never asked for a pardon. What he does seek is clemency.

3) Some of the reasons Pollard seeks presidential clemency include:

o a grossly disproportionate sentence
o a broken plea agreement
o the use of secret evidence
o a false charge of treason
o ineffective assistance of counsel
o ex parte communication between prosecutors and judge
o a lack of due process
o a sentencing procedure infected by false allegations and lies
o violation of constitutional rights

4) Jonathan Pollard is now completing his 23rd year of an unprecedented life sentence for providing classified information to an ally, Israel. The median sentence for this offense is 2 to 4 years, with some serving no jail time at all.

Senator Biden's comments supporting presidential clemency for Jonathan are appropriate and welcome.

See Also:

The J4JP Facts Page

The Comparative Sentencing Charts

Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Dan Calic, August 23, 2008.
For those who oppose Israel as a Jewish state —
  • Why is it that someone can say they support national movements, and yet oppose Zionism?

  • Why are there 22 Arab countries and the world doesn't have a problem with that, yet throw one Jewish country in the mix and you think the world was about to end.

  • We hear public calls for the destruction of Israel again and again, and no one does a thing. What would happen if Israel called for the destruction of her enemies just once?

  • Hezbollah has rearmed itself with over 40,000 rockets and missiles in Lebanon, since the end of the '06 war, in flagrant violation of UN resolution 1701, while the UNIFIL has done absolutely nothing to stop them. Yet the commander of the UNIFIL is complaining that Israel has conducted a flyover and their Defense Minister won't meet with him.

  • How can someone go to bed on June 4, 1967 as a Jordanian and wake up the next day as a Palestinian? (quote from Walid Shoebat)

  • Why should it be Israel's responsibility to compensate "refugees" who supported those who intended to destroy it?

  • How can living on land G-d gave you be an "illegal occupation?"

Contact Dan Calic by email at calic@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 22, 2008.


Foreign Min. Livni asked the Attorney-General to order PM Olmert not to undertake critical negotiations with the Arabs, now that he has submitted his resignation. A caretaker government should not make great innovations nor vital decisions. She said it was the Basic Law in Israel, but cited only Supreme Court decisions and Attorney-General dictates, not the law (IMRA, 8/5).

It is the custom in the US, too. She wants to make poor decisions herself. Olmert may be making foolhardy decisions to please leftist prosecutors. What is her excuse? Her decisions would be made by a lame duck government, too. She is trying to avoid new elections. The prior elections led to a coalition regime that lost the people's confidence. Her policies are those that the people reject.

I agree that Olmert should restrain himself or be restrained, but it would be better to hold new elections. The government is so afraid of the people and so avid to keep its jobs, that it averts new elections.


The US has no national security objections to Israeli military sales to Turkey. Turkey elicited a bid from Israeli companies to develop its tanks. Israel refrained from bidding against US companies. It feared that doing so would irritate US military relations with Israel. A S. Korean company won the bid (IMRA, 8/5)

This incident illustrates that US relations with Israel are insecure, and that the US is wont to retaliate against normal competition. In theory, capitalism promotes efficiency, by virtue of competition. In practice, capitalists lobby for government subsidy, tariff, or punitive measures against foreign competitors. In practice, what is called efficiency often is cheapness of quality.


Israel is allowing the warrior Hilles clan that escaped from Gaza to settle in Jericho. An Israeli general warned them that they had to behave, on pain of removal. Dr. Aaron Lerner doubts that the warning would be followed through.

Residents of Jericho resent this infusion of Fatah men. They already suffer from extortion by Fatah men already brought there (IMRA, 8/5).

Israel has been letting hostile Arabs enter the Territories. I think that is not prudent. The reverse would be wiser policy.


Smugglers often bribe Egyptian soldiers to let them through (Arutz-7, 8/5).

Egypt has found and decommissioned a number of tunnels, lately (IMRA, 8/6). Actually, Egypt just demolishes a tunnel exit, leaving the same tunnel's other exits intact. There are more tunnels now than previously. Egypt still is pretending to be doing something about tunnels (IMRA, 8/6). Why don't the major media get the correct angle on this story, instead of giving Egypt credit?


Saddam favored Palestinian Arabs, one reason for their present unpopularity there, now. They tried to flee to Syria, but were denied entrance. Some dozens are being welcomed by Iceland and Sweden (IMRA, 8/5).

Sweden means well, but is subjecting its own people tor criminal assault and an assault on its own civilization. That is the record of the Palestinian Arabs in the Middle East and of Muslims in Europe.


When Israel refused to let some Gazan Fullbright Scholars pass through Israel, Sec. Rice reacted in a fury. Now she believes, along with Israel, that they present a security risk (Arutz-7, 8/5). She reacted in haste and ignorance.

Due to anti-Zionist prejudice, the US often scorns Israeli intelligence. Israeli sources, however, often prove correct. The US should give more credence to Israeli intelligence. It should work together with Israel. When the US works together with Israel, it accomplishes much more.


For three days in succession, police broke the cameras of reporters filming police response to Jewish nationalist demonstrations. The third day, an INS reporter was photographing an Israeli policeman beating a demonstrator. That cop turned on the reporter, and beat him, too. Later he apologized.

Other Israelis were commemorating the third anniversary of the removal of the Gazan Jews. [Most of those removed still lack decent and permanent housing, jobs, and closure over the parsimonious and bureaucratic way the government still, deliberately, treats them.] They tried to place a radio ad lamenting the "expulsion." The Israel Broadcasting Authority refused to allow it. Excuse: "expulsion" is a political term, the proper word is "evacuation" (Arutz-7, 8/5). They didn't evacuate, they were expelled for political reasons. Even if the ad were political, political expression would be protected if Israel were a democracy. Better to keep the government out of the media and as much else as possible.


Israeli prosecutors do not demand the death penalty for convicted terrorists. They fail to realize that irresponsible Israeli governments are liable to release them in a lopsided exchange. "...these men, and thousands like them continue to constitute a grave danger. In prison they are free to plot and order the carrying out of still more attacks. Several murderous attacks have been ordered by prisoners who communicate their orders through their lawyers, their family members and even on the telephone. Moreover, while in prison they are free to draft their fellow prisoners into their genocidal ranks. Since many of these fellow prisoners were convicted of lesser crimes, they will [soon] be released to kill still more Israelis after being radicalized in prison by the likes of the Silwan gang."

Failing to execute convicted terrorists is not justice and not humane. It is left-wing anti-Zionism by so-called intellectuals. Those "intellectuals" don't recognize the danger to their people and their duty to protect them from radical Muslims.

So warped is the Supreme Court, which overrules Knesset laws on the basis of judge's ideological or personal preferences and not on legal matters, that it took five years to sanction targeted assassination of terrorists who make war on Israel. Even then, it circumscribed the IDF's freedom of action. The Court acts as if its primary duty is to protect genocidal national enemies (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 8/5) and to thwart democracy in Israel.

The Court is anti-Israel and dictatorial. It should be tried for treason. But that would mean the people gaining sovereign control from the elite.


The IDF swiftly arrested a Jew accused of throwing stones at Arabs. It said it would increase its patrols in the province, to prevent further such acts.

Jewish representatives in Samaria complained that Arabs have attacked Jews there for years, without being apprehended by the IDF. Arabs still do, many times more than Jews attack Arabs. When Jews call the Army for help, if it comes at all, it arrests the Jews. The representatives link this anti-Jewish discrimination with other governmental efforts to make life difficult for Jews in Samaria. Thus the government obstructs connections of new houses to electricity, doesn't approve building plans, etc. (Arutz-7, 8/6).

I have never heard the government defending the reputation of settlers and religious Jews against the constant slander from the Left and by the Arabs. It was a settler and a religious Jew who each slew a tractor terrorist in Jerusalem.

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

Posted by Dave Alpern, August 22, 2008.

This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner and comes from IMRA. Dr. Lerner is Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il


Maariv correspondent Ben Caspit reports in today's edition that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is pushing hard to reach a deal with PA head Mahmoud Abbas before he leaves office. American businessman Daniel Abram recently met with Abbas a number of times to encourage Abbas to reach an agreement with Olmert.

According to Caspit, Olmert tells his circle that if he reaches a deal with Abbas, "the president of the United States will adopt the wording, the world will adopt it, the European Union, and also the Arab world. We can tell the Israeli people that this is what can be achieved after long years of negotiations, and the Nation will decide."

Put another way: Olmert intends to create a situation according to which the Israeli public will be faced with the danger that rejection of the deal means rejection of a plan already embraced by the entire world — with all the consequences that entails.

Contact Dave Alpern by email at daveyboy@bezeqint.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Marc Samberg, August 22, 2008.

This was a news item in One Jerusalem


Earlier this week Jordan's King publicly embraced Hamas and today Jordan's Foreign Minister warned Israel's Ambassador against a planned archaeological dig in Jerusalem because:

"This would also lead to a new violent conflict in the Middle East because Jerusalem is a red line for Muslims and Arabs."

That the Jordanians have suddenly become energetic opponents of Israel is troubling. It could mean they have calculated that being on Israel's side against radical Islam is a losing proposition. There is no doubt that Israel's policy of appeasing its enemies is emboldening its enemies and causing its friends to rethink their alliances.

It is also the height of Chutzpah for Jordan to threaten Israel over Jerusalem. Remember it is Jordan that kept Jews out of the Old City from 1948 to 1968.  

EDITOR'S NOTE: This was a comment by Richard Rheiner:

It should be absolutely clear now that Israel is virtually alone now. She is weak and weakening further because of her cowardly prime minister who has appeased, who is appeasing and who will always appease until the day when Jewish blood will run in the streets of Jerusalem. This man Olmert must resign NOW AND LET THE BRAVE RUN ISRAEL'S AFFAIRS. If it is inevitable that the Jewish people must die then it is better to die fighting as did the warriors of the Polish ghetto rather than walk into the gas chambers like meek lambs. Israel is now on the verge of losing everything. She MUST EXACT A HORRIBLE TOLL ON THOSE WHO WOULD DESTROY HER. It seems inevitable that Obama (no friend to any Jew) is going to be elected President of the USA.

Jordan is a joke and should be made to worry about what Israel might do with a brave man or woman at the helm. All these Muslim countries should be made to worry about what action Israel will take. Instead of trying to get world opinion on her side, which is an impossibility, Israel should go ahead with plans to do whatever it takes to survive. There should be a credible threat to release the dogs of war on those who would threaten every Jew's beloved homeland. Trying to show the world what a wonderful democracy exists in Israel is a waste of time and energy. The "world" will never love us or care about us. We must think of this last chance we will ever have to be a nation. What the world fears, it respects and Israel needs respect not love.

Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jack L., August 22, 2008.

This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and it appeared in today's Arutz-7.


Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) and police brought charges on Friday against a Be'er Sheva area Bedouin was who was arrested four weeks ago for plotting to contact Al Qaeda terrorists and suggesting to a friend to carry out a suicide bombing. A gag order on the arrest was lifted Friday.

The friend turned down his proposal to carry out an attack.

The terrorist was identified as Abu Rakik, a 24-year-old former student at a technological college and a resident of the Bedouin town of Tel Sheva, near Be'er Sheva. He allegedly tried to contact a Gaza terrorist linked with the Al Qaeda network, headed by Osama Bin Laden, with the intentions of setting up a local cell.

Authorities said Rakik also had downloaded from the internet instructions on how to manufacture a bomb.

The indictment is the latest in a growing number of arrests and charges against Israeli Arabs linked to the international terrorist organization, which government officials several years ago dismissed as having any influence on Arab and Bedouin citizens living in the Jewish state.

Last month, four Israeli Arabs, including two from eastern Jerusalem, were arrested for trying to establish an Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade cell.

Al Qaeda's sights on Israel go back at least until 2002, when the organization was behind the double attack on Israelis in Kenya. Then-Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said at the time, "Our hand will reach them," referring to the Al Qaeda terrorists.

A government spokesman stated after the attacks, "The road from 9/11 through Chechnya to Bali and now Mombasa is a clear one", and then-Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu warned that the attacks showed the dangers of setting up a new Arab state within Israel's current borders.

Binyamin Netanyahu warned that the attacks showed the dangers of setting up a new Arab state within Israel's current borders.

Intelligence experts warned the government after the withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza three summers ago that Al Qaeda might step up attacks in areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and that several of its terrorists crossed into Gaza from Egypt.

Hizbullah deputy secretary-general Sheikh Naim Qassem told the Christian Science Monitor two years ago, after the Second Lebanon War, "Small [Al Qaeda] groups can infiltrate in and out very quickly. Weapons are available everywhere. It is not complex. These are not large groups of people. Just two or three who plan for a while and then launch several rockets."

Al Qaeda has used language in its propaganda similar to that of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, with such statements as, "The rockets fired at the grandchildren of monkeys and pigs from the south of Lebanon were only the start of a blessed in-depth strike against the Zionist enemy."

Contact Jack L. by email at yakovdov1@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by HaDaR, August 22, 2008.

This was written by Jonny Paul, Jerusalem Post correspondent in London. It is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid= 1219218613539&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


The BBC has denied charges that money raised by a BBC charity was used to recruit and train the terrorists involved in the 7/7 terror attacks on London that killed 52 people in 2005.

The BBC's own Newsnight current affairs programme reported on Tuesday night's broadcast that the BBC's Children in Need charity had donated around £20,000 to the Leeds Community School, Yorkshire, between 1999 and 2002 which went towards funding the activities of the terrorists behind the July 2005 attacks.

On Thursday the BBC said that there is no evidence that the money was used for terrorist activity.

The school funded and shared premises with the Iqra Islamic book shop where the suicide bombers Muhammad Siddique Khan and Shezhad Tanweer regularly met. Khan and Tanweer attempted to radicalize youths by showing propaganda films at the bookshop, which became a regular meeting place for young Muslims at the time — including Jermaine Lindsay, who went on to become the King's Cross bomber.

The two handed out DVDs and books about Bosnia and Chechnya and held Arabic classes in a back room of the store. They also produced a leaflet in the wake of September 11 blaming the attacks on a Jewish conspiracy.

The school also received large sums from other public bodies and paid for adventure weekends, used to recruit potential Muslim radicals, such as a rafting trip to Wales a month before the London attacks. Tanweer and Khan went on the trip, along with Khalid Khaliq, who this year was jailed for terrorism offences.

Khaliq's house was raided by police last year. They found books with titles such as Zaad-e-Mujahid [essential provision for holy fighters] and The Absent Obligation, a book about jihad, as well as 250 copies of a booklet entitled The War on Terrorism: the Final Crusade.

Both Khan, the leader of the bombers, and Tanweer, the Aldgate bomber, were trustees of the bookshop. Khan also worked at the school and ran the adventure courses in Wales.

The bookshop and the school were registered charities. The bookshop claimed, according to the UK Charity Commission, that its aim was "the advancement of the Islamic faith," while the school's aim was said to be to "advance the education of Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils."

Martin Gilbertson, an IT technician who worked at the school and bookshop, said that he had been concerned about the activities of Tanweer and Khan.

"They blamed everything on the 'Jewish conspiracy,' they hated Western culture; it was like living with jihad on a daily basis," he said.

On Wednesday, David Ramsden, chief executive of Children in Need, said: "I'm incredibly concerned that we did make an award to Leeds Community School over nine years ago, and any allegation that any funding we've given to any project has been misused and not used to change the lives of disadvantaged children and young people makes me concerned and very sad.

"I can reassure the British public that we are very careful in who we fund and this allegation is a very rare one for us, but one that causes a great deal of concern."

However on Thursday, the BBC said the money had been given in "good faith," and that there was no evidence to show the money was used for terrorist activity.

"The grants made by BBC Children in Need to Leeds Community School, itself a charity registered with the Charity Commission, were given in good faith in 1998 and 1999," said Hellen Martin, media relations manager at the BBC.

"No evidence has been produced that the money they received was used for terrorist activity. Clearly if there is an allegation of fraud, then it is a matter for the police. BBC Children In Need distributes more than £30 million in grants every year, greatly benefiting disadvantaged children and young people in the UK.

"BBC Children in Need does everything it possibly can to make sure that the public money is entirely used to benefit these children."

Children in Need says its mission is to "positively change the lives of disadvantaged children and young people in the UK."

On the charity's Web site, its mission statement says that support is given in the form of grants to organizations "working with children who may have experienced mental, physical or sensory disabilities; behavioral or psychological disorders; are living in poverty or situations of deprivation; or suffering through distress, abuse or neglect.

"The size and scale of the BBC Children in Need Appeal means that we're able to give grants to hundreds of different organizations, some of which are very small and don't have the resources to fund-raise for themselves."

In 2006, the BBC Children in Need Appeal raised over £33m. Last month, the BBC was fined a record £400,000 by media watchdog Ofcom for misleading its audiences by "faking" phone-in competitions. A Children in Need appeal in 2005 was part of the scandal.

"The BBC deceived its audience by faking winners of competitions and deliberately conducting competitions unfairly," Ofcom said.

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by B. Taverna, August 22, 2008.

This was written by Etgar Lefkovits and it appeared yesterday in The Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1219218613473&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


A group of more than 50 Holocaust scholars from around the world on Thursday urged Yad Vashem to include an exhibit in its museum about a WWII rescue group.

The scholars' appeal to add information about the Bergson Group in the Holocaust museum came two months after Yad Vashem surprisingly rebuffed an earlier petition by a cross-section of Israeli political and cultural figures on the issue.

The Bergson Group was a maverick activist group in the US in the 1940s that raised public awareness of the Holocaust and campaigned for US rescue action to save the Jews of Europe during WWII.

Led by Hillel Kook, a nephew of Israel's first chief rabbi who worked under the pseudonym of Peter Bergson, the organization was viewed by mainstream US Jewish leaders during the war as being too direct in its criticism of the Roosevelt administration's blatant failure to rescue Jewish refugees, although in recent years most scholars have come to recognize the group's crucial contribution to the infamously belated rescue effort.

"As scholars who have researched and written about the Holocaust, we support the recent appeal, by a wide cross-section of Israeli scholars and political and cultural figures, urging Yad Vashem to add to its exhibit materials about the Bergson Group's role in promoting rescue from the Holocaust," the August 21 letter to Yad Vashem chairman Avner Shalev read.

"Yad Vashem's exhibit already includes material about the failure of the United States to admit significant numbers of refugees or to bomb Auschwitz. But this chapter of Holocaust history is incomplete without reference to those in America who did act to bring about the rescue of Jews from the Nazis," the letter states.

The signatories to the letter include Dr. Irving Greenberg, chairman emeritus of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, which governs the US Holocaust Museum.

In contrast to Yad Vashem's surprisingly steadfast refusal to include such an exhibit in its museum, the museum in Washington DC earlier this summer added information about the Bergson Group to its museum on the heels of a similar public campaign.

The American Holocaust Institute, which is leading the campaign to include an exhibit on the Bergson Group in Yad Vashem, said Thursday the Israeli museum needed to amend its historical omission.

"More than 50 leading Holocaust historians have urged Yad Vashem to correct its inexplicable omission of the Bergson Group's rescue campaign," said Dr. Rafael Medoff, director of the Washington DC-based David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies. "This is a body of serious scholarly opinion that no Holocaust institution can reasonably ignore."

But Yad Vashem said Thursday inserting information about the Bergson Group in its Museum without "the overall context" would be "misleading."

"It is unclear if all those who signed on to the letter are familiar with Yad Vashem and the Holocaust History Museum, and with the presentation of this subject in Yad Vashem's research and educational activities," a Yad Vashem representative said in a written response.

"The Holocaust History Museum does not presume to include every person, event, and place connected with the Holocaust, but rather to present the visitor with the story of the Holocaust, providing an experience that will hopefully encourage the visitor to learn more via books, the Web site, and other sources — available at Yad Vashem and elsewhere."

The Bergson Group is credited with helping to persuade the president in 1944 to establish the War Refugee Board, which ultimately saved 200,000 Jewish lives during the Holocaust. "Omitting the saving of 200,000 lives is a mistake," said Prof. David S. Wyman, a leading international authority on America's response to the Holocaust, and author of the highly acclaimed The Abandonment of the Jews.

Despite opposition from mainstream American Jewish leaders, the group actively campaigned to save the doomed Jews of Europe through theatrical pageants, lobbying on Capitol Hill, newspaper advertisements and organizing a march in Washington by 400 Rabbis, which was the only rally for rescue held in the nation's capital during the Holocaust.

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 21, 2008.

This was written by Yaakov Lappin and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1219218601145&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull AP contributed to this report.


The US turned down a request by Defense Minister Ehud Barak to purchase the Boeing 767 aircraft, which can be used for mid-air refueling, amid fears that the sale would appear to support an Israeli strike on Iran, Channel 10 news reported on Thursday.

The JASDF Boeing KC-767, a refueling aircraft.

Some 1,000 kilometers separate Israel from Iran, a distance that would play a key role in any attack on Iranian nuclear sites.

The IAF already has mid-air refueling capabilities and possesses 63 f-16I fighter jets with an estimated 2,100 kilometer range, which would enable them to strike targets deep within Iranian territory without the need to refuel.

Israel also possesses dozens of F-15I long-range fighter jets, which are also capable of flying for thousands of kilometers without refueling.

A BARAK AIDE TOLD THE JERUSALEM POST that he was unfamiliar with the content of the Channel 10 report.

Former Military Intelligence officer Col. (res.) Ephriam Kam of the Institute for National Securities Studies at Tel Aviv University said he was unsure whether the report was accurate. "We can already refuel in mid-air," Kam said, adding that the report raised more questions than answers.

According to Channel 10, the request was made during Barak's visit to the US last month.

On Tuesday, the IDF announced plans to soon bring into service Boeing 707 aircraft, which also can refuel fighter jets in mid-air.

Boeing 707s "can refuel other airplanes while in the air, thus enabling them to continue flying," the IDF said. It added that "the last project involving a refueling system took place six years ago."

The latest initiative, known as Project Green Salad, will cost the military NIS 80 million, and has been placed under the auspices of Israel Aerospace Industries.

"We are talking about a very big project that will give the IAF another refueling system," said Maj. Shlomi Shefer, head of the air force's Aerial Refueling Department. "The fact that the IAF will have another [model] of these aircraft means that more planes will be able to achieve their mission. We expect this aircraft to have the ability to refuel other planes in a short amount of time."

The flurry of reports over the air force's long-range capabilities came as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad released yet another declaration in which he predicted Israel's demise.

In a message posted on his presidential Web site, he described Israel as a "germ of corruption" that would be "removed soon."

The statement comes shortly after Iranian Vice President Esfandiar Rahim Mashai said the Iranian people were "friends of all people in the world — even Israelis."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 21, 2008.


Patriotic, psychologically normal Israelis resent Jew-hating Arabs and Jews who teach at Ben-Gurion U. For the second time, a teacher ordered out of the classroom an Israeli reservist student in uniform. [The soldier probably had just returned from military duty.] This teacher nominally Jewish; the other, Arab.

A few weeks later, three men, including a masked reservist in uniform, entered the classroom. They poured a bucket of paint over the teacher (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/5).


"Saddam is dead. Had he remained in power, we would likely still believe he had WMD. He would have been sitting on an oil bonanza priced at $140 a barrel. He would almost certainly have broken free from an already crumbling sanctions regime. The U.S. would be faced with not one, but two, major adversaries in the Persian Gulf. Iraqis would be living under a regime that, in an average year, was at least as murderous as the sectarian violence that followed its collapse. And the U.S. would have seemed powerless to shape events. Instead, we now have a government that does not threaten its neighbors, does not sponsor terrorism, and is unlikely to again seek WMD. We have a democratic government, a first for the Arab world, and one that is increasingly capable of defending its people and asserting its interests. We have a defeat for al Qaeda. Critics carp that had there been no invasion, there never would have been al Qaeda in Iraq. Maybe. As it is, thousands of jihadists are dead, al Qaeda has been defeated on its self-declared "central battlefield," and the movement is largely discredited on the Arab street and even within Islamist circles. We also have — if still only prospectively — an Arab bulwark against Iran's encroachments in the region. But that depends on whether we simply withdraw from Iraq, or join it in a lasting security partnership. None of these are achievements to sneer at, all the more so because they were won through so much sacrifice." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/5 from Bret Stephens.)


Egypt and Israel are considering fixing the fence between Gaza and Egypt, using high-tech devices to thwart smuggling. Dr. Aaron Lerner wonders why they don't use a simpler, cheaper, and more effective means. That would involve clearing a swathe in the desert by removing or moving away the houses that hide smuggler's tunnel exits. Tunnels then would have to be much longer and more expensive and require bigger, easily spotted equipment (IMRA, 8/5). I think the reasons are that Egypt doesn't want to stop smuggling and Israel is afraid of criticism for suggesting moving Arabs. I'd fear terrorism more than criticism.


First, UNIFIL stated a high-sounding principle. It would save the lives of foreign soldiers stranded in Lebanon. If an Israeli pilot were shot down over Lebanon, UNIFIL would try to reach him before Hizbullah or fight Hizbullah to free him.

Then, UNIFIL states another principle, that it would turn the Israeli over to the Lebanese Army (IMRA, 8/5). That principle is fraudulent.

UNIFIL is pretending, long after that pretense has been exposed, that the Lebanese Army is an independent force. The Lebanese Army is subordinate to Hizbullah. It just said it approves of Hizbullah rearming, though that violates the Security Council Resolution. It would turn the Israeli prisoner over to Hizbullah, to be murdered and then the corpse held for ransom.

The solution would be for UNIFIL to turn the Israeli over to Israel.

As for fighting Hizbullah, UNIFIL never has done that. It has let Hizbullah build up into a force stronger than UNIFIL. The UNO military rarely protects people or accomplishes its mission. It is an excuse for inaction.


Pres. Sarkozy announced that Syria had agreed to opening embassies with Lebanon. He implied that Syria now is willing to recognize the independence of Lebanon. Syria immediately denied that its policy has changed and stated obstacles to opening embassies (IMRA, 8/5).

The West still doesn't know how to deal with the Muslim Arabs. The Western diplomat strikes an agreement with an Arab one. Sounds as if something were accomplished. Immediately afterwards, the Arab diplomat or his boss reinterprets what was a clear agreement, adds new conditions, or denies the agreement, or another Arab leader declares that the diplomats don't speak for his faction. Even if the Arabs don't demur, they may renege.

This isn't only a problem for the West. Arabs run into the same problem with each other. I'm not sure of the solution. I would advise being very careful about announcing an agreement. First get it written. Make it clear, and not with legal jargon. State that there are no other conditions, and that each party signs with authority for his country. Make sure that one does not depend upon the other's goodwill. The Westerner should not make concessions first, but should make his concessions dependent upon fulfillment by the Arab side. This is like the way Israeli wholesalers should have dealt with P.A. customers, when Israeli troops pulled out of part of the P.A.. The Arabs bought and didn't pay. Next time, C.O.D.! If the Arabs complain this treats them as dishonest, cite their record.

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

Posted by Gary Bauer, August 21, 2008.

Russia's war against the democratic state of Georgia is a test of Western resolve. And while our allies in "Old Europe" — kept safe for generations thanks in part to America's commitment to freedom — have expressed muted criticism of Russia's actions, our allies in "New Europe" — former Eastern Bloc states and those once dominated by the Soviet Union — have been eager to step up to the plate.

Today, Secretary of State Rice signed a treaty with Poland to expand America's missile defense system at Polish bases. Ukrainian leaders have expressed their desire to negotiate a similar deal. That's very revealing. Nations on Russia's border are in the greatest danger and have the most to lose. They also know Russia best and are the ones now most eager for American military assistance and leadership.

Unfortunately, before the ink was dry on the treaty, congressional liberals, who have fought the missile defense system ever since Ronald Reagan first launched the program, were already trying to sabotage the deal, suggesting they would fight the deployment of the U.S. missile system in Poland. Representative Ellen Tauscher of California said, "Go ahead and move on with research and development. But as far as putting holes in the ground in Poland, we are saying no." Now is not the time to show weakness or indecision. Our enemies and our allies are watching us.

Meanwhile, Moscow's response indicates that the bear is back and that the fears of Poland and Ukraine are well founded.

The Russian Foreign Ministry denounced the deal and said that Russia's response would go beyond the diplomatic.

Secretary of State Rice shot back, saying, "When you threaten Poland, you perhaps forget that it is not 1988. It's 2008 and the United States has a ... firm treaty guarantee to defend Poland's territory as if it was the territory of the United States. So it's probably not wise to throw these threats around. The Russians are losing their credibility."

The fact is, Russia should have nothing to fear from this system. It is defensive in nature, and the real "target" is not Russia but Iran, which has a very active ballistic missile program and a nuclear program that is in violation of U.N. resolutions. Sadly, however, Russia has been assisting Iran, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, with its nuclear program and has resisted U.N. efforts to bring Iran into compliance with international obligations.

The West's response to Russia's increasing belligerence had better take a more serious and forceful tone and quickly.

So far, Putin might be forgiven for thinking that he can invade neighboring democracies with impunity. Russia has violated the terms of the Georgian cease-fire, is taking prisoners and nothing has happened.

Last week, columnist Charles Krauthammer listed a few "cards" the West should play, such as expelling Russia from the G-8 organization of leading industrial nations, barring Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization and organizing a boycott of the 2014 Olympics in Sochi.

But Russia also has some "cards" to play — oil and natural gas. Russia is one of Europe's largest energy suppliers, which partly explains the hesitancy of our European allies to defend Georgia more vigorously. Yet, if anything, Russia's belligerence should be seen as a wake-up call for America to do everything we can to protect our economic and national security by aggressively developing our own energy resources.

Gary Bauer is the president of American Values. Contact him at gary.bauer@mail.amvalues.org. And visit the website: http://www.ouramericanvalues.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, August 21, 2008.

This was written by Rabbi Aron Moss. Rabbi Aron Moss works to bring searching souls back to Judaism in Sydney, Australia. It was published August 19, 2008 in Arutz-7


The life that was is gone.


My life has fallen apart. My husband left me, I have been kicked out of my home and my career is over. And now I am losing my faith, too. I used to believe so strongly, but now my thinking has changed. Was I deluded to think that G-d would help me?


I feel for you in what must be a huge test of your character. Your whole world has been shattered to pieces. Just to get up in the morning and face the day must take mammoth strength.

There is a name for your situation. The Kabbalists call it Ayin Baemtza — "transitional nothingness."

Between any two states of being lies an intermediary state of non-being. Like a seed that must become a tree, it first decomposes, nullifies itself and rots into oblivion. Just as it reaches the verge of complete nonexistence, the seed starts to sprout and reinvents itself into a new being. Only by losing its being as a seed and becoming nothing, can it reach a new being, a greater being, as a tree.

It has to be this way. To truly reinvent oneself, there must be a true and complete break from the past, a real nothingness, to make room for the new self to emerge.

You are presently going through an Ayin Baemtza stage in your life. The life that was is gone, the life that will be is yet to blossom, and you are left in a big black hole of confusion, pain and darkness. That is a very hard place to be.

Everyone knows that transitional nothingness is just a temporary state, a step between two stages in life. Everyone knows that except the one who is going through it themselves. For you, the nothingness is real. It is hard — maybe impossible — for you to see any bright future ahead.

So, what can you do to survive the transitional nothingness? What will keep you going until you transform into the you of tomorrow?

In your state of nothingness you need to hold on to something higher than yourself. Now, you need faith, not philosophy. Say to yourself: "My life is in disarray, I don't know what's flying, I don't know what will be, but I am in G-d's hands. This is a process that for whatever reason I must go through. And with G-d's help, I will get through it."

When in an Ayin state, it is not the time to be changing belief systems or making important life choices. The ground you are standing on is too unstable for you to be able to think clearly. It would be sad — no, it would be tragic — if in your frustration you made choices that you will later regret, but not be able to reverse.

My friend, I offer no solutions to your predicament. But I offer you one piece of advice. Just hold on to G-d, the one thing that even in your nothingness you haven't lost. You will get through this black hole and your life will be reborn. The seed is planted. Have faith and your new tomorrow will blossom soon.

Contact Avodah by email at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, August 21, 2008.

This was written by Victor Davis Hanson and appeared on the TownHall website.


Everyone is distracted by the Olympics. The squabbling here on the campaign trail consumes the media. Two presidential candidates and a lame-duck president all are weighing in on foreign policy. No wonder Vladimir Putin thought it was a good time to invade Georgia.

Apparently the Russian prime minister knew exactly what he was doing but assumed no one in the West did. And he was right.

Our pundits and politicians are all over the map as Putin is variously portrayed as villain, victim, patriot, tyrant — and more still.

The neoconservatives: We must make Russia pay a terrible price for subverting a democracy. Our policy of promoting liberal governments among the former Soviet republics, with integration into Europe and relations with NATO, was sound, and it cannot be allowed to be aborted by Putin.

Bottom line: Form a ring of democracies around Russia until it sees the light and likewise evolves into a constitutional state.

The paleoconservatives: Putin is only protecting his rightful national interests in his own backyard, which don't really conflict with ours. You have to admire the old brute for taking care of business. Neocons — and no doubt Israelis in the background — provoked that Georgian loudmouthed dandy Saakashvili to stick his head in a noose — so he deserved the hanging he got.

Bottom line: We should cut a deal with our natural ally Putin to keep out of each other's proper sphere of influence — and let each deal as it wishes with these miserable little third-party troublemakers.

The realists: Don't poke sticks at the Bear. We should define what our strategic interests in the region are. Maybe we can protect Eastern Europe, the Baltic republics and the Ukraine — but only if we accept that Georgia just isn't part of the equation. We need to back out of the saloon with drawn pistols, and save as much face as we can.

This is a reminder that we forgot the role of honor and fear in international relations when we encouraged weak former Soviet republics merrily to join the West and gratuitously humiliate Russia.

Bottom line: Don't get caught again issuing promises that we can't keep!

The left wing: Putin's unilateral pre-emption was just like our own in Iraq. His recognition of South Ossetia's independence was no different from our own in breakaway Kosovo. So America is just as bad. Russia's attack is the moral equivalent of America arbitrarily removing the tyrant Saddam. It's all about Big Oil and pipelines anyway — along with Bush, Cheney, Halliburton et al.

Bottom line: Another long overdue comeuppance for the American Empire.

The liberal mainstream: Both sides are at fault. We understand Georgia's plight, but also sympathize with Russia's dilemma. We should consult the United Nations, involve the European Union and encourage European diplomacy. We can learn from the multilateral NATO teamwork in Afghanistan.

Bottom line: Make sure that international institutions don't confuse an empathetic America with cowboy George Bush.

The Europeans: Prioritize! 1) Don't jeopardize gas supplies from, and trade with, Russia; 2) Avoid any confrontation in any form; 3) Make sure that Bush does not do something stupid to draw us too far in, but at least does something to avoid leaving us too far out.

Bottom line: Luckily, Tbilisi is still a long way from Berlin and Paris!

The rest of America: My lord, Putin is acting just like Brezhnev! But they told us that he just wanted to democratize and reform Russia, integrate with NATO and the EU, and help fight radical Islam! So why did he get angry with Georgia when it just wanted to do the same things he was supposed to be doing? That backstabber wasn't honest with us!

Bottom line: Now what?

The more Russia promises to leave Georgia, the more it seems to stay put. One reason may be that Putin keeps counting on us either to be confused, contradictory or angrier at ourselves than at Russia over his latest aggression. And given our inability to speak with one voice, he seems to be absolutely right.

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

Posted by Gerard A. Honigman, August 21, 2008.

Now tell me...What would you do in the age of nationalism — which came relatively late to the Middle East — if your national group already had almost two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory (conquered mostly from other national groups), wanted to create at least one more, but another people's sole, tiny, resurrected nation state stood in the way?

Well, please take a look — like many of us have over the decades — at the answer through the oft-quoted words of a spokesman for that above national group itself, PLO executive committee member Zuheir Mohsen, on March 31, 1977, in the Dutch newspaper Trouw.

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese... Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism...

Before having to deal with the politics and sensitivities of at least some in the West, Arabs simply gave no thought to Mohsen's tactics.

As I deliberately like to reemphasize time and again (for those who like to place Israel under the high power lens of moral scrutiny while playing deaf, dumb, and blind to what surrounds it), millions of native peoples were simply conquered and forcibly Arabized in the name of the Arab Nation and the spread of its Dar ul-Islam — imperialism and colonialism, pure and simple — and millions of native Egyptian Copts, black Africans, Kurds, Imazighen (Berbers), Jews, and others are still suffering the consequences of this murderous subjugation.

In a post-Holocaust age, however, in the struggle to win over hearts and minds from abroad, how could Arabs demand twenty-two states while denying Jews their one?

The answer — as Mohsen so correctly stated above: Reinvent yourselves.

From now on, you're "Palestinians." And then depend on the ignorance of most of the rest of the world to back your claim, "If Jews can have a state, why not Palestinians?" And, don't you know, "Palestinians" are the new formerly stateless Jews.

Forget the facts...

Like most Arabs never saw the land of the Jews — Judaea — until their own murderous imperial conquests brought them out of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century C.E. when they spread out in all directions.

Or that the very name "Palestine" was dubbed upon Judaea by the Roman Emperor Hadrian after the Jews' costly second revolt for freedom. To pour salt onto their wound, he renamed the Jews' land after their historic enemies, the Philistines — a non-Semitic sea people (i.e. not Arab) from the area around Crete. Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and other contemporary Roman historians wrote all about Judaea and Judaeans — not "Palestine" or "Palestinians." Listen to one of my favorite telling quotes about the Jews' first revolt in Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus:

Vespasian... succeeded to the command.... it inflamed his resentment that the Jews were the only nation that had not yet submitted...Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea... he commanded three legions in Judaea itself... To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria... amongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations.

Or that, not having endured the forced exile and diaspora of many (but not all — many still remained in the hill country and elsewhere clear up to the Arab conquest) of the Jews, still...so many Arabs were newcomers themselves to the Mandate of Palestine after World War I and the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire which had controlled the land for over four centuries, that when the United Nations Relief Works Agency — UNRWA — was set up to assist Arab refugees (after a half dozen Arab states invaded a nascent Israel in 1948 to nip it in the bud and their attempt backfired), the very word "refugee" had to be redefined from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948 to assist these people. Hamas's own patron saint, for whom its terror brigade and rockets are named for, Sheikh Izzadin-al-Qassam, was born in Latakia, Syria. Arafat was from Egypt. And both "native Palestinians" had plenty of company, pouring into the Mandate because of the economic development going on due to the Jews.

And so forth.

Now, using this same tactic, Serbs have been similarly shafted.

Albania is an independent nation southwest of the former Yugoslavia. The Serbs fought their first major battle for Kosovo against the spread of the Dar ul-Islam (this time led by Turkish imperialism) in 1389 — over six centuries ago.

Albania had become at least nominally converted to Islam via the Ottoman conquest. Over the centuries, ethnic Albanians encroached upon traditionally Serbian lands.

Enter the late 20th century...

Everyone knew that with the death of Tito, Iraq's twin, artificially glued together state of Yugoslavia would fall apart.

Now, if you're an Albanian in Serbia and you already have an ethnic Albanian state in existence (so you can't claim "statelessness"), how do you stake your claim for additional territory — at another people's (Serbs') expense?

Hitler played a somewhat similar game with the large population of ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland. World War II soon followed, as his sights were set far beyond the Czechs' and Slovaks' domain.

According to this reasoning, America also better watch its own southwest very carefully — especially since it really was once part of Mexico anyway. And what's Russia up to these days, since we're on this subject? Think non-Russian peoples' lands, with Russian ethnic minorities, and how this game could be played out.

The answer, however, regarding Albanians in Serbia is...You follow Zuheir Mohsen's advice.

But instead of renaming yourselves "Palestinians," you, of course, call yourselves Kosovars instead. And then get assorted Jihadis from the rest of the Arab/Muslim World to assist you — along with America and NATO.

There is no doubt that too much of the conflict regarding the breakup of Yugoslavia was deliberately biased against the Serbs.

Atrocities occurred (as they had for centuries) — but on both sides, with Serbs often the victims...victims the American State Department ignored as it sought Muslims it could point to as championing while America was fighting others in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. American bombers led the final dismemberment.

There's a lesson here...and Jews, Kurds, Imazighen, and others need to pay close attention.

Instead of demanding just the rebirth of their one state, Jews need to demand others as well.

Jews have a long history in Morocco, as just one example — long before Arabs conquered both Jews and Imazighen alike there.

Over 600,000 Moroccan Jews now live in Israel — part of the other side of the Middle East refugee problem few ever talk about...more Moroccan Jews than Arabs who got their own nation states in Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, etc. when they were created. Additionally, many more Moroccan Jews live in America, France, and elsewhere today, including Morocco.

Why multiple states for Arabs and not Jews?

As early as Roman times, Jews fleeing the Roman wars in Judaea began to travel inland in North Africa and forged both economic and cultural ties with the Imazighen — especially in the Atlas Mountains. Some of the latter folks even adopted the faith of their Jewish neighbors.

When Arab Muslims invaded, Jews and Imazighen fought them together. Across the Atlas Mountains, Queen Dahlia al Kahina (whom the famed Muslim scholar, Ibn Khaldun, called "the Jewess" ) led both Jews and Imazighen in battle against invading Arabs, who would later massacre and subjugate both peoples.

Why not states for the Atlasians — at least one for Jews and one for the Imazighen — in North Africa?

Why "Palestinians" and "Kosovars," but not "Atlasians?"

While we're at it, some thirty-five million stateless Kurds need to jump aboard as well.

Kurds predate Arabs in "Arab" Syria as well as in "Arab" Iraq... and in "Turkish" Turkey. But we all know what happened/happens when Kurds try to assert their rights there. Their best hope right now is in the place where they were indeed promised independence after World War I — in northern Mesopotamia, part of today's renamed Iraq.

While I don't really expect that much of the above will happen, it's worth asking those academics, State Department folks, left-wing knownothings, and other hypocritical practitioners of the double standard... Why not?

If Kurds played the Arab game regarding trading "Arab" for "Palestinian," how many Kurdish states might they be entitled to?

The reality, of course, is that all of these peoples are still struggling to maintain or obtain basic political and human rights in what Arabs call "purely Arab patrimony."

That others buy into their subjugating mindset is the real travesty.

Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php

To Go To Top

Posted by Daisy Stern, August 21, 2008.

(IsraelNN.com) A bull crossed the border from Israel into Lebanon Wednesday and began running wildly among Spanish UNIFIL soldiers. The bull rammed several UNIFIL vehicles and attacked the soldiers, until one of them shot him dead.

The Spanish soldiers buried the bull near the border and set about fixing the fence where he had broken through.

Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Daisy Stern, August 21, 2008.


While some teach that islamic terror is merely a continuation of Nazi totalitarian policies (which were themselves developed from Muhammad's teachings), Prof Geifman shows that Hamas, Hizbollah, Fatah, and the myriad other terrorist groups developed from — and carefully emulate — their Russian Bolshevik predecessors.


This below was written by Sam Ser and it appeared August 19, 2008 in the Jerusalem Post


Anna Geifman's cappuccino is getting cold as she talks about Hamas and its motives. The energetic professor makes one point that leads to another, and then to four more.

Anne Geifman (Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski)

"I can talk about terrorism from today until doomsday," Geifman says with a laugh, catching her breath and then adding, more seriously, "or until they stop."

In Jerusalem, discussions of Palestinian terrorism do seem as if they'll go on until doomsday, and the academics doing the talking are a dime a dozen. What makes Geifman different is that her expertise lies in another field, even in another era: revolutionary Russia. It's a subject she teaches her students at Boston University and one that, she says, is strikingly similar to modern times.

"Everything you see today — every single aspect of terrorism — you can see it in the Russia of a century ago," she says.

Before our lives were changed by the likes of Hamas and Hizbullah, Geifman notes, Russian society was devastated by rampant violence, from the turmoil leading up to the peasant revolt of 1905, through the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 and the establishment of the Soviet Union. Political violence in Russia — what we call terrorism today — developed primarily in Moscow and was perpetrated by "combat organizations" whose first targets were government officials.

"This was old-time, traditional terrorism — targeting people very carefully, assassinating people who were senior members of the government, people who affected policy," Geifman says. "But then, they basically killed whoever they could attack, and very often there was no connection. Anyone who wore a uniform became a target — being a mailman was a very dangerous occupation, for example."

Think attacks on police recruitment centers in Iraq are unique? Think again, says Geifman, noting that a quarter of the police in Riga were gunned down.

Think al-Qaida's informal, decentralized network of cells and spinoffs is an innovation? Not so, she continues, saying that Moscow's combat organizations spawned acolyte groups in outlying areas that often operated independently from the headquarters that, sometimes, were totally unaware of their existence.

As the bloodshed increased, Geifman says, "the violence descended into indiscriminate killing. They were no longer attacking people in uniform, but anyone who 'looked bourgeois.' If you had glasses, or a watch, or an umbrella, then obviously you were too rich to be a proletarian. That is where the descent into sheer terror begins."

At some points in the early part of the 20th century, Geifman says, as many as 18 terrorist acts were carried out in Russia every day. That rivals the murderous activity here in 2002, for example, or more recently in Iraq. Likewise, the terrorism was similar.

"They would blow up train stations, they would blow up cafés," Geifman says. "One such bombing was justified with the remark, 'We just wanted to see how the bourgeois squirm in death.'"

Not only were the targets of the attacks indiscriminate, but so were the attackers. Every other person, it seemed, was declaring himself a "revolutionary terrorist" and joining one of myriad groups, with fanciful names like "The League of the Red Fuse," in a hodgepodge of violent orders that blurred together.

Like the mind-numbing proliferation of Palestinian terrorist groups (that was so brilliantly lampooned by Monty Python) and the endless permutations of jihadi militias, Russian revolutionary terrorists' claims of ideological affiliation and aims became so convoluted that they often even confused themselves. Terrorists testifying at their trials, Geifman notes, were often unable to explain what they believed — or, sometimes, to even accurately recall the full name of their organization.

"Some were honest enough to say, 'Who the hell cares about ideology? The main thing is to kill.'"

SUCH SIMILARITIES between Russian terrorists and those on Israel's doorstep are the subject of much of Geifman's work these days. Since making aliya earlier this year — she plans to divide her time between teaching in Boston and writing in Jerusalem — Geifman has spent extended weekends in Sderot, meeting the people of the bombarded city and trying to raise awareness of their plight. Knowledge of Russian history, she believes, will provide valuable insight on the situation in Gaza City.

"Israelis know all about Hamas," she says, "but they don't know anything about the Russian precedent. People have no clue that the origins of the war on terrorism are in Russia."

Geifman took a circuitous route to that knowledge herself. After moving from the Soviet Union to Boston with her family in 1976, the teenager "felt so un-American" that she took to studying Russian history as something of a refuge. It led to her eventually writing a biography of Viktor Chernov, leader of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party for which terror was a chief strategy, as well as Thou Shalt Kill: Revolutionary Terrorism in Russia and other works.

Since a sabbatical visit to Israel in 2000, Geifman has focused on modern parallels to political violence in revolutionary Russia, especially in the Middle East. She has also become more Zionistic and more religiously observant.

Mostly, though, Geifman tries to sound the alarm about the dangers of thinking that Hamas is moderated by its control of the Gaza Strip.

"Whenever I hear someone suggest that Hamas might become a more responsible movement now that it is in charge, I think, 'Why don't you read a little about the Bolsheviks and see if you still believe that?'" she says.

It bothers her to hear speculation about Hamas being more open to negotiating with Israel and softening its radical positions, when history suggests otherwise.

"You want to know what happens when terrorists come to power? As soon as terrorists come to power, they begin building on what they did to get there. Look at the Bolsheviks, who were terrorists before they came to power in 1917. They used this terror-based revolution to build a terror-based state."

It's no surprise, for example, that Hamas is so heavily invested in its "security forces," considering that the Bolsheviks established the forerunner to the KGB less than a month after taking over. Terror states, Geifman says, are based on a legacy, an ideology and a practice — specifically, the legacy, ideology and practice of terrorism.

So when anyone suggests that seeing a terrorist group like Hamas come to power in Gaza might actually be a positive development, Geifman says, "It scares me like you can't imagine."

If her analogy of Hamas as the Bolsheviks of Gaza is accurate, then there is "no way that Hamas will turn away from terrorism. No way! They will remain an organization committed to terror," she says. "And the first victims of Hamas rule will not be the Israelis, but the Palestinians themselves — just as the the Bolsheviks' primary victims were not the Poles, nor the Czechs, nor the Americans, nor anyone else, but the Russians and the Ukrainians."

Avoiding this comparison, Geifman believes, turning to psychology, is an effect of the terrorism with which Western society is bombarded.

"I think we suffer — I think the whole world now suffers — from a collective Stockholm syndrome," she says. "Our problem is that we so want to believe in the goodness of people that we can't see how bad some people are. [There are people who] don't want to call these people terrorists. Well, you can call them pussycats, if you want. But they're not going to stop killing."

Geifman draws on the Beslan school massacre for comparison with the Gaza terrorist groups' missile barrages on Sderot and the Western Negev, noting that "they often fire their rockets in the morning, as children are going to school, and in the afternoon, as they are on their way home from school." Children, she notes, are symbols of life, and as such serve as particularly attractive targets for groups whose culture is "death-based."

At this, Geifman turns to thoughts from her growing religious observance, recalling the Torah's directive to "choose life."

"As Jews, we have an obligation to choose life, and to defend it. Otherwise," she says, "death takes over." In spite of this bleak view, though, Geifman says she is "very optimistic" that Hamas will eventually fade away.

Why? "Because," she says, "in history, not a single death cult survives."

Furthermore, how they meet their end is instructive.

"One of the basic characteristics of violence in culture is that it is like a living organism, in that it is mobile, and it must remain in motion in order to survive," Geifman explains. "So long as the violence is directed externally, it can maintain its momentum — but once it is prevented from that goal, if you wall it off, it can't stop. Like any organism, it must keep moving. So the violence turns on [its originators]. Consider the Nazis: When they could no longer kill others, they killed themselves."

If history is a guide, she says, Hamas ought to pay attention.

"[Terrorist] leaders think that they control death, but in reality they are merely agents of death," she says. "That is why every revolution ultimately swallows itself."

Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, August 21, 2008.

(IsraelNN.com) Canadian Member of Parliament Irwin Cotler, a Liberal party representative, has stated that the Palestinian Authority, including its Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, is guilty of purveying hatred of Jews. He also lamented that the official PA incitement is being ignored by Western governments and media outlets.

MP Cotler said that Hamas, with their charter's "genocidal objective, anti-Semitic ideology and terrorist instrumentality," is not alone in its incitement in the PA public sphere. "I'm talking about the Palestinian Authority," said the Mount-Royal MP at a press conference this week. He added that the "culture of incitement" harms not only Israel, the PA Arabs themselves.

Cotler recently returned from a fact-finding mission to Israel, where he also met with PA officials and told them that "hate breeds hate. If you have a culture of incitement and hate, you're going to create a culture of hate that is pervasive in the Palestinian society itself."

Cotler cited several examples of anti-Jewish incitement in the PA. Among the most egregious offenses, he noted, were those promoted by official PA government outlets and officials, as well as by Arab academics.

"People don't realize that Abbas signed a law, on the very day there was a suicide terrorist attack in December 2005 against Israel, providing monthly stipends for the families of suicide bombers. In January 2007, Abbas addressed a large crowd that was estimated as being over 100,000, in which he said 'the sons of Israel are mentioned in the Koran as those who are corrupting humanity on Earth.'"

According to the Canadian MP, "Abbas has never recognized Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish state." The official PA media, meanwhile promotes anti-Israeli libels and "breeds hatred and contempt for Jews."

The PA leader's anti-Israel statements and the hatred promoted by his official outlets, Cotler charged, has been judiciously ignored by the West and those involved in promoting Middle East peace. Yet, that incitement, Cotler concluded, is "the greatest threat to a just and lasting peace."

MP Cotler also noted in passing that other parts of the Arab world have bred a similar hatred. The recent ransom agreement between Israel and the Hizbullah, in which the Lebanese terror organization released the bodies of two IDF soldiers it had kidnapped in 2006 in exchange for several terrorists held in Israeli jails, was greeted in Lebanon joyously. In Cotler's view, "Knowing that Israel was in mourning was, tragically, a national day of celebration in Lebanon."

MP Cotler, a former Canadian Minister of Justice and Attorney General, is currently official Opposition Critic for Human Rights, a member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Human Rights, and a member of the House of Commons Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

He is also a well-known advocate for the rights of Jews expelled from Arab and Muslim countries in the years following Israel's establishment.

Earlier this month, Cotler said that he was working on a draft legal indictment of Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which he'd like to present to the United Nations on September 22 of this year. He would like to see Canada, the United States, the U.K., Australia, France and Israel, among others, work together to bring Ahmadinejad to an international court for Iran's domestic human rights abuses, support of international terrorism, and incitement to genocide against Israel.

Nissan Ratzlav-Katz is a writer for Arutz-7. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 20, 2008.

I cannot think of a better word to describe the current international situation, which seems only to be worsening over time. We've got Russia moving in an expansionist, cold-war direction again, a nuclear Pakistan headed the wrong way, and Iran continuing on its belligerent path of nuclear development, missile testing and aggressive posturing.

What is worrisome is that the response of the world is all too weak in countering these multiple threats. Just at a time when there should be firm resolution to be strong, there is appeasement and backtracking and ideological confusion. Not to mention short-sighted, self-serving national policies that bring long-term risks to the international community, and more than a bit of hypocrisy, with leaders declaring one thing and doing another.

I have in mind, for example, German declarations of special commitment to Israel, coupled with the German readiness to do business with Iran. And the initiation by Jordan of meetings with the terrorist Hamas — appeasement if I ever saw it, with Jordan undoubtedly afraid it may have Hamas at its border. Not to mention the Bush administration's reversal of its previous War on Terror policy, and a readiness to sit with Iran.


If there is a note that is encouraging, it is the lead now taken by McCain over Obama in a major poll — encouraging because it is Obama who is the more ideologically confused and eager to appease.

Once a month, Reuters/Zogby does a poll of likely presidential voters. In July Obama was ahead by 7 points. Now McCain is shown leading 46% to 41%. May the trend strengthen.


The current world state of affairs, of course, impinges upon Israel in a number of ways.

Thus you might want to read a serious and somber assessment of the situation with Russia, "The Russian-Georgian War: Implications for the Middle East," by Ariel Cohen at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

Among the significant points Cohen makes:

"U.S. intelligence-gathering and analysis on the Russian threat to Georgia failed. So did U.S. military assistance to Georgia, worth around $2 billion over the last 15 years. This is something to remember when looking at recent American intelligence assessments of the Iranian nuclear threat or the unsuccessful training of Palestinian Authority security forces against Hamas."
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID= 1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=2402&TTL= The_Russian-Georgian_War:_Implications_for_the_Middle_East


In her piece, "Georgia, Israel, and the nature of man," Caroline Glick also draws some very pertinent lessons for Israel from the current international situation:

"In recent years, the understanding that the only guarantor of Israel's survival is Israel's ability to defeat all of its enemies decisively has been forgotten altogether by most of the country's leaders and members of its intellectual classes.

"Since 1979 and with increasing intensity since 1993, Israeli leaders bent on appeasing everyone from the Egyptians to the Palestinians to the Syrians to the Lebanese have called for Israel's inclusion in NATO, or the deployment of Western forces to its borders or lobbied Washington for a formal strategic alliance. They have claimed that such forces and such treaties will unburden the country of the need to protect itself in the event that our neighbors attack us after we give them the territories necessary to wage war against us...

"If nothing else comes of it, the West's response to the rape of Georgia should end that delusion. Georgia did almost everything right. And for its actions Georgia was celebrated in the West with platitudes of enduring friendship and empty promises of alliances that were discarded the moment Russia invaded.

"Georgia only made one mistake, and for that mistake it will pay an enormous price. As it steadily built alliances, it forgot to build an army. Israel has an army. It has just forgotten why its survival depends on our willingness to use it.

If we are unwilling to use our military to defeat our enemies, we will lose everything..."
http://www.jpost.com:80/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710365631&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I would be hard put to think of a more important lesson for Israel's leaders to learn now. If only...


Precisely how short sighted our appeasement policies are is brought home by an article yesterday by Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post. Abu Toameh writes:

"It's hard these days to find one Palestinian who regards Israel's decision to release some 200 Palestinian prisoners as a 'goodwill gesture.' It's also hard to see how the release of the prisoners would 'boost' the popularity of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas among his people.

"The argument that the release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails strengthens the 'moderates' has never proven to be correct...

"Ironically, in some cases the released prisoners turned out to be a big headache for the 'moderate' Palestinian leadership.

"Shortly after the signing of the Oslo Accords, Israel freed hundreds of Fatah security prisoners...

"But many of the released prisoners soon became involved in various criminal activities ranging from armed robberies, extortion, theft and arms trafficking...

"Others later joined Hamas and other radical groups...

"They also became a financial burden on the shoulders of the PA, which had to put the local 'heroes' on its payroll... "...it's highly unlikely that Abbas would benefit from the release of the [current 199] prisoners because many Palestinians don't give him credit for the move. Rather, these Palestinians see the decision as an attempt on the part of Israel to improve its image on the international arena and extract political concessions from Abbas and his colleagues in Ramallah."


Not only have we agreed to release the 199 in our prisons, but our doing so has permitted four other murderers of Israelis to now also go free. This is fairly incredible:

Just a little over a year ago, we released to Jordan four Jordanian prisoners who had been convicted of killing two Israeli soldiers in 1990, before Israel had a peace treaty with Jordan. We let them go ostensibly so that they might serve their life sentences in a Jordanian prison, closer to their families.

However, according to a 2007 release by the Jordanian News Agency, Petra — which Aaron Lerner has now put up on IMRA — the agreement between Jordan and Israel said the prisoners could be released after "...18 months of their prison term in Jordan or if the Israeli authorities release other prisoners, who are convicted of similar [crimes]."

The murderers got out today, and Jordanian Islamist trade unions planned a festival to celebrate.


Olmert, on the other hand, made a most interesting comment with regard to how prepared we will be to take on the Lebanese if hostilities again break out again (which everyone assumes they eventually will). He explained:

"In the Second Lebanon War, we had much greater means and capabilities, which we avoided using since we fought against a terror organization and not a country. In this context, if Lebanon turns into a Hezbollah state, we won't restrain our response."

Well, it's not really "IF Lebanon turns into a Hezbollah state," because for all practical purposes it already has. Earlier this month, Lebanon's parliament approved a national unity government — with Hezbollah having veto power — and declared a policy of supporting "resistance."

Olmert says that any future war would be fought in as quick and efficient a manner as possible to maximize the military advantages and to ensure a minimum of losses.

All our wars should be fought this way, with victory and safety for our own boys the priorities. That Olmert says this is good. Better still will be that when the time comes, either in the north or in Gaza, that we will behave this way, with military strength, and the political factions not holding us back out of fear or indecision.


The "ceasefire" with Hamas in Gaza, which is euphemistically referred to as "fragile," truly doesn't exist. For we keep getting hit with rockets and mortars — now on close to a daily basis. In response to this, Defense Minister Barak order crossings into Gaza closed for two days, at which point he will re-evaluate.

Sorry, this is not exactly being tough. In fact, it's pathetic.


According to a MEMRI dispatch, Iran is threatening, if attacked, to close the Straits of Hormuz, through which millions of gallons of oil move daily.


It has made news in an Italian paper, Corriere della Sera, that a former Italian president, Francesco Cossiga, admits that for a period of time some years ago the Italian government had a deal with Palestinian terrorists: they could roam freely in Italy and use Italy as a base of operations, as long as nothing was directed against the Italians. Real appeasement. And while here it is being admitted openly, this sort of thing has occurred in many countries.


There is considerable concern, at long last, about water shortages here in Israel. What is not well enough known is how much water has illicitly been siphoned off by Arabs, especially in Judea, south of Jerusalem: 3 million cubic meters a year. Until now nothing was done about this — why?? — but finally the Civil Administration is beginning to act.

The theft takes place when Arabs hook piping to the main lines used to transport water to Jewish communities. Some 50,000 kilometers of piping have been confiscated, and that's a small percentage of what exists.


Some political game-playing: Kadima activists David Schwartz and Hussein Suleiman have filed a petition with Kadima to stop the primary for party leader that was to be held in September because of irregularities in how the decision to hold the vote was originally taken. Party leaders are saying this is a technicality only and a re-vote on the election will be taken so that matters can proceed.

Suleiman, who is close to Olmert, admitted freely that a chief goal in doing this was to keep Olmert in office longer.


In polls Livni is running well ahead of her closest contender, Shaul Mofaz, to head the Kadima party next. Both Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter and Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit have entered the race but are far behind. Olmert — who is passionate in his hatred for Livni at this point — has declared Sheetrit as his first choice to succeed him as party head. Suleiman was reportedly hoping to buy time for Sheetrit to garner strength in the party campaign.

There are speculations that if Livni wins leadership of the party she might opt to go to elections. For the first time recently she has come out ahead of Netanyahu in some polls.


Hurray for us! Israeli sailor Shahar Zubari won a bronze medal in men's windsurfing in the Olympics today.


This too, announced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is lovely: A 2,600 year old clay seal impression (bulla) bearing the name Gedaliah ben Pashur has recently been uncovered completely intact during archeological excavations in Jerusalem's ancient City of David, located just below the walls of the Old City near the Dung Gate. The name appears in the Book of Jeremiah (38:1).

"It is not very often that such a discovery happens in which real figures of the past shake off the dust of history and so vividly revive the stories of the Bible," said Dr. Eilat Mazar of the Hebrew University who is leading the dig.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, August 20, 2008.

For 60 years, Israeli prime ministers have banished God from the domain of statecraft, and with the compliance of the religious parties. May there not be a connection between the absence of God in Israeli statecraft and the absence of wisdom, courage, and Jewish national pride in Israel's government?

How is it that Israel, despite its awesome military power, appeases and retreats before a gang of terrorists, be it Hamas or Fatah? Can it be because Israel's ruling elites are godless in contrast to Israel's enemies, who never fail to invoke the name of Allah?

Juxtapose these Arabs and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (or his predecessors Ariel Sharon and Ehud Barak). The asymmetry may be seen in the psychological consequences of their respective goals. Whereas the Arab goal — victory over the Jews — arouses Arab pride and spiritedness, Olmert's goal of "peace" arouses Jewish self-effacement and defeatism.

Enough to recall Olmert pathetic whining: "We are tired of fighting, we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies .... We want them to be our friends, our partners, our good neighbors." How the Arabs must gloat over this drivel, which would make any man of taste want to vomit.

Let us face the truth: Prime Minister Olmert is the leader of a clique of cravens. These poltroons cannot but make the surrender of Jewish land, hence treason, their one and only policy. Of course, they will adorn this treason in the cloak of "peace." This politics of peace is destroying the Jewish state.

Clearly, 60 years of secular leadership in Israel — whatever its accomplishments — has not achieved the goal of political Zionism: security and the restoration of Jewish honor. Political Zionism is dead, buried by the Likud, a secular party that has committed treason by surrendering Jewish land to the consortium of terrorist thugs called the Palestinian Authority. And do not be misled by Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu. The mere fact that he is willing to negotiate with these thugs on the basis of "reciprocity" means he is willing to surrender more Jewish land to these implacable enemies of the Jewish people.

As for religious Zionism, it too must be pronounced dead, at least in the Knesset. Like the Likud, the National Religious Party is willing to submit the disposition of Judea and Samaria, the heartland of the Jewish people, to a referendum — and this despite the fact that 20 percent of Israel's population consists of Arabs. But to propose a referendum on Judea and Samaria is to bow in advance to the idolatry of statism, that is, to the alleged right of the State of Israel to expel perhaps 200,000 Jews from their homes!

Anyone who thinks modern Zionism can be restored, or rather, is worth restoring, is either an ignoramus or a charlatan.

Zionism without God is a falsification of Zion. So is any Zionism that subordinates Judaism to the State. Indeed, if the state is sovereign, the very concept of the Jewish State is an oxymoron. The era of this intellectually shallow Zionism has come to an end. It has fulfilled its historical purpose: it facilitated the ingathering of the Jews and developed the country's infrastructure. All honor to the founders of this State, a state that has now become the enemy of the Jewish people. It's time to move on.

We need to develop a Jewish philosophy of democracy that brings God back into the domain of statecraft. I discuss this task in my book Jewish Statesmanship: Lest Israel Fall, and in its abbreviated version, The Myth of Israeli Democracy: Toward a Truly Jewish Israel. Much more discussion is needed, by Jews identified with and proud of their heritage.

But let me not be misunderstood. I do not advocate the rule of Israel's religious parties. The supine collaboration of these parties with their secular counterparts has brought Israel to its present nadir. The religious parties, understandably concerned about the needs and education of Jewish children, have downplayed Israel's geo-strategic interests. They have failed to inspire the public by vigorous and sustained opposition to Israeli prime ministers who have released Arab terrorists, retreated from Jewish land, and allowed Arabs to murder Jews with impunity.

Indeed, why haven't the rabbis demanded swift and devastating vengeance on the murderers of our people? Why haven't they exposed the cowardice and treachery of Israeli prime ministers? Why haven't they told the truth: that to expect peace from Arabs animated by the Jew-hatred of a warrior religion when Jew-hatred thrives in peace-loving Europe is a commentary on the imbecility or decadence of the contemporary mind.

Every rabbi who has not sacrificed his intellect to the "cult of peace" knows that Israel's government has betrayed the people. Every rabbi worthy of the name knows that the people of Israel, led by this government, have become increasingly demoralized and servile. Hence, every rabbi should be primed to sanctify God's Name by calling for a massive rejection of Israel's perfidious and pusillanimous government.

Are there no rabbis with courage enough to come forward and warn the Jewish people about the Road Map to Israel's demise? Are there no heads of yeshivas with courage enough to come to Jerusalem with hundreds and perhaps thousands of students to sanctify God's Name by saying "Enough of this illegitimate as well as godless government!"

Instead of calling on decrepit and superficial parties in or outside the Knesset to unite, they should urge the formation of a constituent assembly to create an authentic Jewish government, one that rallies all Jews to its banner, and does so in the Name of God.

Without God Israel is lost.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at Constitution@usa.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 20, 2008.


Jimmy Carter's book accuses Israel's security barrier against terrorists of being a manifestation of apartheid.

Would Mr. Carter contend that his State of Georgia practices apartheid, because it builds security bars against convicted criminals? No, he would insist, criminals must be kept from harming innocent people. Well? [Remember, P.A. society endorses terrorism and keeps preparing people to become terrorists.]


Explanations in newspapers, such as, "The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to privacy concerns..." appear with frequency lately. The official breached someone's privacy; he's just evading being called to account. His governmental leak may have been premeditated. Journalists' readiness to deal in clandestine information affects national security as well as privacy. Their caution may be due to the legal profession's new proclivity to sue, knowing that just the threat to sue may coerce an expensive settlement.


Half the Israeli officials deny that Israel has poor public relations. They indignantly reject suggestions that somebody else knows how to improve them. That is the arrogance of the ignorant.

The other Israel officials admit that Israel has poor public relations but blames prejudice. That is an evasion (you know, what younger people call a "cop-out.")

Yes, prejudice affects it. But many Israeli actions imply guilt. Israel's failure to respond promptly to accusations lets damage be done. The main problem is that Israel's psychotic ruling elite refuses to assert Jewish rights, somewhat sides with the terrorist enemy, and fail to make even the simplest Jewish case.

Consider the latest Israeli offer to release prisoners as a favor to Abbas. I've considered before: the false assumptions that Abbas is not a terrorist; that releases strengthen him against Hamas and build goodwill with his people; the criminal negligence in failing to keep recidivists terrorists off the streets; Israel's striking failure to evaluate past gestures or ask why he wants terrorists released. Here I point out that these constants favors are one-way, implying that Israel is in the wrong and owes the Arabs much. This confirms Arab slander.

Why don't Israelis demand "goodwill gestures" from Abbas? After all, his regime advocates terrorism and his P.A. has made unwarranted war on Israel.


Remember the couple of hundred Jewish nationalist "hilltop hikers" set upon by club-wielding, rock-throwing Bedouin, while police watched until the Jews fired a warning shot, then disarmed the Jews and arrested those who had had arms? Three Arabs briefly were detained but released.

It came to court. There was no evidence of a crime by Jews. A police officer admitted that the police put the Bedouin up to the provocation. It was an ambush, both by the Bedouin and by the police.

Nevertheless, the judge fined those arrested and ordered them to stay out of the Territories for varying periods. No Israeli civil rights organization objected (IMRA, 8/3). What a trumped up case. Israel needs trial-by-jury!

The Bedouin attackers and the police commanders should have been indicted. The Jew who fired the warning shot should have been honored. That would be justice. There isn't much justice in Israel for self-respecting Jews, these days.


First report: he stole chemicals from his lab at Hebrew U., for making bombs. After prison, he asked to renew studies at that lab. Hebrew U. agreed.

New report: the university claims he was convicted of something else and no chemicals were stolen. They won't readmit him to campus but will review his theses — even convicted criminals have a right to complete their education (IMRA, 8/3).

Convicted criminals have a right to complete their education, but Israel is not obliged to let P.A. Arabs complete it in Israel. Israel's would be wise to conserve its resources for its own citizens and to deny its resources for the enemy people, especially not train them in military science.


Haaretz lead headline and story was that Israelis threw a stone at an Arab's car and injured his baby. How did the newspaper know Israelis did it? An Arab said he saw it. It was near an Arab area.

Arabs stone Israelis almost every day, in Israel and in the Territories, sometimes killing someone. Those stories rarely appear in Haaretz, and never on page one. Haaretz's goal is to defame and weaken Israel. As for Arab witnesses, they are enemies who have proved untrustworthy (Prof. Steven Plaut, 8/3).


University Middle East Studies Centers have abandoned scholarship for propaganda. That propaganda is anti-Israel.

Students are indoctrinated in slander against Israel. They are taught counter to historical fact, and only the Arab side.

To avoid being accused of antisemitism, the Centers hire token Jews or even Israelis. Some naïve; people imagine that having an Israeli balances the anti-Israelis. [One, alone, couldn't.] These Jews, however, are of the anti-Zionist "new historian" type, about as prejudiced against Israel as the gentile members of the staff. They are more destructive, since it isn't realized how antisemitic many of them are.


The King of S. Arabia had convened a summit of major religions to discuss tolerance, but held it outside his kingdom. He must have been afraid they would find that his brand of Islam bans all rival religions' expression and persecutes minority sects, including Islamic ones. Foreign delegates also might have found the Saudi program for rehabilitation of terrorists. It claims to re-educate captured terrorists in a couple of months, and releases them. By contrast, it keeps non-Islamists who criticize the regime imprisoned indefinitely (letter, NY Sun, 8/4).

At the conference, a Christian bishop requested Muslim help in repudiating death threats against Western Christian converts from Islam. He got no takers. Many Islamic countries consider apostasy a capital crime. The Islamic organizations in the West, that always defend Muslims from accusations, did not oppose death threats or other persecution of Christian converts. How will the West protect the converts, thereby maintaining Western freedom? (MEFNews, 8/4.)

By expelling Muslims. We can't live with them in security.


Iran just ignored the US deadline for freezing its nuclear weapons drive. It has been ignoring such deadlines without consequences for five years, sometimes more than one a year. Nevertheless, candidate Obama still says he believes in negotiations with Iran. "What is he going to do, give them a deadline?" What is called a deadline is Iran's way of buying time (NY Sun, 8/4, Ed.).

Obama is avoiding difficult decisions or deceiving naïve followers. Will he and they wake up too late?

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

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 20, 2008.

After Russian bombings that killed thousands of civilians and after Russian tanks trod their way across sovereign Georgian territory, most of the usual suspects who had wailed about the American violation of "Iraq's Sovereignty" and Israeli bombings in Lebanon had little to say on the subject, when they weren't actively taking Russia's side.

But that's only to be expected. These self-proclaimed guardians of international morality aren't out to save lives or protect peoples, if they did they might elevate Darfur somewhere above the bottom of a long list headed by Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon.

Like the rest of us they've picked a side, and if the greatest trick of the devil was to convince the world that he doesn't exist, the greatest trick of these freelance humanitarians is to convince the world that they haven't picked a side, despite the blatantly obvious fact that they have.

Such people of course resist awkward labels such as "Anti-American" or "Anti-Israel" let alone "Pro-Terrorist." As far as they would have you believe their hearts bleed for all the peoples of the world, so long as the peoples in question are pointing the business end of an AK-47 at Americans or American allies.

It's sad to say, but it used to be that these sort of people had standards. And by standards I mean that they reserved their support for any mass murderer or terrorist group with socialist and progressive credentials, or at least official backing by the USSR. Today all it takes is a few dead Americans, Europeans or Israelis and the humanitarians will line up on their side.

The obvious observation is that it isn't justice or even suffering that attracts the Birkenstock crowd, but death. The death of the sort of people they'd like to kill themselves if only training to blow up US bases didn't interfere with finishing their masters thesis on the sociology of the subcultures surrounding the Grateful Dead.

If their parents cared deeply about the fate of Africa, they care about the "Conflict Regions" and the successors to Che and the PLO. It isn't about rescue, but about resistance to some nebulous American occupation of the world and admiration for anyone who shoots an American soldier.

As the official Humanitarian to the Terrorists, former President Jimmy Carter ably embodies the hypocrisies and compromises of the breed, dallying with the worst of the terrorists while threatening anyone willing to stand in their way and using whatever media attention he can garner to promote fraudulent peacekeeping efforts that serve the aims of terrorists and totalitarian regimes.

In this skewed morality, North Korea and Saddam's Iraq are preferable to Japan and Israel, and Venezuela easily trumps Columbia, Pakistan would be just swell if they put the ISI back in charge of the task of blowing up Americans and beating women. But it isn't morality or social justice that they're after, but killing daddy, who happens to compromise major chunks of the Northern part of the globe.

Cloaking their love for atrocities in humanitarianism gives them the freedom to go anywhere and aid any terrorists and posture as injured lovers of humanity whenever they get into legal trouble. Gaining the best of both worlds, the thrill of mingling with killers and the whitewashed moral facade of secular humanitarian saints, they get to play Mother Theresa and Che in one, before updating the playlist on their iPhone and heading home for a job at daddy's law firm, specializing of course in environmental law in between the occasional Obama Meetups.

And their greatest trick is convincing the world that they haven't picked a side. Yeah right.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 20, 2008.

This was written by Robert Spencer and it appeared in Jihad Watch


Now don't go getting all excited. Doesn't your local church have a torture chamber? What's that? It doesn't? Well, okay, but there must be at least a room in the basement where they rough up heretics? No? But...but...well, at very least Father McGillicuddy has a pair of thumbscrews — doesn't he? He doesn't? Well, then, uh, remember the Inquisition! And the Crusades!

"Chain wrapped around 'old man's body' found in mosque," by Arwa Damon for CNN, August 19 (thanks to all who sent this in):

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — "There are the bloodstains on the wall, and here it is dried on the floor," says Abu Muhanad as he walks through a torture chamber in a Baghdad mosque where more than two dozen bodies have been found.

"And here, a woman's shoes. She was a victim of the militia. We found her corpse in the grave."

Chunks of hair waft lazily across the floor in the hot Baghdad breeze.

"This was the torture room," says Muhanad, the leader of a U.S.-backed armed group that now controls the mosque.

"This is what they used for hanging," he says, pointing to a cord dangling from the ceiling. "Here is a chain we found tied to an old man's body."

The horrific scene at this southwestern Baghdad mosque is what officials say was the work of a Shia militia known as the Mehdi Army. Residents who live near the mosque say they could hear the victims' screams.

The militia had been in control of the mosque, called Adib al-Jumaili, for at least a year and a half....

These were some comments:

A Master-List of Mosques Behaving Badly should be compiled. It should include, from U.S. military records, all the shoot-outs in Iraq (and Afghanistan) with people who fired on American soldiers from mosques, or ran to mosques in order to avoid capture, and used them as places from which to attack Americans (until the Americans stopped, as they eventually did, from holding back).

It should also include all of the mosques in Western Europe found to contain false papers (sometimes in false ceilings, as in the mosque in Milan on Viale Jenner), including forged passports, and AK-47s, explosives, and videocassettes of beheadings of Infidels, and audiocassettes to whip up the Believers to evern greater deeds of derring-do against the Infidels, yes all that stuff, that weaponry, those forgeries and counterfeits, those hysterical whippings-up of hatred for Infidels — see what Saudi-supplied "literature" has been found in American mosques — and that by now the security services of the Western world are so used to that they practically yawn at what they find, but that the rest of us have to piece together, from a story here and a story there.

Meanwhile in churches, last I looked, I could find hymnals, the Book of Common Prayer, candles lit in memory of the recently departed, information on volunteering for the food bank and soup kitchen, and disaster relief at home and all over the world, including such relief, notably, in Muslim countries.

Compare. Contrast.


Posted by: Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 19, 2008 3:39 PM

Mr Fitzgerald proposed the compilation of a list of Mosques Behaving Badly.

A preliminary list could probably be compiled just by a gentle stroll through the jihadwatch archives.

Copies of such a list, fully referenced, could then be submitted to the relevant authorities — such as town and shire and county councils — in the kafir lands, whenever and wherever the local advance party of Muslims were proposing to build a mosque. Or, for that matter, an Islamic School.

Further thought: I think I now understand something. Muslims forbid kafir to build new places of worship, or to extend or repair old ones. I think it is because they think the kafir use kafir places of worship the way that Muslims use mosques! (i.e. as war rooms, recruitment centres, arms dumps, sniper nest, etc.). 'Projection'.

We're 'projecting' — with massive error — when we assume a mosque is 'like a church' (i.e. primarily a place of peaceful spiritual contemplation and exhortation to charity and devotion). But MUSLIMS are 'projecting', too, when they assume a church, synagogue or temple is 'like a mosque' (i.e. primarily a war room/ arsenal/ centre for making plots against The Enemy Other).

Similarly: I suspect Muslims don't like kafir having any position of authority over Muslims because Muslims are assuming that such kafir would do to Muslims what Muslims would do if the positions were reversed...

Muslims don't let kafir, in Muslim lands, enter into the structures of power (commercial, military, civil service, government) in any meaningful way, because they take it for granted that kafir would do what Muslims would do, under those circumstances (i.e. defraud/ manipulate/ abuse/sabotage/ infiltrate/ take over).

Muslims plot world conquest and mass murder against us, because they are convinced that we are plotting the same against them; they are getting in the 'pre-emptive strike', precisely as in Qur'an 4:34 a man is permitted to 'admonish', then separate himself from, then beat, a wife from whom he merely FEARS 'rebellion' (she doesn't have to have actually done anything).

Whatever they say they fear from us is probably what they are doing or mean to do.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 19, 2008 5:47 PM

Sam Solomon has a wonderful booklet named "The Mosque Exposed". It explains in some 80 brief pages. what a mosque really is designed to do. Weapons and torture chambers should not surprise anyone.

I encourage getting a few copies and distributing it to relevant people. That should put a brake on mosque projects.

The Mosque Exposed
Paperback: 100 pages
Publisher: Advancing Native Missions (April 1, 2007)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0979492904
ISBN-13: 978-0979492907 Posted by: Henrik [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 19, 2008 6:08 PM

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, August 20, 2008.

I want to share with you some very important news.

Bnei Menashe men in India reciting
traditional Jewish prayer (photo: Shavei Israel)

Bnei Menashe Mother and Child

There has been a momentous, even historic breakthrough, in my efforts to bring the Bnei Menashe of northeastern India, who claim descent from a Lost Tribe of Israel, home to the Jewish state.

For the past 12 years, I have lobbied and cajoled, nudged and pressed the Israeli government to open the gates and to allow the entire Bnei Menashe community to return to the land of their ancestors, the Land of Israel. Now, at last, this dream may be about to come true.

As the attached article from today's Maariv indicates (see the translation below), Prime Minister Ehud OImert has acceded to my request and has agreed to bring the remaining 7,000 members of the Bnei Menashe community on aliyah.

Bnei Menashe Women in Dental Assistants Program

This is a heroic act of Zionism, and it will constitute the fulfillment of the centuries-old yearning of the Bnei Menashe to rejoin the Jewish people.

But the move is already coming under attack, as various critics seek to persuade the Prime Minister to rescind his decision.

And that is where I need your help.

Please take a moment and send a quick, congratulatory e-mail to Prime Minister Olmert thanking him for his decision to bring the Bnei Menashe to Israel and encouraging him to move forward with their aliyah. E-mails should be sent to him at his assistant's address: avi.widerman@it.pmo.gov.il.

Here is a sample text that you can cut and paste:

Prime Minister Olmert

I applaud your decision to bring the 7,000 Bnei Menashe to Israel. This is a true act of Zionism, and it will strengthen the State of Israel and the Jewish people. I encourage you to press forward and to bring the Bnei Menashe home as soon as possible.


The fate of 7,000 Bnei Menashe hangs in the balance. We can not miss this opportunity to bring them home to Israel — so please take a moment and voice your support for this important initiative.

Michael Freund
Chairman, Shavei Israel

Below is the translation of two articles by Eli Bardenstein.


1. "Olmert Decides: Thousands of Bnei Menashe will come to Israel"
by Eli Bardenstein

In a historic decision, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has decided that all 7,232 members of the tribe of Bnei Menashe who are living in northern India will be allowed to make Aliya.

Olmert and his office took the decision a short while after they decided to put a stop to the aliya of the Falash Mura from Ethiopia.

The decision came a short while after Meir Shitreet, Minister of the Interior, who had lead the opposition to their Aliya, removed his objections. After Rosh Hashana, Shitreet, together with Eli Afflalo, Minister of Absorption, will fly to northern India, where the Bnei Menashe reside, and will meet with them. Upon the Ministers' return, the decision will be brought to the Prime Minister for formal approval. Their Aliya will take place, in all probability, with a monthly quota system of a few hundred Olim per month, with the anticipation that within two years, the entire group will be brought over to Israel. The agreement in principle regarding their Aliya was reached in a small meeting that took place last Wednesday in the Prime Minister's office.

The decision to bring over the Bnei Menashe is first and foremost an achievement for one man — Michael Freund, Chairman of the Shavei Israel Organization. Freund has been working since the mid 90's to convince the Prime Minister of the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Bnei Menashe. He has established centers for Jewish education and training in the two northeastern Indian states of Manipur and Mizoram, where the Bnei Menashe are situated. The educational activities extend from the centers all the way to the villages where the Bnei Menashe live. In addition, the organization encourages them to complete their education and does not push them to leave their villages with false hope.

Until 2003, only 100 of the Bnei Menashe made Aliya each year, and completed their conversion in Israel. In that year, Avraham Poraz, then Minister of the Interior, decided to freeze their Aliya until the topic was clarified. In the meantime, Freund succeeded in convincing Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar to visit India, and at the end of his visit, he concluded that in fact they are an offshoot of the Nation of Israel. Following his visit, Rabbi Amar sent representatives of the Rabbinical Court to convert 218 of the Bnei Menashe. The episode caused resentment within the Indian Government, because the Israeli government performed conversions in their country.

That group made Aliya in 2006, and another 232 made Aliya in the context of a secret agreement that Freund reached with the head of the office of the Interior Ministry at the time, Ram Balinkov.

In the past year and a half, a number of parties tried to convince Olmert and various governmental authorities of the rights of the Bnei Menashe to make Aliya. In addition to Freund, who took the lead in this endeavor — he lobbied governmental authorities, ensured that letters from the community members would reach Olmert's desk, and even enlisted several Knesset members for the cause — the Jewish Agency was also involved together with the Keren Yedidut.

Recently, Shavei Israel undertook a precise census of all the Bnei Menashe from which they prepared a closed list of names that strictly defines those who can make Aliya. The government and the Jewish Agency will be involved in their Aliya, in order that a similar situation will not arise as with the Ethiopians, where it seems that their Aliya will never end.

The Israeli government is aware of the sensitivities of the Indian Government with regard to the emigration of thousands of Bnei Menashe from their country within a short period of time. Therefore, their Aliya will take place over an extended period, with the quota system. Of course they will undergo conversion in Israel with the assistance of the Shavei Israel organization.  

2. "Joy Among the Immigrants in Israel: I Waited For This News for a Very Long Time"
by Eli Bardenstein

"I am thrilled that the government has decided to allow all of the Bnei Menashe to make Aliya from India. We waited for this news for a very long time, and it is difficult for me to describe how happy I am", said Uri Paltiel who made Aliya with his wife from India a year ago.

"For so many years we dreamed of coming home", explains Paltiel. "I believe that our return to Israel is part of the greater Divine plan that returns all Jews in the "End of Days" to Israel. It may be a sign that the Messiah is coming, and therefore we should all be here for his arrival". According to this recent Oleh, "We are part of the Jewish tradition and history. We love Israel and want to be part of our Jewish country and contribute to it. I want to raise my year-old child that was born here as well as my children that are yet to be born in a religious atmosphere, and I want them to become Israelis.

Paltiel lives with his wife and baby in Maalot. After they underwent conversion they began to attend Ulpan in order to learn Hebrew. "The people here in Maalot have helped us tremendously" said Paltiel. He continued "The parents of many of these people were new immigrants themselves and are aware of all the difficulties that arise in the first few years in the country. They provide assistance to us wherever we need it". Paltiel plans to start learning a new profession after the holidays. "I may train to become a chef, or perhaps I'll study computers", he concluded.

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, August 20, 2008.

IDF to Try Officer for Wounding Terrorist 3 Years Ago  

(IsraelNN.com) The IDF intends to court martial an officer who accidentally wounded a rock-throwing Arab three years ago.

The incident occurred when the officer and other soldiers ran into a violent riot by Arabs near Tekoa, in Judea. The force fired in the air but the Arabs continued to attack them with rocks. The officer then fired at a wall and a terrorist who was hiding nearby was severely wounded in the head.

The Military Prosecution now wishes to charge the officer, who is no longer in active duty, with causing severe injury.

Police Say They Lack Manpower to Evict Arabs
by Hillel Fendel

(IsraelNN.com) Yitzchak Herskovitz had hoped to have his Jerusalem property freed of Arab squatters by today (Wednesday), as the court ordered, but the police said they don't have the men for the job.

Herskovitz, a septuagenarian formerly of Los Angeles and now of Kiryat Arba in Judea, bought property in southern Jerusalem in 1992. He has never been able to take possession of it, however, because of Arab squatters living there.

The police have turned down the most recent court order to evict the Arabs because of riots they expect will result. They promise to carry it out within several weeks — but Herskovitz is not optimistic.

Though the feisty and colorful Mr. Herskovitz has legal title to the property, located near the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Gilo (Jewish) and Beit Tsafafa (Arab), a clan of Arab squatters say it is theirs. Their claims have alternated between "we received it when the original owner defaulted on a loan" and "we bought it from him."

Courts Rule in Herskovitz's Favor

In 2004, after handwriting and document experts testified that the Arabs' documents were fraudulent, the Jerusalem Magistrates Court ruled in Herskovitz's favor. The Arab clan appealed the ruling in the Jerusalem District Court, which also ultimately ruled in Herskovitz's favor. The squatters then tried another tack, and in 2006, they sued for ownership of the property. The court has not yet ruled on this claim — but has given a hint of its position by issuing an interim order for the squatters to post bond and pay past rent, or else face eviction.

Arabs Didn't Pay, Court OKs Eviction, Police Say Not Now

The Arabs did not pay rent or post the bond, and the District Court ruled, once again, that they can be evicted. Herskovitz, in accordance with accepted procedure, applied to the police to carry out the eviction order — but the police turned him down.

Adv. Yaakov Golbert, representing Herskovitz's interests in the foreclosure and reclamation of the party, told IsraelNationalNews what happened: "A police lawyer called me yesterday [Tuesday], and said that the police simply don't have the manpower for the job. They're afraid of riots, and soon [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza] Rice is coming to the region, and soon it will be Ramadan, etc. etc. But she promised over and over that for sure before the High Holidays [nearly six weeks from now — ed.], they will do it."

Police Ask for Long Delay

The lawyer was actually more generous than an official police letter to the court. The letter stated, "The eviction is a very sensitive, on behalf of a Jew living in Hevron [sic; he actually lives in Kiryat Arba — ed.], and the property is located in [an Arab neighborhood]. It should also be noted that the eviction was set for approximately a week before the onset of the Ramadan month... In my estimation, the [police] deployment for the eviction will be very intensive, because of the expectation of riots after the eviction — and it will lead into the Ramadan fasts. Similarly, it will involve the deployment of many policemen on the day on which U.S. Secretary Rice is expected, which will make it very difficult... Based on this, we ask for a flexible eviction order beginning from Oct. 5, 2008 until Feb. 1, 2009."

"Not only are they refusing to do it now," an astounded Herskovitz said, "but they even want to put it off for several months! ... And how can the police lawyer make a promise [to Golbert] that they will do it before Rosh HaShanah, when the days before Rosh HaShanah are still in the month of Ramadan?! How can I believe them?"

Asked if he has any recourse against the police position, Golbert said, "Most unfortunately, no. If the police explain that they can't carry it out, then the court will believe them, and that's that."

Herskovitz sees it differently. "The police are simply bucking a court order," he said. "They have made this into a soap opera and a circus. I would like to believe them when they say they will do it in a month — but it's very hard for me to do so because of how they have stalled and pushed this off so many times in the past, and because of what they are 'promising' now."

Jewish People Could Lose Sovereignty

Meanwhile, the Arab squatters continue to live, rent-free, on the property Herskovitz bought 16 years ago but has still not merited to move into. He is not giving up the fight, though: "I have interests here — but the Jewish People have an even greater interest in this case. If the courts do not enforce this order, it is very likely that this entire area will simply become Arab. When you lose the ability to enforce the law, you lose sovereignty — and the Jewish People are in danger of having that happen right here, in Jerusalem!"

Olmert: We Limited Use of Power in Hizbullah War

(IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert maintained Tuesday that he restrained the IDF from unleashing all of its power in the Second Lebanon War against Hizbullah because Lebanon was not involved in the war.

During the war, Israel bombed hundreds of Lebanese targets that were used by Hizbullah terrorists, including the closure of the Beirut International Airport. However, he revealed during a visit to the Home Front Command that he restricted the IDF during the war. He warned that if Lebanon becomes fully dominated by Hizbullah and if there is another war, "then we won't have any restrictions."

Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, August 20, 2008.

Once again, the New York Times demonstrates its anti-Israel pro-Arab bias.

As radical Islamic "Jihadists" (holy warriors for Islam) rage across the globe, the New York Times offers a national suicide note, drafted for the Israeli Leftists to leave behind if and when she takes their advice to become a corpse. The August 18th NYT editorial "Perils of Israeli Transition" is a 'spin', telling us how PM Ehud Olmert is on the right track in dividing the Jewish nation to accommodate a non-people called 'Palestinians' who support Terror and the elimination of the Jewish State.

So, let's go over the NYT suicide note: First, we are told that history is unlikely to be kind to Ehud Olmert, implying that he will be unfairly treated for what most consider the most corrupt and incompetent government Israel has ever had.

In the next paragraph, editorial spin tell us that, according to the NYT, Olmert understood that a two-state solution was vital for Israel's security. That this scurrilous, anti-Semitic journal expresses concern about Israel's security is laughable, considering their unbroken track record of anti-Jewish bias going back as far as WW2, when they either refused to cover the Nazi Holocaust or when they spun the information by saying 'unconfirmed reports suggest casualties'.

The NYT slips forward, saying "Without jeopardizing its security, Israel could take important steps to improve the lives of ordinary Palestinians and give them a real state in peace". Watch carefully how a propagandist newspaper packs a series of lies into a brief paragraph:

First, they position themselves as being concerned about Israel's security with a leading statement: "Without jeopardizing its security"... The NYT already knows that the so-called ordinary 'Palestinians' have already voted overwhelmingly for Hamas who have pledged to never recognize Israel and will destroy her when stronger. Israel's security has already been jeopardized, both by the Muslim Arabs and by Leftist apologetic Jews — like Olmert and his collaborators.

The editors of the NYT already know that Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin, with the assistance of the Europeans, greased through their secret, abortive agreement with Yassir Arafat, called the Oslo Accords. Without prior approval by the Knesset or the people, they turned over 7 important cities to control of Arafat — all of which became a safe haven for Muslim Arab Terrorists of all factions.

As a relevant aside, the only reason that Arafat's partner of 40 years, Mahmoud Abbas, current President of the Palestinian Authority, can maintain the fiction of controlling these cities are the Israeli patrols and constantly ferreting out Terrorists in such cities as Jenin, Nablus (Schehem), Ram'Allah, Qalqilya, Tulkarem and Jericho. Without Israeli soldiers supervision and control, all would have passed over to Hamas — like Gaza City has since Israel's precipitous surrender in 2005, as orchestrated by Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert.

The NYT then recommends that Olmert could "burnish his legacy" and the prospects for an agreement if he announced a full freeze on an expansion of Jewish settlements and reduces the number of roadblocks in the 'West Bank', which the NYT claims is strangling the Palestinian economy which subsists on massive donor funding from America and the European Union.

Examine the next set of NYT lies and spin in this paragraph: First, Olmert could indeed burnish his legacy — with the Arabs, Rice and Leftists generally — by pushing hard for the re-partitioning of Israel as he did in Gaza. This would include driving the Jews out of Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and dividing of the Jewish capital of Jerusalem. Surely, Israel would then enjoy the same peace which the Muslim "Jihadists" (holy warriors for Islam) are providing the Americans in Iraq, Afghanistan — and the Jews in Israel within Rocket and Missile striking range from Gaza, as well as Jews and other non-Muslims elsewhere around the globe.

No doubt, the grateful 'Palestinians' would sequester a burial place for Olmert next to Arafat in honor of what the NYT calls his "burnished legacy". Clearly, the NYT's "burnish" paragraph and their recommendation to freeze Jewish settlements and reduce the number of roadblocks which were set up to catch inflowing Muslim Arab Terrorists is an important segment of their national suicide advice. At a great cost, the security fence and the roadblocks have successfully reduced bloody Terror attacks. Many of those Terrorists were caught with arms and explosives. They were tried, convicted by the courts and then released by Olmert's corrupt government so they could continue to maraud and kill Jews.

I wonder why the NYT hasn't demanded that American troops cease setting up checkpoints in Iraq and Afghanistan? Are the road-blocks and checkpoints there because Arab Muslims cannot be trusted without playing the dual role of civilian and Terrorist interchangeably? I wonder, if the NYT has armed security guards in their lobby of its building? Surely they, as fellow travelers of the Muslim "Jihadists", Terrorists would never think their Terrorist friends would consider blowing up the NYT building or shooting their reporters or editors. Yassir Arafat killed many journalists as well as 100,000 Lebanese Christians and Muslims in Lebanon during his 12 year Civil War.

As the story goes about a typical Middle East scenario: "A scorpion asks an alligator for a lift across the river. The alligator first refuses, saying: "Your sting will kill me." To which the scorpion replies, "If I sting you, I too will drown and die." So the alligator is persuaded and says, "Climb on my back." In the middle of the river the scorpion stings the alligator and, as he is dying, he asks: "Why did you kill me and yourself?" To which the scorpion answers: "This is the Middle East.' "

Let's move on:

The editorial speaks of two other gullible stupid 'alligators': Israel's Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak who favor a two-state solution. The NYT suggests that they will benefit if they invite a host of "scorpion" Palestinians to climb on the back of Israel. Why worry — since the NYT and other Jew-haters offer us assurances that, once on the other side of the River, all will be well...no more Kassam Rockets, no suicide bombers, no alliances with Iran and Syria to launch saturation missile attacks? Surely we can trust the "Jihadi" Muslims to keep the peace and discard their laws of the Koran to make Israel "Judenrein" (Jew-free) and go on to make the entire planet into one Caliphate subject to Sharia law.

The NYT tells us that, making deals to divest Jewish Land to the 'Palestinians' will take enormous political courage for both the Jews and the 'Palestinian' leaders. As stated earlier, those risks for peace were already taken and, it was the Jews who paid the price each time. The NYT, in its pernicious wisdom, says permanent borders are to be drawn up, which will give Israel defensible frontiers and the 'Palestinians' an economically viable state.

First, any borders that Israel has ever accepted were immediately challenged by the collective Muslim Arab world, usually followed by invasions. After each defeat, the Muslim Arabs re-armed and prepared for the next — and then, the next war — claiming it is their Islamic destiny. As for the Palestinians creating an economically viable state, that's too much to expect from Muslims locked into their 7th Century mind-set, driven by religious clerics. What Arab Muslim country is really self-sustaining, based on their own energy? Even the Saudis are only successful because of the oil under their feet and the world oil companies that built the infrastructures to pump out and ship the oil.

All are economic basket cases, contributing nothing to the world, who are keeping their own populations in abject ignorance and poverty, while they spend their donor money and/or oil loot on Western weapons. Is this then the economically viable nation the NYT tells us will be built by the 'Palestinians'? Once they were economically better off than Arab Muslims in surrounding countries because the State of Israel employed them — until every 'Palestinian' was suspected of being a Terrorist simply because some had shot or stabbed their own bosses — or blown up civilians, mostly Jews but also including Muslims.

The NYT burbles and airily dismisses the fact that Hamas does not acknowledge Israel's right to exist and refuses to accept any past (or future) agreements. This follows both the Arab League charters and the 1964 Charter of Arafat's PLO, calling for Israel's destruction is still in effect. The NYT refuses to acknowledge that all past agreements, like ceasing Terror, disarming, dismantling Terror infrastructure and de-weaponizing — stopping the teaching of their children to hate and kill Jews — all of these commitments for the Oslo Accords, 'et al' — have been broken. Then, the NYT says: "A way must be found to help turn Hamas into a legitimate and acceptable negotiating partner." Will wishing change a pagan, war-like people from the time of Mohammed into a non-aggressive democratic culture because the NYT babbles about finding a way to tame the beast called "Islam"?

The NYT goes on to say that Israeli politicians unwilling to work with Mr. Abbas will only strengthen the hand of Hamas and other extremists. Oh. Really?

The corrupt government of Olmert, Kadima, his Cabinet, the Knesset offer little or no resistance to peddling large parts of the Jewish country's ancient historic heartland. In each perfidious give-way, the failure of these confidence-building gestures becomes apparent in the number of dead Jewish men, women and children — both civilians and soldiers.

Yes, indeed, assisting Mr. Abbas with such things as releasing hardened, convicted and jailed Terrorists must appear beneficial to the NYT — although one cannot point to what those benefits were.

Finally, the NYT makes its grand wish that all that has to happen is that the Arab/Muslim countries simply need to face up to their responsibilities. Responsibility to whom? Allah? Mohammed? The Ayatollahs or President of Iran? Which Islamic nation feels it has a "responsibility" to the 'Palestinians' — let alone the Jews of Israel? Is it Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Libya, etc?

The fact is, they hate the prosperous, humanitarian Jewish State, both religiously and, because by comparison, the Israelis show the Arab Muslims they are a hopelessly backward people whose only success through the ages has been war and living on the loot built by other industrious nations,

Now the world waits for the primitive and savage people to explode one or more nuclear devices which we in the West passed on to them. This then is the story of how the New York Times became a fellow traveler of a pagan people who still believe in the blood cult of human sacrifice — be it us and our children or them and their children.

One last thought: The NYT would have Israel surrender Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and all those parts of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. This would be a deal similar to the Sharon/Olmert gesture of abandoning thriving farms and productive greenhouses, uprooting 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from the 21 communities of Gush Katif/Gaza as well as the 4 North Samarian communities.

Have you ever seen vegetable gardens and fields of crops invaded by wild hogs? Nothing is left but destroyed crops as happened as soon as Gaza was surrendered 3 years ago in August 2005. Imagine, if you will, what Judea and Samaria would look like after being abandoned to the 'Palestinians'. If the homily of casting pearls before swine comes to mind, as in Gaza, that would be Israel's fate if it were up to the NYT and Olmert's government.

Thank G-d, it is not. The people of Israel are stronger than the NYT would ever write about. ###

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).
Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Robert Spencer, August 20, 2008.

EDITOR'S NOTE: According to Wikipedia, Hizb ut-Tahrir (The Party of Liberation) is "a internationalist Sunni, anti-nationalist, pan-Islamist vanguard[2] political party whose goal is to combine all Muslim countries in a unitary Islamic state or caliphate, ruled by Islamic law and headed by an elected head of state (caliph).[3]." See also Oliver Guitta's article (click here) and Jonathan Spyer's article (click here.)

This is from yesterday's Jihad Watch


Jihad Watch reader S. Azam went undercover to the Hizb ut Tahrir conference in London on the caliphate last Saturday, and kindly sends us this exclusive report about what was said there:


London Conference Saturday 16th August 2008

Hosted by Hizb Ut Tahrir — Britain

"The destruction of the Islamic Khilafah State over 80 years ago marked the beginning of dividing the Muslim World into countless nation states governed by a plethora of kings, dictators and western backed 'democrats'. Today three major regions of the Muslim World are under occupation, Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. Oil and food crisis has pushed millions of people into starvation. Sectarian divisions are fuelled by occupying powers to further divide and weaken us.

The Muslim Ummah now needs a new political thinking and direction. It requires a new leadership that will unify the Umma and utilize her resources to address these countless problems. This one day conference will address the obligation of unifying our Umma under one leadership and discuss how political unity is the only practical way forward for the Muslim Ummah." — Hizb Ut Tahrir, Britain

Sajjad Khan: Realising Political Unity
Dr. Mahmad Salim: The Shariah and Unity
Sister Sultana Parvin: Scientific and Educational Potential under the Khilafah State
Jamal Harwood: Economic Development through Unity and Khilafah policy
Dr. Imran Waheed: Pakistan Case Study — an application of Unity and Khilafah policy

Conference Attendance 2000-2500 people.

The Troxy is located in the heart of East London, Commercial Road, E1. The overwhelming majority were from the Bangladeshi community. A high number of women attended, with the majority in attendance being male.

Islam Channel, the satellite media broadcasters, were present as well, for media coverage.


Since 1924, the Muslim World saw the collapse of the Golden Age of Islam and the destruction of the Islamic State: the Uthman Khilafah I.E. the Ottoman Empire. Today, due to Islamic political parties such as Hizb Ut Tahrir, Muslims worldwide are supporting and working towards the re-establishment of this Islamic State.

Rallies, demonstrations, protests, and conferences take place in Turkey, Indonesia, Hebron, Kyrgyzstan, Al Quds (Jerusalem), Lebanon, Pakistan, Kenya, Bangladesh, Yemen, Ukraine, Australia and the United Kingdom. As part of a global campaign, Hizb Ut Tahrir are going from country to country announcing the need for political unity and establishing an Islamic State. Muslims in their thousands are responding to the call.

May this point be emphasized: Islam demands the political unity of the Ummah. The Muslim World united under one Islamic leadership and ruler.

This much-desired Islamic State is not some dream or vague imagination proclaimed just by Islamists, jihadists or extremists. No, this so-called Caliphate is a very real political and religious ideology long held in the hearts and minds of Muslims the world over. Indeed, since the days of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the yearning to return to the glory days of Islam never diminished.

British Muslims (despite their inconsistent condemnation and lack of public protests against acts of Islamic terrorism) state that Islam is a peaceful religion that seeks to live in harmony, not superiority with others. And so, as hard-working, law-abiding citizens of the respective countries in which they reside, they seek to be treated as such. They demand that they be recognized for their peaceful endeavors to encourage moderate Muslims to strengthen community cohesion. They want recognition for their achievements and contribution to society and should be supported. Instead, they feel victimised because of the global terrorism which has been carried out in the name of Islam. Thus we often hear complaints of 'Islamophobic' attitudes within the community, government and media, which British Muslims say they are continually confronting post 7/7. Yet is this a backlash or rightly placed frustration with the British Muslim community for their lack of conviction in condemning acts of terrorism in the name of Islam?

I'm sure that some truly condemn terrorism. However, there is a problem. If this is the view of the majority of peaceful Muslims in the UK and the West; then how on earth did we all end up in this so-called clash of civilizations? Why are there ongoing debates about whether or not Islam is a religion of peace, how to differentiate between the moderates and extremists, and how to fight this perpetual 'War on Terror'? Who are we actually at war with? Who can we trust to help us in this war? What values are we defending and from whom, exactly? Could the likes of Osama Bin Laden indeed be correct when they state that the West has launched Crusades against Islam (i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and now perhaps Pakistan is next?). This is not a War on Terror, but a War on Islam — they say.

Well, the Islamic Liberation party 'Hizb Ut Tahrir' certainly seems to think that the War on Terror is a War on Islam. And not only that, they are putting forth their case for the return of the Islamic State remarkably well, and ever so defiantly against the U.S. and U.K.

Their objective is to politically unify the Muslim World and its resources, to become the world's one and only authentic Islamic State. A genuine and Sharia-governed Islamic State without Western designated 'artificial' borders, without corrupt dictators and non-Islamic leaderships and without the influence of Western imposed democracy, Imperialistic and Colonialist agendas. An Islamic Superpower ruled under one leader — Islamically elected, of course.

One reason why the political case to unite the Muslim World and its resources is so appealing to Muslims is because this will also cause an affront to Western powers. And the following will prove it to be immediately obvious as to why.

Consider these facts:

  • Around 70% World's Oil Reserves — Owned by the Muslim World
  • 55% World's Gas Reserves — Owned by the Muslim World
  • 2 Trillion Dollars in Assets alone — Owned by the Muslim Gulf States, (6 Gulf nations alone). This is more than enough to wipe out the outstanding combined debt in the Muslim world.
  • 4.7 Million in Military Reserves — Muslim World
  • Massive Land Mass — 57 or so nations of the entire world are Muslim and/or Islamic
  • Major Sea ports for trade etc are conveniently surrounded by the Muslim world (Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caspian, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea)

Also worth noting:

  • Islam is reported to be the world's fastest growing religion. Conversion rates are claimed to have increased significantly post 9/11. At present the number of Muslims around the globe is reportedly around 1.3 Billion. 1 out of 4 people in the world's population is Muslim.
  • The Financial World is looking to the Middle East for investments and developments as the new economic and financial headquarters, i.e., Dubai. While in the meantime the doom and gloom of the West's dwindling economy and the dreaded credit crunch is grabbing headlines daily. I am beginning to be persuaded that the vision set out for the unity of the Muslim world is very real, and it needs to be addressed seriously by us in the West.

At the conference I repeatedly heard speakers say something on the lines of "How can it be that we have allowed our lands Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, our people, our resources, our wealth and our very dignity to be eaten up and destroyed by the enemies of Islam, when we have such great potential among us? If only we unite as one Umma ..."

How eager they are for the defeat and collapse of the West. In anticipation they gather to discuss, plan and put forth their proposals to revive the Golden Age of Islam: The return of the Khilafah.

What a paradox. At one stage we have the Shia Muslim leader of the Iranian regime, Mr. Ahmadinejad, anticipating the return of the Imam Mahdi, Shia Islam's long awaited Messiah figure. And then we have this call from primarily Sunni Muslims for the re-establishment of the Khilafah that is governed by an Islamic Leader; the Imam Caliph. Perhaps they are in cahoots. Nevertheless, a resentment and humiliation remains deep within the minds of Muslims at the 'Allies offensive' that brought down the collapse of the last Khalifah. In bitter memory of this crucial event in world history, Hizb Ut Tahrir vow to take back all that was stolen from them. And they will do so, by any means, despite the tailored peaceful political rhetoric that is used to back up the vision.

Trying to remain within the boundary of various incitement to religious hatred laws perhaps, Hizb Ut Tahrir have once again carefully scripted their words to get their point across and almost so eloquently manage to display authority and political clout to gain British supporters in favour of their arrogant, totalitarian and supremacist ideology.

It is a question of how long it will take to make this vision a reality. So far, this movement seems to have rallied enough support to start something serious. Hizb Ut Tahrir proclaim that they have members in their millions worldwide, yet will not disclose their exact numbers. Surely a political party would know the number of members it has? Despite the large crowds that entered the Troxy in London, I estimated that at least 2000-2500 turned up. The choice of this venue surprised me, as it didn't have the capacity to hold any more than 3000. Perhaps this was due to the party aiming at gathering the local Bangladeshi community, who heavily populate the East London's Aldgate East and Whitechapel. From what I saw at the conference of the kind of fervour and enthusiasm amongst the crowds, it doesn't take much persuading for young impressionable Muslims to become passionate about the cause for Political Islam. They are easily swayed to think that the British government is their enemy, not just for supporting the Iraq war but for imposing democracy there. Democracy is non-Islamic. I know that many people may disagree with me saying this. But any good Muslim who is living according to Islam's goals will never choose loyalty to their citizenship over loyalty to Islam.

That should end the 'are you British or Muslim first?' debate there.

Conference Speakers

Session 1: Unity the only path to progress

Sajjad Khan — Chief Political Advisor HT Britain: Realising political unity

There is a lack of global unity in the Muslim World. 80 years on, after the end of the Uthman Khilafah, then began political divisions. A reflection on the past, and reminiscing the days of the Islamic Empire. The Muslim World is in a mess due to corrupt leadership, dictatorships and Western interference.

Quoting David Milliband and John McCain in their condemnation of the recent Russian military offensive in Georgia — 'this is no longer the 19th Century, when States invade other States' — Implying how preposterous a statement to make after the U.S led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

After discussing the impressive capacity of wealth, oil, and resources available in the Muslim World, Sajjad goes on to say how the West is an aging population, whereas in the Muslim World is a young and fast growing population. A young and vibrant military capability is attainable. The Muslim World has the money and the manpower to develop and build our own military; we need not buy from the West. We must establish our own Islamic Military, for the benefit and protection of the Umma. Some skeptics talk of the dated and medieval system of the Khilafah. What they don't realize that it is separate individual states that are dated and medieval in the 21st Century. Because all the worlds problems are transnational, not individual. Therefore, the need for a Transnational state is the solution to the world's problems. The Khilafah will be a Transnational Islamic State, without the discriminatory artificial borders that separate the Muslim World rather than unite it.

The Khilafah will not differentiate between Shia and Sunni, because the Islam that prophet Mohammed and the Sunna followed will unite us. No persecution, no force shall be imposed upon anyone within the Islamic State. When the Jews were being persecuted during the Spanish Inquisitions, they fled to the Ottoman Empire and found a safe haven. This is what the Islamic State was like.

So do not allow yourselves to be intimidated, afraid or deterred from supporting the re-establishment of the Khilafah. The West will use these scare tactics to put the Umma off and preventing this vision to be accomplished, in the name of fighting this so called War on Terror.

Dr. Mahmad Salim: The Shariah and Unity

Quoting extensively from the Quran and Hadith, Dr. Mahmad puts forth the Islamic obligation for Muslims around the globe to support this vision for the re-establishment of the Islamic State.

No longer must Muslims unite on the basis of or identify themselves as belonging to any nationality, but should unite only as Muslims, as part of the Ummah. National or patriotic feelings are unIslamic. In this manner, you will be stronger together as one Umma. Do not be divided over nationality. The enemies of Islam are quick to supply weapons to corrupt leaders in the Muslim World, which causes divisions between nations against nations. Our resources should be plundered by our enemies.

Recall the Shahada (Muslim confession of faith), and stand by it in your actions. Why should we fight amongst ourselves, when we should be united to fight together against our enemies?

When the Khilafah comes, the Imam will be responsible for the protection of the people of the Umma, and including the non-Muslims who are also under the State. The prophet Mohammed demanded political unity for the Umma; we cannot go against this command.

Sister Sultana Parvin: Scientific and Educational potential under the Khilafah State

Does the Organization of the Islamic Conference represent the Umma? No. They have their own agendas. We have nothing to help ourselves. We are dependent on others, mostly. How then are we going to get the courage and enthusiasm to unite? Our own Muslim governments don't educate us. They can't even feed us, and the protection of their own people is disgraceful.

There was once a place of excellence in the past, in our Islamic history. A time where women were treated equally, they were educated. There was a high level of science and education, and remarkable inventions and developments were achieved. Now our doctors, around 500,000 from around the Muslim World, are leaving their homelands to come here to the West to find better salaries, respect, and recognition of their hard work. Their own governments have failed them. There is no mark of achievement in the Muslim World now, so they come to the West. We have the resources, yet the wrong governments. We can regain what was lost, if only we unite together. Super status belongs to Islam, if we make it happen.

Session 2: Unity — The practical path

Jamaal Harwood: Economic Development through Unity and Khilafah policy

With the aid of many images, maps and diagrams, Jamaal Harwood opens his presentation. The Umayyad Khilafah was strong and powerful. Jamaal quotes Bernard Lewis, the famous historian regarding this empire, calling it "the greatest economic power the world has ever seen".

The Muslim World controls some of the world's most strategic water ways, Oil and Gas reserves, minerals etc........Yet with all this wealth, poverty remains high in the Muslim World. Our resources are being wasted and exploited by the greed of the nations especially the West. This is a case of chronic mis-management through corruption and bad leaders in the Muslim World.

Despite the Muslim World having more enough wealth to wipe out the debt owed by Muslim nations, it is not being done. The need for political unity is urgent and necessary. Our lands are fertile for agricultural produce, rich in oil wealth, abundant in minerals. The Khilafah will look to reform:

1. Food Security — Industrialisation
2. Land Reforms
3. Sharing Resources (land, manpower, wealth)

The Khilafah will have an independent policy, not 57 separate policies. To distribute the wealth of our lands fairly and justly. It is the opposite of Capitalism, which has failed and is on a downward spiral.

The Khilafah will not recognize the Confederation of Nations, be it the United Nations, The EU, the OIC etc. There is only one State, the Islamic State. One Khilafah.

Imran Waheed — Chief Media Advisor: Pakistan Case Study. An application of unity and Khilafah policy

Imran begins his talk using Pakistan as a prime example of a so-called Islamic nation that has suffered due to the lack of and the need for the Khilafah State.

The 3rd of March 1924 was the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It resulted in the sudden carving up of lands by the Imperialists and Colonialists, and thus began the era of division amongst Muslims. Separate, individual nations formed, causing sectarianism and disunity in the Muslim World. Pakistan was one such case. However, Hizb Ut Tahrir is working actively in Pakistan, and the people are demanding the return of the Khilafah.

There is a battle between Democracy and Dictatorship; both are opposed to the command of the prophet Mohammed. Each side of this battle in the Pakistani political scene is really fighting for their own political gains. We have heard of the corruption of Bhutto, Sharif and Musharraf. The popularity ratings for Musharraf are astonishing in the West. Shimon Peres has been quoted saying that he prays for Musharraf everyday (at which point the crowd begin to curse, bemoan and slander Israel).

The security service in Pakistan only works for America's War on Terror. It has no care for its own people or for the implementation of Islam. Pakistan being a nuclear nation, it has become an occupying ground for the West, with the U.S setting up their bases all over the land. Pakistan allowed the U.S to attack Afghanistan because it gave them free passage. Now watch and see how Pakistan becomes the next U.S. target.

This is what happens due to the lack of the Islamic State. When the Khilafah returns, there will be a uniting of Muslim lands, without borders in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India. No more occupation of our lands. We will stand up against U.S. and Britain. (Takbir, Allah Hu Akbar)

An opinion poll recently carried out by the University of Maryland, 74% of Pakistanis support the establishment of a unified Khilafah in the Muslim World. The establishment of such an entity is therefore not a question of if, but when.

To Go To Top

Posted by Middle East Strategic Information (MESI), August 20, 2008.

This was written by Lt. Col. (res.) Jonathan D. Halevi and Ashley Perry and it was published on the MESI website:

Lt. Col. (res.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is the co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd. and is a former advisor to the Policy Planning Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Ashley Perry is an editor at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs for the Middle East Strategic Information project.


Recently, Iran's sabre-rattling has escalated in an attempt to deter an attack on its nuclear facilities. On July 13 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened that "the [Iranian] armed forces will cut off the enemies' hands before they can put their fingers on the trigger."

While many have interpreted this as a possible pre-emptive missile strike emanating from Iran, there is an even more sinister possibility.

Over the last few years, Iran's proxy Hizbullah, has been spreading its influence far and wide. In its brinksmanship with the West, Iran has learnt much from the two neighbouring Gulf Wars. As opposed to Saddam Hussein, whose threats of an all-out campaign against the West was largely rhetoric; Iran takes a global view and is diligently preparing terrorist networks all over the world which will spring into action when the word is given.

Hizbullah is an integral part of the Islamic revolution regime in Tehran. The ruling Iranian religious authority in Iran gave its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, the title of Lebanese "representative," making him an essential part of the Iranian revolution.

Hizbullah receives millions of dollars a year from Iran to finance its operations. After the Second Lebanon War it received even more funds to compensate for its military and civilian losses and to rehabilitate the Shi'ite villages which supported it. The Iranian funds are transferred to Hizbullah by the Al-Qods Force of the Revolutionary Guards, the Iranian foreign ministry and official institutions with branches in Lebanon.

The Al-Qods Force and Hizbullah are important tools for exporting the Islamic revolution to non-Shi'ite Islamic countries with "infidel" populations. Iran has taken upon itself the missionary task of attempting to institute a Shi'ite caliphate which will unite the Muslim world under its leadership in preparation for a jihad against the "infidel" states. Its expected victory, it is believed, will pave the way for Islam's conquest of the entire world and the reappearance of the Mahdi.

Exporting the revolution differs from country to country. Hizbullah's model in Lebanon is an apparent success. Hizbullah organizes the Shi'ite population in South Lebanon and then expands throughout the country via civilian institutions which created a powerful social, economic and political conglomerate.

Hizbullah's military wing prevents government action against the organization that provides Hizbullah and the Lebanese Shi'ites enormous leverage. The recent battles in Lebanon were largely because the Lebanese government tried to cut off secret independent communications systems Hizbullah had with its allies outside of the country. Even after the Doha meetings that led to a ceasefire, Hizbullah were allowed to keep these communication systems and now hold veto-power on all executive decisions made in Lebanon.

The current relative calm along Lebanon's border with Israel should not be mistaken for a cooling off of Hizbullah's enthusiasm for an Islamic revolution, but rather it serves to mask Hizbullah's focus of its main goals: changing the Lebanese constitution and ensuring a greater Shi'ite presence in the Lebanese parliament, with an eye to eventually taking over Lebanon by exploiting the country's democratic processes to turn it into a radical Shi'ite Islamic country like Iran.

However, Hizbullah's mission reaches far beyond Lebanon. Hizbullah is very popular in the Arab world, even amongst Sunnis, and is an important factor in sweeping the masses into jihad. The organization assists those that target their own governments, in weakening Sunni opposition and in creating an admittedly ad hoc strategic alliance with the all the branches of the Muslim Brotherhood across the globe, infiltrating even the Palestinian Authority-administered territories.

Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood leader Muhammad Mahdi Akef put his stamp of approval on an alliance with Hizbullah and even said he was willing to send fighters to help Hizbullah in the second Lebanon war. Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestinian branch, opened the Gaza Strip to Iranian agents, who engage in propaganda activities and seek to establish Shi'ite institutions there.

Muhammad Ali Jaafari, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, indirectly admitted the existence of a global Hizbullah-Hamas terrorist network. On June 28 he told the conservative Iranian newspaper Jamjim that if Iran were attacked, Hizbullah and Hamas would join its ranks and activate sleeper cells against American and Israeli interests in the Middle East and around the world.

Their activities are in line with the Iranian leadership's 50-year plan made public at the end of the 1990s. According to an Iranian document, the plan is to export the Islamic revolution to neighboring countries and beyond through preaching, encouraging Shi'ite emigration, purchasing real estate, forming political organizations, infiltrating the local political establishments and taking over the various parliaments and focal points of political power.

Syrian-born historian Mahmoud Al-Sayyed Al-Dugheim, told Al-Jazeera earlier in the year "We consider the Zionist plan to be dangerous to the Arab nation, but even more dangerous is the Safavid Sassanian Iranian plan to restore the Empire of Cyrus, which would range from Greece to Egypt, and the Arabian Peninsula, in addition to other regions."

Al Qaeda website Al-Nida warned, "If these Shia get organized and if their initiatives get support from countries that sponsor them — Iran, Syria, and Lebanon — it will mean that they have reached advanced stages in their 50-year plan."

Iranian-Hizbullah footprints can be found in various African and South American countries. In Nigeria, for example, Hizbullah operates within the expatriate Lebanese Shi'ite and local populations. The leader of the indigenous Shia in Nigeria, Sheikh Zakzaky has created idolism for Hassan Nasrallah and the leaders of Iran. According to Hassane Souley, a researcher at the university of Poitiers who specialises in the study of Islamic revival in Niger and Nigeria said Zakzaky "spent a lot of time in Iran, which cost him years in prison during the Sunni dictatorships in the eighties."

In Venezuela and other South American countries Hizbullah has been waging a long-term campaign to convert the native Indians to Shi'ite Islam.

Hizbullah Latin America, is also known as Hizbullah Venezuela and has been converting the indigenous population for some time. Teodoro Rafael Darnott, also known as "'Commander Teodoro' recently claimed, "If the United States were to attack Iran, the only country ruled by God, we would counter-attack in Latin America and even inside the United States itself. We have the means and we know how to go about it. We will sabotage the transportation of oil from Latin America to the US. You have been warned".

On June 29 the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siasa reported that Hizbullah was training young men from Venezuela in its military camps in south Lebanon to prepare them to attack American targets.

In addition, Hizbollah and Iran has set up secret cells abroad for carrying out terrorist attacks. Such cells were responsible for the attacks on the Israeli Embassy and the AMIA Jewish Center building in Buenos Aires in the early 1990s, the attacks in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and attempted attacks in London and Thailand.

ABC reported that the American and Canadian intelligence services had information about Hizbullah sleeper cells in Canada whose role was to gather intelligence about Israeli and Jewish targets in Ottawa and Toronto for possible terrorist attacks.

The ramifications of Hizbullah's reach are the very real threat they pose in many corners of the world. Iran has understood that to truly threaten and hold the West hostage it must create a multi-faceted menace to the citizens of these nations and their interests. Hizbullah's web of terror cells provides them just that.

The UK government is one of very few in the world to realize this threat by recently outlawing the military wing of Hizbullah. It is time that more Western nations follow suit if they are going to neutralize Iran's surrogate and joker card in case of an attack on its nuclear program.

To Go To Top

Posted by HaDaR, August 20, 2008.

Some time ago, someone wrote to me the following:

The fact is that if another million immigrants came to Israel today, nothing would change to the degree that would make a difference.

The following was my answer, which I'd like to share with you.:

One million BELIEVING JEWS immigrating to Israel, would obtain a FEW things like:

1) The disappearance of Meretz, which now is less than 4% of the population;
2) One million votes more to the National Camp would give it a majority of 90-30 Knesset Seats;
3) No one could speak of the demographic threat any longer and the Arabs would have 4, not 8 MKs.;
4) Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria would be BUILT RATHER THAN DESTROYED;
5) if only half of these Jews voted for national religious parties, there would be NO POSSIBLE MAJORITY IN THE KNESSET WITHOUT THEM (hence no more "let's sell pork and desecrate Shabbath" kind of laws)
6) There would be no government ready to give away our HERITAGE ("Morashah", remember?... Not inheritance, "Yerushah"...).
7) Politicians a la Olmert and Ramon, sr"y, would be somewhere else, not in the Government...


Sorry but I could not disagree with you more.

2500 and so years ago there were people giving all sorts of excuses and analyses also... They were wrong as much as those who give reasoned excuses are today.

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by LEL, August 19, 2008.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post


Gates wants to appease Iran at Israel's expense

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is the darling of Bush administration foes. Gushing about Gates in a recent column, Washington Post writer David Ignatius crooned, "Gates is an anomaly in this lame-duck administration. He is still firing on all cylinders, working to repair the damage done at the Pentagon by his arrogant and aloof predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld." Ignatius called on the next administration to give Gates a major role leading its foreign and defense policy.

It can only be hoped that Ignatius's advice will be ignored.

Today the US's strategic posture lies in tatters in the aftermath of Russia's invasion of US-ally Georgia. The fact that aside from issuing strong reprimands the administration has no policy for contending with Russia's aggression shows clearly that the move caught Washington completely by surprise.

That Russia was apparently able to invade Georgia without US foreknowledge is a stinging indictment of all US intelligence agencies. As was the case before the September 11, 2001 attacks, again US intelligence agencies have failed their country.

But America's intelligence agencies' failure to comprehend the significance of Russia's intentions was not theirs alone. It was shared as well by Gates and by his State Department counterpart Condoleezza Rice. Both senior cabinet secretaries simply failed to notice what Russia was doing, or how its actions would influence US interests.

GATES'S DENIAL of Moscow's strategic hostility to the US was made clear as late as last month. As Russia built up its forces along Georgia's borders, Gates released his new National Defense Strategy which he presented as "a blueprint for success" for the next administration.

Gates's strategy paper, which foresees asymmetric campaigns against non-state actors comprising the bulk of US military operations in the coming decades, raised the hackles of US military commanders when he turned his attention to Russia and China. In Gates' view, the best way to confront these authoritarian rising powers is to deny that they constitute a threat to US interests. Rather than building US forces to confront them, Gates advocates building "collaborative and cooperative relationships" with them.

Gates's penchant for collaborating and cooperating with US rivals and enemies is no doubt the reason that the Left supports him so enthusiastically. Since he assumed office after the November 2006 elections, betraying allies as part of a strategy of appeasing US enemies and rivals has been the focus of his efforts.

Ahead of his appointment to the Pentagon, Gates was a member of the Iraq Study Group led by James Baker and Lee Hamilton. The thrust of the ISG report, issued on December 6, 2006 — the day he was sworn into office — was that for the US to maintain its credibility in the Middle East and generally, it was necessary to appease its enemies by betraying its allies.

While the ISG report was ostensibly focused on Iraq, its real focus was Israel. Although the report advocated removing all US combat brigades from Iraq by the beginning of 2008, it wasn't wedded to the notion. It allowed the possibility of a temporary surge of US forces to secure Baghdad and so enable the Iraqi government to assert control over the country and build its military.

But while ambivalent on Iraq, the Baker-Hamilton report was unyielding in its insistence that the US distance itself from Israel. The report argued that to gain regional — and indeed international — support for the project of stabilizing Iraq, it was necessary for the US to appease the Syrians, the Iranians, the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Jordanians. And the best way to do that, they claimed, was to disembowel Israel. The report recommended that Israel be forced to give Syria the Golan Heights and coerced into accepting a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Jerusalem which would be run by a Hamas-Fatah "national unity government."

Like Baker and Hamilton, Gates was also not wed to the idea of a speedy withdrawal of combat forces from Iraq. Instead he supported the surge and for that he has gained great acclaim in Washington. But also like Baker and Hamilton, Gates has been unyielding in his push to distance the US from Israel. Indeed, in his National Defense Strategy, Israel is not listed as a US ally.

GATES'S PUSH to abandon the US's alliance with Israel in favor of embracing Iraq's Iranian and Arab neighbors is nowhere more apparent than in his actions regarding Iran's nuclear weapons program. And those actions are simply a continuation of his efforts before entering office. In 2004, Gates co-authored a study for the Council on Foreign Relations with Israel foe Zbigniew Brzezinski calling for the US to draw closer to Iran at Israel's expense.

Over the past nine months, largely due to Gates' advocacy, this has been the essential thrust of US policy toward Iran and Israel. The policy involves downplaying the urgency of the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, understating the progress Iran has made toward nuclear capabilities and openly working to appease Iran through US support and involvement with EU negotiations with Teheran.

The first US assault on what had until then been a more or less united public front with Israel on the issue of Iran's nuclear program came with the publication of the US's National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear weapons program last November. In the face of Iran's open calls to destroy Israel and the US, its rapid progress in its uranium enrichment activities, its command of the insurgency in Iraq, of Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian Authority, and its ballistic missile buildup, the NIE claimed that Iran had ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

The publication of the NIE was a body blow not only to Israel's efforts to solate Iran and forge an international consensus about the need to confront Teheran. It was also a precision strike against the US's own stated objective of building a consensus for sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council. Gates was responsible for the report's public dissemination.

IN RECENT months, as Iran has ratcheted up its genocidal rhetoric, taken over the Lebanese government, strengthened its alliance with Syria, built up its offensive forces, doubled the scale of its uranium enrichment, and strengthened its attachment to Russia, Gates has moved out of the shadows and into the spotlight. Assisted by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen and Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, Gates has made defending Iran's nuclear installations against the prospect of any Israeli or US attack his primary concern.

Gates has been a constant proponent of "engaging" Iran. In May for instance, he told a group of retired US diplomats, "We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage... and then sit down and talk with them. If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us."

Following Gates' clear lead, the US not only stopped being "the demander," it has become Iran's supplicant. And it has been repaid with increased Iranian extremism. Iran met the US's decision to openly join the Europeans in offering it everything from nuclear reactors to World Trade Organization membership last month with intensified military action directed most recently against the US's allies in the Persian Gulf. Iran has threatened international oil shipments through the Straits of Hormuz, has launched a satellite and tested still more missiles and again and again called for Israel's destruction.

BUT THIS hasn't thwarted Gates. Since Iran itself demonstrated the falsity of the National Intelligence Estimate, Gates moved from subtle to open opposition to US military strikes against its nuclear installations. Together with Mullen, in recent months he has stated repeatedly that attacking Iran would be a disaster for the US. And he has not stopped there. Gates has used his authority as defense secretary to also block any possibility that Israel will attack Iran.

In June the Pentagon leaked information about the IAF's massive exercise in the Mediterranean which it claimed was a rehearsal of an attack against Iran. The same month, McConnell and Mullen visited Israel and rejected requests for military equipment and other support that would improve its ability to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

Asserting that as far as the obviously infallible US intelligence estimates are concerned, Iran's nuclear program is not nearing completion, Mullen and McConnell also told their interlocutors that the US opposes an Israeli strike against Iran. As a consequence the US will deny the IDF the right to fly over Iraqi airspace.

Alarmed by the administration's swift slide toward Iran in recent months, senior IDF commanders and cabinet ministers have streamed into Washington. Last month Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi spent a week in Washington trying to convince the US to change course. After Ashkenazi failed to deliver the goods, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz all converged on Washington. They too failed.

To hide the US's now openly pro-Iranian position from the public, Mullen gave Ashkenazi an unrequested Legion of Merit decoration. Gates agreed to supply Israel with advanced anti-missile defense systems that could be deployed as early as 2011 if funding is steady. If deployed successfully, these anti-missile systems should be able to intercept up to 90 percent of incoming Iranian nuclear warheads.

SPEAKING OF Russia's invasion of Georgia over the weekend, Gates claimed that Russia's actions would harm its relations with the US and the West "for years to come." But at the same time, he demurred from mentioning even one concrete step that the administration is considering adopting against Russia, arguing that "there is no need to rush into everything."

The administration has been accused by its critics of ignoring the strategic alliance among Russia, Iran and Syria. That alliance has been made most apparent by Russia's assistance to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and its provision of sophisticated air-defense systems to both countries. Yet it is more likely that the administration is acutely aware of that alliance. Bush has simply decided to follow Gates' recommendation of appeasing all three.

Gates's position presents a daunting challenge to Israel and indeed to the US. If Iran is to be prevented from carrying out genocide, and if Bush hopes to leave office with even a shred of international credibility, Gates must be shunted firmly to the side.

Contact LEL by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Seth J. Frantzman, August 19, 2008.

The most fascinating aspect of the Georgian war has been the European hypocrisy and betrayal of Georgia. Georgia put her faith in the West and her president evoked Hitlers assault on Czechslovakia in 1938 as a comparison. Perhaps Georgia forgets history. The Europeans abandoned the Czechs in 1938. They abandoned the Georgians in 2008. In seventy years very little has changed.


When Whittaker Chambers published Witness in 1952 he believed that he was publishing the Epitaph of Western Civilization. Having been an activist in the Communist party in the 1930s he had 'witnessed' the corruption of the Wasp Anglo elites and the subversion of them to Communism and he had witnessed the degree to which intellectual society was unable to confront this threat. Whittaker Chambers was wrong. His book helped influence many people to stand astride history and fight against the linear timeline of Communism.

But when I found myself in a hotel room in Tunisia watching the BBC report from South Ossetia in Georgia I felt a similar feeling as must have overcome Mr. Chambers. Yet today we speak not of the fall of Western Civilization, for there is no longer such a thing, but we speak of the cowardice and betrayal of the Europeans.

As usual when dealing with modernity and the response of the West and its media and people one deals with two separate issues. First there is the issue of the thing itself. Thus there is the evil of terrorism and Islamism. Thus there is the issue, in Georgia, of a small semi-democratic state attempting to assert its control over its own country and the 'breakaway' region of South Ossetia. There is the 'reaction' of Russia and the subsequent invasion and bombing of Georgia by the Russian army. When one deals with the aggressive response of the Russian army or Islamism one admits that indeed these things are natural. Islam is naturally a chauvinistic religion and the outcome of religious Islam is war, intolerance, the suppression of women and terror. But since it is natural it is not hypocrisy. It is genuine. Thus it is not palatable but it is understandable and it is easier to fight. With the Russian bombing of Georgia one can understand the Russian mentality, the desire to assert Russian power and embarrass the West. The Russians tongue-in-cheek use of words such as 'ethnic-cleansing' to describe the situation in South Ossetia was a brilliant ploy to poke a finger in the eyes of the West and reveal the hypocrisy of the Kosovo adventure whereby bullying Western states had pried away Kosovo from Serbia. Thus Russia was playing at the game of the Westerner in her 'humanitarian intervention'. Bombing Gori and Tblisi was no different than the Nato bombing of Belgrade. One understands the Russian.

But the second issue that always pops up whenever one deals with modernity is the issue of the western elitist leftist reaction. This is always encapsulated in the reporting of the BBC and the reactions of the Western European. These reactions are not genuine or 'authentic'. They are 'critical' and 'thought provoking' and always the opposite of what logic might dictate.

Thus while the BBC described the Israeli bombing of Lebanon as 'disproportionate' the Russian bombing of Georgia was described as Russia's reaction to a 'gamble' carried out by Mikhail Saakashvili in South Ossetia. The BBC continues its legacy of reporting the Lebanon conflict by having reporters amidst the propaganda. Thus BBC reporters had Hizbullah minders in Lebanon and in South Ossetia they dutifully follow around the Russian army and meet the 'right' Ossetians and see the 'dead children' and the 'old women'. It is the classic presentation that one is used to from the Middle East: the weeping old woman and the crying children. Men are, as a rule, excluded from pictures and media reports by white European westerners because the male, especially the 20-40 year old male is not a sympathetic character in the West. The classic statements of propaganda are reiterated by the BBC: 1,600 dead civilians. "We want to be with Russia". The BBC usually finds it can do best in reporting propaganda by sending a female reporter. Its reporter in South Ossetia who is 'escorted by the Russian military' is Sarah Rainsford. The European women reports accurately her role in the propaganda: "we met no Georgians at all on this trip." This is the way of the European. It is the way of the Western media. The idea of journalism, once something that prided itself on sending western reporters to combat regions in order to find out the truth through observation by westerners, now prides itself on sending western reporters to conflict areas to find out what the authorities on one side of the conflict will tell the reporter. It is a fascinating digression of the logic of reporting. If one is going to report only one side and quote only one side and be shown around by minders then why not just let the Russian Ministry of Information provide the details since the BBC is only parroting those details and passing it off as 'journalism'. Perhaps the reason to have the BBC along is to provide the editorial at the end, the Western viewpoint of "This conflict has already destroyed any trust between Georgian and Ossetians. It now looks like any chance there was of reconciliation is burning along with the houses." One can understand when a Russian provides his view of the conflict, what one cannot understand is the way in which the European becomes a propaganda piece for the Russian government.

The reason for the European reaction is cowardice and the classic European act of betrayal. Mikhail Saakashvili compared the situation of his country today, after Russia began bombing it on August 10th 2008 to that of Czechoslovakia in 1938. Like Czechoslovakia both countries have ethnic-minorities. In Czech it was the Sudetenland Germans who agitated for German intervention to 'protect' them. Hitler complied. The West, led by the appeaser Neville Chamberlain relented and granted the West 'peace in our time'. Hitler got Czechoslovakia and the West received 'peace'. It was to prove to be an Islamic peace. Saakashvili evidently used the comparison because he believed the Europeans were of the 'never again' mindset. But Saakashvili obviously has not been paying attention to European history in the 20th century. Europeans have never defended their allies. The European way is to abandon small states to their fate. The European way is to mince words and ignore genocide. Thus it was in 1938 and nothing changed after. The threat of Communism and Soviet imperialism didn't steel the hearts of Europeans. They mostly appeased Communism and expected the U.S to protect them. Elites in many European countries joined Communist terror gangs such as the Red Brigades and the Red Army Faction (Baarder-Meinhof gang). Some of England's most well bred men spied for the KGB. Charles De Gaulle was no champion of freedom against Communism and set France on a 'separate path' while Willy Brandt reconciled with the East German regimes. All the while the 'arsenal of democracy' in the U.S had to protect the European so that his economy could grow and he could sip his latte and work his 35 hour work week and enjoy his 'social justice' welfare system. The EU economy of today was primarily founded on the back of the American taxpayer. But when Europe was rebuilt and it once again had armies it never used them to prevent genocide. It always hid behind America so that when America succeeded the Europeans could take credit and when America failed, as in Vietnam, the Europeans could protest and scoff. When 800,000 Tutsi tribesmen in Rwanda were hacked to death in 1994 with French supplied machetes the Europeans did nothing and then accused the Americans of 'lacking leadership'. Evidently the 500 million people of the EU could not have done anything themselves. Thus Mr. Saakashvili was walking a foolish road when he compared himself to Czechoslovakia. Most people do not even recall the president of Czechoslovakia in 1938. His name was Edvard Benes. Why would Saakashvili inadvertently compare himself to such an unmemorable person. Did Saakashvili forget what Czechs call the Munich agreement of 1938 which destroyed their country? They call it was the 'Western betrayal' (zrada spojencu or Mnichov Mnichovská zrada-Munich Betrayal).

The nature of the Betrayal is quite deep. The West courted the various former Soviet Socialist Republics after 1991. Some of them, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, were allowed into the EU and NATO. Georgia was one of the foremost candidates for the next round of expansion. It was seen as a bulwark of western decency in the Caucuses. On April 9th, 1991 Georgia had declared independence from the U.S.S.R. Zviad Gamsakhurdia became its first president. After being forced into exile by a coup he died during a bloody Civil War in 1993 that pitted him against the former Soviet Foreign Minister, western media darling and Russian supported Eduard Shevardnadze. Shevardnadze served as president until 2003 at which time the 'Rose Revolution' brought Saakashvili to power. During this chaos a number of separatist movements sprouted up in Georgia demanding independence for ethnic minorities including the Abkhaz (94,000 people), Ossetians (65,000) and Ajarians (Adjaria 376,000). Russia has worked since the 1990s to absorb the two northern enclaves, Ossetia and Abkhazia, sending Russian 'peacekeepers' into the areas (much as Nato did in Kosovo) and giving Russian citizenship to the locals. Thus when Saakashvili sent his army to crush the Ossetians in August of 2008 he was attacking 'Russian' citizens and when a few Russian 'peacekeepers' were fired upon the Casus Belli was upon the Georgians. Saakashvili played the game badly. He was not, as the Godfather notes, a 'Wartime Consigliere'. He was an emotional wreck within twenty-four hours of realizing that his gambit had provoked the hungry Russian bear on August 9th. Unlike Henry V at Agincourt he behaved more like Stalin, who was also Georgian, after the Nazi invasion of 1941 (Stalin had a breakdown, seems to have resigned and hid in his room for several days). Saakashvili seems to have rarely slept, perhaps not a surprise given the situation, and he made the strange decision to withdraw the Georgian armed forces from Ossetia and order them to stand down in or around August 13th (an earlier ceasefire declared by him on August 7th before the Russian intervention had not stopped the fighting in South Ossetia). This allowed Russian soldiers to enter Georgia unopposed, takeover the Georgian city of Gori (Stalin's birthplace, the city was subsequently looted by Ossetians) and move towards the Georgian capital. Perhaps this is the Georgian way of fighting. Despite stories of Georgian 'knights' and an ancient history one is all too aware that for many centuries Georgia was the main supplier of slave women to the Ottoman sultan's harem and slave raiders targeted the country annually to reap the latest harvest of young Georgian girls up until the 19th century. Perhaps years of enslavement turned the nation into one of passionate men who, although calculating, clannish and temperamental, are not really the warriors they make themselves out to be). Whatever the case of Saakashvili's inability to carry through with his boastful words, his nation caved in the face of aggression much the way the Czechs caved in 1938. The western betrayal affected Saakashvili so deeply that he was unable to fight.

When the EU president Nicolas Sarkozy, who one might suppose would be a 'wartime Consigliere' given his tough stance against Muslim 'youth' rioters in Paris 2005, in fact signed the death warrant of Georgia. The 'six point peace plan' outlined by the EU ordered the Georgian army to return to its military basis while the Russian army would remain in Georgia under the ambiguous clause "Russian military forces must withdraw to the lines prior to the start of hostilities. While awaiting an international mechanism, Russian peacekeeping forces will implement additional security measures." This is the European way of peace. It is the peace of Petain. Petain signed a similar treaty with Hitler in a railroad carriage in 1940, giving the Nazis access to most of France and setting up a Vichy regime which would actively collaborate. But Georgians are not Frenchmen. They are not collaborators.

In truth the Georgians have learned the hard way what many peoples have had to learn in the 20th century. Having a European friend is meaningless in the hard world of Realpolitic and war. European allies are not a guarantee of military aid. Europeans do not guarantee anything. Europeans offer two things: Cowardice and betrayal. Such is the epitaph of European civilization. To be sure, it was a civilization that produced much guts and bravery. It was not always this way.

But the modern European culture is the culture of critique and protest. It is the culture of the coffee-house intellectual, the poverty tourist and the protest tourist. Thus Europeans will be extremely violent after a football match, they will protest violently against the WTO and globalization. They will even throw rock and assault Chinese Olympians running with the Olympic torch in Paris. This is European bravado at its best: attacking things that cannot fight back. A European will sail on a 'free Gaza boat' from Cyprus to the Gaza strip, know Israel won't hurt his lily white skin, but a European will not go to Darfur. A European will protest China in Paris, but not in China. When ITN China coorespondent Nick Ray was covering a small protest by Chinese people during the Olympics he was pushed around by the police " the journalist's shoes were scuffed, his trousers and shirt dirty and some bruising was visible on his hand." "This was an assault in my mind. I am incredibly angry about this," he told AFP. This is the European mentality. Some scoffed shoes and a dirty shirt is a 'human rights violation', perhaps even an 'act of genocide' if it happens to a European. An entire country invaded, bombed and humiliated, such as Georgia. That is just something to call an unfortunate incident.

European Civilization is dead. It is not something to be fought for and passionate about. There is no strength of vitality in Europe. There is no faith or honor. There is betrayal and cowardice. The Georgian people were deceived and sold a bill of goods over democracy and free markets. They should have learned that democracy, despite the European talk, does not truly wrench he hearts of the European. Crying grandmothers, military minders, terrorism and crying children, and women in veils, that is what wrenches the European mind. A note to Georgia: If you want sympathy import some little black children, convert to Islam and then maybe you will get some sympathy. But you still won't get the military support you need. You are a small little unique country, like Israel and Serbia, and you therefore get the other end of the stick, the one that is useless, flaccid and rotten. You are on your own. It is unfortunate that Mr. Saakashvili does not seem up to the task of defending your country and he has instead put his faith in those who fled the Nazis and those who collaborated.

Contact Seth J. Frantzman at sfrantzman@hotmail.com This is Issue 48 of Terra Incognita and can be found on his website http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com/

To Go To Top

Posted by LEL, August 19, 2008.

1. Scientists in Israel found that the brackish water, drilled from underground desert aquifers, hundreds of feet deep, could be used to raise warm-water fish. The geothermal water, less than one-tenth as saline as sea water, free of pollutants, and a toasty 98 degrees on average, proves an ideal environment.

2. Israeli-developed designer-eyeglasses, promise mobile phone and iPod users, a personalized, high-tech video display. Available to US consumers next year, Lumus-Optical's lightweight and fashionable video eyeglasses, feature a large transparent screen, floating in front of the viewer's face that projects their choice of movie, TV show, or video Game.

3. When Stephen Hawkins visited Israel recently, he shared his wisdom with scientists, students, and even the Prime Minister. But the world's most renown victim of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), or Lou Gehrig's disease, also learned something, due to the Israeli Association for ALS' advanced work in both embryonic and adult stem cell research, as well as its proven track record with neurodegenerative diseases. The Israeli research community is well on its way, to finding a treatment for this fatal disease, which affects 30,000 Americans.

4. Israeli start-up, Veterix, has developed an innovative new electronic capsule that sits in the stomach of a cow, sheep, or goat, sending out real-time information on the health of the herd, to the farmer via Email or cell phone. The e-capsule, which also sends out alerts if animals are distressed, injured, or lost, is now being tested on a herd of cows, in the hopes that the device will lead to tastier and healthier meat and milk supplies.

5. The millions of Skype users worldwide will soon have access to the newly developed KishKish lie-detector. This free internet service, based on voice stress analysis (a technique, commonly used in criminal investigations), will be able to measure just how truthful that person on the other end of the line, really is.

6. Beating cardiac tissue has been created in a lab from human embryonic stem cells by researchers at the Rappaport Medical Faculty and the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology's biomedical Engineering faculty. The work of Dr. Shulamit Levenberg and Prof. Lior Gepstein, has also led to the creation of tiny blood vessels within the tissue, making possible its implantation in a human heart.

7. Israel's Magal Security Systems, is a worldwide leader in computerized security systems, with products used in more than 70 countries around the world, protecting anything from national borders, to nuclear facilities, refineries, and airports. The company's latest Product, DreamBox, a state-of-the-art security system that includes Intelligent video, audio and sensor management, is now being used by a major water authority on the US east coast to safeguard the utility's sites.

8. It is common knowledge that dogs have better night vision than humans and a vastly superior sense of smell and hearing. Israel's Bio-Sense Technologies, recently delved further, and electronically analyzed 350 different barks. Finding that dogs of all breeds and sizes, bark the same alarm when they sense a threat, the firm has designed the dog bark-reader, a sensor that can pick up a dog's alarm bark, and alert the human operators. This is just one of a batch of innovative security systems to emerge from Israel, which Forbes calls 'the go-to country for anti-terrorism technologies.'

9. Israeli company, BioControl Medical, sold its first electrical stimulator to treat urinary incontinence to a US company for $50 Million. Now, it is working on CardioFit, which uses electrical nerve stimulation to treat congestive heart failure. With nearly five million Americans presently affected by heart failure, and more than 400,000 new cases diagnosed yearly, the CardioFit is already generating a great deal of excitement as the first device with the potential to halt this deadly disease.

10. One year after Norway's Socialist Left Party launched its boycott Israel campaign, the importing of Israeli goods has increased by 15%, the strongest increase in many years, Statistics Norway reports.

In contrast to the efforts of tiny Israel to make contributions to the world so as to better mankind, one has to ask what have those who have strived to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth done other than to create hate and bloodshed.

Contact LEL by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 19, 2008.


"Twenty-seven leading rabbis have joined the public call for Jewish Labor, under the motto, "Don't give them guns, don't give them tractors, don't give them jobs."

"The enemy is raising his head with brazenness, with verbal and physical violence, and with offensiveness to Jewish girls. The enemy is making inroads into our neighborhoods and cities, and we are giving them jobs." (Arutz-7, 8/1.)

During pre-statehood Zionism, Ben-Gurion strove to get Jews hired — employers preferred cheap Arab labor. Then Rabbi Meir Kahane urged that Arabs be encouraged to leave the country, else they would try to take it over. He was right — they are trying this. Arab brazen affronts to Jewish girls are indeed a result of the timid Israel reaction to their aggression and the leftist reaction of giving Arabs preferences and pretending that the Jews must appease the Arabs.


As predicted, Hamas is using the truce to train its troops. It used to try to train them in secret, to avoid Israeli raids. Not fearing raids during the truce, it now can train them openly. Dr. Aaron Lerner sarcastically calls this "another achievement" of the Olmert regime (IMRA, 8/1),

Training in the open naturally is more effective.

Except for the minor media, I don't hear much protest against the Olmert regime that pushes through policies that critics warn harm national security.


When Hamas staged its coup in Gaza, it disbanded all the Fatah militias that had opposed it. It spared those militias and clans that did not oppose it.

After a mysterious attack on Hamas men, Hamas raided and disarmed the remaining Fatah militias and clans, with one notorious clan to go. Fatah would seem to have no chance of regaining power there (IMRA, 8/1).


Egypt shuts down arms smuggling tunnels now and then. The latest one blown up had five smugglers inside, at the time. They suffocated from having their air supply cut off (IMRA, 8/2). Egypt demolishes just enough tunnels so it can make headlines and claim it is doing something. The five men paid the ultimate price for Egypt's public relations stunt.


Some US academics met with Syrians to discuss future cooperation (IMRA, 8/2).

US national security would be stronger if the Arabs knew less science and even other subjects. Their code is intolerant and cruel. Many favor the evil axis against civilization. Western universities should not cooperate with theirs.

Why did the US academics consider cooperation with Syrian universities? NaÏve; about the military uses to which Syria puts science? Guess they haven't heard of Syrian chemical weapons and attempts to get nuclear ones. NaÏve; about the effects of mingling with Western academics? Or are those Western academics anti-Western, like the corrupted university Mideastern Study Centers?


Under fire, 15 Fatah men fled from Gaza to Israel. Israeli troops risked their lives letting them in and to a hospital, as a "humanitarian gesture." Abbas asked Israel to take in dozens of non-wounded members of a pro-Fatah clan, to spare them execution. Then he refused to give them asylum, so Israel returned at least 34 to Gaza. Hamas arrested them. A day later, Abbas seems to accept them.

Apparently, the clan fled rather than fight, when Hamas bombarded their houses, in which non-combatants also lived. The clan was indignant about that bombardment (IMRA, 8/2-3). These preliminary numbers are not reliable.

Not a gesture by Israel, but a deed. Not humanitarian, saving foreign terrorists. Israel should not have interfered. Let terrorists kill each other! If the Fatah men had to surrender to Hamas, and didn't get medical treatment, Israel could show that Hamas is inhumane. Israel rarely explains to the world how inhumane and unjust its enemy is. It lets the world mistakenly think that Israel is inhumane. It gets no credit with the world for being foolishly over-humane.

The clan was indignant, but that is how the Muslim Arabs fight. Although Israel tries to spare non-combatants, war is not exact mathematics, and accidents occur. When they do, the Arabs call it deliberate and hypocritically complain, and the so-called humanitarian organizations condemn Israel. Those organizations rarely condemn the Arabs for their war crimes against Israelis. Now that the Arabs commit war crimes against their own people in Gaza, will Human Rights Watch, Amnesty Intl., and the Israeli anti-Zionist groups financed by the New Israel Fund and the EU object? Will those groups do anything to counter the world's impression of criminal Muslim Arabs as victims of Israel?

Why Abbas' initial betrayed? Trying to deceive Israel to take in more Arabs?


Last year, Arabs stole a reported $15 million of crops and farmers' equipment from Israelis. More, being uninsured, was unreported. Israelis defending their lives and property were arrested. The Arabs usually were not punished.

The Knesset passed a bill allowing farmers to defend themselves from obvious criminal intent. They want the law strengthened to impose harsh penalties upon the thieves, to discourage them (Arutz-7, 8/3).

Israeli police, however, rarely crack down on Arab criminals who harass the Jews, whom the leftist government wants to expel from Judea-Samaria. Would the new law that farmers request accomplish what they wish?


The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) is suing to prevent Israel from sending Fatah members back to Gaza, where they might be killed. ACRI contends that returning refugees to a country that might harm them contravenes international law (IMRA, 8/3).

Earlier news was that Hamas released most of those who went back. I don't know what international law holds. If it is as claimed, then it is wrongful. What could be better than for Hamas to execute the terrorists from Fatah, and for Fatah to retaliate and execute terrorists from Hamas? We are talking about people deserving execution under international law, not innocent people. Fatah members constantly commit terrorism against Israel. How humanitarian is it to insists that Israel accept Fatah members? Not at all. ACRI simply is anti-Zionist.

Having to grant asylum even for refugees innocent of crimes where they fled would be wrongful if they present a danger to the country they flee to. Palestinian Arabs present that danger to Israel. [PLO members were expelled from Jordan and Kuwait, because they became a fifth column there.] It should be the obligation of the P.A. and the Palestinian Arab state of Jordan to take them in.

I think that the civilized word should review the rules for granting sanctuary, so that countries don't become hostages unfairly.


The government of Lebanon compromised with Hizbullah, ruling that it may keep its [illegal] arms (IMRA, 8/3). How is that a compromise? Face-saving falsity.

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

Posted by GWY, August 19, 2008.

In 1929, Arab mobs attacked Jewish communities throughout Israel. False rumors — fueled by inflammatory sermons in the mosques — declared that the Jews were preparing to take control of the holy places, and that Jews were carrying out "wholesale killings of Arabs." Muslims mobs went on the attack, killing 17 Jews in Jerusalem and 18 in Tzfat. The worst atrocities occurred in Hebron, where only one British policeman guarded the entire city and was powerless to stop the rampage. In Hebron, 67 Jews including 12 Americans were murdered. The survivors were relocated to Jerusalem, leaving Hebron barren of Jews for the first time in centuries

Contact GWY by email at gwy123@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, August 19, 2008.

So let's see if we have this straight.

The entire world is horrified at Russian behavior. The Russians invent a new 'nation' in need of self-determination, all as a ploy to break up Georgia. The Russians scream about the mistreatment of the Ossetians and never mind human rights abuses inside Russia, especially in Chechnya. The Russians coordinate moves by separatists inside Georgia to serve as justification for their own invasion. The Russians preach human rights and self-determination as a ploy to engage in aggression. Hmmm, where have we heard that before?

The story brings to mind immediately two historic parallels. The first is the campaign by Nazi Germany on behalf of 'self-determination' for the Sudeten Germans inside Czechoslovakia in the 1930s. For details see this: http://www.meforum.org/article/459. Germany also invented a 'people' in need of self-determination inside the small state it had designs on, invented claims of human rights abuses, and then used the separatist activities of the Sudetens as an excuse to invade and demolish in stages Czechoslovakia. Never mind that human rights were respected a zillion times better inside Czechoslovakia than inside Nazi Germany. Never mind that ethnic Germans already had their own sovereign countries they could migrate to if they were unhappy in the Sudeten areas of Czechoslovakia.

The other historic parallel concerns the invention of a 'Palestinian people.' The Arabs use the 'Palestinian' separatist movement the exact same way that Russia uses the Ossetian separatists. The Arabs and their apologists invent tales of 'human rights abuses' by Israel of 'Palestinians' much like Russia invents stories about Georgian mistreatment of Ossetians. Never mind that the human rights of Arabs inside Israel are respected infinitely better than are those of Arabs inside Arab countries, and the non-Arabs inside Arab countries are treated even worse. The world whines about Israeli 'apartheid,' whereas in reality Israel is the only Middle East regime that is NOT an apartheid regime.

In fact, the Georgians did sometimes mistreat the Ossetians and the Ossetians have a far stronger case for self-determination than the 'Palestinians. The Ossetians speak their own language unrelated to that of their neighbors and have their own culture. In comparison, the 'Palestinians' are less different culturally and less distinct linguistically from the Arabs in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria (whence most of them migrated into 'Palestine' in the late 19th and early 20th century) than Californians are from other Americans.

If the world is horrified at Russian aggression and behavior towards Georgians, why are so many of these same people not horrified at Arab aggression towards Israel and behavior identical to that of Russia? Why are those who pooh-pooh the claims of a right to self-determination by Ossetians not dismissing as a similar Sudeten-style ploy the demands for 'Palestinian self-determination?' Why are Palestinians, who enjoy treatment far better than that of the Ossetians and the Chechens, the focus of countless media exposes about their imaginary mistreatment by Israel?

And where are all those solidarity protesters? How come the same 'International Solidarity Movement' protesters who like to attack Israeli troops and police and to serve as 'human shields' to protect the po' Palestinian 'victims' of Israeli self-defense not rushing to Ossetia and Georgia to stand up to the Russian troops, throwing rocks at them and singing Kun-Ba-Ya? Where are the leftist human shield blocking Russian (and Georgian) military vehicles the same way they block Israeli Defense Forces operations? Are they afraid they will not be served the same nice gourmet lattes they get when Israeli forces apprehend them for hooliganism in the West Bank?

Why are the leftists not organizing ships to break the Russian blockade of the Georgia coast the same way they are trying to provide sea-borne aid to the Hamas in Gaza? Where are the Rachel Corries and why are they not challenging Russian bulldozer crews? Why are the Anarchists against the Wall not hopping planes to Tbilisi to challenge Russian construction crews erecting walls in Abkhazia and Ossetia? Why are the Israeli leftist professors not holding pro-Ossetian poetry readings and solidarity rallies in Tbilisi?

Leftist hypocrisy seems to have no limits!

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Yishai Fliesher and Elana Eden, August 19, 2008.

Former Arkansas Governor and vice-presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee flew in to Israel Monday on a whirlwind two-day fact-finding and solidarity tour. On his first day in the Holy Land, Huckabee visited Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem, while on Tuesday he is scheduled to tour Sderot.

Daniel Luria, executive director of the Jerusalem Reclamation Project (Ateret Kohanim) took Governor Huckabee around Jerusalem, including a traditional stop at the Western Wall. However, Huckabee was also afforded the opportunity to view parts of Jerusalem which no major American politician has had the privilege of seeing. These included new Jewish enclaves at Abu Tor, the Yemenite Village in the Shiloach (Silwan Valley), Kidmat Zion, the Muslim Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, and the grand new housing project at the Mount of Olives.

In the Muslim Quarter

While touring Governor Huckabee also had time to make statements and respond to questions from journalists.

Gov. Huckabee said he understood the need for a Palestinian state, but that it should not interfere with the Jewish one.

"There are many, many places where a homeland for the Palestinians could in fact take place that would be consistent with their roots," he said. "But there is only one place on earth where the Jewish people could have a homeland that is consistent with their roots."

He emphasized that the international community agreed to recognize clear, definitive boundaries of a Jewish homeland in Israel as early as 1919.

Mati Dan of Ateret Kohanim showing the Governor the new Jewish project on the Mount Of Olives

"We have a moral obligation to the Jewish people to honor the commitment that has been made through decades and decades of understanding that there is going to be a homeland for the Jewish people," he said.

"The question shouldn't be 'Do Arabs have a right to live in Jewish territory,'" said Gov. Huckabee, "but, 'Do Jews have a right to live in Jewish territory?'"

"To say that Jews can't live in Jerusalem is the equivalent of telling the Boston Red Sox they can't play in Fenway Park. Obviously, that would never go over very well on Beacon Hill."

Click Here to Download Interview With Huckabee

EDITOR'S NOTE: Aaron Klein of the World Net Daily Jerusalem Bureau reported on August 20, 2008:

"On his two-day mission here, Huckabee visited the various quarters of Jerusalem's Old City, the Western Wall and underlying tunnels, and the rocket-battered town of Sderot.

He also visited Arab-majority neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem and expressed strong support for moving Jews into the areas. Much of the Arab communities were built illegally upon Jewish-owned land. The Israeli government over the years has done little to stop rampant illegal Arab construction in northern and eastern neighborhoods of Jerusalem. Hundreds of acres of the land in question are legally owned by the Jewish National Fund, or JNF, which purchases property in Israel for the stated purpose of Jewish settlement.

The demographics in eastern Jerusalem have major political implications, since it involves areas widely expected to be handed over to the Palestinian Authority as a result of Israeli-PA negotiations aimed at forming a Palestinian state."

This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva (www.inn.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Simon McIlwaine, August 19, 2008.

This was written by Hillel Fendel, senior news editor at Arutz-7. It was published August 24, 2008 in Arutz-7


(IsraelNN.com) The Arabs have been stealing some 3 million cubic meters of water each year in parts of Judea, south of Jerusalem, and the government has now taken action. The Civil Administration confiscated some 50,000 kilometers' worth of water piping this week from Arabs living in the South Mt. Hevron region.

The Arabs steal the water by hooking up pipes to the central pipelines that deliver water to the Jewish towns in the Mt. Hevron Regional Council.

The Civil Administration is the body that governs Judea and Samaria in the name of the Israeli Government.

Despite the considerable size of the confiscated haul, the Civil Administration estimates that it is merely a drop in the bucket. The Arabs still retain some 85% of the piping through which they stream the stolen water to the Arab villages.

Two weeks ago, Mt. Hevron Regional Council head Tzviki Bar-Chai wrote an urgent letter to Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer and Police Commissioner Dudi Cohen. Bar-Chai wrote that the matter of Arab water theft had gone "out of control." He pleaded with the two to convene the relevant authorities and take action to "stop the ongoing catastrophe."

Amir Ben-Tovim, Assistant to the Police Commissioner, wrote in response his confirmation that over the past three summers, Arab theft of water had risen in the Judea and Samaria district.

Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel (www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 19, 2008.

This comes from the Joshua Pundit website and was posted by Freedom Fighter.


Russian Bear Poster

"It's not a ceasefire until we say so, Condi, no matter what we signed or agreed to."

That's essentially what Putin and his hand puppet Medvedev are saying, loud and clear.

Not only have the Russians and their Ossetian and Abkhazian 'militias' not pulled out of Georgia, they've advanced further into the country and have essentially cut it in half. They've refused to remove their forces and instead are digging in and fortifying their positions in spite of the signed deal Condi was waving around.

They've also continued to pour troops in Ossetia and Abkhazia and continue to occupy Gori and the Georgian Black Sea port of Pori.

And while they're there, they've been totally destroying Georgia's infrastructure, wrecking roads, power stations, civilian dwellings and government buildings as well as anything even remotely connected with Georgia's ability to defend itself.

There has been widespread looting and theft,even of reporters attempting to cover the carnage. Human Rights Watch has reported widespread ethnic cleansing of Georgians living in or near Ossetia and Abkhazia, and there are numerous reports of rapes and shootings of civilians.

The Russians have even kidnapped Georgian citizens, forcibly taken them to the Russian zone of occupation and put them to forced labor.

What they're after of course, is to leave Georgia destitute, powerless and unable to defend itself, ideally with Saakashvili out and a Russian stooge in charge.

Russia's goal is to send a message to the old parts of its empire that the Bear is back and they are its vassals...and to wall off the last link between Europe and the energy producing areas in Central Asia not under Russian control.

Along with this obscene aggression, the Russians have done a typical job of attempting to come up with some myths to justify what they're doing, like 'Ossetian genocide', and 'Russia's humanitarian peacekeeping mission.

I've already explained why most of this is sheer horse manure, and the Washington Post also does a pretty fair job debunking most of this mythmaking coming from Moscow.

However, expect the Russians to continue their propaganda efforts with inflated casualty reports of 'Ossetian civilians' and films of Russians or Ossetians using some of the Georgian uniforms and military equipment the Russians captured as 'Georgian soldiers' performing 'atrocities.'

Hitler used exactly the same kind of tactics in Czechoslovakia and Poland, and they will no doubt be effective here as well with the more gullible. The Left in Europe and America still, after all these years has a soft spot for Russia that has increased as Putin has reverted back to his KGB roots and become more Soviet-like and anti-American.

The response of America and the West to the rape of Georgia has been incredibly feeble so far.

The Western European part of NATO, particularly Germany have been incredibly craven. The Europeans are the ones chiefly to blame for this defeat — and I won't characterize it any other way — by refusing to allow Georgia and the Ukraine to enter NATO out of fewar of Russia, as the US wanted.

And aside from some tough rhetoric, a ride home for 2,000 Georgian troops stationed in Iraq and some humanitarian aid, little has been done by the US except to negotiate a ceasefire agreement...which the Russians obviously intend to interpret in their own way and in their own good sweet time. They may very well get what they're ultimately after...a Georgian puppet state and de facto control of the pipeline routes into Europe.

However, there are also some signs the Russians may have overplayed their hand.

The nations of what Donald Rumsfeld presciently called 'New Europe' reacted to the Russian invasion, not with fear as might have been expected but with resolution.

The leaders of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and the Ukraine were quick to make common cause with President Saakashvili of Georgia, traveling to the embattled capitol of Tbilsi to stand with him and condemn the Russian aggression.

This is historic..through the centuries, these countries have never before united against Russia in this way, which is why they became part of Russia's empire. Look for them to put together a formula for their common defense and integrate their forces.

Moreover, they've realized that the Old Europe members of NATO like France and Germany cannot be depended on for any kind of concrete support against the Russians..so they've turned to the US.

The Poles quickly signed an agreement with the US that had been hanging fire for 18 months to put a US defense missile shield there and also signed on to massive US aid for its armed forces, while the Ukraine has offered to link up its missile warning system with Europe and has limited the Russian navy's use of the Black Sea port of Sevastapool

The Ukrainians and Poles know full well they could be next on the chopping block, and Russia's crude violation of Georgia has reminded them of their history in a way nothing else could have.

Another bit of positive fallout from the Russian invasion has been the discrediting of Condaleeza Rice, arguably the worst Secretary of State in US history.

President Bush went to Bei-jing for the Olympics having been assured by Rice and her minions in the US State Department that there was no chance of the Russians making a power play in the Caucasus.

And even after the Russians went into Ossetia while he was still in China, Rice assured him that she had 'talked to Putin' and that the Russians would never invade Georgia.

So President Bush didn't rush home at the beginning of the crisis, relying on Rice and the State Department's assessment that it was something fairly minor and containable that could be worked out with the Russians.

So when the fit hit the shan and Bush realized that the Russians were in fact running rampant in Georgia, he reportedly got fairly irritated, not only with Putin but with Condi Rice.

Rice made her bones in the State Department as a Russia expert, yet the Bush Administration was caught completely by surprise when Russia invaded.

Her entire modus operandi with the Russians has always been to engage with them as 'allies' in the belief that Russia's imperialist nature had changed and that Putin was trustworthy, even when every sign showed that Russia was reverting to its autocratic past. Like her dealings with Lebanon, Kosovo,Syria, the Arab-Israeli conflict and North Korea, this latest fiasco simply underlines exactly how ineffectual and agenda driven she really is.

The beneficial part of this is that more sensible voices like Dick Cheney and ex-US Ambassador John Bolton have been vindicated...and that might just change a few things in the Bush Administration's waning days, especially where subjects like dealing with Iran's nuclear weapons program are concerned.

Another positive development, and perhaps the most significant is that many Americans awoke from their stupor and realized that it's still a very dangerous world out there.

Comparing John McCain's quick and forceful response to the crisis compared with Barack Obama's waffling, a lot of Americans were reminded of the need to have someone experienced, tough and forceful in the White House when the crunch comes.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, August 19, 2008.

Ex-president reveals nation allowed bases, free movement for jihadists in secret pact

You can be sure that Italy is not alone in this and that it is still going on. This article was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in World Net Daily


JERUSALEM — In an astonishing admission, the former president of Italy has confirmed his country provided Palestinian terror groups with sanctuary and the ability to establish internal bases in a secret pact in which the terrorists pledged not to target Italian interests.

"I always knew, though not by official documents and information kept from me, about the existence of an agreement based on 'don't harm me and I won't harm you' between the Italian Republic and organizations such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the PLO," Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga revealed in a letter to the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

Cossiga was responding to an interview the newspaper conducted last week with Bassam Abu Sharif, a top Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, or PFLP, leader who claimed Italy provided his group in the 1970s with safe haven in a non-aggression pact.

"The terms of the agreement were that the Palestinian organizations could even maintain armed bases of operation in the country, and they had freedom of entry and exit without being subject to normal police controls, because they were 'handled' by the secret services," Cossiga wrote.

Cossiga stated the agreement was approved and directed by former Italian Premier Aldo Moro, who in 1978 was kidnapped and assassinated by the Italian terror group the Red Brigades.

At the time of the agreement, Cossiga was serving as Italy's interior minister. Palestinian groups in the 1970s carried out scores of attacks targeting European countries.

"During my time as interior minister I learned that PLO people were holding heavy artillery in their homes and protected by diplomatic immunity as representatives of the Arab League. I was told not to worry and I managed to convince them to lay down their heavy artillery and make do with light weaponry," Cosinga wrote.

The Italian pact apparently didn't work. Palestinian factions are blamed for several attacks against Italy in the 1970s and 80s, including an attack at Rome's airport and main synagogue and the infamous hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship. The Rome airport attack was attributed by some to a breakaway PLO leadership.

Cossinga singles out Palestinian groups as responsible for a 1980 explosion at an Italian train station that killed 85 people and wounded 200 more. He says it may have been a "work accident" by Palestinians transporting explosives into Italy.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 18, 2008.

This was written by David J. Rusin and it appeared in Islamist Watch


A recent news item exposes the Dutch response to polygamy as a stew of accommodation, bungling, and illogic. We have witnessed these elements many times before as Western states grapple with Islamism, but their confluence in a seven-paragraph article is striking.

For starters, local Dutch officials are registering plural unions even though the practice is formally banned. The paperwork proceeds with nary a hitch as long as the people involved are immigrants whose marriages took place in countries where having more than one wife is permitted.

But this represents the least interesting part of the story. After all, Britain and the Canadian province of Ontario already grant de facto recognition of polygamy by providing added welfare benefits to men with multiple wives. Far more intriguing in the Dutch case is the manner by which the national government has been excising these data from public records:

The Central Bureau for Statistics (CBS), where all marriages are registered nationally, removes these bigamous or polygamous marriages from its files, on the assumption that administrative errors have occurred. As a result, it is not known how common the phenomenon is in the Netherlands.

[The] Amsterdam city council has informed the CBS that the marriages are not a mistake. "We will now investigate whether this can be regarded as a trend that was previously not recognized. If this is the case, it is our task to report this," CBS researcher Jan Latten explained in NRC Handelsblad.

"At present, it is not included in our statistics," Latten pointed out. "In the same way, we delete marriages involving fourteen-year-olds. A man with two wives just cannot exist by law."

The bizarre reasoning of the Dutch official recalls an attempt by Ontario parliamentarian Ted McMeekin to deny the presence of polygamy in his province, based on similar logic that something illegal must not actually exist.

Yet most disturbing of all is the census researcher's offhand comment, "In the same way, we delete marriages involving fourteen-year-olds." Child marriage is endemic to much of the Islamic world and the phenomenon is of growing concern in the West. For example, earlier this year British officials warned that pupils missing from school may have been forced into wedlock overseas.

Which begs the obvious question: is polygamy just the beginning of what gets dropped down the Dutch memory hole?

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by GWY, August 18, 2008.


The OPEC minister will look you in the eyes and state:

We have been at war with you stupid infidels since the embargo in the 1970's. You are so arrogant you haven't even recognized it!

You have more missiles, bombs, and technology. So we are fighting with the best weapon we have — oil. It gives us such great pleasure watching the western economy falling apart....... and extracting on a net basis $700 billion a year out of your economy.

We will destroy your economy! Death to the infidels!

While I am here I would like to THANK you for the following:

Not developing your 250-300 year supply of oil shale and tar sands.

We know if you did this it would create millions of jobs for US citizens, expand your engineering capabilities, and keep the wealth in the US. Leaving us with very little cash flow.

Instead you send it to us to finance our war against you Americans.

THANKS for limiting Defense Dept. purchases of oils lands from your neighbors to the north. We love it when you confuse your allies.

THANKS for over-regulating every segment of your economy and thus delaying, by decades,the development of alternate fuel technologies.

THANKS for limiting drilling off your coasts, and in Alaska! Look how rich we Arabs are getting from the petro $$$$$. Glad to see our lobbying efforts have been so effective.

THANKS for your corn-based Ethanol. Praise Allah for this sham program! You will destroy yourself from the inside with theses types of policies.

This is a gift from Allah, praise his name! We stupid arabs never would have thought of this one!

This is better than when you pay your farmers NOT TO GROW FOOD. Have them use more energy to create less energy, and simultaneously drive food prices through the roof.

Thank you US Congress!

And finally,we THANK you for letting us fleece you without end!

You will be glad to know we have been accumulating millions of shares in your banks, real estate, and publicly held companies. We also finance a good portion of your debt and now with ease we can manipulate your markets, currency, and economies to our benefit.



Contact GWY by email at gwy123@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Phillips, August 18, 2008.


Dr. Israel Eldad
The First Tithe
The story of Israel's fight for freedom
Translated into English by Zev Golan
Publisher: Gefen Publishing House
ISBN 10: 9654160153
ISBN 13: 978-9654160155
Number of Pages: 420
Year Published: 2008

Israel celebrates the sixtieth anniversary of the rebirth of Jewish statehood this year and an important book has been published that sheds much needed light on the little known (and less understood) freedom fighters that made that very independence happen. The late Dr. Israel Eldad's memoirs of Israel's battle for independence titled The First Tithe (Ma'aser Rishon) are now available in English for the first time. Eldad originally published this volume of memoirs, primarily about his experiences as a leader in the Zionist underground, in Israel in Hebrew in 1950. The new English edition has been published by the Tel Aviv based Jabotinsky Institute.

Eldad died in 1996 and was one of the three commanders of the Zionist underground organization known as the LEHI (the Fighters for the Freedom of Israel) and shared the leadership of the LEHI after the assassination of Avraham "Yair" Stern by the British army in 1942. The British called the organization the Stern Gang in an effort to marginalize it as simply a gang of criminals. Another member of the LEHI's three-man high command was Yitzhak Shamir, who later served twice as Israel's Prime Minister.

Throughout the LEHI's revolt against the British, Eldad crafted and taught the ideology of the LEHI, edited its underground newspapers and functioned as its chief propagandist. The translation of The First Tithe is by Zev Golan, an American-born Zionist historian of note. Eldad's book covers the period between 1938 and 1948. As he relates in the beginning of the memoirs, Eldad starts his narrative in 1938 when he spoke at the Betar conference in Warsaw. Eldad dramatically addressed Zev Jabotinsky in a dynamic speech directly after Jabotinsky rebuked Menachem Begin for calling for Betar to advocate "conquering of my (Jewish) homeland" and make the statement part of the Betar oath of allegiance. Jabotinsky was the greatest Zionist leader after Herzl and founder of the military-like Zionist youth movement Betar. Eldad made an impassioned call for an open revolt against the British aimed at establishing a Jewish state. Stern arranged to meet Eldad at the conference after hearing his speech.

Dr. Eldad and his wife shared an apartment with Menachem Begin and his wife in Vilna after the Nazi invasion. Eldad arrived in the British Palestinian Mandate in 1941 and promptly joined the LEHI, soon becoming a member of the LEHI high command. In 1944, Eldad was seriously hurt while attempting to escape from British custody. Eldad was finally freed after a dramatic prison break engineered by the LEHI. He was still wearing a cast on his back from the injuries he sustained during his first escape attempt. After two years of British imprisonment Eldad resumed his activities in the underground.

The final part of Eldad's First Tithe contains his penetrating analysis of the early history of the Israeli Army. He covers the failure of Israeli Army to capture Jerusalem's Old City in 1948, the decision of the LEHI to disband and integrate into the Israeli Army and the brutal attack on the Irgun arms ship Altalena by the Israeli Army.

Eldad was a leader in the struggle to stop Jerusalem from being internationalized by the United Nations in 1948. He saw the dissolution of the LEHI and the loss of the Old City in epic proportions. Had the LEHI and its Irgun allies successfully pushed Ben-Gurion's government to make Jerusalem the priority it should have been, argues Eldad, then the ultimate dream of building the Third Temple would have been met. Moreover, the LEHI and Irgun should have, and could have, captured the Temple Mount without the Israel Defense Forces.

Eldad combines the above analysis with an original take on the failure of the Underground to grasp the power it had at that time. The Underground publicly forced Ben-Gurion to declare Israel's Independence, a point too many historians evade. Eldad posits that the Irgun and LEHI should have made the declaration themselves and assumed government leadership afterwards. He declares that by publicly stating that they would not engage Ben-Gurion in a civil war, the Irgun and LEHI failed to turn their defeat of the British into a political victory. Eldad wrote that the Underground's moral right to lead was earned by the fact that they had driven the British out and that their battle-experienced forces and arms outmatched Ben-Gurion's new army.

Eldad's eleven-chapter memoirs cover many of the most important Jewish historical events of the 20th century and this is what makes the book such a treasure. Eldad had a unique perspective as both a witness and as a central player to this history. Add to that his training as a historian and a political philosopher and his work as a propagandist, and you have a book that could have been written by no one else.

Zev Golan's translation brings Eldad's distinctive voice to English successfully. No easy task. Golan is better known as the author of the 2003 book Free Jerusalem: Heroes, Heroines and Rogues Who Created the State of Israel (Devora Publishing), which is available in English and should not be missed by those who want to know more about the Zionist Underground before Israel was a modern state. Golan's The Shofars of the Revolt (in Hebrew) is about the men who from 1930 to 1947 violated British regulations against sounding the shofar at the Western Wall at the conclusion of Yom Kippur services. His God, Man and Nietzsche: A Startling Dialogue between Judaism and Modern Philosophers (in English) was also published in 2007 (by i-Universe) and includes some information on Eldad. Eldad translated Nietzsche's works into Hebrew and was Israel's foremost Nietzsche scholar.

After Israel's independence, Eldad concentrated on ideological activities. He began publication of the ideological magazine Sullam, which provided a unique perspective on the cultural and social problems of the new Jewish State and was known for its sharp criticism of the Israeli government. David Ben-Gurion, acting in his role as Israel's Minister of Defense, ordered Eldad banned from teaching in government schools. Even after having won a Supreme Court suit against Ben-Gurion's order, Eldad could not immediately find a teaching position. He found work as an editor for the publishing arm of Mossad HaRav Kook. Eventually Eldad held positions on the faculties of the Technion in Haifa and the former Beersheba University; he also wrote for Israel's daily newspapers Haaretz and Yediot Ahronot.

Even in his senior years Eldad's work for a Third Temple and his support for the Temple Mount Faithful and Jewish settlers and their organizations remained vibrant. He died without seeing the State of Israel become the vehicle for sovereign Jewish Redemption ("Malchut Israel") that he longed for it to be. After the 1948 failure to win the battle for the Old City and the Israeli government's subsequent ability to maintain a Jewish State without a desire for Judaism's holiest sites, Eldad did not lose hope. He looked at the Temple Mount and saw the necessity to have the site be the focal point of the Jewish nation when far too few cared about it at all. In his 1961 booklet Israel, The Road to Full Redemption, Eldad wrote: "The road from the State of Israel to Malchut Israel with a Holy Temple is far shorter and easier than ever the road was from Hibbat Zion [the 1880s return-to-Zion movement that pre-dated the founding of the modern Zionist political movement] to the State of Israel." After the liberation of the Old City in 1967 and the Israeli government's abandonment of the Temple Mount to the forces of Islam, Eldad still did not lose hope.

Given a wide enough audience, this first-ever translation of Eldad's memoirs may help bring about a reexamination of and rededication to his ideas — ideas that the Jewish People so desperately need to internalize now. Those who read them may learn from Eldad how not to lose hope.

Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For a Safe Israel — AFSI. The chapter's new website is at: www.phillyafsi.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Mandel, August 18, 2008.

Email received from a friend:


Amazon's new "tag" system is creating yet another opportunity for anti-Israel propagandists to campaign against the Jewish homeland. A few dozen books are already "tagged" under the "palestine" label, and the majority of them are anti-Israel.

A terrific antidote will be if enough people tag books on the pre-Israel "Palestine" that include much history on the Jewish presence in Israel, that is, the Jewish people of ancient Palestine, as well as the pre-Israel Palestine Mandate.

To make this successful, we'd need LOTS of people to "tag" books. At least 87 books are already tagged "Palestine" and most are anti-Israel.

To help, please go to Amazon, and if you're logged in, visit the following titles and under the subheading

Suggested Tags from Similar Products
What's this?)


Tags Customers Associate with This Product
What's this?)


[Tag this 'spirituality'] spirituality (10)
[Tag this 'religion'] religion (9)
[Tag this 'carter'] carter (8)
[Tag this 'israel lobby'] israel lobby (7)
[Tag this 'religion'] palestine (7)
[Tag this 'bible prophecy'] bible prophecy (5)
[Tag this 'israel'] israel (4)
[Tag this 'peace'] peace (3)
[Tag this 'objective truthful'] objective truthful (2)
[Tag this 'globalization'] globalization (1)

Do the same for all the following, as well as any other books that show the Jewish relationship to Israel in a truthful, and or neutral, light. (As opposed to hateful rhetoric.)

Saul Friedman's Land of Dust

The Jews of Palestine: A Political History of Palestine from the Bar Kokhba War to the Arab Conquest
http://www.amazon.com/Jews-Palestine-Political-History-Conquest/dp/ 0805235809/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219013835&sr=1-9

Jews of Palestine: 1800-1882
http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-1800-1882-Historical-Society-Studies/ dp/0861932099/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219013387&sr=1-1

Jews and Christians in the Holy Land: Palestine in the Fourth Century
http://www.amazon.com/Jews-Christians-Holy-Land-Palestine/dp/ 0567086992/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219013835&sr=1-5

Land and Economy in Ancient Palestine (re how ancient Judeans fed their people)
http://www.amazon.com/Land-Economy-Ancient-Palestine-Pastor/dp/ 0415159601/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219013835&sr=1-8

British Mission to the Jews in Nineteenth-century Palestine
http://www.amazon.com/British-Mission-Jews-Nineteenth-century-Palestine/ dp/B000OI0T54/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1219018027&sr=1-10

The Jews in Palestine in the Eighteenth Century: Under the Patronage of the Istanbul committee of Officials for Palestine
http://www.amazon.com/Jews-Palestine-Eighteenth-Century-Patronage/dp/ 0817305726/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219018027&sr=1-11

Mystics and Missionaries: The Jews in Palestine 1799-1840
http://www.amazon.com/Mystics-Missionaries-Jews-Palestine-1799-1840/ dp/0874803918/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219018808&sr=1-18

Yalla!: A Wandering Jew Survives Palestine, Cuba, Jamaica, And America
http://www.amazon.com/Yalla-Wandering-Survives-Palestine-Jamaica/ dp/1931741646/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219013835&sr=1-6

Daniel Mandel (PhD Melbourne, 1999) is a Research Fellow in the Department of History at Melbourne University and author of H.V. Evatt and the Establishment of Israel: The Undercover Zionist (Routledge, London, 2004).

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 18, 2008.


A second seal of a minister of the Hebrew King Zedekiah has been found fully intact, in Jerusalem, in the ancient City of David. The seals date back about 2,600 years! Both those ministers were mentioned in the Bible. The Book of Jeremiah refers to their demanding the death of prophet Jeremiah for preaching surrender (IMRA, 7/31).

This is inspiring. Note that this buttresses the Israelite claim to the Land, and helps refutes the Arab claim that the Jewish people were not sovereign in the country. We need a modern prophet to demand the deaths of Olmert, Livni, and Peres, for preaching surrender of much of Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Gaza, and the Golan. Surrender then may have meant survival. Now it means death.


Hizbullah is restoring Lebanon's narcotics industry, to finance its activities. It now is involved with drug traffic all over the world. It gets military intelligence from drug dealers who smuggle drugs into Israel.

The government of Lebanon rarely sends troops into the Bekaa Valley, where the crop is grown. When they come, they let the media take pictures of them destroying a few of the thousands of acres of poppies. The pretense is that they are doing something about the problem. Their country should not get any US aid until they clear up the problem (IMRA, 7/31).

The admonition is not realistic. Lebanon is controlled by Hizbullah. The government would rather forfeit US aid than antagonize Hizbullah. The US should deny the aid, because the government is allied with Hizbullah.

Israel had its chance to destroy Hizbullah. It failed to, and the US cut short its opportunity by resorting to the counter-productive UNO. Now we need a new strategy. The new strategy requires a new understanding of the situation, before we try to figure out new moves. The US must understand that Lebanon lost its independence. The US must stop aiding terrorism there and in the P.A. The US must stop favoring the anti-American Arabs over the pro-American Israel.

Israel must stop depending on foreign powers to protect it. It must stop appeasing the Arabs. It must crush Hamas. It should recover as much of the Territories as it can, and encourage the Arabs to leave Israel and the Territories.

If the US and Israel come to their senses and develop some integrity about jihad, perhaps they can figure out what to do about Hizbullah.


"The [Britishj] public was appalled at the archbishop's prescription for the Balkanization of Britain. [He said let's adopt Sharia.] But in fact, the British government is already affording Islam a special status provided to no other religion or culture, thus bringing about the development of parallel jurisdictions and the growth of an Islamic state within a state."

"Multiple wives of Muslim men can now receive welfare benefits, effectively sanctioning polygamy. Banks now offer "Shari'a-compliant" mortgages, and the Treasury is currently considering the introduction of Shari'a bonds — regardless of the links with terrorism. A number of people serving on the Shari'a advisory boards for British and Western banks have connections with Islamist extremism. In addition, a number of experts have said that Shari'a finance offers an obvious camouflage for terrorist financing."

"While the British security service says it is monitoring thousands of British Islamist terrorists and hundreds of terror groupings, the government and many within the security establishment refuse to acknowledge that religious war is the motivation for these Islamists; too often, they describe such terrorism instead in Orwellian terms as 'anti-Islamic.'"

"Meanwhile, Ibrahim Moussawi, the head of Al-Manar, Hezbollah's anti-Semitic television station, is welcomed into Britain on a speaking tour, and Hizb ut-Tahrir — banned around the world — continues freely to recruit countless thousands of impressionable young British Muslims to the cause of the Islamic takeover of Britain and the West."

Britain has lost faith in its culture. Multi-culturalism paralyzes its ability to face down the Islamist threat; it allows itself to be colonized. Sharing sovereignty with the EU, Britain is not sure which government is responsible for dealing with the problem. Britain may not be devoting enough resources to internal and external defense. Nor are the people clear about whether, in contemporary, amorphous, undeclared wars, they are at war and whether there is a home front (Melanie Phillips, MEPForum, 7/31)


Peace treaties are of value if they codify what both sides agreed to and if both sides want peace. "...the paradox of 'land for piece of paper': the greater the Israeli security concessions for a piece of paper, the greater the chances that the Arabs ultimately turn their backs on the deal." (IMRA, 7/31). .


Abbas' P.A. presented Israel with a list of prisoners it demands be released to it (IMRA, 8/1).

The news brief did not specify why. We had seen that PM Olmert recently offered to release hundreds of prisoners under the rubric of "goodwill." Not that such releases engender goodwill so much as they enable more terrorism.

Who is Abbas to demand anything of Israel? He is a lifelong terrorist. His regime stirs his people to commit terrorism. In that an in other ways, he violates the P.A. and PLO peace agreements with Israel. The prisoners were terrorists, deserving of execution as common enemies of mankind. And Abbas demands their release and insists on certain ones, including ones who committed and coordinated acts of terrorism, including murder?

What kind of person, then, is Abbas? I'd respect him if he publicly said he is against terrorism, and the prisoners should stay incarcerated. He doesn't dare. But must he plead the terrorists' case?


Germany plans to sell hi-tech equipment to Iran. Israel objects. It points out that the West is supposed to be imposing sanctions on Iran. Germany says that those items are not prohibited (IMRA, 8/1).

Germany is acting within the law. But it is helping a rogue state.


Hizbullah has hinted that it will impede Israeli sir surveillance of it over Lebanon. That probably means anti-aircraft guns.

Should Israel act beforehand, wait for the first set of guns to be installed, or wait for them to target Israeli aircraft? What should Israel do if Hizbullah shoots down an unmanned Israeli aircraft? Israel needs to give its military some decisions in advance (IMRA, 8/1).

The decisions should have been made before. The UNO truce should contain clauses explaining what voids the truce and what the parties may do about violations by the other parties. Israel always should plan for Arab violations.

Israel violates the truce by flying spy planes over Lebanon. That is fair — it monitors Hizbullah violations, such as rearming and fortifying southern Lebanon.

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

Posted by David Wilder, August 18, 2008.

The public is asked to urgently pray for David Meir ben Haviva, father of a Hebron resident, who today fell from a ladder and is presently in critical condition.


This afternoon a group of people gathered at the ancient Jewish cemetery in Hebron to participate in a memorial service on the anniversary of the killing of Hebron resident Elazar Leibovitch six years ago. Murdered at the same time were three members of the Dickstein family — the mother, father and young son.

Elazar Leibovitch was murdered, by the Hebrew calendar, on the 17th day of the month of Av. On the same date, at almost the identical hour, Shmuel HaLevy Rosenhaltz, nicknamed "the Matmid' or perpetual student, was the first victim of the 1929 riots and massacre in Hebron. The next day, another 66 men, women and children were killed. Tomorrow a group of people will gather at the same cemetery, only a few meters from Elazar's grave, and mark the 79th anniversary of that horrific event.

This week the Israeli government decided to commemorate these two events in a unique way. They decided to release 200 terrorists, as a 'good-will' gesture to Holocaust denier, Abu Mazen, presently head of the palestinian authority. In order to express support for one Jew-hater over another Jew-hater (Hamas), the Israeli government is freeing 200 terrorists from prison. Not only isn't Israel getting anything in return; they didn't even bother asking for anything in return. What could Israel dare request? Perhaps little things, like Abu-Mazen's full cooperation in successfully achieving the release of Israeli POW Gilad Shalit. But no, that would be too much to ask for. This time Israeli has to give something for nothing, thereby showing Abu-Mazen's supporters and not so much supporters just how good he is, just how strong he is, just how much he can twist the long arm of the Zionist enemy and get murderers released from jail. Without paying any price.

Of course, in their opinion, this isn't enough. All prisoners must be released, unconditionally. But, this is a good beginning, a step in the right direction.

This is how the Olmert administration is marking the 79th anniversary of the 1929 riots, instigated and initiated by Amin el-Husseini, who later met with Hitler in Berlin, formed the Muslim Brigades, and had plans to annihilate all the Jews living in Eretz Yisrael when they expected Rommel to invade during World War Two. Amin el Husseini's direct successor was Abu-Mazen's predecessor, Arafat. Abu-Mazen is trying hard to follow in his footsteps.

However, the government's decision was not enough to mark the current occasion. They had to go just one step further, stick the knife in just a little deeper.

The common rule of prisoner releases over the years has been to refrain from freeing terrorists with 'blood on their hands.' In other words, those that just helped, or attempted to kill but didn't succeed, and the like, they're ok to set free. But those who actually pulled the trigger, they're another story.

That's the way it was, until today. For the first time, the Israeli government decided to release a couple of 'real terrorists,' those who went all the way, and did the dirty act to its fullest degree.

So, who's being released, in celebration of the anniversary of the killings in Hebron? One of the two is Ibrahim Mahmoud Mahmad, who twenty years ago murdered Yehoshua Saloma, a young Yeshiva student studying in the Kiryat Arba Yeshiva. Saloma, a new immigrant from Sweden, who came to Israel alone, had walked into Hebron from Kiryat Arba to buy some dried fruits for the upcoming Tu B'Shvat holiday. While making his purchase in the Hebron Kasba, he was brutally murdered from behind by Ibrahim Mahmoud Mahmad. Saloma is still dead. Mahmad is still alive. And if Olmert et al have their way, he will soon be free. This is the message to the world that Israel is making on the days when Hebron is marking the murders of 68 other Jews by Arabs: 67 in 1929, and Elazar Lebovitch, 6 years ago.

It's interesting to note: Yehoshua Saloma was the first Jew to be killed in Hebron since the 1929 riots. His murderer is about to be freed by the Israeli government. Can you image Israel releasing a few of the barbarians who butchered Jews during those few hours on a summer Saturday in 1929? What's the difference between the barbarians of 79 years ago, the barbarians of 20 years ago, the barbarians of 6 years ago, or the barbarians of today?

Ah, what's the difference you ask? Very simple. In 1929 we could (rightfully) blame the British. Today who do we have to blame? We need only look in the mirror and point a finger at the image we see.

But, then again, it's only a gesture.

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Bedein, August 18, 2008.

Nicosia, Cyprus — On Monday, a movement known as FreeGaza.org held a press conference in Nicosia, Cyprus, in which a group of 40 people from around the world announced that they would board two small boats to travel by sea to Gaza to "break the siege" that Israel has placed upon Gaza.

There was no acknowledgement that in June of 2007, the Hamas regime took over Gaza and formalized a total state of war against Israel with the aim of liberating all of Palestine and using Gaza as a stepping stone to recoup any and all land ruled by the Jewish state.

With increasing boatloads of Iranian military hardware landing on the Gaza coastline, the Israeli navy was forced to impose an embargo of goods coming into Gaza. Israel offered to oversee goods and services for humanitarian needs in Gaza, by allowing specified supervised land crossings for supply to Gaza.

The press conference, held at "Journalist House" in Nicosia, was launched with an opening statement by an Israeli American Jerusalem resident, Jeff Halper, who alleged that Israel was behaving in defiance of international law by closing shipping lanes to Gaza. He also claimed that the people of Gaza faced a severe shortage of milk and medical supplies.

Mr. Monir Deeb, a native Gazan who has lived in Los Angeles since 1979, explained to the media that he was boarding these boats to reunite with his siblings in Gaza. Mr. Deeb described Gaza as a "peaceful community under Israeli military siege" and said that this small convoy was meant to deliver a message to Israel to stop the siege of Gaza.

This reporter asked Mr. Deeb about the armed Gaza militias who have fired thousands of missiles over the past eight years against Israeli civilian communities that surround Gaza. I also asked for his comment on how the Hamas government is using the current cease fire period to regroup and train for the next attack on Israel. Mr. Deeb said that he "could not relate to this question," since it was "political" and his concern was "only humanitarian" in nature.

The convener of the FreeGaza.org press conference, Ms. Greta Berlin, an American woman formerly married to a Palestinian whose family was dislocated from Safed in Northern Israel during the 1948 war, gave examples of the humanitarian mission on which they were embarking. "One of her missions," she said, "was to supply 9,000 hearing aids for Palestinian children who suffer hearing loss at a young age, due to Israeli missile attacks on Gaza."

I asked Ms. Berlin if it were not the case that the missile attacks that she had claimed had been fired at Palestinians in Gaza by Israelis were actually fired by Palestinians towards the Western Negev, as they screech over Palestinian villages en route to hit Israeli civilian targets.

Ms. Berlin would not comment, saying repeatedly that the purpose of the voyage to Gaza was not political, even though the press statement issued by FreeGaza.org touched every raw political nerve possible.

FreeGaza.org also clearly stated that it strongly condemns Israel for not allowing "refugees and their descendants the right to return home" to the villages that have since been resettled by Israel after the 1948 war. Meanwhile, the "FreeGaza.org" press statement also decried "Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine," laying aside any pretensions that the group only favored Israel's full withdrawal from Gaza.

Ms. Berlin reported that the operation to bring two boats into Gaza was independent of any foreign entities. She mentioned that FreeGaza.org had already raised $210,000 of the total budget needed, more than $300,000 for the boats. However, on July 31st, the Palestine Information Center issued a press release in which it stated that a member of the Lebanese Parliament had confirmed to Hamas leader Abu Marzook in Cairo that the boats had been provided by Palestinian popular committees by the Hamas. That would mean, in effect, that FreeGaza.org received two sources of support for its work — from American Jewish groups and from the Palestinian popular committees which are run by Hamas.

Nothing like the profit motive to move things along the high seas.

The boats are timed to arrive in Gaza this coming Saturday night, which this year marks Tisha 'av, the ninth of Av on the Jewish calendar, a fast day which marks disasters which have befallen the Jewish people.

By coincidence or not, pro-Palestinian movements around the world have designated this Friday and Saturday as a time of solidarity with their cause.

Indeed, an international Palestinian solidarity conference will convene this coming weekend at Wyndam Ohare Hotel in Chicago, Illinois, where a coalition of fifty Arab groups will gather under the umbrella of the first "Palestinian Popular Conference in North America." The theme of the conference, promoted in all of their publicity, leaves no room for the imagination: "Ending Zionist occupation and colonization of Palestine.

David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il or at bedein@thebulletin.us His Web site is wwwIsraelBehindTheNews.com. This was published in www.stoptheism.com/

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, August 18, 2008.

This was written by Diana West and it appeared in the Jewish World Review.


Amazing how quickly the punditocracy switches maps, time zones and histories, simultaneously mastering new combinations of consonants and vowels, to report and react to a "surprise" conflict in Georgia. It's almost hard to recall that, just a few days ago, the most urgent questions confounding most of the media had to do with just how narcissistic John Edwards really is, or what the ramifications of Barack Obama's plans to announce his vice presidential pick via text message might finally be.

Since the sight of tanks rolling usually has a way of concentrating the media mind, the question has become: Whither Russia?

In truth, the demise of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn earlier this month was a journalistic godsend. After all, who hadn't already dusted off their long-retired Soviet history books — not to mention their long-retired Soviet history experts, all of whom have had the busiest couple of weeks in years — by the time Vladimir Putin announced last week that "war has started" over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

Historical memory somewhat refreshed, Western media were ready with the headlines — "The evil empire is back"; "Welcome to the 19th century"; "The Russian bear's new teeth" — to promote the main thrust of most stories: namely, that Russia is reverting to tsarist, expansionist, Soviet-style, empire-amassing type.

It's not that there's anything controversial in this journalistic approach, although I do tend to think there remain aspects of the Georgian story we haven't reconciled. What's noteworthy about this narrative consensus, however, is that the invocation of Russia's historical and cultural record is being made so frankly and without hedging. That is, no one's blaming "Russian extremists," "tsarismists," or "hijackers of a great history." On the contrary, the implication behind most Russia-versus-Georgia stories is that the Russians' world-stage behavior as they smash Georgia is something that this same historical and cultural record tells us that Russians do.

Certain political leaders in the West are saying much the same thing. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the invasion was "a reversion to not just Cold War politics, it is a 19 century way of doing politics." At home, John McCain explained the Russian strike against Georgia as a part of the same historical continuum: "I think it's very clear that Russian ambitions are to restore the old Russian empire. Not the Soviet Union, but the Russian empire."

And why is this important? When I started seeing these stories and statements — even making some of them myself — I realized there was something free-wheeling about the style of expression that made it different from what has been the norm. I first wondered if there was a somewhat perverse trace of nostalgia in dealing again with the Russians. And then it hit me. In the nearly seven years since Islam has wholly dominated current events, neither our media nor our leaders have ever, not even once, looked at similarly characteristic behavior from the Islamic world and labeled it accordingly.

In other words, no pattern of avowedly Islam-inspired violence in the world has ever earned a headline nearly as straightforward as "Islamic jihad is back." Not even the Islamic success of Motoon Rage, which has severely repressed Western modes of expression regarding Muhammad in particular and Islam in general, inspired anything as descriptive as, for example, "Sharia's new teeth."

Ask yourself: Would any British foreign secretary of the postmodern age look at, say, last year's trial of a British teacher in Sudan for "blasphemy" in naming a teddy bear "Muhammad," and conclude: "It's a reversion to not just post-colonial politics. It is a seventh century way of doing politics"? Hah.

And what American presidential candidate would ever explain the Islamic push, financial and otherwise, in the West for mosque construction, Islamic schools (madrassas), campus Islamic studies (apologetics) departments, Sharia law-inspired legal challenges, lobbying for Sharia-compliant banking and the like as a matter of Islamic imperialism?

I quoted McCain above discussing, matter-of-fact, what he considers to be catchall "Russian" ambitions to restore the "old Russian empire." Would he, or any other American politician, ever say the same regarding catchall "Islamic" ambitions? While both Russia and Islam claim similarly long histories and cultures of conquest for reference, it's mighty tough to imagine any U.S. politician ever saying the following: "I think it's very clear that Islamic ambitions are to restore the old caliphate." (And that's despite a growing body of statements, even polling data, reflecting the persistence of Islamic caliphate dreams.)

I'm afraid all the radical, fasco-Russian tsarismists will have to abandon their quest for world domination before we hear anything like that.

Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by LEL, August 18, 2008.

This was written by Gail Lichtman and it appeared in Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=3&cid= 1218710375492&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Mayor Benny Kashriel sits in his office on the top floor of City Hall in Ma'aleh Adumim. His window looks out over one of the many flower-lined boulevards and squares that dot this city, located only a seven-minute drive east of Jerusalem on the road to Jericho.

Building project in Ma'aleh Adumim

A popular three-term mayor, who is running unopposed for his fourth term this November, Kashriel's name has become synonymous with Ma'aleh Adumim. He has helped transform it from a low-cost alternative to Jerusalem to one of the cleanest and best run cities in Israel, with a quality of life few other municipalities rival.

In the 31 years since it was established, Ma'aleh Adumim has grown from 23 families to some 34,000 people. During this time, there has hardly been one day when the city was not building new housing and expanding. But all this may end, as Ma'aleh Adumim seems poised to run out of land for residential building.

"Today, the land we have for residential building in the new neighborhood of Nofei Hasela is running out," says Kashriel. "We have land for only some 400 more apartments. Our city has a natural growth of 700 persons annually and we need about 200 new housing units a year. In two years, there will be nowhere for our children who marry and want to stay here to live, let alone new families who want to move here. The only future land we have for residential building is E-1. There is simply no other land in Ma'aleh Adumim for this. In E-1, we can build 3,500 new residential units."

At a time when the Israeli and foreign press are reporting a renewed building boom in Judea and Samaria (despite the freeze Israel declared on new permits for construction after Annapolis in November 2007), why is Ma'aleh Adumim being denied the final go-ahead to build residential housing in the E-1 area that is part of its municipal jurisdiction, a denial Kashriel claims will result in the city being choked off from natural growth within the next two years?

It is difficult, however, to determine just how many housing units have been approved since Annapolis because it all depends on how one defines "approved," from issued tenders to a general go-ahead.

According to a recent report on the McClatchy Web site, companies have been asked to start building some 1,700 units over the Green Line since Annapolis. And in April, the Israeli press reported on government plans to build 1,900 units in the area in 2008. These figures do not include building in east Jerusalem.

The spokesman's office of the Construction and Housing Ministry, when asked by In Jerusalem how many residential units had been approved by the government for 2008, responded: "The number of residential units for 2008 beyond the Green Line [excluding Jerusalem] is 286 units in Betar Illit." Apparently the ministry was relating only to units for which the Israel Lands Administration had published tenders.

However in February, the press reported that 94 units had been approved for Modi'in Illit, in March 750 units for Givat Ze'ev and 80 for Elazar in Gush Etzion. In addition, in April, Betar Illit received approval for 800 new units, and in July, the government announced tentative plans for two dozen homes in Maskiot in the Jordan Valley.

"I don't know about 1,900 or 1,700 units being approved for Judea and Samaria," says Pinhas Wallerstein, director-general of the Council of Jewish Communities of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. "You have to understand that most of what is being reported as approved is building that has been delayed and is now being given the go-ahead. Betar Illit is actually new building."

Kashriel is perplexed by the developments. "Ma'aleh Adumim was established legally by the Israeli government and is at the heart of the Israeli consensus concerning land Israel intends to retain beyond the Green Line, yet we are being denied building in E-1."

But there seems to be more at work here than "the heart of the consensus." The majority of units approved since Annapolis are intended for the haredi community, specifically those close to or affiliated with Shas. These include the units approved for Modi'in Illit, Betar Illit and a new haredi neighborhood in Givat Ze'ev.

It has been widely reported that the decision to build in these communities is connected with keeping Shas in the shaky government coalition. Kashriel, as a member of Likud, the opposition, finds himself with limited leverage in the government.

"Shas can play pressure politics on the [prime minister Ehud] Olmert government because it is part of the government," explains Likud MK Reuven Rivlin.

"There are two reasons why building has been approved for other areas and not E-1," adds Wallerstein. "One is that the haredim are needed for the government coalition; not building in E-1 is not going to cause the coalition to fall apart. And two, the significance of E-1."

Indeed, both the Palestinians and the US have consistently opposed building in E-1, arguing that construction in the area would cut a future Palestinian state in two, a claim Kashriel adamantly denies. And of late, more and more Palestinian and left-wing Israeli voices are saying that building in E-1 would be the deal breaker for a two-state solution to the conflict.

E-1, SHORT FOR EAST 1 AND ALSO KNOWN AS MEVASERET ADUMIM, is a nearly 12-square-kilometer (12,000 dunams) mostly empty area, located within Ma'aleh Adumim's municipal limits, on the opposite side of Road 1 to Jericho from the city's currently developed sections. It is bordered by Jerusalem's French Hill neighborhood to the west, Abu Dis to the southwest, Kedar to the south, the present built-up areas of Ma'aleh Adumim to the east and Almon to the north. The overall plan for E-1, in addition to the housing units (both apartment buildings and villas to be built in three sub-neighborhoods), includes five hotels, a commercial center and the police headquarters for Judea and Samaria. Some 75 percent of E-1 is to be preserved as a forested park of the Jewish National Fund. The entire project is supposed to be completed by 2020. To date, only the police headquarters has been completed, with police operations transferred to E-1 this spring. Inauguration of the police headquarters was reportedly postponed twice because of US opposition — once when US President George W. Bush visited Israel in January, and then again when US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice came in March. Building project in Ma'aleh...

Adjacent to E-1, on the territorial strip connecting Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem, is envisioned an economic development zone: the Ma'aleh Adumim Employment and Commerce Center (ECC). A joint venture of the Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem municipalities, the ECC would serve as a greater metropolitan industrial and commercial zone serving all communities in the Jerusalem area.

In addition to providing thousands of jobs (to Palestinians as well as Israelis), the ECC would enable Jerusalem to evacuate aging industrial areas within the city (Givat Shaul, Talpiot, Mekor Baruch) and convert the land to much-needed residential housing.

In the wake of the demise of the Safdie Plan to build 20,000 housing units in the hills west of Jerusalem, the idea of an eastward expansion has been bandied about as a possible solution to the capital's housing crunch.

Building plans have been approved for ECC as well, but the project is currently on hold. Kashriel says that the ECC is not economical at this point, and would like, instead, to concentrate on strengthening the city's existing industrial area, Mishor Adumim.

The Jerusalem Municipality says that the decision to develop the ECC is in the hands of the government, and that the municipality is concentrating on developing industry and commerce in Har Hotzvim, Malha and Atarot.

E-1 was annexed to the Ma'aleh Adumim Municipality in 1994 by the government of Yitzhak Rabin, which also planned and approved the area's general building plan. A more detailed building plan was approved by the Binyamin Netanyahu government. The Ehud Barak government also supported and promoted building in the area, as did Ariel Sharon's government, which pushed for the building of the police headquarters.

"E-1 is a natural part of Ma'aleh Adumim. It is entirely on government-owned land," says Kashriel. "None of it is on privately owned Arab land. The E-1 plan has passed all the committees and received all the necessary permits.

"Building in E-1 is in the natural interest of the residents of Jerusalem and its surroundings. Every Israeli government has supported this plan. The plan now sits on the prime minister's desk awaiting his final go-ahead. This is what is holding it up."

KASHRIEL HASN'T KEPT HIS FRUSTRATIONS ON THE MATTER SILENT. On Israel's 60th Independence Day, the mayor went public with his dissatisfaction about the delays in final government approval, taking his case to an E-1 hilltop.

Sitting in a protest tent near the completed police headquarters, Kashriel set up detailed maps and aerial photos to explain to the public the importance of E-1 to his community's future, and how building there would not divide any future Palestinian state.

Kashriel explains: "The Americans have always been against any building beyond the Green Line, even in Jerusalem. This is not a new policy on their part. The US objected to Ma'aleh Adumim when it was established, but all previous Israeli governments continued to build in those areas they saw as being in the national interest of the population of Jerusalem and its surroundings. Only this government has given in to the US pressure."

According to Haim Erlich, coordinator of policy advocacy for Ir Amim, a non-profit organization that works for coexistence in Jerusalem, building in E-1 is designed to create a wedge between east Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, and will split the West Bank in two.

"This is not about the innocent building of Ma'aleh Adumim or connecting Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem," says Erlich. "If we want to create a sustainable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity, we cannot build in E-1. If Benny Kashriel wants a binational state, then building in E-1 is the way to get it. Construction there will make it impossible to divide between Palestine and Israel. Therefore, building in E-1 is not in the interest of the State of Israel.

"We have to ask if our policy will lead to two states or a binational one," he continues. "If Israel wants a binational solution, then Ma'aleh Adumim can stretch from Jerusalem to the Jordan. But if we want a two-state solution, then we have to know that building in E-1 is of strategic significance and will effectively end negotiations with the Palestinians for a two-state solution."

His words are echoed by Jihad Abu Zneid, a deputy in the Palestinian Legislative Council and a resident of Shuafat. "Building in E-1 is against UN resolutions and all agreements between Palestinians and Israelis to date," she says. "We [the Palestinians] believe that this is an attempt at determining facts on the ground and at isolating east Jerusalem from the West Bank.

"Building in E-1 will destroy the link between Jerusalem and the West Bank, both physically and psychologically, and without Jerusalem, there can be no solution to the conflict," she continues. "E-1 construction will destroy any hope for a real, comprehensive solution. The two-state solution will no longer be available and this will lead to a new conflict. Building in E-1 destroys all hope for a Palestinian state."

Kashriel insists that "building in E-1 will not divide a Palestinian state in two. Everyone knows this. What is going on here is disinformation. This is the disinformation that the Palestinians have told the Americans. We [officials of Ma'aleh Adumim] have gone to the Americans with detailed maps to show them that this is simply not true. We have also gone to the Foreign Ministry, the Defense Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office."

The connection between the Palestinian centers south of Jerusalem (Hebron and Bethlehem) and those north of the city (Ramallah and Samaria) will be provided by a network of separate roads free of Israeli checkpoints and barriers, says Kashriel. This will also be true for the connection between Jerusalem and Jericho in the east, he adds.

"There is a road already planned and approved that will run from Eizariya [east of Jerusalem and west of Ma'aleh Adumim] to A-Zayim and on to Hizma," Kashriel explains. "This road will connect with the existing road from Hebron to Bethlehem to Eizariya. It will also hook up with the road from Hizma to Ramallah and will thus enable Palestinians to have free passage, with no checkpoints or barriers along the way from Hebron to Ramallah. This route will be even shorter than the route Palestinians currently take.

"The section from A-Zayim to Hizma is already paved, but the section from Eizariya to A-Zayim still needs to be built. Building this section, to be carried out by the Defense Ministry, will cost between NIS 80 million to NIS 100m. The road was approved a year ago but is being held up by the Treasury over financing," he says.

"With respect to connecting Jerusalem with Jericho," Kashriel continues, "there is Road 80 now in the planning stages, which will run north of E-1. This will also not have any checkpoints or barriers. Road 80 will cost NIS 60m. and is also being held up because of financing."

But for Erlich "a road is not territorial contiguity, it is transportation contiguity."

Rivlin couldn't agree more, but for opposite reasons. If Ma'aleh Adumim is not territorially connected to Jerusalem by E-1, and not a road alone, he envisions it "ending up cut off from the rest of Israel like Mount Scopus was from 1947 to 1967. Everyone who sees Ma'aleh Adumim as part of Israel understands the need for territorial contiguity. Ma'aleh Adumim cannot continue to exist if all the area connecting it to Jerusalem becomes densely populated with Palestinians. This will only lead to putting the city in danger of terror attacks."

"I see it as a very serious error not to build in E-1," Rivlin continues. "Connecting Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem through E-1 is what will give the city the ability to continue to exist under any future agreement. The American position against building there is against Israel's vital national and security interests. This has been the opinion of both Labor and Likud governments. The Americans understand when we stand firm on our vital interests. Unfortunately, the present government is not weighing our vital interests."

"E-1 is the key to Jerusalem's security," insists Wallerstein. "Building in E-1 will create a continuous area from French Hill to Ma'aleh Adumim. The minute E-1 is filled with Jewish building, then we have closed the corridor from Abu Dis to Ramallah. Not building will endanger parts of Jerusalem."

JOEL GUBERMAN HAS LIVED IN MA'ALEH ADUMIM FOR MORE THAN 15 YEARS. "Any limitation on the natural growth of Ma'aleh Adumim is automatically limiting the city's potential," he says. "I have older children. Housing costs are now very high in Ma'aleh Adumim and apartments are in great demand. I would like it if in a few years, when my children marry, they could remain in the city. But I am not sure that this will be a possibility without building in E-1.

"But E-1 is more than a matter of housing or security," he adds. "It belongs to us and there is no reason why we should not be building and developing this area so Ma'aleh Adumim can be connected to Jerusalem."

"I am really worried," says Antony Ordman, who has lived in Ma'aleh Adumim for 23 years. "The Olmert government is sending signals that show that the Palestinians can control settlement building, even in Ma'aleh Adumim. I don't like the idea that for the first time an Israeli prime minister has stopped building in Ma'aleh Adumim. Rabin, Peres, Barak, Bibi [Netanyahu], Sharon never touched Ma'aleh Adumim. They all said it was part of the consensus. Olmert has given in on a big issue that no other politician has.

"The political impact is very worrisome. Something is going on here and it is not nice. This is politically bad news and very scary. I am not sure enough people have woken up to this."

Another Ma'aleh Adumim resident, Michael, says that not building in E-1 shows a hesitation on the part of the government to commit to Ma'aleh Adumim.

"For the security of our city, E-1 is essential. It will help to protect the road [from Mount Scopus to Ma'aleh Adumim]. Already when you drive on the road, the Arab villages are building down toward it. If we don't build in E-1, what is to prevent the Palestinians from building there and turning Ma'aleh Adumim into a compromised area?

"We have been told that the major settlement blocs, like Ma'aleh Adumim, will be part of Israel no matter what," he continues. "If the government is committed to this, why not commit to building in E-1? We are being left hanging. Nothing is sacred any more and we are not as secure as we would like to be."

Kashriel still holds out some hope that the present government will approve building in E-1. "It would be a great pity for it [the present government] to betray previous government decisions concerning E-1. But if it does not approve building in E-1, then we hope that the next government will. In the meantime, we will continue to fight by all legal means for building in E-1. We intend to lobby MKs and government officials and provide accurate information to the public."

Contact LEL by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by B. Taverna, August 18, 2008.

Below are two items: (1) The original problem; and (2) an update, when the problem was corrected. For more information contact Carol Greenwald, Chairman, Holocaust Museum Watch at cgreenwald1@verizon.net. Read more at http://www.hmwatch.org/



The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM), the nation's leading educational institution on the Holocaust, has posted on its website a biography of the Holocaust-era Mufti of Jerusalem
(http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007255) that distorts the historical record of the Holocaust.

The father of Palestinian nationalism, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Hussayni, was a terrorist and a Nazi collaborator, indicted at the Eichmann Trial. The Museum wrote a web biography which presents al-Hussayni as a moderate supporter of non-violence. Falsifying and omitting key facts from the historical record, including photographs of Hussayni conferring with Hitler, the Holocaust Museum attempts to exonerate him from well documented charges of Nazi collaboration. The Museum's website states that his "controversial...relationship with Hitler's government...has led some to label him a Nazi collaborator and war criminal...."

When the Museum blurs the line between facts and opinion, it opens the door to Holocaust denial. The Holocaust Museum's standard for historical truth cannot be what "some" say, since some say there was no Holocaust. The Museum's entire mission depends on disseminating the facts of the Holocaust. They have now joined deniers in attempting to whitewash parts of the historical record that they seem to find politically difficult. Changing history throws the Museum's credibility into question. (Fact Sheet attached.)

The Mufti's Lasting Legacy Ignored by Museum

There are direct historical links between the Nazis, the Final Solution, Husayni, the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. The Museum's policy is silence about current Muslim antisemitism. Now it has chosen to falsify these historical roots in the Mufti's biography. Accordingly, it chose an academic well known for denying any link between Nazism and the current Islamic terror organizations to misrepresent the genocidal activities of the Mufti.

Conclusion: It is very serious when the Museum creates a false historical record

The Museum website calls the Mufti a "moderate voice for peace" and states that his collaboration with Hitler was "inconclusive" and his work for the Nazis was "ineffective."

  • A British inquiry found Husayni responsible for the 1936-39 reign of terror against Jews and Arab moderates in Palestine. The violence led the British to close Palestine to Jews fleeing the Final Solution. The Mufti spent the war in Nazi Berlin working for Hitler.

  • The Jerusalem court that tried Eichmann found in its Judgments, Part 50: "It has been proved to us that the Mufti, too, aimed at the implementation of the final solution, viz. the extermination of European Jewry."

  • The Mufti recruited 20,000 Muslims for the Handschar divisions of the Waffen SS that annihilated 90% of Bosnia's Jews. Yugoslavia convicted him of war crimes. He fled to Egypt where he recruited fleeing Nazis and helped found modern Islamic terrorism through the Muslim Brotherhood and the PLO.


2. THE U.S. HOLOCAUST MUSEUM (USHMM) TODAY REMOVED FROM ITS website the falsified biography of the Holocaust era Mufti of Jerusalem. The Museum was criticized for blurring the line between facts and opinion, and in so doing, opening the door to Holocaust denial.

The father of Palestinian nationalism, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Hussayni, was a terrorist and a Nazi collaborator, indicted at the Eichmann Trial. The Museum wrote a web biography which presented al-Hussayni as a moderate supporter of non-violence. Falsifying and omitting key facts from the historical record, including photographs of Hussayni conferring with Hitler, the Holocaust Museum attempted to exonerate him from well documented charges of Nazi collaboration. The Museum's website stated that his "controversial...relationship with Hitler's government...has led some to label him a Nazi collaborator and war criminal...."

Within hours of the widespread dissemination to the press and public of HMWatch's press release describing the Museum's whitewash of the Mufti, the Museum removed the article.

The Museum still does NOT have in its archives the infamous November 28, 1941 photograph of the Mufti meeting with Hitler when he obtained Hitler's assurance to exterminate the Jews of the Middle East. Nor does the Museum have a factual biography of the Mufti and his role in creating the Nazi-Palestinian alliance.

There are direct historical links between the Nazis, the Final Solution, Husayni, the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. The Museum chose to falsify these historical roots in the Mufti's biography because the Museum is determined to be silent about current Muslim anti-Semitism and its connection to Nazism.

We applaud the Museum for removing the meretricious article and call on them to post an accurate one and to break their silence on the roots and connections of current Muslim anti-Semitism and Nazism.

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, August 17, 2008.

This is the edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, 18 August 2008.


Fools aside, everyone knows that Israel is at war with the Palestinian Authority. Whatever the machinations of Fatah-leader Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas-leader Ismail Haniyah, both villains are committed to Israel's annihilation.

That many of Israel's own Arab citizens have long been participating in this war against the Jews has been ignored by various Israeli governments, Left and Right — if I may use these obsolete terms. Arabs freely traverse the roads assaulting Jewish vehicles; they brazenly fly the flag of PLO; and the Olmert-Livni-Mofaz government blinks.

Sderot has been depopulated, Iranian weapons flow into Gaza and are smuggled thence to Judea and Samaria. Soon every city in Israel may become another Sderot, and the Olmert-Livni-Mofaz government blinks.

This cockamamie government is just a collection of political liars and crooks — Likud turncoats and other hacks paid by the overtaxed citizens of Israel. Under this corrupt and craven government, the IDF behaves more like the police on horses than as a war machine. It's primary mission, it seems, is to expel Jews from their homes rather than destroy Israel's enemies.

Meanwhile, the so-called opposition parties twiddle their thumbs, more cretins paid for political correctness or impotence. That's democracy, Israeli style, where all parties jockey for place, perks, and power, lusting for the control of various ministries — thiefdoms by which, under color of law, they rob Jews of their money. David Ben-Gurion said this many years ago, when the Left was the Left, and the Right was the Right. Today the Left is devoid of any ideology — just a bunch of paltry power-seekers. As for the Right, it's an embarrassment: the less said about it the better.

Such is the shoddiness and fragmentation of politics in Israel that one begins to wonder whether Israel is a state. Perhaps the "State of Israel" is an illusion? Perhaps the Proclamation of the State of Israel of 1948 is a travesty?

What, indeed, is a "state"? My dictionary tells me that a state is "a politically independent entity representing a people and occupying a definite territory." This definition of a state contains three elements. (1) A state must be a politically independent entity; (2) this entity must represent a people; and (3) this people must occupy a definite territory. Let's apply this definition to Israel.

(1) Far from being a politically independent entity, the State of Israel — judging from the behavior of its ruling elites — seems tied by an umbilical cord to the United States. Israeli prime ministers slavishly imitate the lifestyle and diplomacy of that great democracy. They lie to us about peace while they lick the boots of Arab despots. Yesterday it was Yasser Arafat, today it's Mahmoud Abbas. And notice how pathetically concerned Israeli prime ministers are about "world opinion." Do you really believe that this reputed state is a "politically independent entity"?

(2) As for its representing the people — that too is a lie, to endow the government with legitimacy and its ruling elites with respectability, especially in the United States, where Zionist organizations are so fond of purveying and profiting from the Myth of Israeli Democracy. How can this so-called state represent the people when the so-called people are divided into a dozen and more parties?

Besides, what is a "people"? In defining a people, the Torah makes a distinction between an Ahm and a Goy. Whereas an Ahm signifies a collectivity united by a religious heritage, Goy signifies a collectivity united only on the basis of a common territory or homeland.

Let us therefore define a people as a monocultural entity united not only by language, but by shared beliefs and values rooted in a common and immemorial past. Have you bumped into such a people lately in the Land of Israel?

Okay, let's confine things to Jews and Arabs. Inasmuch as the Jews and Arabs inhabiting this land have antagonistic beliefs and values, the State represents not an Ahm but a Goy. This reminds me of a remarks attributed to Senator Barack Obama, that America is not a Christian nation but a nation of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and what have you — which makes America a Goyishe state.

Any way, those who control the political and judicial institutions of the Goyishe State of Israel represent only themselves or their party factions. Consider the Knesset: Many MKs hop from one party to another and thus betray those who originally voted for their parties. Since they are not individually elected by, or accountable to, the voters in constituency elections, these MKs — including cabinet ministers — can ignore the voters with impunity. Thus, when Meretz MK Yossi Beilin was a member of the Labor Party, he brazenly said at a meeting of Labor's Central Committee: "When have we ever listened to the people?" Did Ariel Sharon listen to the people when he nullified the January 2003 election by adopting Labor's policy of "unilateral disengagement"? Just think: Sharon ended up as a disciple of Yossi Beilin!

Beilin does not regard himself as a member of the Jewish people; he's too enlightened for such tribalism. Beilin reminds me of the Illuminati ensconced in Israel's Supreme Court, whose former court president, Aharon Barak, brazenly admitted that the court represents Israel's "enlightened population." These "enlightened" ones are ultra-secularists, a small minority of the population — the geniuses responsible for the Oslo disaster. These geniuses are indeed represented by the priests of Israel's Supreme Court.

This priesthood substitutes its own neo-pagan predilections for the beliefs and values of the Jewish sages of old, beliefs and values still cherished by a number of Jews far surpassing in number what Judge Barak calls the "Enlightened population." But the Court regards this population as multicultural. For the ruling elites, Israel has no distinctive Jewish character; it is merely a collection of discordant ethnic and religious groups. It's not an Ahm but a Goy!

(3) Finally, contrary to the above definition of a state, which requires the people to occupy "a definite territory," Israel's borders are not at all definite. The 250,000 Israelis residing in Judea and Samaria may soon be under the control of the Palestinian terrorist Authority. Virtually all parties in the Knesset support the castrating policy of "territory for peace." It logically follows that these parties will surrender territory whenever Arabs threaten war!

The conclusion is inescapable: What is called the "State of Israel" does not contain any of the elements of a genuine state. The State of Israel is a fiction — a fiction exploited by its political elites, especially those connected to tycoons hither and yon.

But don't be alarmed or alienated by my cynicism. Since Israel is for the taking, it presents a marvelous opportunity to people with intellectual venture capital and ambition! A full-scale, unambiguous war is going to break out as Hamas and Fatah acquire more and deadlier weapons. Hence, let me address some stouthearted Jews: Prepare a shadow government for that revolutionary moment. You can replace Israel's decadent leadership and its equally decrepit opposition parties. You can liberate Israel from the illusion of making peace with Arab thugs. You can rejuvenate the IDF and destroy Israel's enemies, who have so long afflicted the Jewish people. Employ overwhelming and even disproportionate force so that these disciples of Muhammad will never again raise their scornful heads.

You can establish a new form of government. Terminate Israel's multiparty thiefdom. Empower the people, so that their sacred beliefs and values may again provide the foundation for pubic law and foreign policy.

With the enemy vanquished, and the government cleansed of its political cesspool, no longer will Israel be enthralled by the United States. At last, Israel, the God-bearing nation, will come into its own — free!

To the young and bold of heart: Prepare for this revolution NOW and say TO HELL WITH THE POLITICS THAT HAS STUPEFIED AND CORRUPTED OUR COUNTRY!

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at Constitution@usa.net

To Go To Top

Posted by AFSI, August 17, 2008.

The week ending on August 15, 2008 was a "week of shame for the State Department" said Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, today.

"The Secretary of State has rightly voiced support for the territorial integrity of Georgia, but in violation of this same principle the State Department has recognized Kosovo's independence from Serbia and thereby strengthened the Islamic presence in the Balkans, likely leading to increased destabilization and Islamic expansionism," Mr. Zweibon said.

Also in violation of the principle of territorial integrity, Condoleezza Rice continues to push the "road map" as official American policy. Under the "road map" Israel would be forced back to what has fittingly been called the Auschwitz borders. "Applying a double standard dishonors the State Department but applying a double standard to the benefit of the enemies of America and its ally Israel is dreadful and dangerous," Mr. Zweibon said.

Further disgracing itself this past week, the State Department agreed to pay reparations to Libya for retaliatory air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi on April 15, 1986. The strikes were ordered by President Ronald Reagan after Libyan terrorists killed three people, including two U.S. soldiers, and maimed 200 others in an attack on a Berlin discotheque.

"When, representing the State Department, U.S. diplomat David Welch embraced his Libyan counterpart and signed the diplomatic agreement that included reparations for the retaliatory air strike, he in effect placed Ronald Reagan and Ghadafi on equal moral footing — a reprehensible act that projects weakness of character and resolve to our enemies," Mr. Zweibon said.

Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Barry Freedman is Executive Director.

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 17, 2008.


A few editions ago, I reported that Abbas' forces finally arrested a number of Hamas gunmen. Many people thought that this was as an anti-terrorist crackdown. Others thought it was part of the Fatah-Hamas rivalry. I thought it probably was the latter, but wrote, wait and see.

Now Ha'aretz reports that Abbas has ordered the Hamas men released, after Hamas released many of its Fatah captives (IMRA, 7/31).

Now we see. He's never done anything anti-terrorist of significance or that is lasting. He's done much for terrorism. He used to be Arafat's bag man for terrorism.


Foreign Min. Livni expects to become the head of Kadima and the next Prime Minister. She says she would continue the "peace process" in behalf of national security (IMRA, 7/31).

She has helped ruin national security vis-à-vis Lebanon and Gaza. It's really a war process, since by letting the enemy have strategic territory or build up powerful forces, the enemy can make war sooner and harder. If there were a decent opposition, it would point that out. It would disabuse Israelis of their many misconceptions. It doesn't. MK Netanyahu hardly opposes the government. He has been like that before. Don't trust him! He is an appeaser, too. Ask yourself, why doesn't he speak out often?


Jordan hasn't conferred with Hamas for a decade. Now its intelligence agency is doing that. Their topic supposedly was reconciliation with Fatah. That is a topic that Egypt has been handling (IMRA, 7/31).

The Arabs constantly mediate. Jordan, however, finds Hamas a threat to itself, so this new development is surprising. Is it the usual mediation, or is Jordan sensing Israeli national suicide, a la Livni, and wants to be in on the kill?


They say they need to build up winter fuel supplies and that their own domestic economic growth needs more oil (IMRA, 7/31).

I read that in New York City, there are obstacles to erection of solar panels.


A Jew owns a 5-acre, unused tract in northern Jerusalem, on which there are some trailers. The City had planned the area for residence and industry.

Arab squatters had been ejected from that property once before. Now Arabs are attempting to build illegally on his land. He gave a group of Jewish activists permission to take control of this tract for him. Police forbad their entry, apparently without legal authority to do so.

Nevertheless, they got in, and declared it in his possession. [If Israeli law is like the law in Connecticut when my father owned land there, the owner just has to affirm control and squatters rights cease.]

"According to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA), a senior PA official boasted that Arabs have built 6,000 homes without permits during the last four years in Jerusalem alone, of which fewer than 200 were demolished by the city. Many of the illegal Arab homes are being built on Jewish-owned land, according to Haaretz." "At the same time, the Israeli government has destroyed a much higher percentage of Jewish homes that do not meet the paperwork requirements."

"The JCPA reports that 'in the Jewish neighborhoods, illegal construction typically takes the form of additions to existing legal structures — such as closing a balcony or hollowing out under a building to create an extra room. In the Arab sector, however, illegal construction often takes the form of entire multi-floor buildings with four to 25 living units, built with the financial assistance of the Palestinian Authority on land that is not owned by the builder.'"

It was reported that when Olmert was Mayor of Jerusalem in 2006, he had files about illegal Arab building "...destroyed with the specific intent of allowing the statute of limitations on home demolitions to run out, making it impossible to destroy the illegal Arab homes."

Olmert ordered Israeli security forces not to demolish the illegal Arab complexes. Senior municipal workers told real estate agent King that "...Olmert said not to bother with the illegal Arab homes because eventually eastern Jerusalem would be given to the P.A.." (Arutz-7, 7/31.)

The leftist ruling elite long ago plotted surrenders of Israeli sovereignty! They use the police to bar legitimate Jewish owners from their property. That's abusing their police power for an ideology that the people of the country have rejected. The government claims to be legitimate, but the people vote for parties promising nationalist security, but in office, those parties compromise national security in police state fashion.


An Israeli went to Russia to show officials that Hamas was operating a web site there. Within three weeks, the site was closed (Arutz-7, 7/31).


The head of Palestinian Media Watch went to Norway, bearing evidence that the P.A. preaches hatred and glorifies terrorism. He sparked a national debate about Norway's funding of the P.A.. The country's currently most popular party objects to paying for children to hate the West.

Norway's Prime Minister follows the same procedure as the other international donors and doesn't suppose that Norwegian funds support hate-TV (Arutz-7, 7/31). If he follows the same procedures, then they all should halt their aid!

The Prime Minister sounds evasive. He must know that foreign funds for the P.A. are stolen or misappropriated. Either he doesn't care about this misuse, because he is striking an idealistic pose, or he agrees with this misuse.


A bill that passed its first vote bans free plastic bags and imposes higher penalties on illegal polluters (Arutz-7, 7/31). I re-use my own bags.


Remember the prize-winning thesis at Hebrew U., alleging that Israeli soldiers demonstrate racism by not raping Arab women they could, at gunpoint? The student writer interviewed some, but what they said did not indicate racism.

Now one of his thesis reviewers has been charged with raping female graduate students if they wouldn't sell their bodies to him for grades and grants.

That is the same university where several Arab students were convicted of terrorism. One of them had stolen gallons of chemicals from his lab, to turn into explosives. He finished his prison term, reapplied, and the head of the lab wants to readmit him! The President of the university signed a petition accusing Israel of being an apartheid state (Prof. Steven Plaut, 7/31).

The Israeli Left is emotionally sick. It is the shame of Israel. By contrast, most right-wing settlers and the Orthodox are normal. A few may not be, but they tend to be secret service provocateurs. Having such provocateurs is a shame, too. It is part of the Left's dirty tricks, unpatriotic conniving, and undemocratic practice.

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

Posted by Yehoshua HaLevi, August 17, 2008.

Berries ripen on a tree in the Ela Valley in central Israel.


Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT:

On a midsummer's day hike lacking color and visual inspiration, I surprised myself with this photographic souvenir. After several rainless months and the accumulation of dirt and sand blown in from the desert or a closer source, much of Israel's August landscape is uninviting to the artist. Nevertheless, my professional pride pushes me to take on a challenge to find some subject of interest every time out, even if I have to resort to the abstract form as I have this week. I use the word "surprise" with total honestly because this is one of those pictures that I didn't get a feeling for while I was shooting, but discovered only when I emptied the contents of my memory card onto my hard drive. I took only two shots, another sign that I wasn't seeing well in the moment.

The original is a paler version of this image, which I sharpened and added contrast, post production tasks that every image receives in some measure. In a landscape of dull browns and dusty greens, the pink berries of this unidentified tree caught my attention. The unanticipated bonus in this shot, however, are the blue, unripened berries, which, along with the green foliage, add a nice complement to the dominant pink color scheme. The shot was taken late in the day, so I was forced to use a wide aperture at ISO 400, choices I would have made in any case in order to narrow the depth of field. It used to take days before prints would come back from the lab, nearly long enough to forget what was in the bag. I guess a few hours delayed gratification is not such a bad thing.

Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 17, 2008.

An Arab terrorist who was pardoned after promising not to engage in terrorism has been re-arrested for firing at IDF soldiers.

The undercover IDF Duvdevan unit, operating in the Arab-populated town of Shechem (Nablus), arrested Firas Tashtush, 24, for his involvement in shooting attacks against IDF soldiers. Tashtush had been one of nearly 180 terrorists included in a special pardon deal finalized a year ago between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

The deal granted amnesty to the wanted Fatah terrorists, in exchange for their promise to stop their terrorist activities. They first underwent a trial period of three months; those who passed this period without engaging in terrorism — most of them — were then officially removed from Israel's "wanted" list.

Sold Their Guns, Received New Ones

Many of the terrorists in question were paid by the PA tens of thousands of shekels for turning in their weapons. Those who joined the PA's security forces received new weapons.

Tashtush was arrested ten days ago, but the news was permitted for publication only on Sunday. A senior Fatah Tanzim terrorist leader, he was arrested for his involvement in several shooting attacks against IDF forces in Judea and Samaria.

Terror Victims Group Responds

Lt.-Col. (ret.) Meir Indor, director of Victims of Arab Terror, says that the release of captured terrorists shows that the Cabinet is not serious about ending terrorism. "We know of some 180 Israelis who have been murdered during the last six years by terrorists who have been released," he told IsraelNationalNews.

"The lesson of this release is simply this," Indor said: "Terrorists who have been released are going to go back to the business they know how to do. And they will encourage others to do what they know, as well."

EDITOR'S NOTE: Also in today's Arutz-7:

The Cabinet voted Sunday morning to approve Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's latest "goodwill gesture" to Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, freedom for 200 PA terrorists [...] The list of terrorists to be returned to the streets will reportedly include some with "blood on their hands" — that is, those who have been directly involved in attacks that resulted in the murder of Israelis.

[...]In last month's exchange deal, Hizbullah returned the badly decomposed bodies of kidnapped and murdered IDF reservists Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. In return, the Iranian and Syrian-backed Lebanese terrorist group won the freedom of jailed child-killer Samir Kuntar as well as four Hizbullah guerrilla fighters. In addition, Israel also exhumed and returned the bodies of 199 Arab terrorists, each delivered in brand-new coffins.

Hillel Fendel is senior news editor at Arutz-7. The article appeared in Arutz-7

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 17, 2008.

Bad, bad news: According to Maya Bengal in Maariv today, Olmert has submitted a proposal on Jerusalem to Abbas in an effort to reach an agreement before he leaves office. Reportedly this entails Israeli control of Jewish neighborhoods, Palestinian control of Arab neighborhoods, and the issue of the status of holy sites — including the Temple Mount and Mount of Olives — to be tabled with administration of these places by a joint Israeli-Palestinian body until there is final resolution, which, since there is no timeline, could be indefinitely.

There is so much wrong with this, beyond the simple fact that Jerusalem is ours and should remain undivided:

The Jewish and Arab neighborhoods are so intertwined that dividing jurisdiction according to Jewish and Arab residency simply won't work. Not to mention that it would put terrorist-prone Palestinians within easy shooting distance of Jewish neighborhoods.

Plus, tabling the most sensitive issue, control of holy sites, and calling it a "deal" is a cop-out that would only lead to continuing lack of resolution and growing tensions.

Lastly, assigned shared jurisdiction over these most sensitive areas is an invitation to a situation that would be nightmare from hell. It is simply not workable.


The PA is demanding all of Jerusalem beyond the Green Line. That means Jewish neighborhoods built since 1967 and all of the Old City. They are not going to settle for Jewish neighborhoods outside the Green Line to remain under Israeli jurisdiction, with the Old City issue unresolved, and call this a "deal." I don't believe they'll even remotely consider going for it. They'll scoff.

What is much more to the point for me is where Shas is in this. They said they would pull out of the government if Olmert negotiated on Jerusalem.



What makes it even more certain that the PA would not sign on to a deal with us is something else just reported by Ben Caspit, also of Maariv. He says that Israel has submitted security requirements for a final deal to the US. These include:

1. Demilitarized Palestinian state not to have tanks, cannons, rockets or air force.
2. Security pacts prohibited between the Palestinian state and other nations.
3. Israeli warning stations on the mountain ridge.
4. IDF presence on the Jordan River.
5. Israeli control of airspace.
6. Israeli access to routes going deep into Judea and Samaria


Now there's more in the Caspit article, and I ask all Americans to pay special attention here:

"In the meantime it turns out that one of the two presidential candidates, who visited Israel sent emissaries and special messages to president Al Assad in Damascus and Abu Mazen [Abbas] in Ramallah, with an interesting message: continue the negotiations with Israel, any progress is welcome, I want to jump into the conflict immediately upon my entry onto the position and the more advanced the negotiations are the better."

That presidential candidate was Obama, clearly, and this constitutes a sort of meddling that is outrageous.


The message I have consistently communicated here is that Egypt — in spite of having a peace treaty with us — is not only not our friend, but often works against our interests.

The most glaring example of this is the failure of the Egyptians to stop the smuggling of weapons into Gaza in spite of commitments to do so. MK Yuval Steinitz (Likud), former head of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, has over a period of time vociferously proclaimed Egypt not trustworthy. It was he, in particular, who pointed out how ridiculous is Egypt's lament that they'd like to stop the weapon smuggling but can't find many of the tunnels used by the terrorists. If they were sincere, he pointed out last year, all they would have to do was make a no-man's land in the Sinai a kilometer or two before the border with Gaza, and stop all vehicles traveling the sparsely-used roads in that open desert area well before they reached the tunnels.


Not long ago I sat with an Arabic-speaking researcher who explained that as much as the Egyptians dislike and fear the radical influence of Hamas (which is an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and sponsored by the hated Iran), they dislike and fear Israel even more. Thus they have been willing to foster a situation that makes trouble for Israel.

I will add here that there is enormous and virulent anti-Semitism in Egypt. While, for all their suspicions of Hamas, the Egyptians have strong cultural and linguistic bonds with members of Hamas, not as Hamas per se but as Muslim Arab residents of Gaza. Egypt controlled Gaza from 1948-1967 and there was considerable interaction. Culturally, the ties between Gazan Palestinians and Egyptians is said to be stronger than the ties between Gazan and West Bank Palestinians.


And so, the news from the very reliable Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post today came as a bit of a surprise: A Hamas official is now saying they've been told by Egypt that they won't open the crossing at Rafah (between Gaza and Egypt) until Hamas releases Gilad Shalit to Israel.

What is more, Egypt is saying that when it does permit the crossing to be opened, it will be under the supervision of the PA, and not Hamas. This is in accordance with the arrangements made under extreme pressure by Rice, after Israel pulled out of Gaza three years ago. We were supposed to stay in Rafah, but she pushed hard for us to leave and the PA to take over. The PA remained in charge, more or less, in a highly unsatisfactory arrangement, until Fatah was routed by Hamas in June of last year.

This feels like a shift: an Egypt willing to take positions amenable to Israeli, US, and PA stipulations and requirements, at the expense of Hamas. One must ask what is going on behind the scenes to foster this.


Needless to say, Hamas is declaring this to be a totally unsatisfactory scenario. They maintain that Egypt is supposed to open Rafah because of the ceasefire and regardless of the situation with Shalit. However, they neglect to mention that the ceasefire itself included a stipulation that they were to speed up negotiations on Shalit. What has actually happened is the reverse — a slowdown, with Hamas complaining that Egypt, which acts as the negotiating go-between, is favoring Israel by not applying enough pressure with regard to release of prisoners.

The issue of who supervises Rafah when it is opened is considered critical: Hamas is trying to establish a veneer of legitimacy as the governing power of Gaza that is undercut by Egypt's position.


One facet of Egypt's current position echoes its long-standing desire to make trouble for Israel, however: The Egyptians are saying that when the crossing is opened it will be for personnel only. Fuel, food and other humanitarian supplies would have to come exclusively via crossings from Israel — for Israel, and not Egypt, is responsible for Gaza.


It never ends. Remember the recent promise by Olmert to Abbas to release at least 150 prisoners as a "good will gesture"? Well, the cabinet today approved the release of 200, including two with blood on their hands. Transportation minister Shaul Mofaz and the three Shas ministers in the cabinet voted against, 16 voted for. A ministerial committee, headed by Haim Ramon, will finalize details, with release expected next Monday.

Tzipi Livni defended this decision, saying that:

"When Israel releases prisoners only to groups that exert force, it sends out the message that it gives in to pressure and that the use of violence and kidnapping are [effective] ways of acting against Israel."

This is going to "strengthen" Abbas, you see, by showing he can be moderate and still get something.

That's just great. Let's not only grant prisoner releases in exchange for something. Let's let out murderers and those associated with terrorist acts just for the doing of it, with nothing received in return.


Criticism with regard to this has been strong from many quarters.

As MK Yisrael Hasson (Yisrael Beitenu) so aptly put it: "The government insists on 'fixing' the damage it causes by inflicting significantly more damage. A government that would not have given in to Hezbollah and Hamas demands in the past, would not have to give in to Fatah today, by releasing prisoners in return for nothing."

Shas's Eli Yeshai (Trade and Labor Minister) predicted that this would cause us problems with the negotiations on Shalit: If we give away prisoners for nothing, then Hamas will want even more in an exchange.

There was an outcry from MK Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud, head of opposition), and from National Union-NRP.


Are officials of the PA happy with this Israeli generosity? Don't be silly. Said PA Prime Minister Fayyad:

"We welcome the release of any Palestinian prisoner. It is considered a victory for Palestinians. We ask Israel to change its conditions for releasing prisoners and we ask for the release of all prisoners without exception."

Have you noticed that they always demand more?


Hamas, meanwhile, is saying that Israeli's projected release of Fatah prisoners is designed to widen the rift between Fatah and Hamas. Not sure exactly how that is, actually.

Realize how surreal the situation is, as Fatah and Hamas have established a rivalry based on who can get us to release more of their prisoners.


While the claim is that this is being done to strengthen Abbas, there is another factor that must be noted: Rice is due here again soon, to see progress on the "peace negotiations." She is breathing down the necks of the Cabinet, you can be sure.

I'm a bit vague on when she will arrive, because her trip here may be delayed by matters concerning Russia.


Speaking of Russia, I would like to share this quote from the Middle East Newsline:

"What does the Russian-Georgian war have to do with the Middle East?

"Everything. Moscow's invasion of Georgia has tested Western intentions toward Russia and its allies, particularly Iran. The United States, a sworn friend of Georgia, did nothing to save Tbilisi from Russian troops. European Union countries, particularly Germany, prostrated themselves to Russian Prime Minister Putin. This is not the kind of Western alliance that will save the Gulf Cooperation Council and Israel from a nuclear Iran."


And another take, from Scott Peterson at the Christian Science Monitor:

"American criticism of Russia's military action in Georgia is almost certain to jeopardize a very different U.S. strategic objective: stepping up pressure on Iran with another layer of UN sanctions. 'This will make any hope of cooperative effort on Iran much more difficult,' says Michael McFaul, a Russia and Iran expert at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Support on Iran, he says, is 'without question' the biggest strategic casualty of the renewed U.S.-Russia tension. Iran is 'the one place...of high national security interest to the United States where Russia plays a direct role in what we are trying to do. In that sense, it towers over all these other things.'


The chief of the Iranian air force today declared that it has war planes capable of flying 3,000 kilometers without refueling — enough to reach Israel and return.


Every time it seems the situation could not become more incredible, it does:

We've known from the beginning that Resolution 1701, which ended the Lebanon War in 2006 and put a UNIFIL force into place that was to stop Hezbollah from re-arming was going to be a joke. And we've seen evidence that the re-arming was indeed taking place at a furious level.

But now we have a statement, made last Thursday at the UN in New York City, by UNIFIL commander Maj.-Gen. Claudio Graziano. Israel Air Force forays over Lebanon, he said, constitute a "permanent violation of 1701." We're violating Lebanese airspace.

But he leaves out the reason why we do this: To monitor the re-arming of Hezbollah. Without those flights it would be hard to keep track. Apparently General Graziano doesn't think there's any need for such forays, for he says that UNIFIL enjoys excellent relations with Hezbollah.

"At this moment Hezbollah is one of parties that agrees with 1701."

According to him, no one south of the Litani River, no one is armed except the UNIFIL forces, the Lebanese army and hunters.

So, he's not only turning a blind eye to the re-arming of Hezbollah, he's covering for this terrorist organization and attempting to block Israeli efforts to expose them.


Luckily, not everyone is either crazy or totally corrupt. There is the internationally-based Lebanese Committee for the implementation of 1559, which refers to the UN Security Council resolution that calls for the disarming of militias in Lebanon and sealing the border between Syria and Lebanon so that no weapons can get to Hezbollah; this is incorporated in 1701. This group acts as a consulting body of the UN, and monitors the implementation of relevant UN resolutions.

Says Tony Nissi, the general coordinator of the group:

"...Hezbollah is violating 1701 big time, and not only by hiding its weapons in warehouses in the south. Also, we haven't seen any weapons coming out of the south after the war of 2006, so did Hezbollah throw its weapons used in the 2005 war into the sea?

"[UNIFIL is] coordinating with Hezbollah and not with the Lebanese government. [Resolution] 1701 says clearly no arms south of the Litani. No militias south of the Litani. That is why UNIFIL is there.

"Is the UNIFIL mandate to coordinate with Hezbollah or to kick Hezbollah out south of the Litani?"


Nissi acknowledged that UNIFIL is stymied in its ability to function because its mandate requires it to receive approval from the Lebanese army for actions against Hezbollah, and the army isn't giving that approval (another part of this complex story). However, he said, UNIFIL should either request the UN for a mandate change so that it can operate or leave Lebanon, rather than coordinate with Hezbollah.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, August 17, 2008.

KidneyMitzvah@aol.com    KidneyMitzvah@aol.com

"He who save one life, it's as if he has saved the entire world"


12 year old frum Jewish girl desperately needs a kidney!

If you are O blood type and in good health, you can save her life!

Please contact me,

Chaya Lipschutz
(917) 627-8336,

In most cases surgery is done laproscopically, and hospital stay is usually only 2 days for that procedure. 2 days in the hospital can give this young girl many, many years of life! Both my brother and I donated a kidney and it was the greatest experience of our lives. Please contact me for more info. Would be happy to answer all your questions.

Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by LS, August 17, 2008.

This was written by Abraham Katsman and Kory Bardash and it appeared in today's Jerusalem Post Special Reports: America Decides 2008.


One of the knocks on Barack Obama is that his résumé is, so to speak, paper-thin. But that is not entirely accurate. Obama, in fact, has held some major job titles which are noteworthy all by themselves: United States Senator, Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, Harvard Law Review President — each of these titles puts him in rarefied company. Tack on a few Illinois State Senate terms, and his resume actually appears solid. Yet, in spite of these prestigious positions, Obama has increasingly resorted to making claims of accomplishment that are so patently inflated that even his cheerleaders at CNN and the New York Times are taking notice. Why?

It seems that Obama recognizes that while his résumé titles are impressive, his actual accomplishments are weak. It's as if he were jockeying to be the next company CEO with little to show for his prior high-profile management positions. So, he does what anyone else does who has spent years coasting on charisma without doing any heavy work: he pads his résumé-stretching the truth here, stealing credit there, and creating the illusion of achievement during his lackadaisical, undistinguished tenure in previous jobs.

A few examples? Take Obama's first general election ad. We are told that Obama "passed laws" that "extended healthcare for wounded troops who'd been neglected," with a citation at the bottom to only one Senate bill: The 2008 Defense Authorization Bill, which passed the Senate by a 91-3 vote. Six Senators did not vote-including Obama. Nor is there evidence that he contributed to its passage in any material way. So, his claim to have "passed laws" amounts to citing a bill that was largely unopposed, that he didn't vote for, and whose passage he didn't impact. Even his hometown Chicago Tribune caught this false claim. It's classic résumé-padding — falsely taking credit for the work of others.

Or take one of Obama's standard lines: his claim of "twenty years of public service." As pundit Michael Medved has pointed out, the numbers don't add up. Shall we count? Three years in the US Senate (two of which he's spent running for President), plus seven years in the Illinois State Senate (a part-time gig, during which time he also served as a law professor) equals, at most, ten. Even if we generously throw in his three years as a "community organizer" (whatever that means, let's count it as public service), that still adds up to just thirteen.

Obama's other activities since 1985 have included Harvard Law School, writing two autobiographies (including several months writing in Bali), prestigious summer law firm jobs, three years as an associate at a Chicago law firm, and twelve years part-time on the University of Chicago Law School faculty. As Medved notes, it takes quite the ego to consider any of those stints "public service." Which of them is Obama including?

Obama made yet another inflated boast last month during his visit to Israel. At his press conference in Hamas rocket-bombarded Sderot, Obama talked up "his" efforts to protect Israel from Iran:

"Just this past week, we passed out of the US Senate Banking Committee — which is my committee — a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon." (Emphasis added.)

Nice try. But as even CNN noted, Obama is not even on that committee. That is one peculiar "mistake" to simply have made by accident. Again, his claiming credit for the work of others just looks like clumsy, transparent résumé embellishment.

Would someone with Obama's stellar list of job titles resort to making stuff up? He seems to think he has to. In spite of the many impressive positions he's held, he's done almost nothing with them. If he wants to claim specific, relevant accomplishments, his only resort is to stretching the truth.

Look at his record: he's now completed over half of a Senate term; yet, is there even one signature issue he has taken hold of, other than his own presidential run? Similarly, as the New York Times recently pointed out, Obama spent twelve years on the University of Chicago Law School faculty — singularly famous for its intellectual ferment and incubator of scholarship — and produced not even a single scholarly paper. He was President of Harvard Law Review, but wrote nothing himself. Even as a state legislator for seven years — or community organizer for three years, there is little that shows his imprint. OK, to be fair, he did write two books. About himself.

For all his glowing job titles, Obama has never gotten much done. Is it any wonder that his spokesmen respond with sweeping generalities when asked what Obama has actually accomplished relevant to the presidency?

Obama has held several serious positions from which a serious man could have made a serious impact. But Obama made none. He remains a man of proven charisma, but unproven skill — and not for lack of opportunity. He's treated his offices as if they were high school student council positions — fun to run for, fun to win, affirmations of popularity, heady recognition from superiors, good resume-builders for stepping up to the next position of power, and...well, that's about it — actual accomplishments are not expected; heavy lifting is never on the agenda.

Obama's record of accomplishment is thin not because of lack of opportunity, but in spite of it. For twenty years, Obama has walked the floors of the most prestigious institutions in the nation, but has left no footprints other than those from his runs for whatever office came next.

It's been said that some people want to be President so they can do something; and some want to be President so they can be something. Obama has accomplished nothing noteworthy despite the golden opportunities and positions he's had; why should we believe he'd be a different man in the White House?

No company would hire anyone with Obama's empty track record, pattern of underachievement and padded résumé to be CEO. Is America really ready to hire him as President?

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, August 17, 2008.

This was written by Yaakov Lappin and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710387824&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

What with waiting in jail for trial, you serve almost as much time in an Israeli jail if you are a Jew defending yourself from Arab attack (See below) as you do if you are an Arab terrorist with blood on your hands. How weird is that!


The government's decision to release some 200 security prisoners — mainly from Fatah and including two with "blood on their hands" — to help Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is opposed by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), a senior defense official told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

Cabinet okays release of 200 prisoners

News of the impending release was received negatively among Shin Bet handlers and agents, the source said.

"You have to hear the responses inside the Shin Bet to the release. They work day and night to capture and neutralize terrorists, and all of it is gone in an instant," he said.

About 40 percent of security prisoners are released before completing their sentences, the defense source said. "People in the Shin Bet end up asking, 'Why do we capture these people? Where did all my work go? Where is the deterrence?'"

He added that similar responses were heard in the corridors of judicial departments within the security forces.

"A terrorist who plants an explosive device gets 10 years in prison but will end up being released after three or four years. This hurts the motivation in the Shin Bet," he said.

The same source said he was sure that the government chose to go ahead with the prisoner release deal with Hizbullah in July because the chances of a similar deal with Hamas to free kidnapped soldier Gilad Schalit were very low.

"The government realized it could not do a southern hostage deal, so it went with the northern hostage deal to reduce public pressure on it. The government knew that they [Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser] were no longer alive. They figured that [child-killer Samir] Kuntar had been in prison for many years, and went for the deal.

"Hamas is demanding 450 heavyweight prisoners who took part in recent terrorist attacks. The memories of the victims' families are still very raw. I don't believe the government can go ahead with this," the defense official said.

The government's attempt to help Fatah with the new prisoner release was unlikely to succeed, Brig.-Gen. (res.) Shalom Harari, a senior research scholar with the Institute for Counter-Terrorism at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, said on Sunday.

Harari, who was as a senior adviser on Palestinian affairs to the Defense Ministry for 20 years, said Fatah was in an extremely vulnerable state, and that the proposed prisoner release would likely be "forgotten after two days."

Fatah's responses to previous prisoner releases were not encouraging, he said. "On the morning after the release, we heard Fatah blaming Israel. Whatever happens, they will blame Israel and fault everyone except for themselves," Harari said.

"The aim of the release is also to show the Americans and Europeans that we are open-minded, and that we are helping out the side that we are supposed to be helping," he added.

Around 20% of security prisoners engage in terrorism after being released, Harari said. "In the short term, this is not a risk — the Aksa Martyrs Brigades have been neutralized by the PA for the time being," he said, adding that Fatah might return to terrorism in the future.

"But what many in Israel do not realize is that while these terrorists may not go back to fighting, many will go back to indoctrinating others into terrorism, and creating a terror-supporting environment," he added.

"Some will recruit on campuses, others will become so-called 'journalists,' while others will be integrated into institutions or sent abroad. These jobs are meant to compensate them for the alleged suffering they underwent in prisons in Israel."

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Shlomo Brom of Tel Aviv University's Institute for National Security Studies said the security risk from such a release was "very low."

Brom, a former head of the Strategic Planning Division in the General Staff's Planning Branch, said the main obstacle to releases were the emotions experienced by victims' families by the release of terrorists with "blood on their hands."

"The families' lobby seeks revenge, and opposes the releases," Brom said.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 17, 2008.

From http://onemansthoughts.wordpress.com/2008/05/24/stanley-ann-dunham-obama-soetoro/


In an interview, Barack Obama referred to his mother as 'the dominant figure in my formative years... The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics.' Since this man wants to lead the greatest nation on earth, it only makes sense to learn something about his mother and the values that are so important to him.

Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro November 29, 1942 — November 7, 1995

The mother of Senator Barack Obama Stanley Ann Dunham, also known as Ann Dunham, was an American anthropologist and left-wing social activist. She was born in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, to Stanley and Madelyn Dunham. Her father was a furniture salesman in downtown Seattle, Washington, and her mother worked for a bank. After a year living in Seattle, her family moved to Mercer Island, Washington, in 1956 so 13-year old Ann could attend the Mercer Island High School that had just opened. At the school she was on the debate team and graduated in 1960.

Her family moved to Hawaii and Ann attended the University of Hawaii at Manoa, where she studied anthropology. When Ann Dunham arrived in Hawaii, she was a full fledged radical leftist and practitioner of critical theory. She also began to engage in miscegenation (inter-racial relationships) as part of her attack on society. Susan Blake, one of her friends has stated she never dated 'the crew-cut white boys.' She had a world view, even as a young girl. It was embracing the different, rather than that ethnocentric thing of shunning the different. That was where her mind took her. In Hawaii she met Barack Obama, Sr. from Kenya in her Russian language class. Barack Obama, Jr. was born August 4, 1961.

Barack Obama, Sr. left Ann and their son in 1963 to attend Harvard in Boston. Press reports claim Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. were divorced around this time; however, no evidence has yet been presented to show they were ever married. The senior Obama obtained a masters degree in economics at Harvard and returned to Kenya in 1965 where he obtained a position in the Kenyan government. He was killed in an automobile accident in 1982.

Two years later, when her son was five, Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian oil manager and practicing Muslim whom she met at the university. In 1967 they moved to Jakarta, Indonesia. While in Indonesia, Ann got a job at the American embassy teaching English.

Barack's half-sister, Maya Soetoro was born in Indonesia. Ann, Barack and his sister Maya moved back to Hawaii. Ann Dunham soon returned to Indonesia with Maya but divorced Soetoro in the late 1970s.

Dunham traveled around the world, pursuing a career in rural development that took her to Ghana, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Nepal and Bangladesh. In 1986, Ann Dunham worked on a developmental project in Pakistan. Later that year, Ann and her daughter traveled the Silk Road in China. In 1992, she earned a Ph.D. in anthropology from the University of Hawaii. Her dissertation, 'Peasant blacksmithing in Indonesia: Surviving and Thriving Against All Odds,' was 1067 pages long. She worked for the Ford Foundation and promoted Microlending.

During Obama's campaign for the 2008 presidential election, he portrayed his mother as a conservative girl from Kansas; however in reality she was a radical leftist and cultural Marxist. She lived in the Seattle area; spending her teenage years in Seattle coffee shops with other young radical leftist. Obama claims his mother's family were conservative Methodists or Baptists from Kansas. However his mother's parents were members of a left-wing Unitarian church near Seattle. The church located in Bellevue, Washington was nicknamed 'the little red church,' because of its communist leanings.

The school Ann attended, Mercer Island High School, was a hotbed of pro-Marxist radical teachers. John Stenhouse, board member, told the House Un-American Activities Subcommittee that he had been a member of the Communist Party USA and this school has a number of Marxists on its staff. Two teachers at this school, Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman, both Frankfurt School style Marxists, taught a critical theory curriculum to students which included; rejection of societal norms, attacks on Christianity, the traditional family, and assigned readings by Karl Marx. The hallway between Foubert's and Wichterman classrooms was some times called 'anarchy ally.'

Dunham has been described by her friends as 'a fellow traveler' meaning 'a communist sympathizer.'

Before she died, Ann Dunham wanted to adopt a mixed-race Korean baby fathered by a Black American stationed in South Korea.

Stanley Ann Dunham died in Hawaii November 7, 1995 of ovarian cancer and uterine cancer. very scary.

Click here: Eyeblast.tv — I Invented The Internet (Episode 1: The Audacity)

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Teresinka Pereira, August 17, 2008.
I was sleeping.

They wake me up.

No, it was not a nightmare:

I am in the war.

Contact T Piereira at tpereira@buckeye-express.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 16, 2008.

(IsraelNN.com) President Shimon Peres has refused a request to pardon Itzik and Danny Halamish, two brothers who were convicted earlier this year of attacking Arab marauders who attacked them.

Danny, 35, was sentenced to seven months in prison, but his request for parole has already been granted, and he is set to be freed in a month. His brother Itzik, 28, was sentenced to eight months, and the Parole Board is to convene in three weeks' time to hear his case. If he is granted the customary one-third off for good behavior, he should be released a month later.

The beginning of the jail sentences for the two IDF combat unit veterans was delayed for several weeks while Peres considered their request for a pardon. However, in May, the Supreme Court denied their request to have their sentences pushed off for good until Peres would make his decision.

Arabs Attack, Jews Arrested

The brothers were convicted of attacking Arabs who infiltrated the fields of their town, Maaleh Rechavam in eastern Gush Etzion. Not only do they claim that the Arabs attacked first, they also say they did not shoot at all, and that the judicial process against them was faulty throughout.

The story began one day in February 2004, when an Arab gang entered the fields just outside the young Jewish townlet of Maaleh Rechavam. In accordance with accepted procedure, the Defense Ministry-hired local security officer called two members of the local fast-response security team — Danny and Itzik — and the three went out to banish the Arabs from the fields where Jewish children play.

It did not go smoothly, however. The mob of 20 Arabs attacked the Jews with rocks and even with sticks, and then surrounded them. The security officer shot at the ground in front of the Arabs, and then he and the Halamish brothers retreated.

"The next thing we knew," Danny Halamish later told Arutz-7, "the police came to arrest us — after the Arabs claimed that we had attacked them!"

Though the Jews filed a counter-complaint, the police later acknowledged that they never even interrogated the Arabs, Halamish said, "because of the weak claim that the Arabs had complained first..."

The site is just a kilometer away from the cave in which 13-year-old Kobi Mandell and his friend Yosef Ishran were brutally murdered while hiking in the area in 2001. The murderers, who were apprehended just several months ago, were still on the loose at the time of the Halamish incident.

The Halamish brothers and the local security officer spent a few days in jail, and were soon accused of assault and battery. The security officer, who admitted that he had shot, received a pardon for "personal reasons." But the two Halamish brothers said they "had nothing to confess, since we did not shoot. But even more importantly," added Danny, "I have no intention of apologizing for having gone out to protect Jews. Even if I have to sit in prison for a few months, I will not say that it is wrong to do what I did. What do we have a State for, if not to protect ourselves? The State has lost its way..."

Danny, married with two children, said that though his legal position was solid, "the courts took the strange position that because we didn't make certain claims at the right time, our conviction stands. This is unheard of. First of all, our legal claim is one that can be made at any time, and the courts are simply not following the law. But regardless of this: How can they send two upstanding citizens to jail merely because of a technicality? This is totally unjust."

Police Shoot the Guns Themselves, Thus Neutralizing the Evidence

The brothers said that when their weapons were taken from them, they were confident that the ballistics tests would show that they had not been fired. This would support the finding that all the bullet casings had been shot from the security officer's gun. However, the police did not check the guns; instead they fired them, claiming to want to see if they were in working order. Thus, the brothers' claim that they had not shot could no longer be proven.

Despite the lack of evidence against the brothers, and despite a recommendation by the probation officer that the sentence be only community service, Judge Amnon Cohen and two other judges of the Jerusalem Magistrates Court ruled that they believed the Arabs. The judges said they should be jailed to "serve as a lesson to others."

The brothers' subsequent appeals to the District Court and the Supreme Court were rejected, largely because the claim about the lack of police ballistic tests should have been submitted earlier.

Danny said that he and his brother were convicted because "the justice system simply doesn't know how to deal with Arab aggression. Therefore, the easiest targets for their frustration are those on the frontline — like us, in this case, and Shai Dromi, and the settlers [Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria] in general. If the legal system were to exonerate us, this would be an admission that we are doing the security job that the country is supposed to do on its own, but is failing at."

Attorney Sheftel's Presentation

Attorney Yoram Sheftel, representing the two brothers, said in one of the appeals, "My clients were convicted amidst total disregard of the police blunder in not having performed ballistic checks on the guns... In addition, the Arab identification of the brothers was done improperly, and is not acceptable as evidence."

Furthermore, Sheftel said, "there are no grounds for the judge having rejected my clients' claim that they acted with proper authority as part of their community's security team. Actions like the one they took are routine in many towns in Judea and Samaria." www.IsraelNationalNews.com

Hillel Fendel is senior news editor at Arutz-7. The article appeared in Arutz-7

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, August 16 2008.

Fred Reifenberg was born in Germany, and grew up during the Hitler period. In 40's he moved to NY. He is veteran of the Korean War. Currently, he lives in Israel, where he enjoys harmonizing with nature, and photographing nature in its many wonderful forms. He creates a variety of abstracts, combining photography and graphics. Contact him by email at fred343@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steve, August 16, 2008.

This has been making the rounds by email — author unknown.


The two million Jews remaining throughout the rest of the world — less than 100,000 total in all the Islamic countries — banded together and purchased the dark side of the moon, which no other companies or people wished to colonize.

Great transports were arranged via the 62,000 mile space elevator and the Space Shuttle and every Jew on Earth — including anyone who claimed any Jewish heritage whatsoever — left to go to a place where no one could blame them for anything.

The Earth rejoiced — happily rid of all Jews. There were huge parties throughout all of Sweden and the rest of Europe, Africa, Asia South America, and North America. (Now known as the Northern Alliance of Islamic States after the United States was taken over peacefully in the elections of 2040 by a predominantly Muslim Congress and President, who immediately passed amendments making Islam the main religion of the United States and the world.)

After the last Jew entered the elevator, (a David Goldstein, 62, formerly of New York), the Earth was officially declared Judenrein, by Hans Ibn Hitler, a great, great-grandson of Hitler who had been raised in Brazil and hidden by Nazis until this precious moment.

It was not an easy move for the Jews but, in some ways, it was no different than all their moves of previous eras. Some former Israelis, (still alive because they were out of Israel when the bombs dropped), claimed that the moon was easier to deal with because there were no Extremist Muslims. Of course, this precipitated a huge argument with some Jews, who felt not having the Radical Muslims nearby was not enough challenge.

Other Jews argued that taming a wilderness with no atmosphere, plant or animal life and freezing temperatures was enough challenge. And yet other Jews argued that arguing was counterproductive. It came as no surprise to anyone that for the two million Jews, there were eventually one million synagogues. (With the other million Jews not joining.)

It was also no surprise that within just three years, the Jews had created a controlled environment that allowed for antastic plant and animal growth and production. The transports, which had been called the Arks, had also carried two of each animal and plant (remember, Noah), and through the ingenuity of the Jews and cloning, there were now many new species which sped up production of food (cows with six udders, chickens with four drumsticks and so forth.)

The population had rapidly increased and, due to the amazing collection of scientific and medical minds, most diseases and even ageing had been reduced to nil. There was even a ministry of communication with Earth consisting of the remains of Hollywood producers and moviemakers, who sent back to Earth portraits of life on the moon. Of course, it had been decided when the Jews first got to the moon — based on six-thousand-year history of people being jealous of Jewish accomplishment — that all news coverage of the moon's population would be 'movie-ized' to show only horrible things. The film industry, led by Jordan Spielberg, went to great lengths to fabricate news clips to show Jews barely surviving in the harsh lunar habitat. Artists and engineers labored to cover over the vast environmental successes with illusionary domes showing massive areas of wasteland — just in case anyone from Earth ever sent a spaceship with cameras to see what was going on.

But no one ever did, and the years passed rapidly. One decade, then another. Bar Mitzvahs, weddings, Brittot, all elebrated under the artificial world that the Jews had created — not only had it not been that bad, but by the end of the century, some Jewish authors were calling the moon colony — 'Eden 2'.

Of course other Jews disagreed. In fact, much time was spent on disagreeing. There were even contests for arguing but, in general, there was peace. Anyone who threatened the peace was forced to officiate at a contest with people arguing about why that person was wrong. The contests would go on for days, (sometimes weeks) until the troublemaker begged for forgiveness. (Many penalties on the moon were similar to this, and were extremely effective.) Back on Earth, life disintegrated without the Jews. There was a return to Middle Ages thought — only the current religion du jour was valid — all others were kept legislated into poverty until a war erupted and the positions changed for a few years.

Another amazing anomaly appeared when there were no longer any Jews on Earth — anti-Semitism actually increased to monumental proportions! Famous orators explained this simply by saying; 'I don't have to have a gun to be afraid of having my brains blown out.'

Additionally, without the presence of the Jew, the world developed incredible evil that had no release. (Previous evil had always focused on the Jews;) One Rabbi on the moon actually said G-d spoke to him and said that he, G-d was about to destroy the Earth because everyone on the Earth was evil. The Rabbi begged him to reconsider, and bargained that if there were 1,000 good people left on Earth, G-d should spare the planet. G-d then told the Rabbi, "Hey, I was through this before with Abraham and Noah and I already know the answer because I'm G-d."

People laughed at the Rabbi, but then, one day, while all the lunar citizens were going about their business, an enormous series of explosions was seen on the Earth. Everyone on the moon stared at the distant fireballs that seemed to engulf the blue planet that was once their home.

Although there had been great anger at being forced to leave the Earth, the true spirit of Judaism was always present on the moon, and no one had wished ill on to their former home. As in the tradition of the Seder (when the wine is spilled because the Egyptians perished and we do not rejoice fully when even an enemy has died) when the Jews saw what was happening, they began to weep and pray, and watch what was to be the final news broadcast from Earth.

The horror of the apocalypse was videotaped by cameras until all electricity was ionized by the new electron bombs. Entire countries were wiped away in the blink of an ion exploding. And then came the final transmission from the nation that had started the entire mess — it was a desperate headline screamed by a hundred dying newscasters. Their rant continued until it was just blackness. What were they saying? As the Jews watched, some gasped, others cried, and a few even laughed. For the last words of the disappearing civilization were condemnations. "The Jews have caused all our problems — they left us here to face the mess they made." "If the Jews hadn't taken all the best scientists and engineers, we could have defeated our enemies." "Our enemies are the Jews! Kill all the Jews."

It took a little while, but the electronics experts pieced together what had happened on Earth during its last days anti-Semitism, which had grown stronger and stronger since the Jews had left, had reached its pinnacle, and all the countries of the world had decided to launch a massive attack on the moon.

The attack had been coordinated by the United Nations and, although all the missiles had been launched properly, there was some sort of glitch in the targeting system, resulting in all the weapons colliding in the upper atmosphere and showering the Earth with a deadly rain of nuclear fire, electronic destruction and a generally bad day. The mistake triggered the military response of all the nations — (who all had nuclear weapons by then — plus a few other horrid toys) and the result was truly an Armageddon.

The Jews on the moon went into a period of deep mourning. The Orthodox rent their clothing and there were mass counseling sessions. And then, about one week after the BIG DAY, as it was now called, a presence was detected heading towards the moon. Had one of the missiles escaped? Were the Jews doomed after all? The leaders checked with the defense experts — no, this was not a missile, it was an old-style spacecraft, like the ones used in the early seventies. As it approached, the laser defense was trained on the craft. Debates raged as to whether the craft should be destroyed or allowed to get close enough to communicate with.

A message from the ship came just in time. It said, "We are the last representatives from Earth — two from each country and we come in peace." Some Jews rejoiced that there were survivors, others demanded isolation or death of the approaching group.

The Rabbi who had had the vision of earth's destruction told the leaders that G-d wanted them to have a chance, so they were allowed to circle the moon. When told they could have a section of land to themselves to farm and repopulate, the Earthlings were upset. They told the Jews that they should be allowed to live with the Jews and have all the same privileges — because, after all, in Judaism, the stranger is given the same rights and privileges as the citizen. Upon hearing this, the leaders went to the Rabbi with the visions, and he offered to guide the visitors to their new home. The leaders allowed him to give the instructions for landing. Of course, not trusting the Rabbi, the commander of the ship didn't listen to his advice and instead crashed into a lunar crater.

And so we have the final days of the history of the planet Earth, which have been generously shared with us by the Jewish colony of the 453rd Solar System of the (M Galaxy. Although the Earth is currently uninhabitable, the head engineer of the Jewish colony on Mars tells us that Venus will be fully colonized by the year 2120, and with continuous replanting, Earth will once again be ready for Jews returning from other planets in the year 2136.

An interesting side note — inside the wreckage of the rocket with the survivors from Earth was a specially marked package that had survived which included the following words: 'Once there was a great planet named the Earth. And there were many peoples on this planet, and they all existed peacefully with each other, except for the Jews. Wherever there were Jews, there was trouble. Jews brought dirt and death and hatred and strife. They were finally banished from our planet, only to take with them many great inventors and scientists and doctors, leaving Earth with nothing. We have decided to destroy the remnants of the Jews, and since the first attempt failed, we are the last chance for Earth. Whoever shall find this will know the truth — It was all the Jews' fault.'

This panel has been saved and is on display at the Earth Memorial Museum at Rivkah Crater, NW, for all travelers who wish to see the remains of a civilization that did not understand the words — 'he who blesses the Jews, is himself blessed, he who curses the Jews, is himself cursed.'


Contact Steve at crestln@erols.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, August 16, 2008.

Why does the West dither? Make the embattled pro-democratic nation of Georgia a member of NATO now! Indeed, make every security challenged sovereign nation not yet a member, such as the Ukraine, threatened by Putin's imperialistic inclinations, if they so choose, a member of NATO. Furthermore, why not include Israel in this 'in your face' assertion of strength, suggesting an 'all for one and one for all' defense supersedes any potential disruptions in the flow of Asian oil. If the West, lead by Uncle Sam, does not act decisively and vigorously now, dire consequences will result in the not too distant future. If NATO is to remain a relevant force on this challenged planet, it must be willing to walk the walk now, willing to use its formidable military might if necessary! Russia's former KGB agent and current strongman Vladimir Putin, awash in oil and arrogance, believes he can virtually annex Georgia and its essential oil pipeline to his nation, in effect begin to recreate an erstwhile Soviet Union, with impunity. No doubt other Caucus nations offer tempting targets, lying within the crosshairs of his egomaniacal ambitions. Is Putin delusional, will NATO respond with more than rhetoric to his aggression, or is that organization more concerned in maintaining an uninterrupted flow of energy inconveniently controlled by Russia's big boss man. Is the pertinent motto 'oil uber alas'?

Putin's agenda likely includes forming his own anti-Western 'axis of evil' consisting of an expanded Russia, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, perhaps a morphing Pakistan, and other pliable regimes. While fossil fuels continue to be the world's major energy source, rising in cost, Putin and his henchmen will flourish, challenging Western nations for planetary dominance. Dominant Eastern nations such as China, having no common heritage thus no innate love for Western culture, could form an alliance with this strengthening axis. Under these circumstances, it makes no sense to continue the current currency war between the United States and European Union, vying for dominance as the world's primary oil trading currency. Merge the dollar and the euro into one currency the 'duro' now! Democratic nations need to unify, strengthen each other, band together as one synergistic entity if they are to thwart planetary dictatorships controlled by egomaniacs. If Georgia becomes a Russian satellite will the Ukraine be next? Will the security of small democratic nations like Israel, abutted by axis regimes, be further compromised if the West refuses to confront Putin? If the West has any intentions of spreading democracy eastward, it will not succeed on words alone. Condoleezza Rice can skewer Putin with all the high pitched academic verbiage she can muster, but battle ships and swarming warplanes speak with more clarity, indeed more convincingly! Must a disillusioned Mikheil Saakashvili continue to plead for assistance while the West in effect procrastinates, unwilling to flex its collective muscle?

Russia's assertion that troops invaded Georgia in response to ongoing genocide against pro-Moscow civilians in Georgia' s two rebellious regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is not supported by evidence. Georgia's pipeline, bypassing Russia, transporting oil from the Caspian Sea to Europe and eventually to Israel is what this invasion is about. Reestablishing an empire by annexing sovereign neighboring nations one by one is what this invasion is about. Despite pronouncement by Mikhail Gorbachev castigating Georgia, blaming it's leaders for provoking the Russian incursion onto Georgian soil in order to protect South Ossetia's pro-Moscow citizens, further asserting 'the United is jeopardizing its fragile relationship with Russia by backing Georgia', there is no substantive evidence to support that claim. Indeed, while the 'mild, mild, West' continues to huff and puff, peaceful Georgians are ousted from their homes by South Ossetia's rebels, businesses are looted, and flash backs of other historical catastrophes such as Hitler's invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland permeate the Caucuses. Unless NATO and the West assert some real authority soon, Eastern powers will continue to emerge filling the power vacuum. Alas, the West's dependence on an uninterrupted flow of fossil fuels could in fact compromise its ability to assert itself as a global force. Might a nation like Israel ponder the consequences?

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Marc Samberg, August 16, 2008.

This must make some might funny tasting milk and other things to eat. Fertilizer sounds so yummy!!! This article was written by Nissan Ratzla-Katz and it appeared in Arutz-7



(IsraelNN.com) Security agents of the Israel Airport Authority (IAA) discovered two tons of material used to manufacture explosives on a truck supposedly delivering humanitarian aid for residents of the Palestinian Authority. The discovery was made at the IDF checkpoint at the Kerem Shalom Crossing into southern Gaza, a transit point for goods from Egypt destined for the PA.

The bomb-making ingredient was found by IAA officials during routine and random inspections of vehicles supposedly carrying humanitarian supplies into southern Gaza. According to security sources, the chemical compound, made from fertilizer, is used as fuel for PA rockets and in the manufacture of incendiary devices. The quantity of material discovered was sufficient for hundreds of rockets.

Security officials have yet to determine the source and destination of the explosives supplies. The investigation continues.

The smuggling incident was the second of its kind in less than a month. In late December, IDF soldiers discovered 6.5 tons of potassium nitrate hidden in sacks marked "sugar" and earmarked for needy Arabs in Gaza. Potassium nitrate is a banned substance in Gaza, Judea and Samaria due to its use by terrorists for the manufacturing of explosives and Kassam rockets. The bags were marked as humanitarian aid from the European Union, Gaza's biggest source of assistance.

While security officials investigating the December case do not assume that the potassium nitrate was sent by the European Union, they have noted that terrorist groups have learned to take advantage of such shipments. An IDF source said at the time, "This is another example of how the terror organizations exploit the humanitarian aid that is delivered to the Palestinian population in Gaza with Israel's approval."

PM Olmert Opposes Gaza Incursion

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Monday that Israel was at "war" with Arab terrorists in Gaza, but said he opposed a full-scale invasion of the area "right now."

The prime minister explained his position: "Hundreds of fatalities amongst terror organizations in Gaza in the last year are a heavy price for the terror groups to have paid. I highly recommend that we do not get involved in operations and costs out of all proportion to the issues we are dealing with."

At the same time, Olmert stressed that he did not underestimate the severity of Kassam attacks on Sderot and other Jewish communities located near Gaza.

Israel Lifting Fuel Sanctions

The random discovery of the bomb-making material last month and on Monday did not change Defense Minister Ehud Barak's decision to drop fuel sanctions imposed on Gaza by the government last month.

The cutbacks in fuel supplies were implemented as part of the effort to isolate and pressure the Hamas government in Gaza. The High Court of Justice heard several petitions against the move. On Thursday, the state submitted a motion in which it announced the suspension of the punitive measures.

Canada to Provide Aid

In addition to the assistance from the EU for the PA, Canadian Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier announced that his government would allocate $300 million for the PA over the course of the next five years. The money will be used to reform the PA and to fund its security forces, Bernier said.

The PA security forces have begun patrolling Shechem and Bethlehem in an effort to prove that the PA is able to fight terrorism and control crime. Terrorists who are caught by PA forces serve up to three months in prison and then become members of the force, provided with weapons and a salary from the PA.

Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Chuck Brooks, August 16, 2008.

This was written by Rich Carroll, who can be contacted by email at crossedrifles@hotmail.com


How long did it take Islam and their oil money to find a candidate for President of the United States? As long as it took them to place a Senator from Illinois and Mi nnesota? The same amount of time to create a large Muslim enclave in Detroit? The time it took them to build over 2,000 mosques in America? The same amount of time required to place radical Wahabbist clerics in our military and prisons as 'chaplains'? Find a candidate who can get away with lying about their father being a 'freedom fighter' when he was actually part of the most corrupt and violent government in Kenya's history. Find a candidate with close ties to The Nation of Islam and the violent Muslim overthrow in Africa, a candidate who is educated among white infidel Americans but hides his bitterness and anger behind a superficial toothy smile.

Find a candidate who changes his American name of Barry to the Muslim name of Barack Hussein Obama, and dares anyone to question his true ties under the banner of 'racism'. Nurture this candidate in an atmosphere of anti-white American teaching and surround him with Islamic teachers. Provide him with a bitter, racist, anti-white, anti-American wife, and supply him with Muslim Middle East connections and Islamic monies.

Allow him to be clever enough to get away with his anti-white rhetoric and proclaim he will give $834 billion taxpayer dollars to the Muslim controlled United Nations for use in Africa. Install your candidate in an atmosphere of deception, because questioning him on any issue involving Africa or Islam would be seen as 'bigoted racism'; two words too powerful to allow the citizenry to be informed of facts.

Allow your candidate to employ several black racist Nation of Islam Louis Farrakhan followers as members of his Illinois Senatorial and campaign staffs.

Where is the bloodhound American 'free press' who doggedly overturned every stone in the Watergate case? Where are our nation's reporters that have placed every Presidential candidate under the microscope of detailed scrutiny; the same press who pursue Bush's 'Skull and Bones' club or ran other candidates off with persistent detective and research work? Why haven't 'newsmen' pursued the 65 blatant lies told by this candidate during the Presidential primaries? Where are the stories about this candidate's cousin and the Muslim butchery in Africa? Since when did our national press corps become weak, timid, and silent?

Why haven't they regaled us with the long list of socialists and communists who have surrounded this 'out of nowhere' Democrat candidate or the fact that his church re-printed the Hamas Manifesto in their bulletin, and that his 'close pastor friend and mentor' met with Middle East terrorist Muammar Qaddafi, (Guide of the First of September Great Revolutio n of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya)? Why isn't the American press telling us this candidate is supported by every Muslim organization in the world?

As an ultimate slap in the face, be blatant in the fact your candidate has ZERO interest in traditional American values and has the most liberal voting record in U.S. Senate history.

Why has the American mainstream media clammed up on any negative reporting on Barak Hussein Obama? Why will they print Hillary Rodham Clinton's name but never write his middle name? Is it not his name? Why, suddenly, is ANY information about this candidate not coming from mainstream media, but from the blogosphere by citizens seeking facts and the truth? Why isn't our media connecting the dots with Islam?

Why do they focus on 'those bad American soldiers' while Islam slaughters non-Muslims daily in 44 countries around the globe? Why does our media refer to Darfur as 'ethnic cleansing' inst ead of what it really is: Muslims killing non-Muslims! There is enough strange, anti-American activity surrounding Barack Hussein Obama to pique the curiosity of any reporter. WHERE IS OUR INVESTIGATIVE MEDIA!?

A formal plan for targeting America was devised three years after the Iranian revolution in 1982. The plan was summarized in a 1991 memorandum by Mohammed Akram, an operative of the global Muslim Brotherhood. 'The process of settlement' of Muslims in America, Akram explained, 'is a civilization jihad process.' This means that members of the Brotherhood must understand that their work in 'America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions.'

There is terrorism we can see, smell and fear, but there is a new kind of terror invading The United States in the form of Sharia law and finance. Condoning it is civilization suicide. Middle East Muslims are coming to America in record numbers and building hate infidel mosques, buying our corporations, suing us for our traditions, but they and the whole subject of Islam is white noise leaving uninformed Americans about who and what is really peaceful.

Where is our investigative press? Any criticism of Islam or their intentions, even though Islamic leaders state their intentions daily around the globe, brings forth a volley of 'racist' from the left-wing Democrat crowd.

Lies and deception behind a master plan — the ingredients for 'The Manchurian Candidate' or the placement of an anti-American President in our nation's White House? Is it mere coincidence that an anti-capitalist run for President at the same time Islamic Sharia finance and law is trying to make advancing strides into the United States?

Is it mere coincidence this same candidate wants to disarm our nuclear capability at a time when terrorist Muslim nations are expanding their nuclear weapons capability? Is it mere coincidence this candidate wants to reduce our military at a time of global jihad from Muslim nations?

Change for America? What change? To become another 'Nation of Islam'?

Contact Chuck Brooks by email at chetz18@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 16, 2008.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said the Islamic organization had "nothing whatsoever" to do with any threats and that any allegations to that effect would be "scurrilous."......... (???)

But wait a minute ......So, did he condemn the threats?... I did not see or hear such !!!!

Is the FBI here sleepwalking now.... ????.... when normally the FBI goes into overdrive when any Muslim scum organization even makes false claims

Savage has been savaging Muslims and Islam for years; ....Now suddenly he gets a death threat that makes him back down?

It can't be a coincidence this death threat relates to his actions against CAIR, and it must be an unusually credible threat to make Savage back down.

One question; Who and what Rebel is protecting CAIR .... ???????

CAIR deserves a lot of credit actually; not only do they have most of the US government under their heel but they can get lawsuits dropped through intimidation !!! One question ..... death threats as well ???

Does CAIR know how to handle America ??? ..... Someone has to shut this door !!!

Now, by death threats against Savage, they took that intimidation to the highest Level, with the result being that a Brave American had to back-off of his Constitutionally Guaranteed legal rights or risk facing the ultimate JIHAD WEAPON!


This was posted by Robert Spencer on Jihad Watch


Last month, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston dismissed the lawsuit. She permanently dismissed Savage's claim of copyright infringement, saying that CAIR's posting of the comments for the purposes of criticism was protected by the right of free speech.

But the judge said Savage could try to amend a second claim of racketeering by trying to show specific alleged financial harm by CAIR to his business. She gave Savage a deadline of Friday.

In a notice filed Thursday, attorney Daniel Horowitz said Savage decided not to file an amended racketeering claim.

In an unusual three-page filing, Horowitz told the judge that he had prepared a 116-page amended lawsuit, but that Savage decided not to file it because of "factors arising out of this litigation but taking place (or potentially have an effect) outside of this litigation."

The court filing gave no details, but in a telephone interview Horowitz said the factors included an alleged phone threat to Savage. Horowitz said he wasn't accusing the Islamic group of making threats, but said Savage didn't want to take the risk that the case could inspire a "lone nut" to try to harm his family.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said the Islamic organization had "nothing whatsoever" to do with any threats and that any allegations to that effect would be "scurrilous."

Hooper said, "It's clear that this baseless and frivolous lawsuit wasn't going anywhere and he decided to cut his losses."...

Hooper knows frivolous lawsuits, too.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Doc Milt Fried, August 15, 2008.

This was written by Daniel Pipes and it is archived at

It appeared in the Philadelphia Bulletin entitled "Examples Of How The West's Islamist Infiltrators Proceed."


Aafia Siddiqui, 36, is a Pakistani mother of three, an alumna of MIT, and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Brandeis University. She is also accused of working for Al-Qaeda and was charged last week in New York City with attempting to kill American soldiers.

Her arrest serves to remind how invisibly most Islamist infiltration proceeds. In particular, an estimated forty Al-Qaeda sympathizers or operatives have sought to penetrate U.S. intelligence agencies.

Such a well-placed infiltrator can wreck great damage explains a former CIA chief of counterintelligence, Michael Sulick: "In the war on terrorism, intelligence has replaced the Cold War's tanks and fighter planes as the primary weapon against an unseen enemy." Islamist moles, he argues, "could inflict far more damage to national security than Soviet spies," for the U.S. and Soviet Union never actually fought each other, whereas now, "our nation is at war."

Here are some American cases of attempted infiltration since 2001 that have been made public:

  • The Air Force discharged Sadeq Naji Ahmed, a Yemeni immigrant, when his superiors learned of his pro-Al-Qaeda statements. Ahmed subsequently became a baggage screener at Detroit's Metro Airport, which terminated him for hiding his earlier discharge from the Air Force. He was convicted of making false statements and sentenced to eighteen months in jail.

  • The Chicago Police Department fired Patricia Eng-Hussain just three days into her training on learning that her husband, Mohammad Azam Hussain, was arrested for being an active member of Mohajir Qaumi Movement-Haqiqi (MQM-H), a Pakistani terrorist group.

  • The Chicago Police Department also fired Arif Sulejmanovski, a supervising janitor at its 25th District station after it learned his name was on a federal terrorist watch list of international terrorism suspects.

  • Mohammad Alavi, an engineer at the Palo Verde nuclear power plant, was arrested as he arrived on a flight from Iran, accused of taking computer access codes and software to Iran that provide details on the plant's control rooms and plant layout. He subsequently pleaded guilty to transporting stolen property.

  • Nada Nadim Prouty, a Lebanese immigrant who worked for both the FBI and CIA, pleaded guilty to charges of: fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship; accessing a federal computer system to unlawfully query information about her relatives and the terrorist organization Hizballah; and engaging in conspiracy to defraud the United States.

  • Waheeda Tehseen, a Pakistani immigrant who filled a sensitive toxicologist position with the Environmental Protection Agency, pleaded guilty to fraud and was deported. WorldNetDaily.com explains that "investigators suspect espionage is probable, as she produced highly sensitive health-hazard documents for toxic compounds and chemical pesticides. Tehseen also was an expert in parasitology as it relates to public water systems."

  • Weiss Rasool, 31, a Fairfax County police sergeant and Afghan immigrant, pleaded guilty for checking police databases without authorization, thereby jeopardizing at least one federal terrorism investigation.

  • Nadire P. Zenelaj, 32, a 911 emergency operator of Albanian origins, was charged with 232 felony counts of computer trespass for illegally searching New York State databases, including at least one person on the FBI's terrorist watch list.

Three other cases are less clear. The Transportation Security Administration fired Bassam Khalaf, 21, a Texan of Christian Palestinian origins, as an airport baggage screener because lyrics on his music CD, Terror Alert, applaud the 9/11 attacks. FBI Special Agent Gamal Abdel-Hafiz "showed a pattern of pro-Islamist behavior," according to author Paul Sperry, that may have helped acquit Sami Al-Arian of terrorism charges. The Pentagon cleared Hesham Islam, an Egyptian immigrant, former U.S. Navy commander, and special assistant to the deputy secretary of defense, but major questions remain about his biography and his outlook.

Other Western countries too — Australia, Canada, Israel, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom — have been subject to infiltration efforts. (For details, see my weblog entry, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security.")

This record prompts one to wonder what catastrophe must occur before government agencies, some of which have banished the words "Islam" and "jihad," seriously confront their internal threat?

Westerners are indebted to Muslim agents like Fred Ghussin and "Kamil Pasha" who have been critical to fighting terrorism. That said, I stand by my 2003 statement that "There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism."

Contact Dr. Milt Fried by email at docmiltfried@mindspring.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 15, 2008.


An amnesty bill passed its first Knesset vote. It would apply to 400 of the 480 cases of protestors arrested over the removal of Jewry from Gaza and northern Samaria. The 400 did "not risk personal injury or loss of life" [were non-violent].

Opposing the bill, a Meretz MK likened its Jewish nationalist supporters to the German nationalists who had failed to enforce the law against Hitler's storm troopers before he took power. She says that for years, Israel has ignored the crimes [unstated] of the right-wing parties. Arutz-7, itself a right-wing, settler news source, described her remark as likening the bill's supporters to the Nazis.

A bill supporter, a doctor, retorted that the Meretz MK's hatred of Israel [he means Jewish sovereignty and loyalty to Judaism and Jewry] is the Left's mental disorder. He thinks it is incurable. Other supporters hoped the clemency would unify the country (Arutz-7, 7/30). Only if leftist psychosis were cured.

Actually, the Israeli government ignored the crimes of the left-wingers. I will state some of them. Rabin and Peres had secret agents not only try to provoke volatile nationalist youth into violence, it also committed dirty tricks, including violence. One agent beat up Arabs and blamed religious Jews. He also attended a rally for MK Netanyahu, as if a supporter, holding an inflammatory poster defaming Rabin, and getting the media to publicize it and blame Netanyahu for it, although the agent stood where Netanyahu couldn't see it. Those are only two of the clearest examples, not prosecuted.

The people quoted have misconceptions and are inaccurate. Some of those are cleared up in the way I summarized the story. Israeli politicians are off target, in their bombast and faulty analogy. Israelis too readily make analogies to the Nazis and too readily object out of over-righteousness. They don't know history well enough. Analogy is a poor means of argument, drawing attention to itself and away from the real issues.

German nationalist judges, imbued with old fears of Socialists and Communists, favored the Nazis as foes of the Left. If they had enforced the law, the Nazis would not have been able to terrorize the country and take power. Nazis were called right-wing, and the Communists were called left-wing, but they most closely resembled each other, as totalitarian. Calling the Nazis and supporters right-wing does not make them like Jewish nationalists in Israel, who also are called right-wing. The Jewish nationalists are far from totalitarian, the Left, not as far.

The real issues here are treason, national security, and police state tactics. Those are traits of the Left, supposedly idealistic. Nor do many on the Right understand civil liberties and how few democratic institutions Israel has.

PM Sharon destroyed the Jewish communities in Gaza and northern Samaria. That blow to national security still is felt in the bombardment from Gaza and Hamas' strategic threat to Israel. His strengthening of the genocidal enemy was treason. He also betrayed Zionism, for those areas are in the Land of Israel, recognized by the Palestine Mandate as areas requiring Jewish settlement. He chose many police from among gentile antisemites, and encouraged to hurt even non-violent protestors first, and then frame them. This allegation has been proved in court, despite the courts' leftist bias (another aspect of non-democracy in Israel). The bill was for relief from persecution. Israel needs to reform the police, the prosecutors, judiciary, and Knesset and make other democratic reforms. It should examine the US Constitution.


A Jewish nationalist organization in Israel led about 200 youths on a week long hilltop hike from northern Samaria [from which Sharon had expelled Jewish residents, to southern Judea]. At one hill, Arabs attacked the hikers with rocks and clubs. Police did not intervene, until [which is a pattern] a Jewish escort fired a warning shot to deter the muggers. Then the police, apparently from hidden observation points, converged on the Jews and arrested the one who fired, and disarmed the others.

The hike organizer thinks that the police disarmed them so as to make them turn back and give up their pioneering spirit. Some people accuse police of complicity with the Arab muggers. The organizer was told that two Arabs were arrested, but she doesn't believe it, not having seen it. An MK noted the police regularly side with the Arabs politically (Arutz-7, 7/30) on orders from above.

Yes, police have disarmed most settlers but not most P.A. Arabs. What do you suppose that is for? I suppose it is to get the Jews to fear assault and to abandon Judea-Samaria, as the government wants them to. The government politics is ignominious and undemocratic, the means is by police state tactics, and the police frame Jews and don't enforce the law against Arab mobs. I am ashamed of the government of Israel for its anti-Jewish, cowardly, and fascist behavior. This behavior by the left-wing is not decent. I had called it a neurosis. I change that now to psychosis.

Now recall the first article, above, about the Israeli bill. The Meretz MK condemned it as exempting Jews from the law. As we now can see, the police abuse the law to frame Jews and exempt Arabs from the law, to serve the government's irrational political ideology. The MK's righteous indignation is phony, as becomes obvious when one realizes that she speaks in the name of law and order, in behalf of police violation of the law and not keeping order among the Arabs. What could be a greater shame for Israeli police to stand by while Arabs beat up Jews, and then intervene when Jews defend themselves, and to arrest the Jew who does, even though he merely fired a warning shot, and then to disarm the Jews so they cannot defend themselves in the future from Arab mobs that are not arrested? I'll tell you what is a greater shame. A greater shame is that a Meretz MK of Jewish origin opposes a bill that would release hundreds of Jews from false arrests, and who opposes it in the name of law and order.


Why did the P.A. lose Gaza to Hamas? It found that at least a third of its forces were riddled with Hamas sympathizers. [No wonder some units didn't fight and others soon yielded! The P.A. lacked coordination. It didn't get help from Fatah men not also in the security forces. I don't know why. Aso, Hamas had a goal and a strategy; the P.A. didn't and was oblivious. The P.A. devoted its US training in intelligence to monitoring Israel and not to monitoring Hamas.]

To prevent a recurrence in Judea-Samaria, the P.A. has stiffened its recruitment criteria to exclude anybody sympathetic to Hamas. It also has discharged about a thousand members of security forces as suspect.

Its criteria include not only membership in Hamas or activity or expressed support for Hamas. It also includes being related to a Hamas member or living near a Hamas official or activist (IMRA, 8/4).

The last criterion may be extreme. In the P.A., families try to secure themselves by having a member in each faction. I don't understand why merely living near a Hamas member renders someone suspect.

When Arafat and Abbas were letting members of Hamas join the P.A. security forces, I wrote that that the P.A. was losing control over its own forces.

STATUS OF HIZBULLAH of the Iranian Shiite variety.

Hizbullah likely believes that Israel would have attacked it if it were weak. That is the way Muslim Arabs think. It is not realistic, however. Israel is in appeasement mode. It refrained from fighting weak Hamas, letting Hamas build up. Likewise, It aborted an offensive that would have wiped out weak Hizbullah, because it doesn't want war. Now it doesn't want to have fight its way through UNIFIL.


Yesh Din is financed by the New Israel fund, European foreign ministries, and private donors. It monitors Arab legal complaints against Israelis

Typical of groups receiving such subsidies, Yesh Din ignores Arab violations of Jews' human rights, including terrorism, and is one-sided in the issues it takes up. "Reports generally omit the context of terror and use pseudo-legal human rights terminology and "apartheid" rhetoric to condemn Israeli policy."

Yesh Din takes up and publishes subjective, non-verifiable Palestinian Arab accusations of criminal acts against them by Jews. Its stated goal is to oppose "'the continuing violation of Palestinian human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.' The group claims to "work for an immediate and meaningful change in the Israeli authorities' practices by documenting and disseminating accurate and up-to-date information about the systematic violation of human rights in the OPT, by raising public awareness of such violations, and by applying public and legal pressures on government agencies to end them.' (OPT — Occupied Palestinian Territory — is a political and not a legal term that is used by many NGOs.)"

[Israel should better document its 'systematic violation of human rights" of Arabs? The very language the group uses demonstrates its bias.]

The organization accuses the police of hardly investigating Arab complaints. It makes no allowances for the difficulties of Israeli police to investigate Arab villages and for police preoccupation with more serious crimes than the many trespassing complaints the organization reviews. Nor does the group explain why it claims that only 10% of complaints lead to prosecution, whereas police reports indicate a much higher percentage.

The significance of the percentages is meaningless without comparisons to Jewish complaints against Arabs and to statistics within Israel as well as in other societies. There are other doubts about methodology. The group's reports included defense lawyers' self-serving complaints, rather than facts. It quotes other, similarly biased organizations' unreliable reports (IMRA, 7/31).

The real problem: such groups encourage Arabs to file false complaints that the political police take too seriously while ignoring bona fide Jewish complaints.


Hamas and Islamic Jihad send tens of thousands of Gaza children to summer camp for military training, including with rockets, and to commit to prisoners of Israel and "Palestinian land." Fatah can't afford this, any more (IMRA, 7/31).

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

Posted by HouMEye, August 15, 2008.

This Email below is re an American Soldier who died who also was a NFL star — Pat Tillman. It is circulating around Al Awda because the Mother of the dead soldier wrote a book as you shall read in the email in regards to Rachel Corrie his "hero" who guarded a "doctors house.

I am enclosing the email and Think-Israel Website where a explanation and a video is provided in regards to the circumstance of Corrie's death. This needs to be corrected with the publisher of the book


This is a copy of the Email talking about the book written by the bereaved Mother of Pat Tillman killed by friendly fire. Check Amazon.com where you shall find it.

Most of you probably remember Pat Tillman of football fame, who was for a time the Pentagon's poster boy for bravely giving his life in Afghanistan until it became widely known that he was killed by "friendly-fire", accidental or otherwise.

His mother has written a book about his life, it came out just a few months ago: "Boots on the Ground by Dusk: My Tribute to Pat Tillman".

Tillman, the mother of the late professional football player and U.S. Army Ranger Pat Tillman, and former journalist Zacchino collaborate for this disturbing story of a mother's desperate search for the truth of her son's death. Pat Tillman constantly defied expectations; following 9/11, he shocked his family and football fans everywhere when he quit the NFL and joined the army rangers. On April 21, 2004, while on a combat mission in Afghanistan, Pat was killed in a firefight.

Not the only American family who has had to fight for the truth of their loved one's death in the Middle East, as we well know.

This "hero" also had heroes of his own.

From Page 67 of the book:

"The article is about Rachel Corrie, the 23 year old peace activist from Olympia, Washington who was crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer on March 16, 2003, trying to protect the home of a Palestinian doctor and his family.

I remember picking up the article from the same spot more than a year ago and asking Pat, "Who's this?"

"That's my hero," Pat said. 'She was a stud; she had a lot of guts."

"Corrie was a member of the International Solidarity Movement. Joseph Smith, 21, of Kansas City Missouri, who was with Corrie at the site, said the driver of the bulldozer, an IDF soldier, could clearly see Corrie as she sat in front of the machine.

"Contrary to Smith's report, IDF Capt. Jacob Dallal of the IDF Spokeswoman's Office said Corrie's death was an accident. The US State Department had no immediate comment.

In a series of three videos, each running approximately nine minutes, Becky Johnson and Lee Kaplan debunk the myth that Corrie was protecting a house. In fact, as Smooth Stone[3] points out and as you will see in the video below, Corrie was standing in a trench where she could not be seen, protecting an entrance to a weapons tunnel.

Actual video footage from the Israeli Defense Forces show the real circumstances under which the terrorist-loving anarchist died: knee-deep in a trench in the middle of dirt in an open dirt field. The left arrow on the photo below points to the tractor, the right arrow shows the kneeling Rachel Corrie. To see the live action footage moments before Rachel Corrie's accidental death, go to the Part 2 video 49 seconds into the video. Click here.

Contact HouMEye at HouMEye@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by HaDaR, August 15, 2008.

This was written by Khaled Abu Toameh and it appeared yesterday in The Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710366378&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

What was the flag of the State of Chelm?


The Egyptian government has informed Hamas that it will not reopen the Rafah border crossing until the movement releases kidnapped IDF soldier St.-Sgt. Gilad Schalit, a Hamas official in the Gaza Strip said Thursday.

The official described the Egyptian condition as "completely unacceptable" and claimed that the Egyptians had promised to reopen the border crossing within four weeks after the cease-fire agreement that was reached nearly two months ago between Israel and Hamas.

"They said the border would be opened if Hamas abided by the cease-fire and stopped the rocket attacks on Israel," the Hamas official told The Jerusalem Post by phone.

According to the official, the Egyptians are "afraid" to open the Rafah terminal for fear of being "reprimanded" by Israel, the Americans and the Palestinian Authority.

"They are all afraid that the reopening of the border would strengthen Hamas and weaken the Palestinian Authority leadership in Ramallah," he added. "[PA President] Mahmoud Abbas is also exerting heavy pressure on Egypt not to reopen Rafah. He doesn't want Hamas to be in control of the Palestinian side of the terminal. He [Abbas] wants his men to return to the terminal, as was the case before June 2007."

A senior Egyptian government official told Hamas leaders earlier this week that even if Cairo agreed to reopen the Rafah border, it would do so only under the terms of the 2005 US-brokered agreement that gave Abbas's security forces exclusive control over the terminal, the Hamas official said.

"We're not completely opposed to the deployment of some of Abbas's loyalists at the border, but we insist that such a move be done in coordination with the legitimate Hamas government," he explained.

The Hamas official quoted the Egyptian representative as saying that as far as Egypt was concerned, Israel still bore full responsibility for the situation inside the Gaza Strip.

"The Egyptian position is that the reopening of the Rafah border crossing would exempt Israel from fulfilling its duties toward the residents of the Gaza Strip," he said. "The Egyptians also told us that if we wanted to import fuel, gas and food, we should do so only through Israel because they insist that the Rafah terminal be used only for the passage of civilians."

Asked if Hamas were holding secret talks with Israel over a prisoner exchange, the Hamas official would neither confirm nor deny rumors of such negotiations.

Over the past few weeks, several Hamas officials have been critical of the role Egypt has been playing in the negotiations over the release of Schalit. Some have even suggested replacing the Egyptians with mediators from Qatar or Germany.

The Hamas officials claim the Egyptians are "biased" in favor of Israel and are putting pressure on the movement to soften its position over the case of Schalit. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar told reporters in Gaza Thursday that his movement's strategy was not to burn all bridges with Egypt.

He also said that as far as Hamas was concerned, Egypt remained the main party authorized to act as a mediator in the talks with Israel.

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Sacha Stawski, August 15, 2008.

This was written by Benjamin Weinthal and it appeared yesterday in The Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710366461&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


The bell has rung for the first round of a legal fight between renowned German-Jewish columnist Henryk M. Broder and Evelyn Hecht-Galinski, a hardcore anti-Zionist critic of Israel who happens to be a German Jew herself.

At issue is whether Broder may write that statements made by Hecht-Galinski are anti-Semitic.

In an open letter to Monika Piel, director of Westdeutsche Rundfunk (Western German Broadcasting), Broder referred to Hecht-Galinski and wrote that "anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist statements are her specialty."

The Westdeutsche Rundfunk radio program Hallo Ü-Wagen had invited Hecht-Galinski to talk about Israel's 60th anniversary, and Broder questioned the soundness of Hecht-Galinski's credentials as an Israel expert who in the past has equated the Israeli government with Nazi Germany.

While Hecht-Galinski did not legally object to his characterization of her as anti-Zionist, she wants Broder to withdraw the anti-Semitic label.

The dispute has a number of subplots, the first of which will proceed within the German judiciary. A temporary injunction prohibits Broder from posting his open letter on his Web site "Die Achse des Guten" (The Axis of the Good).

As reported in the Aachener Zeitung newspaper on Thursday, Hecht-Galinski's attorney, Gernot Lehr, favors a settlement to resolve the dispute.

However, Broder told The Jerusalem Post that he opposes a deal "allowing anti-Semites to decide what anti-Semitism is. It is as if pedophiles can decide what real love toward children is."

A settlement would "muzzle" his free-speech rights and set an unacceptable legal precedent for future criticism of Jews who voiced anti-Semitic remarks and demonized Israel, he said.

After Wednesday's hearing in Cologne, Broder's attorney, Nathan Gelbart, told the Post that the regional court would decide on September 3 whether the interim injunction would be overruled or restricted.

He said the court recognized that the restraining order was too broad, and that the court had been unaware of the nature of Hecht-Galinski's anti-Israeli tirades.

Hecht-Galinski has applauded parallels drawn between Israeli policies and Nazism, and raged against a world-wide Israel lobby that seeks to prevent criticism of the Jewish state.

Her attorney Lehr told the Post he was not prepared to comment on the case until the court issued a ruling.

After his legal victory last year in which a court of appeals in Frankfurt affirmed Der Spiegel magazine journalist Broder's claim that Jews are just as capable of voicing anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic statements as non-Jews, Broder said, "There are nurses who kill their patients, attorneys who commit insurance fraud. Why can't there not therefore be Jews who are anti-Semites?"

The second subplot will play out within German society. Hecht-Galinski's father, Heinz Galinski, survived Auschwitz and became the first chairman of the Berlin German Jewish community following the Holocaust. He also served as the president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany.

Some of Hecht-Galinski's critics say she is misusing her deceased father's stature as an esteemed public figure to mount an anti-Israel campaign. She has invoked the phrase "as the daughter of Heinz Galinski" to defend her criticisms of Israel.

In a Deutschlandradio interview last year, she defended the remarks of German Catholic Bishops Gregor Maria Hanke and Walter Mixa, who, while visiting Israel in March 2007, equated Israel with Nazi Germany.

"This morning we saw pictures of the Warsaw Ghetto at Yad Vashem and this evening we are going to the Ramallah ghetto," Hanke said. For Mixa, Ramallah was "ghetto-like" and "almost racism."

Hecht-Galinski told the radio interviewer she found the Nazi analogy to be "very moderate" and that she "regretted" the decision by then-German Cardinal Karl Lehmann to issue an apology on behalf of his colleagues.

But an apology for such remarks is in order, suggested Prof. Alvin Rosenfeld, director of the Jewish Studies program at Indiana University and a leading expert on Jewish anti-Zionism.

"Anyone who tars Israel with the Nazi brush by drawing obscene analogies between Israeli policies on the West Bank and the Warsaw Ghetto is wandering into very questionable territory and is legitimately open to strong criticism," Rosenfeld told the Post.

His essay, "'Progressive' Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism," which has been translated into German, asserts that vicious anti-Israeli statements and books from a number of British and American Jews are contributing to modern anti-Semitism.

Further commenting on Hecht-Galinski, Rosenfeld cited the US State Department report "Contemporary Global anti-Semitism," which defines "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" as anti-Semitic.

On this side of the Atlantic, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, formerly known as the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, issued a "working definition of Anti-Semitism" that defines "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" as a manifestation of anti-Semitism.

Reached at her home in Malsburg-Marzell, Baden-Württemberg, on Wednesday evening, Hecht-Galinski declined to comment and referred questions to her attorney.

In her frequent media appearances, Hecht-Galinski argues that a "tacit gag order" exists in Germany preventing criticism of Israel.

"The Jewish-Israel lobby with its active network is extended over the world" to clamp down on criticism of Israel, she said in a Deutschlandradio interview last year.

"For the practitioner to cry 'foul' by claiming that the 'Israel lobby' is out to silence all legitimate criticism of Israel is itself nothing more than another rhetorical trick in the standard lexicon of anti-Zionism," Rosenfeld said. "If Henryk Broder exposed one more example of this mendacious behavior, then good for him."

Media critics in Germany have observed the ubiquitous presence of a few anti-Israel Jews who are provided platforms in major press outlets to stoke criticism of the Jewish state.

In an e-mail to the Post, the general-secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Stephan J. Kramer, wrote, "I share Henryk M. Broder's view. It is a rare phenomenon to find even Jews [in Germany] expressing themselves in an anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist manner, and Ms. Hecht-Galinski is a leading representative; she obviously tries to cope with her self-hatred through anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist statements. The Central Council will support Henryk Broder in this trial, if Ms. Hecht-Galinski thinks she has to solve the problem in the courts."

In an interview with Deutschlandradio in 2006, Hecht-Galinski described the Central Council of Jews in Germany as the "mouthpiece of the Israeli government in Germany."

Broder, who is considered a leading expert on anti-Semitism in Germany, testified before the Bundestag's Domestic Affairs Committee in June. The "modern anti-Semite does not believe in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. But instead he fantasizes about an 'Israel lobby' that is supposed to control American foreign policy," he told the legislators.

And in reference to the "memory culture" in Germany, which is consumed with the Holocaust and the period between 1933 and 1945, yet fails to see Iran's genocidal policy as a real threat to Jews, Broder said, "For the modern anti-Semite, it goes without saying that every year on January 27 he will commemorate the liberation of Auschwitz. But at the same time he militates for the right of Iran to have atomic weapons. Or he inverts the causal relationship and claims that it is Israel that is threatening Iran and not vice versa."

Broder cited lawmaker Norman Paech, the foreign policy spokesman of Germany's third largest party, The Left, as an example of contemporary anti-Semitism in Germany. Paech favors nuclear weapons for Iran and employs Nazi terminology when discussing Israel in the media.

"Devote your attention to the modern anti-Semitism that wears the disguise of anti-Zionism, and to its representatives. You will find some of the latter among your own ranks," Broder told the politicians from across the spectrum present at the Domestic Affairs Committee hearing.

Contact Sacha Stawski at sstawski@honestly-concerned.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Sacha Stawski, August 15, 2008.

This was written by Benjamin Weinthal, who is a Berlin-based independent journalist. It appeared in Haaretz


BERLIN — Israel's public rebuke of Germany's pro-Iranian behavior constitutes a dramatic break in diplomatic protocol between the two countries, which usually settle their differences quietly and behind the scenes. The revelation that the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA) had given the green light to a 100 million-plus-euro deal that would have the German engineering firm Steiner Prematechnik Gastec build Iran three plants for converting natural gas to liquid fuel, prompted Israel's Foreign Ministry to issue an unprecedented, scathing indictment of Chancellor Angela Merkel's administration.

The deal had been orchestrated by Merkel's Christian Democratic Party (CDU) undersecretary in the Economics Ministry, Hartmut Schauerte, who spilled the beans when he openly bragged to a local newspaper in Siegen, a city in his electoral district, about how his "pesky" pressure at the ministry helped nail the deal for the Siegen-based Steiner.

Israeli diplomats' growing frustration over Germany's continued undercutting of the international effort to pressure Iran to end its nuclear enrichment program was most evident when MFA Director General Aaron Abramovich charged the Germans with invoking soggy excuses to justify the deal's legality. "We told them, gentlemen, it's not just a question of whether these or other sanctions formally apply. There should be an intent, especially on the part of a leading country in Europe like Germany, to end all commercial dealings with Iran," Abramovich explained to Israel Radio last week.

As I tried during the course of the week to get straight answers to my questions on the subject, it became clear that politicians across the party spectrum are reticent about addressing the Iranian shadow that has fallen across the German-Israeli "special relationship" — a covenant supposedly based on Germany's responsibility toward Israel, in view of the Holocaust and the two countries' shared democratic values.

A shift in Germany's Iran policy is clearly under way. In 2007, when Merkel learned of a firm's plan to build a high-speed railway in Iran, she said: "I consider German assistance in the construction of the Transrapid, in a country whose president constantly announces that he wants to destroy Israel, to be completely unacceptable." The Merkel of 2008, in contrast, seems less and less likely to rein in German firms that are strengthening Israel's number one enemy. A few days after news of the gas-technology deal broke, she was suggesting not that it be scotched but only that future deals be reconsidered: "The government is expecting some sensitivity from businesses," said her spokesman in Berlin, in a half-hearted effort to engage in damage control. A few days later, when I asked a cabinet spokeswoman why Merkel intervened to block the Transrapid deal, but was now retreating from a confrontational approach, she declined to comment. Might it be that the chancellor, who faces an election contest in 2009, is currying favor with the German business sector, a traditional base of CDU support?

Merkel's coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), has remained surprisingly quiet on the political sidelines. Perhaps that's because Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier is embroiled in his own pro-Iran scandal, having invited and funded former Iranian deputy foreign minister Muhammad Javad Ardashir Larijani to speak at a conference in Berlin in late June. Larijani, speaking in the government district, not far from Berlin's memorial to the Holocaust, denied that event, and called for the "Zionist project" to be "canceled."

When I tracked down the SPD's foreign-policy spokesman, MP Gert Weisskirchen, he told me that the gas deal "should be stopped," adding vaguely that he wants to pursue a parliamentary inquiry into the subject.

Germany's Left Party, the country's third largest, remained, like the SPD, inert during the initial whirlwind of criticism of the deal. Jan Korte, a Left MP who serves on the executive committee of the German-Israeli parliamentary group, would only go so far as to say that, "We are demanding a clear explanation about whether State Secretary Hartmut Schauerte became involved as a lobbyist for a liquid gas deal between a German firm and Iran." He also said his faction would "work to obtain a thorough check and upgrade of the system of export controls," adding that, "No business between German firms and Iran may be linked with any threat to Israel."

The relative indifference of the political echelon to the gas deal might be termed the post-scandal scandal. It took almost two weeks, for example, for the SPD and the Left Party to voice their namby-pamby criticisms of the contract with Iran. And then, they spoke out only because a journalist who covers Israeli issues in Germany sought crystal-clear answers regarding the meaning of the special relationship.

Little wonder that critics at home, as well as in Israel and the United States, are starting to question the sincerity of Merkel's much-praised speech in the Knesset in March, in which she asserted that the preservation of the Jewish state is one of Germany's national security interests. In fact, the number of government-approved applications to conduct trade with Iran according to the German regulatory agency BAFA had grown by 63 percent in the first half of 2008, as compared with 2007, with the actual volume of trade growing by 13.6 percent in the first quarter alone. Thus far a total of 1,926 business deals were given the green light. BAFA refuses to state the nature of the commercial activity or identify the firms involved. How many additional natural gas-to-liquid fuel transactions took place remains a government trade secret.

As a reporter who writes for the Israeli press, I have no trouble eliciting proclamations from German politicians asserting that Israel has a right to exist. But isn't that a sentiment it should be possible to take for granted? That international media reporting and Israeli political anger were required before Chancellor Merkel was willing to grudgingly express displeasure about the liquid gas contract, illustrates the tenuous nature of German-Israeli relations. Depressing as this may sound, Germany still lacks a homegrown national consciousness that Israel's security is "non-negotiable," to quote Merkel's Knesset speech.

Internal German political and civil society pressure to draft and enact legislation to radically restrict German trade relations with Iran would fill the "special relationship" with genuine meaning.

Contact Sacha Stawski at sstawski@honestly-concerned.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Aaron Lerner, August 15, 2008.

See no evil: "Asked what UNIFIL would do if it uncovered concrete evidence of arms in Hizbullah's possession, Major General Graziano replied that, while the mission had arrested some people in possession of handguns, it had never seen any evidence of weapons moving south of the Litani River. Hizbullah was one of the parties that had agreed to resolution 1701 (2006), and it was in the group's political interest to support UNIFIL."

Note the the official press release does not include:

"He conceded that his soldiers were not trying to prevent weapons smuggling from Syria as demanded by the UNSC because the Lebanese government had not requested such action."
as reported in the 15 August edition of The Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710369764&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

This was written by Jerusalem Post Staff and is entitled "UNIFIL commander: Israel violating 1701".


Commander of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Maj.-Gen. Claudio Graziano on Thursday accused Israel of violating UN Security Council Resolution 1701 that brought an end to the Second Lebanon War.

General Claudio Graziano from Italy, Commander of UNIFIL in south Lebanon. (Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski)

During a press conference at the United Nations headquarters in New York, Graziano cited the IAF forays over Lebanon and the village of Ghajar, which he called "a permanent violation of 1701" and "a permanent area under occupation."

A further violation, according to Graziano, was Israel's failure to provide maps of all the locations where it dropped cluster bombs during the 2006 war.

In contrast, he said that the UN enjoyed excellent cooperation with Hizbullah and with the local Lebanese people.

"At this moment Hizbullah is one of [the] parties that agrees with 1701," he stressed.

Graziano asserted that apart from UN troops, Lebanese soldiers and hunters, no one was armed south of the Litani River.

"We have seen hunters, we saw somebody moving with one weapon and he was arrested, but we never met anybody [else] moving with weapons," he said.

He conceded that his soldiers were not trying to prevent weapons smuggling from Syria as demanded by the UNSC because the Lebanese government had not requested such action.

The UNIFIL commander emphasized that Israel's numerous allegations regarding violations of the UN resolution were being investigated.  

Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Steve, August 15, 2008.

Our GOOD FRIENDS, the westernizing saudis! how about another set of plagues on ALL islamics, but let's not limit this to the 'first born'.

This is from Jihad Watch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022201.php) and was posted by Raymond.


Her crime? Converting to Christianity. "Saudi man kills daughter for converting to Christianity," by Mariam Al Hakeem for Zawya, August 13:

Riyadh: A Saudi man working with the Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice recently killed his daughter for converting to Christianity.

According to sources close to the victim, the religious police member had cut the tongue of the girl and burned her to death following a heated debate on religion.

The death of the girl sent shockwaves and websites where the victim used to write with various nick names have allocated special space to mourn her, while some others closed temporarily in protest.

According to the Saudi Al Ukhdoud news website, the victim wrote an article on the blog of which she was a member under the nickname "Rania" a few days before her murder.

Interesting choice of names. Was she inspired by Jordan's "hip" queen Rania — the woman devoted to proving to the world that, among other things, honor/apostate killings are totally alien to Islam? Wonder who knows Islam better: the Saudi father (and member of the Commission for "Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice"), or shoulder-exposing, Western educated Rania (the queen, not incinerated girl)?

"She wrote that her life became an ordeal after her family members grew suspicious about her after a religious discussion with them.

She said that her brother found some Christian articles written by her as well as a cross sign on her computer screen. Since then he started to insult her and blamed the internet for pushing her to change her religion.

The "Free Copts" website published a message which it received from a friend of the victim, revealing that the killer is in police custody and that he is being investigated for an honour related crime.

Saudi religious scholars have frequently warned against the dangers of Christian internet websites and satellite TV channels which attract Muslim youngsters to change their religion.

Odd how one never hears Christian societies warning Christians from watching Muslim programs lest they convert in droves. Indeed, willing conversion is usually the last thing those who begin honestly searching into Islam are ever in danger of.

They decreed that watching these channels or browsing these websites which call for conversion to Christianity by various means is against the teachings of Islam.

True that. The Islamic prophet did decree, "Whoever leaves his religion, kill him."

Contact Steve at crestln@erols.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, August 15, 2008.

That title might apply to most of what's happening these days, I realize, but I have one particular situation in mind:

On Wednesday, Haaretz revealed that the US has rejected a request by Israel for military equipment that would enhance our ability to attack Iran. They reportedly — and we've had suggestions of this before — see our readiness to do so as undermining US interests in the area.

It was in the context of this rejection that the Americans then offered to boost our defensive capabilities against incoming missiles — which I wrote about recently.


The lesson for us, as spelled out by Aaron Lerner of IMRA: "A stunning reminder to Israel why it is so important to continue developing and maintaining the Israeli arms industry."

Bottom line: Friends, shmends, each nation ultimately acts in what it perceives to be its own best interest. Unfortunately, the US has a history of abandoning allies in the clinch — which works against genuine long term American interests, even if those who are making the decisions are too blind to see it.

We here in Israel will do as we deem appropriate for our own security. Military action would be handicapped, however, by US refusal to allow us to fly over Iraq to get to Iran. While it seems we cannot count on it, it would be nice to think that, when push comes to shove, the US would at least back us up after the fact. The Americans may have no choice, precisely because their interests will be involved.


Just to keep everything in broader context: At no point has the US said the military option was off the table. They maintain they are holding it as a last resort, if all else in the way of sanctions and diplomacy has failed. They interpret our request for these arms as a sign that we will act in a manner that they believe is precipitous — before other efforts have run their course. While we are watching the narrowing of the window for stopping the Iranians before they develop capacity to build a nuclear weapon, and are mindful of the danger of waiting just a bit too long.

Could sanctions work? Absolutely, if the entire international community was serious about this and put Iran in an economic stranglehold. But since each nation acts in what it perceives to be its own (often very short term) interest....


Appropriate here is a brief consideration, at least, of the entire (also exceedingly disconcerting) Russian action in Georgia.

The broad parameters are clear — with Russia acting with naked power, a la the old Soviet Union. Implications are vast and still being debated. Everything connects to everything else.

There is in several quarters fear of confronting Russia too sternly precisely because Russia is needed as an ally in standing strong against Iran. But, the failure of the world to act against Russian aggression will not be lost on the leaders of Iran. We are speaking here about the power of deterrence.

And, there is also the fact that Georgia is a western-tilting democracy that might have expected international assistance at a significant level. (Speaking of responses to allies.)

There are some very sharp minds currently analyzing what Georgia might have expected from the international community and how appropriately George Bush is responding. (Keep in mind that Georgia supported US efforts with troops in Iraq.)

Please see Jeff Jacoby on this, in his piece, "Back in the USSR." He covers a great deal of territory very incisively:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/ 2008/08/13/back_in_the_ussr/

JINSA points out, in "Hammers and Nails," that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is touted as an expert on Russia, has been so busy focusing on solving the "Palestinian problem" that she dropped the ball totally with regard to Russia:

JINSA also discusses some possibilities for how Russia should be responded to, which does not necessarily or realistically include military action:

Oil is an additional factor, as Russia is an oil exporter. See Lenny Ben David for an effective analysis of this:


On a slightly different note, with significance for US politics, is the matter of how the two contenders for the presidency responded to the issue of the Russian aggression.

Obama began by calling for "restraint" on both sides, which call would do precious little to stop Russia's naked aggression, and which implies the sort of outrageous moral equivalency that we here in Israel are so familiar with.

McCain, on the other hand, put out a statement that included reminders of the moral parameters the situation and calling for specific actions against Russia.

And this, my friends, in a nutshell, epitomizes a major difference between the two candidates. It certainly shows us what response we'd get from each, as president, with regard to our need to contend with Arab aggression.


Regarding politics, here in Israel polls are showing that Livni is likely to beat Mofaz in the September Kadima primary. The key issue, as I see it, is not who will win the primary, but whether this new head of Kadima would be able to put together a coalition for a new government. Mofaz is saying that he, with military experience and a tough attitude on Iran, is the only one who could do that.


The Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza have announced that they have a new "Nasser 4" rocket with a 25 kilometer range that can reach Ashdod. They say they will use it if Israel enters Gaza.

On CNN, Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev then declared this to be a "clear violation" of the ceasefire:

"The ceasefire that was negotiated through Egypt was very specific that the Hamas movement and the other terrorist groups can't use it as a period to import more weapons, more explosives, more rockets into the Gaza Strip.

"[Israel reserves] the right to act, if need be, to protect ourselves. We don't want this current quiet just to be the quiet before the storm."


One might be reduced to tears of frustration and shame in the face of this statement, which is patently ridiculous in several respects.

First of all, well before this statement by the Committees, Israel intelligence was already fully aware that Hamas has been smuggling in huge amounts of weapons since the ceasefire began in late June. I ran a list of what has been brought in, not long ago. So this statement by Regev is merely a PR response to one particular public statement by one group of terrorists, not an actual response to the fact of violations of the ceasefire, per se.

Talk about loss of deterrence power. The terrorists know they can get away with anything short of killing a large number of Israelis at one time.


Second, saying we "reserve the right to act" really makes fools of us. Sort of like, "You keep doing this, you'll see, one of these days, maybe, if we feel like it, we'll do something stop you."

They are violating the ceasefire? Make an official public announcement of this fact and say it is now off, and that we are going to start military operations in Gaza again. It doesn't even have to be (although it should be!) that major operation that we've been told was coming some time soon. Just targeted operations against weapons storage sites and targeted killings of terrorist leaders.

What we're telling the terrorists right now is that the relative quiet suits our government, which was being pressured to do something for the poor suffering people of Sderot and environs. Even though there are severe violations with regard to smuggling and stockpiling of weapons, and a rocket is shot now and then, the constant barrage of rockets has stopped, which makes it easier for Olmert and Barak to function in the short term.

If we say the ceasefire is off, that barrage will begin again. Neither Olmert nor Barak wants this.


But what of the future and the ultimate consequences — regarding loss of Israeli life and damage to Israeli property?? Painful to contemplate. Painful, painful.

Regev says "We don't want this current quiet just to be the quiet before the storm." But of course that's all this is, and all it was ever expected to be. What nonsense to pretend it is anything more. Neighbors who wish to live in peace with us don't stockpile ever increasingly sophisticated weapons. We know this clearly. But the way we're going, we're allowing them to decide when they want to hit us, instead of pre-empting them now.

Has everyone forgotten the Hezbollah lesson? For years our intelligence clearly knew they were stockpiling in Lebanon, but it was thought best to leave the situation alone. Until we got hit by their rockets, which we had done nothing to stop, in 2006.


Is anyone surprised? The lawyers for Morris Talansky have announced that he will not be returning to Israel for additional cross-examination by Olmert's lawyers. This is because Talansky is now the subject of a US grand jury investigation in matters that parallel issues here. FBI agents — alerted by Talansky's testimony in Israel — actually accompanied Israeli agents who were securing information in the US.

This situation will not necessarily affect a decision regarding the indictment of Olmert, although undoubtedly Olmert's lawyers will claim something about his rights having been infringed upon. Israeli law officials are now pointing with a sense of vindication to their insistence on taking testimony from Talansky before he left the country, and before an actual trial began, precisely for this reason. In spite of his insistence that he would continue to cooperate fully, they knew the possibility of his not returning loomed before them.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, August 15, 2008.

Early Morning Gray

Fred Reifenberg was born in Germany, and grew up during the Hitler period. In 40's he moved to NY. He is veteran of the Korean War. Currently, he lives in Israel, where he enjoys harmonizing with nature, and photographing nature in its many wonderful forms. He creates a variety of abstracts, combining photography and graphics. Contact him by email at fred343@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 15, 2008.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710365631&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).
Contact her at caroline@carolineglick.com


In their statements Wednesday on Russia's invasion of Georgia, both US President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly acknowledged that Russia is the aggressor in the war and that the US stands by Georgia.

This is all very nice and well. But what does the fact that it took the US a full five days to issue a clear statement against Russian aggression tell us about the US? What does it say about Georgia and, in a larger sense, about the nature of world affairs?

Russia's blitzkrieg in Georgia this week was not simply an act of aggression against a small, weak democracy. It was an assault on vital Western security interests. Since it achieved independence in 1990, Georgia has been the only obstacle in Russia's path to exerting full control over oil supplies from Central Asia to the West. And now, in the aftermath of Russia's conquest of Georgia, that obstacle has been set aside.

Georgia has several oil and gas pipelines that traverse its territory from Azerbaijan to Turkey, the main one being the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. Together they transport more than 1 percent of global oil supplies from east to west. In response to the Russian invasion, British Petroleum, which owns the pipelines, announced that it will close them.

This means that Russia has won.

In the future that same oil and gas will either be shipped through Russia, or it will be shipped through Georgia under the benevolent control of Russian "peacekeeping" forces permanently stationed in Gori. The West now has no option other than appeasing Russia if it wishes to receive its oil from the Caucasus.

Russian control of these oil arteries represents as significant a threat to Western strategic interests as Saddam Hussein's conquest of Kuwait and his threat to invade Saudi Arabia in 1990. Like Saddam's aggression then, Russia's takeover of Georgia threatens the stability of the international economy.

While Russia's invasion of Georgia is substantively the same as Saddam's attempt to assert control over Persian Gulf oil producers 18 years ago, what is different is the world's response.

Eighteen years ago, the US led a UN-mandated international coalition to defeat Iraq and roll back Saddam's aggression. Today, the West is encouraging Georgia to surrender.

Whether due to exhaustion over the domestic fights about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, dependence on Russian oil supplies, a residual and unjustified belief that Russia will side with the West in a confrontation with Iran over its nuclear weapons program, or the absence of an easy option for defending Georgia, it is manifestly clear that today the West is fully willing to accept complete Russian control of oil supplies from Central Asia.

Notwithstanding the strong statements issued Wednesday by Bush and Rice, the West has taken two steps to make its willingness to accept Russia's moves clear.

First, there was French President Nicolas Sarkozy's photogenic mediation-tour to Moscow and Tbilisi on Tuesday. And second there was the US's response to Sarkozy's shuttle diplomacy on Wednesday.

Sarkozy's mediation efforts signaled nothing less than Europe's abandonment of Georgia. During his visit to Moscow, where he met with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and Putin's Charlie McCarthy doll, "President" Dmitry Medvedev, Sarkozy agreed to a six-point document setting out the terms of the cease-fire and the basis for "peace" talks to follow.

The document's six points included the following principles: The non-use of force; a cease-fire; a guarantee of access to humanitarian aid; the garrisoning of Georgian military forces; the continued deployment of Russian forces in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and anywhere else they wish to go; and an international discussion of the political status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

As a reporter for France's Liberation noted, by agreeing to the document France abandoned the basic premise that Georgia's territorial integrity should be respected by Russia.

Moreover, by leaving Russian forces in the country and giving them the right to deploy wherever they deem necessary, Sarkozy accepted Russian control of Georgia.

By grounding Georgian forces in their garrisons, (or what is left of them after most of Georgia's major military bases were either destroyed or occupied by Russian forces), Sarkozy's document denies Georgia the right to defend itself from future Russian aggression.

In their appearances on Wednesday, both Bush and Rice praised Sarkozy's efforts and Rice explained that the US wants France to continue its efforts to mediate between Russia and Georgia.

Although both American leaders insisted that Georgia's territorial integrity must be respected, neither offered any sense of how that is to be accomplished. Neither explained how that aim aligns with the French-mediated cease-fire agreement that gives international backing to Russia's occupation of the country.

The West's response tells us three basic things about the nature of world affairs.

First, it teaches us that "international legitimacy" is determined neither by a state's adherence to international law nor by a state's alliances with great powers. Rather, international legitimacy is determined by the number of divisions a state possesses.

After Russia illegally invaded Georgia, European and American officials as well as Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama hinted that Russia had a legitimate right to invade, when they wrongly referred to South Ossetia as "disputed territory."

While South Ossetia and Abkhazia are separatist provinces, their sovereignty is not in dispute. They are part of Georgia. Georgia acted legally when it tried to protect its territory from separatist violence last Friday. Russia acted illegally when it invaded. Yet aside from the Georgian government itself, no one has noticed this basic distinction.

"We don't have time now to get into long discussions on blame," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said on Tuesday.

"We shouldn't make any moral judgments on this war. Stopping the war, that's what we're interested in," French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner explained, adding, "Don't ask us who's good and who's bad here."

Then there is the fact that Georgia has gone out of its way to liberalize and democratize its society and political system and to be a loyal ally to the US.

It sent significant forces to Iraq and Kosovo. Far from returning the favor, in Georgia's hour of need, all the US agreed to do was give Georgian forces a free plane ride home from Iraq.

That the administration has no intention of defending its loyal ally was made clear Wednesday afternoon when the Pentagon sharply denied Georgian claims that the US would defend Georgian airports and seaports from Russian aggression.

The Pentagon's blunt denial of any plan to restore Georgian sovereignty was one of the first truly credible statements issued by the US Defense Department on the conflict.

It took the US four days to acknowledge Russian aggression beyond South Ossetia. Even as convoys of journalists were shelled, civilian's homes were bombed, and Georgian military bases were destroyed by Russian forces in Gori, a Defense Department official said, "We don't see anything that supports [the Russians] are in Gori. I don't know why the Georgians are saying that."

The general lesson that emerges from Washington's claims of ignorance is that reality itself is of no concern to policy-makers bent on ignoring it. Through its obvious lies, Washington was able to justify taking no action of any sort against Russia and not speaking out in defense of Georgia until after Russia forced Georgia to surrender its sovereignty through the French mediators.

The US and European willingness to let Georgia fall despite its strategic importance, despite the fact that it has operated strictly within the bounds of international law, and despite its obvious ideological affinity and loyalty to them will have enormous repercussions for the West's relations with Ukraine, the Baltic States, Poland and the Czech Republic.

But its aftershocks will not be limited to Europe. They will reverberate in the Middle East as well. And Israel, for one, should take note of what has transpired.

In Israel's early years, with the memory of the Holocaust still fresh in its leaders' minds, Israel founded its strategic posture on an acceptance of the fact that the soft power of international legitimacy, peace treaties, alliances and common interests only matters in the presence of the hard power of military force.

People such as David Ben-Gurion realized that what was unique about the Holocaust was not the Allies' willingness to sit by and watch an atrocity unfold but the magnitude of the atrocity they did nothing to stop. Doing nothing to prevent an innocent nation from being destroyed has always been the normal practice of nations.

Yet over time, and particularly after Israel's victory in the Six Day War, that fundamental acceptance of the world as it is was lost.

It was first mitigated by Israel's own shock in discovering its power. And it was further obfuscated in the aftermath of the war when the Soviets and the Arabs began promulgating the myth of Israeli aggression. In recent years, the understanding that the only guarantor of Israel's survival is Israel's ability to defeat all of its enemies decisively has been forgotten altogether by most of the country's leaders and members of its intellectual classes.

Since 1979 and with increasing intensity since 1993, Israeli leaders bent on appeasing everyone from the Egyptians to the Palestinians to the Syrians to the Lebanese have called for Israel's inclusion in NATO, or the deployment of Western forces to its borders or lobbied Washington for a formal strategic alliance.

They have claimed that such forces and such treaties will unburden the country of the need to protect itself in the event that our neighbors attack us after we give them the territories necessary to wage war against us.

It has never made any difference to any of these leaders that none of the myriad international forces deployed along our borders has ever protected us. The fact that instead of protecting Israel, they have served as shields behind which our enemies rebuild their forces and then attack us has made no impression. Instead, our leaders have argued that once we figure out the proper form of appeasement everyone will rise to defend us.

If nothing else comes of it, the West's response to the rape of Georgia should end that delusion. Georgia did almost everything right. And like Israel was, for its actions Georgia was celebrated in the West with platitudes of enduring friendship and empty promises of alliances that were discarded the moment Russia invaded.

Georgia only made one mistake, and for that mistake it will pay an enormous price. As it steadily built alliances, it forgot to build an army.

Israel has an army. It has just forgotten why its survival depends on our willingness to use it.

If we are unwilling to use our military to defeat our enemies, we will lose everything. This is the basic, enduring truth of international affairs that we have ignored at our peril. No matter what we do, it will always be the case. For this is the nature of world affairs, and the nature of man.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul Ceder, August 14, 2008.

This was written by David Elizrie and appeared in Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218446195235&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
David Elizrie is president of the Rabbinical Council of Orange County, California. Contact him at rabbi@ocjewish.com


For some time there has been a controversy about Agriprocessors, the largest kosher meat plant in the United States. The media have raised questions of how workers are treated, workers' safety and conditions in the plant. The government detained a large number of illegal workers. All of these questions concerned me. So when a mission of national Jewish leaders was organized to inspect the plant, I decided to go.

The mission included national leaders of the Orthodox community and the directors of kashrut agencies across the country. It represented the broad spectrum — rabbis from Agudat Yisrael, modern Orthodox, the OU, the Rabbinical Council of America, Chabad and Young Israel. Postville, Iowa is remote, the nearest airport is an hour and half away, and that's sparsely serviced Dubuque. I had two flights canceled and got home just before Shabbat after driving hours to Chicago.

Rabbis inspect Agriprocessors

We were given free reign of the plant. Randomly, we interviewed dozens of employees, selecting them ourselves. We viewed the production lines. We spent hours inside the plant. In no way was the trip choreographed.

THE REALITY we saw was far different from that described in the press. The plant is state of the art,and workers told of us of wages beginning at $10 an hour. Benefits such as full health and dental plans kick in at 90 days. One woman from Chicago spoke of working previously at the Tyson meat plant. There she received a dollar an hour more, but told us "in this plant the work is less rigorous and the training better."

I was most impressed from the actual kosher slaughter process. I discovered innovations that reflected the highest standards of halachic observance.

The mayor told us that if the plant fails, the local economy will be devastated. The Presbyterian minister said he has never had reports of abuse from his congregation. We questioned plant officials about safety, human resources and compliance. We heard how the plant had recently instituted the E Verification system that coordinates with the federal government to ensure that all employees are legal. Apparently this system checks the Social Security number against government records to insure all employees are who they say they are and that they are not under 18.

Some of our group, including myself, met with leaders of the local church, St. Bridget, that has historically been very critical of the plant. The rabbis suggested that they begin ongoing meetings with the plant management to investigate alleged abuses. We asked them to provide us with documentation of specific cases of worker abuse which we would bring to the attention of the plant management. We still have not heard from them, and they have nor have they responded to our request for regular meetings with the plant. Instead they continue to use the press as their mode of communication.

NONE OF the press reports have been by reporters who have been inside the plant. One JTA reporter who did visit the plant a few days before us filed a report that reaffirmed what we said. Almost all have based their stories on reports from outside sources — the church and the union which is trying to take over the plant and is being sued by Smith Food for racketeering. In Arizona, a grocery chain that has resisted the union is in court accusing it of defamation, extortion and trespass.

Some leftist Jewish organizations interested in immigration issues have joined the bandwagon. A group of non-Orthodox rabbis wants to create a new rabbinical kashrut certification, based on liberal social values instead of Halacha. Claiming to be motivated by ethics, its approach to the issue has been far from ethical — smear campaigns and demonstrations instead of the Jewish way of exploring the issues objectively and seeking solutions. It has created a battle of Jew vs. Jew, creating a show the media relishes.

While I cannot know anything about the past, I did witness myself the reality today, and it's not what we have read in the media. It could have been that Agriprocessors grew very swiftly and management was not as strong as it could have been. Today the plant is without question state of the art, workers are treated well and there is strong attention to safety and compliance.

Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, August 14, 2008.

What made this below so interesting isn't that the IDF didn't deliberately target a civilian — photographer or not. That's the way they're trained — even to the point of risking their own lives, even when the "innocent" civilians are voluntarily acting as human shields for the terrorists. What made this interesting are the comments — so many of them virtuously felt the IDF was at fault. Why? Because Israel is occupying "Palestinian" land. Duh. I feel like someone in 1800 who has come upon an antiquated, isolated group that firmly believes the earth is flat. It's scary that the Main Stream Media can still block people from learning a little history and geography. How do you uncondition these no-nothings, so they learn that there is no Palestinian state, there is no Palestinian people? AND THERE NEVER WAS. In actuality, by history, conquest, bible and international law, Israel AND the territories (aka the West Bank and Gaza) belong to Israel. By fantasy and PR, the Arabs (not the fake "Palestinians") make it seem they own the land. All they have going for them is that they conquered the land in the 7th cent. But it belonged to the Ottomans for the 4 hundred years before England got it to help the Jews create a Jewish state. Yeah, that's right. Read your history, duhmie dhimmies.

This is a news item from Haaretz

The Israel Defense Forces has closed an investigation into the death of a Reuters cameraman in the Gaza Strip last April, clearing the tank crew that killed the young journalist of any wrongdoing and saying the soldiers will not face any disciplinary action.

Reuters said it was deeply disturbed by the findings and was considering unspecified legal action, while Israel's Foreign Press Association warned the army probe could encourage further violence against journalists.

The army found that troops acted properly when they opened fire on Fadel Shana, suspecting he was a militant preparing to fire a missile after he set up a tripod in a Gaza battle zone. Shana was killed instantly by a tank shell that sprays a hail of metal darts at its target. Four bystanders also died in the attack.

In light of the reasonable conclusion reached by the tank crew and its superiors, that the characters were hostile and were carrying an object most likely to be a weapon, the decision to fire at the targets ... was sound, Brig. Gen. Avihai Mandelblit, the army's top prosecutor, said in a letter sent to Reuters. The news agency made the letter public on Wednesday.

In a statement issued at its London headquarters, Reuters said the army probe could effectively give soldiers a free hand to kill, without being sure of the identity of their targets.

"I'm extremely disappointed that this report condones a disproportionate use of deadly force in a situation the army itself admitted had not been analyzed clearly," said David Schlesinger, Reuters' editor in chief. They would appear to take the view that any raising of a camera into position could garner a deadly response.

Shana, 24, was killed on April 16 while covering clashes between Gaza militants and Israeli troops. Just before his death, Shana was filming an Israeli tank about one mile away, and his final video showed it firing a shell in his direction. The video cut off just as the shell burst in front of him.

The shooting occurred on a day of clashes in which three Israeli soldiers and 20 Palestinians were killed.

In its report, the army said the tank commander sought permission to open fire after spotting a small group of people attaching an unidentified black object to a tripod and pointing it toward the tank.

"The tank crew was unable to determine the nature of the object mounted on the tripod and positively identify it as an anti-tank missile, a mortar or a television camera," Mandelblit wrote.

He noted that earlier in the day, Israeli troops had also come under fire from mortar shells, and a rocket-propelled grenade was fired at a tank.

"These contributed to a heightened sense of risk, and strengthened the genuine suspicion that the persons identified were in fact a threat to the tank and its crew," Mandelblit wrote.

He also said Shana and Wafa Mizyed, a Reuters colleague wounded in the attack, were wearing body armor commonly used by Palestinian militants.

"The tank crew's superiors, asked to authorize firing by the tank, reasonably concluded ... that the characters identified by the tank were hostile, and posed a threat to the tank and its crew," he wrote.

However, Reuters said the men's blue flak jackets, and their vehicle, were clearly marked as press. Palestinian journalists in Gaza commonly wear the blue vests with English markings to avoid harm, while militants wear black or camouflage vests loaded with grenades or military equipment.

The Foreign Press Association, which represents international news organizations operating in Israel and the Palestinian territories, expressed dismay over the Israeli report. It said the findings were the latest in a long line of cases clearing soldiers of deadly negligence, and noted Shana clearly identified himself as a journalist.

"The mere suspicion of possible hostilities should not be enough to justify overwhelming deadly force," the FPA statement said. "We hope that the army's conclusion does not appear to give soldiers free license to fire without being sure of the target, greatly hindering the media's ability to cover the conflict.

Eight other journalists have been killed covering the West Bank and Gaza Strip since 1992, according to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists.

Reuters said it had sent a letter to the Israeli army raising a number of questions, including why the soldiers ruled out the possibility that Shana was a cameraman, why they suspected hostile intent after he stood in full view of the tank for several minutes and why the tank did not move out of site if the crew suspected, but was unsure, it might be attacked.

Reuters said it was examining its options for legal action but declined to comment further.

To Go To Top

Posted by Hot Aaron, August 14, 2008.

Contact Hot Aaron at eatkosher@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, August 14, 2008.

The "Orange" [anti-Expulsion] media was thrilled at the scoop of the week: The sincere remorse of a woman soldier who had evicted Jews from Gush Katif. Her guilty conscience, sleepless nights and request for forgiveness were splashed all over the nationalist newspapers and airwaves.

If we analyze Israeli reality 3 years after the Expulsion (Ariel Sharon's euphemistically named "Disengagement"), though, we will discover that while the soldier's story is a great journalistic item, most of the soldiers who took part in the Expulsion have not suffered the same remorse that this soldier reported. According to a poll taken among the expelling soldiers, it turns out that the absolute majority of the expellers sleep just fine at night. No guilt feelings disturb their slumber. The nightmares promised them by the broken-hearted Orange expellees have inexplicably stayed at bay. It may not be pleasant for us to accept, but this soldier's story is out of the ordinary.

Is this because the IDF soldiers do not have emotions? Do they have hearts of stone? True, the brainwashing — or in Orwellian terms, the 'mental preparation' — to which they were exposed accomplished its goal. During the expulsion, their hearts really did turn to stone. But from my personal experience I can testify that the eyes of the soldiers who came to expel us were not bad.

Three years have passed. Why is this guilt-ridden soldier still a lone blip on the screen? Why doesn't remorse engulf the tens of thousands of soldiers who participated in the Expulsion?

In a radio interview, the soldier explained that what is engraved in her memory is the scene of a young boy who refused to leave his home in Kfar Darom. Ultimately, his parents dragged him outside. Another realization that changed her outlook is the fact that the people who she expelled from their homes really had nowhere to go. The fact that three years later, most of them still do not have a proper home to replace the home from which they were expelled made her understand that the Expulsion was real.

What can we learn from this soldier's story? Throughout the entire Expulsion saga, this soldier was convinced that she was nothing more than an actress in a play with a pre-determined end. The play had good guys and bad guys. What she was sure of from the start was that at the end of the play, all the actors would join hands and take a bow. Of course, no real harm was supposed to be done and we would all be able to watch the sequel the following evening.

The little boy who refused to leave his home broke the spell. He refused to be an actor in the play. The tears and speeches of his parents didn't budge her. As far as she was concerned, they were just playing their part. But the little boy — not yet confused by state supremacy theories — convinced the soldier that for him, there was no play, simply because he refused to leave.

Three years later, this soldier realizes that the Orange actors were genuinely harmed. They really do not have houses or fields or jobs. It really wasn't a play. Now she realizes that if it's not a play, she wasn't just an actress. She was a real live soldier driving real live people out of their homes.

Those Orange leaders who chose to protest instead of to fight wrote the script for all the actors in the play. It's no wonder that the expellers sleep well at night. Did you ever see an actor in the role of the bad guy who feels that he must apologize?

Calibrating Our Moral Compass

"You are a holy nation unto G-d. G-d has chosen you to be His treasured nation, more than all the nations on the face of the earth." (Deut.)

The nations of the world understand this perfectly. They look on as we send our Olympic delegation to the blood-stained city of Beijing. There, on the ruins of the homes of one million Chinese citizens, the Olympics are taking place.

But the direct destruction is not the whole picture at all. There in Beijing, the nation that is supposed to be the moral compass of the world is giving moral legitimacy to unbelievable horrors.

"Why are you so upset by the Chinese?" my friends ask. "Don't we have enough home-grown outrages?"

We are not fighting for the Chinese. We are simply attempting to fulfill our Jewish destiny. Without our destiny, we are irrelevant. That is why our entire existence as a nation seems to be melting away. The state of the Jews must have a much broader goal than the simple preservation of Jewish existence. Judaism is a culture with a universal message — a message of liberty.

"I am G-d, your G-d, who has taken you out of Egypt, from the house of bondage." (From this week's Torah portion.)

If we truly desire to create a Jewish state, we had better begin with some Judaism. If our entire purpose for living in Israel is to preserve our security, we have made an awful deal. In New Zealand or Uganda we could have realized this goal with much greater ease.

Israel's Olympic delegation represents Israel. Israel represents the Jews and the Jews represent divine morality. When Israel sends its delegation to the largest labor camp in the world, lending legitimacy to the horrors being perpetrated by the Chinese regime, it denies its Jewish destiny and shakes the foundations of the existence of the State of Israel.

We are not opposed to Israel's playing in the Olympics only because of our concern for the Chinese. First and foremost, we are concerned for Israel.

A Great Honor Given to Moshe Feiglin:

"How about saying you were dead wrong and the true greats of the Jewish world, who saw the writing on the wall for the last 100 years, were right — people like Theodore Herzl, Ze'ev Jabotinsky, Rabbi Kahane and now the current object of the Left's hatred and fear, Moshe Feiglin."
— Jerome Kaufman, Editor of Israel Commentary Group, admonishing noted author Daniel Gordis for saying that "the Disengagement was a mistake worth making." ( See below.)

Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell)

To Go To Top

Posted by LEL, August 14, 2008.

This was written by Aaron Klein of World Net Daily It is entitled "Israeli forces bar Jews from reclaiming Jerusalem property"


Tens of thousands of Arabs illegally squatting on key capital land

JERUSALEM — Israeli police forces today prevented Knesset members and Jewish activists from reclaiming ownership of a Jewish-owned Jerusalem property that had been illegally settled by local Arabs.

The incident has major political implications, since it involves an area widely expected to be handed over to the Palestinian Authority as a result of Israeli-PA negotiations aimed at forming a Palestinian state. Much of the land in question, however, is legally owned by a Jewish nonprofit organization that purchases property for the stated purpose of Jewish settlement.

Tens of thousands of Arabs moved into the neighborhood, known as Shoafat, the past 15 years and constructed there illegally.

Earlier today, dozens of activists flanked by two Knesset members attempted to enter Shoafat to reclaim a five-acre Jewish property on behalf of the site's owner, identified as private Israeli citizen Eliyahu Cohanim, who had given the group power of attorney over the site.

Cohanim said he had been dismayed that Arabs were constructing illegally on his land and that the PA was planning to build in the area, including on his property.

The Israeli government over the years has done little to stop rampant illegal Arab construction in northern and eastern neighborhoods of Jerusalem, which now have Arab majorities.

As the group congregated near Shoafat, policemen reached the area to prevent the Jewish activists from entering the neighborhood, stating they had a court order barring Israeli Jews from entering the site without police coordination.

The police reportedly detained several Jewish activists who persisted in going to Shoafat to reclaim the property.

"Instead of enforcing the law, you are becoming a criminal police force," Knesset Member Aryeh Eldad of the National Union party shouted at the officers in an incident caught on camera by Israel National News.

"You should have been fighting for the Jews' right to reach their lands and instead you are a criminal police force," he said.

"They help the Arab criminals who build on Jewish land in Jerusalem and instead of destroying the [illegal] Arab houses, they prevent the owner of the land in Jerusalem from going into the land," Eldad said.

National Union Knesset Member Effie Eitam accused the Israeli government of "dividing Jerusalem " by not allowing Jews into an Arab-occupied, largely Jewish owned neighborhood.

"What we're seeing here is the second division of Jerusalem — once they divide Jerusalem with the separation fence, and now, even what is inside the so-called Jewish part of Jerusalem is being divided by declaring that there are places here to which Jews have no access," he said.

While the property in question is owned by an individual Jew, the Jewish National Fund, a U.S.-based nonprofit that purchases land in Israel for the stated purpose of Jewish settlement, owns large swaths of the Shoafat neighborhood, in which tens of thousands of Arabs now illegally reside.

A WND investigation last year found Shoafat was purchased legally on behalf of JNF using Jewish donations in the early 1900s. The Israeli government manages the land on behalf of the JNF.

Much of the illegal Arab construction in Shoafat took place in the past 15 years, with some apartment complexes built as late as 2004.

Internal JNF documents obtained by WND outline illegal Arab construction on the Jewish-owned land. A survey summarized on JNF stationery conducted in December 2000 and signed by a JNF worker states, "In a lot of the plots I find Arabs are living and building illegally and also working the JNF land without permission."

King last year released a study detailing how while Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was mayor of Jerusalem from 1993 to 2003, the Jerusalem city hall deleted files documenting hundreds of illegal Arab building projects throughout eastern sections of Jerusalem. King said he forwarded his findings to Israel's state comptroller for investigation.

King charged Olmert told senior municipal workers not to enforce a ban on illegal Arab buildings.

The Jerusalem municipality released a statement in response to the allegations claiming the threat of Arab violence kept it from bulldozing illegal Arab homes.

"During the years of the intifada, the municipality had difficulty carrying out the necessary level of enforcement in the neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem due to security constraints," the statement read.

Today's incident comes amid a flurry of rhetoric from senior Israeli officials suggesting largely Arab sections of Jerusalem should be severed from the rest of the city for a future Palestinian state.

"Whoever thinks it's possible to live with 270,000 Arabs in (eastern) Jerusalem must take into account that there will be more bulldozers, more tractors, and more cars carrying out [terror] attacks," Olmert said last week, referring to two incidents this month in which Palestinian residents of eastern Jerusalem deliberately plowed bulldozers into pedestrians, buses and passenger vehicles, leaving three dead in the first attack.

Vice Premier Chaim Ramon, a top Olmert deputy, told the Knesset earlier this month: "Whoever thinks the problem of Jerusalem and terror are specific, and that destroying one house or another will help, is burying his head in the sand. The main question is, does the government want [Jerusalem Arab neighborhoods of] Jebl Mukaber or Sur Bahir as part of Israel or not." http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=1993

Excerpt from a January 2008 column by Aaron Klein in WND.

Olmert, as Jerusalem's mayor, allowed 100,000 illegal Arab squatters
Olmert to blame for dividing Jerusalem?

JERUSALEM — During 10 years as mayor of Jerusalem, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert instructed city workers not to take action against hundreds of illegal Arab building projects throughout eastern sections of Jerusalem, allegedly telling municipal workers the area one day would be handed to the Palestinians, according to former workers speaking to WND.

The workers charge Olmert even instructed city officials to delete files documenting illegal Arab construction of housing units in eastern Jerusalem. Those units currently house an estimated 100,000 Arabs, say the workersra.[emphasis added]

Olmert was Jerusalem mayor from 1993 to 2003. As mayor, he made repeated public statements calling Jerusalem the "eternal and undivided capital" of Israel. Jerusalem municipal employees and former workers, though, paint a starkly contrasting picture of the prime minister.

"He did nothing about rampant illegal Arab construction in Jerusalem while the government cracked down on illegal Jewish construction in the West Bank," said one municipal employee who worked under Olmert.

Contact LEL by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Family Security Matters, August 14, 2008.

The Human Rights Council at the United Nations has now banned any criticism regarding Sharia Law and human rights in the Islamic World. According to President Doru Romulus Costea — and following the efforts of delegates from Egypt, Pakistan and Iran — the Council will no longer tolerate criticism of either Sharia or specific fatwas in the name of human rights.

In many parts of the Islamic world, it is becomingly increasing clear not only that the Koran (the written record of the original oral transmissions of Mohammad's life teachings) and the Hadith (the later delineations of those teachings) are considered sacrosanct in their perfection, but also the various implementations of these teachings, known as Sharia Law. No evolution or refinements are required. No matter that nearly every multitudinous Muslim sect or group has a differing interpretation of this God-given Sharia Law. Nor that the stoning to death of women, beheading of men, and all the 6th century niceties of feudal Arabia are still part and parcel of the immovable Islamic tradition. Never mind that Sunni will decimate Shia — and vice versa — over differences of interpretations far more modest than those between (modern) Catholics and Protestants, between Hindus and Buddhists. Islamic sect can war on Islamic sect, Arab can criticize Arab.

Because Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism and all other religions are imperfect, they are fair game for any and all attacks. Since Israel, Zionism, America and the Western World were created and developed outside the Islamic World and its divine perfection, they are likewise subject to criticism.

Now, not only has the Islamic God forbidden outside criticism of the Sharia Law, but the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is its enjoined messenger on earth.

Of course, observers of the HRC should not be surprised. The ostensibly prestigious body has become a revolving door for countries with an ambivalent (or even well nigh invisible) relationship with freedom and democracy. In the two years following its replacement of the equally dictatorship-friendly Human Rights Commission, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Tunisia have all been elected to the Council. As a majority of the Council's resolutions are concerned with Israel, it would effectively cease functioning were it not for its compulsive focus on the Jewish state.

Due to this resolution the Council — and thus, perversely, the UN — is endorsing a worldview in which human interpretation and understanding has been placed beyond the pale of critical thinking and investigation as long as it's part of Sharia Law or the Islamic tradition. Perhaps we should rename the United Nations and call it the "Nations of Islam — United in Unique and Ineffable Perfection." Sounds appropriate. FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Leslie Sacks is an art dealer and gallerist in Los Angeles. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.

Contact Family Security Matters at info@familysecuritymatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, August 14, 2008.

This is a DEBKAfile Exclusive Report:

Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt

The fervently pro-US, pro-Israeli Druze leader, Walid Jumblatt, has decided to hold out no longer. He has thrown in his lot with the most extreme pro-Syrian, pro-Iranian, anti-Israel force in Lebanon, the Shiite Hizballah, which has gained veto power over the government in Beirut unopposed.

DEBKAfile's Middle East sources disclose that over last weekend, Jumblatt quietly signed a "defense cooperation pact" with Hassan Nasrallah, affording Hizballah a strong foothold in the Lebanese Druze bastion of Mt. Chouf. Drawing the hostile noose around northern Israel ever tighter, Lebanese president Michel Sleiman was due in Damascus Wednesday, Aug. 13, to celebrate the thaw in relations between the two countries.

Neither Israeli ministers, sunk in an acrimonious contest over the succession to Ehud Olmert, nor the United States in the dying days of the Bush presidency, have lifted a finger to arrest Lebanon's swift slide into the Iranian-Syrian orbit.

Jumblatt, after watching pro-Western strategic positions crumble in his country, decided to join forces with Hizballah to shield his ancestral mountain domain from Syrian domination.

The Druze and Hizballah militias agreed to set up a joint commission for coordinating military operations. Hizballah is represented by its security and intelligence commander, Wafiq Shafa (who was in change of the recent prisoner swap with Israel) and the Druzes by Akram Shahaib.

The joint security patrols for the Druze communities of the Chouf, will also give Hizballah a military presence on its third strategic Lebanese peak, after Mt. Sannine and Jebel Barukh.

Contact Avodah by email at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, August 14, 2008.

(IsraelNN.com) The process of dismantling the front group used by Peace Now to receive US tax exemption status has apparently been stalled.

A resident of Ofrah, Dalia Laor, filed a complaint with the US tax authorities, against Americans for Peace Now and the Shaal Educational Projects group, claiming that monies earmarked for the educational organization were actually used by Peace Now for its political activities. Alleged discrepancies between the amounts reported to the US authorities and Shaal's reports to Israel's non-profit associations office have also been reported.

Recent revelations have shown that Peace Now in Israel is not actually a legal entity, and has raised funding via the Shaal educational association ever since the 1980's. Shaal's articles of association say nothing about political activity, and Israeli law forbids a non-profit association to deviate from its stated goals. Shaal's funding of Peace Now is thus apparently illegal.

Accountant Gabi Izak, who was appointed to investigate the matter by the Registrar, submitted a grave report on the link between Shaal and Peace Now. It appeared that the Registrar was about to begin dismantling Shaal as a result, following the precedent of Ir Shalem, another left-wing Peace Now-associated group.

However, recent developments indicate that the Registrar is changing his mind. Visits paid last week and this by concerned citizens — Dalia Laor of Ofrah and Dr. Jan Sokolofsky of Jerusalem — revealed that Shaal's file is unavailable for public perusal. The reason explained to them is that the file is "being attended to."

Sokolofsky told IsraelNationalNews that an office clerk told her, "This can mean only one of three things: Its name, or purpose, or articles of association are being changed."

The citizens expressed great concern that a Peace Now front organization is thus being "laundered." Laor says she will file an administrative court suit against the Registrar.

Peace Now has essentially set as its goal the removal of all Jewish presence from Judea and Samaria. It tracks Jewish construction in the area and has often sought out Arabs who then claim that Jewish-built land is actually theirs.

National Union party sources quoted in the Makor Rishon newspaper said, "Once again, serial law violators appear to be rewarded. Peace Now's activity has always served to fan tensions in Israel, and between Israel and its allies."

Hillel Fendel is senior news editor at Arutz-7. The article appeared in Arutz-7

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Kramer, August 14, 2008.

The Jewish world has less to be hopeful about after this news item from Syrian President Bashar Assad's trip to Iran in August. On greeting Iranian spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Teheran, Assad said that he was happy that the meeting was taking place at a time when "we are witnessing great achievements on the part of the Islamic resistance group [Hizbullah] in Lebanon and the strengthening of Hamas in Palestine, while witnessing the weakening of our enemies more than ever before." If Assad is correct, what effect do these "great achievements" have on world Jewry and Israel?

Unfortunately, it appears that young American Jews aren't bothered too much by what Israel's foes have in mind. The recent study, "Beyond Distancing: Young Adult American Jews and their Alienation from Israel" by Steven Cohen and Ari Kelman, makes me wonder whether younger American Jews are stupid or just ignorant. The study shows that only 48% of respondents under 35 agree that "Israel's destruction would be a personal tragedy," compared to 78% of those 65 and older. In addition, just slightly more than half are "comfortable with the idea of a Jewish State". That is, less than half of younger American Jews would read about Israel's destruction online, be sorry but not surprised that it didn't work out, and click to the next news item. One caveat — the opinions of the Orthodox community, which represents roughly 10% of American's Jews and is strongly committed to Israel, weren't included in the study.

If one factors in the Orthodox community, one would assume that about half of American Jewish young adults are concerned about Israel while the other half aren't. Those who are indifferent must be ignorant of the fact that the enemies of Israel consider Diaspora Jews in the same category as Israelis, whether they know it or not. As nearly every educated person knows, the Jews in Germany in the first half of the 20th-century thought of themselves as Germans first and Jews second. The problem was that the Nazi leaders and most of the German gentiles had a different opinion. To them, German Jews were unwanted aliens and the cause of Germany's post-WWI misery, without whom the country would be better off. In fact, the Germans considered all Jews to be vermin, which had to be cleansed from Europe (at the very least). It would seem to be impossible for many young, educated American Jews to be ignorant of the Holocaust and its implications for Jews, yet they are. Or, if they're not ignorant, then they're foolish.

Jews outside of Israel, especially Americans, are somewhat indifferent to Israel's fate for two reasons. First, most of them (about 60%) haven't been to Israel and therefore have little affinity for it. Second, Israel is 5,000 miles from America, far enough away to be out of sight and out of mind. These two reasons account for the literal distancing between young American Jews and Israel, along with the fact that most young Jewish adults have many other things to think about besides their religious affiliation and what it implies.

The fact that Jewish youth in America, Israel's strongest ally, are not united in a movement to support Israel is one thing. Just as troubling are the attitudes of Western leaders, who are following a pattern of inaction on two fronts which confront Israel. Iran is in the headlines daily, mostly for proclaiming that it will never give up its nuclear program, which by the way doesn't include nuclear weapons — they say. At the same time, various Iranian leaders proclaim the imminent destruction of Israel, the "Zionist entity", which will disappear from the map — not that it's on Muslim maps to begin with. While the United Nations Security Council, plus Germany dithers with Iran over whether it will accept Western incentives, Iran steadfastly carries on, never even pretending that it will accept the West's attempts to appease it. As for the so-called sanctions, Iran laughs them off as they continue to do business with Russia, Germany, Italy and others who are supposedly putting pressure on them. In spite of this lack of urgency to apply stringent sanctions against Iran, Israel is expected to sit quietly on the sidelines. In reality, Israel must be ready to protect itself, given the fact that it's being backed into a corner by Iranian threats and the timid Western response.

A more recent threat, in even closer proximity to Israel, is the acquiescence of the West to the Iranian proxy Hizbullah's takeover of the Lebanese government, abetted by Syria. Lebanon, whose government has always said that it would be the "last" to make peace with Israel, continues to flout UN Resolution 1701, which Israel unwisely accepted at the end of the ill-conceived Second Lebanese War in 2006. That resolution, which ordered the return of the two Israeli captives, prohibited the rearming of Hizbullah, and forbid Hizbullah's presence near Israel's border, has been almost a total failure. In the meantime, weaponry and other aid given to Lebanon make it the largest per capita recipient of American aid after Israel. Even following the recognized terrorist group Hizbullah's insurgency in Lebanon, the United States hasn't abandoned the "pro-Western" government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. This is another case where Israel is being told by the West to sit quietly and do nothing.

Now that the end of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's leadership is hopefully just months away, one hopes that Israel will abandon initiatives such as the "peace" negotiations that have rehabilitated Bashar Assad and brought legitimacy to Syria, when a more appropriate policy would be to enlighten Assad to the probability of further isolation if Syria doesn't constrain Hizbullah and expel Hamas leaders from Damascus. Ditto for the West in relation to Iran, which is making its adversaries look foolish as they vacillate over exactly when Iran will acquire an atomic weapon, which will give it the power to call the shots in the world's biggest oil patch.

Israel's policies of the last several years have reduced its deterrent power to the point that its enemies believe it's a paper tiger which they can defeat. Since we know that Israel possesses the weaponry to overcome any of these adversaries, and we also know that the West will "fight to the last Israeli", it is becoming obvious that the West will continue to dither, expecting Israel to do the dirty work if appeasement fails to work. If this analysis is correct, then Israel must act before it's too late.

Both American Jews and Western leaders have failed to appreciate the role Israel plays in the fight against jihadist ambitions. Young Americans have lost sight of the centrality of Israel to Judaism as well as the Israeli role as the ultimate watchdog against anti-Semitism. The West has taken Israel for granted. It's more upset over the probability of a surge in gas prices were Israel to preemptively attack its enemies, than the possibility that Israel could be attacked simultaneously from Iran, Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank. The greatest task for a new Israeli leadership (Netanyahu?) will be to impress both Jews and the Western public with the importance of a strong Israel in the protracted cultural and military battle against Islamic countries that threaten Israel.

Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes-sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me."

To Go To Top

Posted by Yoram Ettinger, August 14, 2008.

As a follow up to the 214th issue of the Jerusalem Cloakroom on "Palestinian Refugees — Whose Responsibility?"
(http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il/Front/Newsnet/reports.asp?reportId=230387), enclosed you'll find the 217th issue on "Palestinian Refugees — The Global Context."

For other documents on national security and overseas investments in Israel, please visit The Ettinger Report at

Shabbat Shalom and Happy Tu Be'Av (August 16, 2008, the 15th day of the month of Av, the Jewish "Valentine Day", a day of courting/mating, commemorating forgiveness for the Golden Calf sin, permission for inter-tribal Jewish weddings, end of a Jewish war on the tribe of Benjamin, removal of road blocks on the pilgrimage trails to Jerusalem and the burial of the rebels against Rome, who were killed on Tisha' Be'Av, the 9th day of Av),

  1. Over 100 million refugees have been created by wars since the end of WW2.

  2. 79 million refugees were created during 1933-1945.

  3. 15 Million Hindus, Sikhs (8.5MN) and Muslims (6.5MN) were displaced, in 1947, in order to reshape British India into India and Pakistan.

  4. A Greek-Turk population exchange of 2 million refugees was codified by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, following the 1919-22 Greco-Turkish War.

  5. Millions became refugees in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia — as a result of ruthless regimes — following US withdrawal.

  6. A population transfer of millions occurred among USSR and Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and Romania, Greece-Bulgaria, Denmark-Germany, etc.


  7. 300,000 Palestinians were expelled from Kuwait, due to PLO's collaboration with the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

  8. 800,000 Yemenites were expelled from Saudi Arabia, due to Yemen's support of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

  9. Over 500,000 Christians fled Lebanon as a result of a series of civil war ignited by PLO and Syrian occupation.

  10. 10,000 PLO members were killed and thousands of Palestinians expelled from Jordan, due to PLO terrorism and attempts to topple the Hashemite regime.


  11. The UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) handles all refugees, except Israeli-related Palestinians...

  12. UNRWA — the largest UN agency (25,000 employees) — handles only Israel-related Palestinian refugees.

  13. Unlike global refugees, Palestinian refugees are defined as any Arab who was in Palestine two years before the 1948/9 War...

  14. Unlike UNHCR, UNRWA covers all descendants, without generational limitation.

  15. Unlike UNHCR, UNRWA perpetuates — and does not resettle — Palestinian refugees.

    While UNHCR is rewarded for sharply reducing the number of global refugees, UNRWA has been rewarded for perpetuating the status — and significantly inflating the number — of Israel-related Palestinian refugees.

  16. In contrast with the mega-million myth, the total number of 1948/9 Palestinian refugees was 320,000. 800,000 Arabs resided within the "Green Line" before the 1948/9 War. 170,000 Arabs remained in Israel following the war. Additional 100,000 were absorbed by Israel. Moreover, 100,000 middle and upper class Arabs were absorbed by neighboring Arab states. Also, 50,000 migrant laborers returned to their states. 50,000 Bedouins joined Jordan and Sinai tribes. 10,000-15,000 were war fatalities. Total refugees = 320,000.

  17. 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries, following the establishment of the Jewish State. 600,000 were absorbed by Israel and the rest resettled in other non-Arab countries.

For further data, please read The Claim of Dispossession by Arieh Avneri, Herzl Press, NY, 1980 and From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters, Harper & Row, NY, 1984.

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

Posted by Boris Celser, August 14, 2008.

Below is an important message from Yekutiel (Mike) ben Yaakov.


Dear friend,

Recent events in Israel involving the use of tractors to commit acts of terrorism have inspired much heated debate in a desperate effort to find solutions in face of the tractor terror phenomena. Some, such as Jerusalem's Mayor have suggested reevaluating municipal policy with regard to usage of heavy machinery within city limits. Others, such as GSS security experts have called for increasing supervision on certain Jerusalem border suburbs.

Find here a link to a historic debate between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the late Rabbi Meir Kahane which was hosted by Ted Koppel on Nightline, over two decades ago, when both were Knesset Members. Pay attention to Olmert's admission that Rabbi Kahane has a solution to Arab terror and an admission that he (Olmert) lacks one. The recent horrific facts on the ground after the last two tractor terror incidents are further proof that PM Olmert lacks answers not only to the Talansky money-stuffed-envelope scandal but also to basic problems that continue to threaten Israel's very existence.

After you view this interesting 12 minute exchange of views, I urge you to consider supporting the following project so that we can hasten the day when Jews will be able to walk proudly without fear of bombs or tractors on busy city Jerusalem or Tel Aviv streets. As you can learn from this video — there is a sound Jewish approach which could bring about peace and security to Israel.


Help us get this video and this message out to millions of Israelis in the remaining weeks, before Olmert resigns, while there is still wide interest. We would like to duplicate and distribute this video, with Hebrew and/ or Russian subtitles to every household in Israel. We would like to call town-hall meetings in every town throughout Israel to show this video and to challenge any Knesset member, rabbi, judge, professor or local leader who claims to have an answer to tractor terrorism.

To help distribute the video or to help sponsor this project, call Yekutiel 05 4487 6709 or email guzofskyyekutiel@gmail.com

Contributions can be sent to Mishal LYisrael POBox 6592 Jerusalem, Israel (note on memo for video duplication/distribution).

To view the debate with Hebrew subtitles:

To view the debate with Russian subtitles:

Please forward this email and these video links to anyone who would be interested.

Please Help Publish "40 Years" Translated Into Russian

From Bnai Elim

We are pleading to everyone to help us finish to publish the book "40 Years" by Rabbi Meir Kahane into Russian Language.

The translation is completed, and we are only $200 less to pay to the translator. All we need is $200 and at most another $200 to start printing. Thats all. All your donations are tax exempt which can be written off your taxes, I will email or send you the form.

The book was translated a month ago and the trasnlator requested $1,200 to pay. With your help I was able to collect $1,000 and we are behind $200 which is nothing.

What is so special about this book is that Rabbi Kahane mixes both prophecy and today's events into a book and can be enjoyed by religious and secular audiences.

Checks or any form of donations can be written to:

Bnai Elim
510 Brighton Beach Avenue #249
Brooklyn NY 11235

Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 14, 2008.

US officials would like to unpeel Syria from Iran. I think the goal is desirable, the means despicable, and the likely results deplorable.

The trouble with conventional discussions of such issues is their basis: a low level of perception, thinking inside a small box.

The State Dept. may offer Syria whatever it wants. Governments, and especially elected officials, are profligate with their people's tax revenues and with other nations' rights. The US already spends billions of dollars on Arab dictatorships and terrorist organizations, without anything in return if not counter-productively. The State Dept. calls such a policy, "realism." It is not realistic, as we face looming deficits and continued world war.

The US probably would give billions of dollars to Syria's armed forces, as it has been doing for anti-American Egypt, the anti-American P.A., and Hizbullah-controlled Lebanon. Foolhardy!

A higher level of perception than the State Dept. or NY Times has or acknowledges would predict US pressure on Israel to sacrifice the Golan Heights, in the hope of freeing Syria from Iran's embrace. The US would, unless Israeli's traitorous leaders give the Golan Heights away first, for nothing. Syria untied to Iran still would want regional hegemony, including conquest of Israel.

This would be a one-two punch at Israel. First, Israel would lose the mountain barrier against Syrian invasion, which is part of its homeland and a major source of water. Second, Syria would gain the might for conquering Israel, at least in concert with Egypt, Lebanon, the P.A. Arabs, S. Arabia, and Jordan.

Could Syria be weaned from Iran? With what the US pay for oil over-indulgence, Iran can finance Syria more than can the US. (Shh. Don't tell Congress or Obama. They want to spend more than you have.) The Iran axis is taking over Lebanon. Once Syria gets what it wants from Israel, what would keep it from resuming its alliance with Iran? Muslim Arabs don't keep their word to infidels.

The proposed US policy, in its narrow box, fails to consider what the current and future leaders of Syria want. Assad is of a minority sect similar to Iran's Shiites. He needs Iran to protect him from Syria's Sunnis. If we assassinated Assad, Sunnis would take over. They might shun Iran but still would be imperialistic.

This dubious and expensive US policy would be a strategic defeat for the US and Israel. The US would lose an allied army, the IDF, and the Islamists would gain momentum from victory. The US would be wiser to refocus support for the Islamist enemy to its one regional ally there, Israel. Try to find those ideas in the major media! The issue is complex, but most analyses have been simplistic.


An amnesty bill passed its first Knesset vote. It would apply to 400 of the 480 cases of protestors arrested over the removal of Jewry from Gaza and northern Samaria. The 400 did "not risk personal injury or loss of life" [were non-violent].

Opposing the bill, a Meretz MK likened its Jewish nationalist supporters to the German nationalists who had failed to enforce the law against Hitler's storm troopers before he took power. She says that for years, Israel has ignored the crimes [unstated] of the right-wing parties. Arutz-7, itself a right-wing, settler news source, described her remark as likening the bill's supporters to the Nazis.

A bill supporter, a doctor, retorted that the Meretz MK's hatred of Israel [he means Jewish sovereignty and loyalty to Judaism and Jewry] is the Left's mental disorder. He thinks it is incurable. Other supporters hoped the clemency would unify the country (Arutz-7, 7/30). Only if leftist psychosis were cured.

Actually, the Israeli government ignored the crimes of the left-wingers. I will state some of them. Rabin and Peres had secret agents not only try to provoke volatile nationalist youth into violence, it also committed dirty tricks, including violence. One agent beat up Arabs and blamed religious Jews. He also attended a rally for MK Netanyahu, as if a supporter, holding an inflammatory poster defaming Rabin, and getting the media to publicize it and blame Netanyahu for it, although the agent stood where Netanyahu couldn't see it. Those are only two of the clearest examples, not prosecuted.

The people quoted have misconceptions and are inaccurate. Some of those are cleared up in the way I summarized the story. Israeli politicians are off target, in their bombast and faulty analogy. Israelis too readily make analogies to the Nazis and too readily object out of over-righteousness. They don't know history well enough. Analogy is a poor means of argument, drawing attention to itself and away from the real issues.

German nationalist judges, imbued with old fears of Socialists and Communists, favored the Nazis as foes of the Left. If they had enforced the law, the Nazis would not have been able to terrorize the country and take power. Nazis were called right-wing, and the Communists were called left-wing, but they most closely resembled each other, as totalitarian. Calling the Nazis and supporters right-wing does not make them like Jewish nationalists in Israel, who also are called right-wing. The Jewish nationalists are far from totalitarian, the Left, not as far.

The real issues here are treason, national security, and police state tactics. Those are traits of the Left, supposedly idealistic. Nor do many on the Right understand civil liberties and how few democratic institutions Israel has.

PM Sharon destroyed the Jewish communities in Gaza and northern Samaria. That blow to national security still is felt in the bombardment from Gaza and Hamas' strategic threat to Israel. His strengthening of the genocidal enemy was treason. He also betrayed Zionism, for those areas are in the Land of Israel, recognized by the Palestine Mandate as areas requiring Jewish settlement. He chose many police from among gentile antisemites, and encouraged to hurt even non-violent protestors first, and then frame them. This allegation has been proved in court, despite the courts' leftist bias (another aspect of non-democracy in Israel). The bill was for relief from persecution. Israel needs to reform the police, the prosecutors, judiciary, and Knesset and make other democratic reforms. It should examine the US Constitution.


A Jewish nationalist organization in Israel led about 200 youths on a week long hilltop hike from northern Samaria [from which Sharon had expelled Jewish residents, to southern Judea]. At one hill, Arabs attacked the hikers with rocks and clubs. Police did not intervene, until [which is a pattern] a Jewish escort fired a warning shot to deter the muggers. Then the police, apparently from hidden observation points, converged on the Jews and arrested the one who fired, and disarmed the others.

The hike organizer thinks that the police disarmed them so as to make them turn back and give up their pioneering spirit. Some people accuse police of complicity with the Arab muggers. The organizer was told that two Arabs were arrested, but she doesn't believe it, not having seen it. An MK noted the police regularly side with the Arabs politically (Arutz-7, 7/30) on orders from above.

Yes, police have disarmed most settlers but not most P.A. Arabs. What do you suppose that is for? I suppose it is to get the Jews to fear assault and to abandon Judea-Samaria, as the government wants them to. The government politics is ignominious and undemocratic, the means is by police state tactics, and the police frame Jews and don't enforce the law against Arab mobs. I am ashamed of the government of Israel for its anti-Jewish, cowardly, and fascist behavior. This behavior by the left-wing is not decent. I had called it a neurosis. I change that now to psychosis.

Now recall the first article, above, about the Israeli bill. The Meretz MK condemned it as exempting Jews from the law. As we now can see, the police abuse the law to frame Jews and exempt Arabs from the law, to serve the government's irrational political ideology. The MK' s righteous indignation is phony, as becomes obvious when one realizes that she speaks in the name of law and order, in behalf of police violation of the law and not keeping order among the Arabs. What could be a greater shame for Israeli police to stand by while Arabs beat up Jews, and then intervene when Jews defend themselves, and to arrest the Jew who does, even though he merely fired a warning shot, and then to disarm the Jews so they cannot defend themselves in the future from Arab mobs that are not arrested? I'll tell you what is a greater shame. A greater shame is that a Meretz MK of Jewish origin opposes a bill that would release hundreds of Jews from false arrests, and who opposes it in the name of law and order.


Why did the P.A. lose Gaza to Hamas? It found that at least a third of its forces were riddled with Hamas sympathizers. [No wonder some units didn't fight and others soon yielded! The P.A. lacked coordination. It didn't get help from Fatah men not also in the security forces. I don't know why. Aso, Hamas had a goal and a strategy; the P.A. didn't and was oblivious. The P.A. devoted its US training in intelligence to monitoring Israel and not to monitoring Hamas.]

To prevent a recurrence in Judea-Samaria, the P.A. has stiffened its recruitment criteria to exclude anybody sympathetic to Hamas. It also has discharged about a thousand members of security forces as suspect.

Its criteria include not only membership in Hamas or activity or expressed support for Hamas. It also includes being related to a Hamas member or living near a Hamas official or activist (IMRA, 8/4).

The last criterion may be extreme. In the P.A., families try to secure themselves by having a member in each faction. I don't understand why merely living near a Hamas member renders someone suspect.

When Arafat and Abbas were letting members of Hamas join the P.A. security forces, I wrote that that the P.A. was losing control over its own forces.


Hizbullah claims to be ready for war. It brags that its strength deters Israel from attacking it, contending that if Hizbullah were weak, Israel would attack it.

The London Telegraph speculates that if the US attacked Iran's nuclear facilities, Hizbullah would attack Israel (IMRA, 8/4).

One almost does a double take at that last statement. If the US attacks Iran, Hizbullah would attack, not the US, which took the offensive, but Israel, which did not? What would Israel have to do with a US war?

That Hizbullah would be used for Iran's purpose is not surprising, since it is not a nationalist organization but a jihadist one of the Iranian Shiite variety.

Hizbullah likely believes that Israel would have attacked it if it were weak. That is the way Muslim Arabs think. It is not realistic, however. Israel is in appeasement mode. It refrained from fighting weak Hamas, letting Hamas build up. Likewise, It aborted an offensive that would have wiped out weak Hizbullah, because it doesn't want war. Now it doesn't want to have fight its way through UNIFIL.

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

Posted by Jaff Sassani, August 13, 2008.

Hatred produces hatred. Violence results in more violence. So why does humanity continue to suffer today and what is the solution?

The Sayeid, Ahal-Al-Bait, are in other words the descendents of Emam Ali ibn Abe Taliab and Prophet Mohammad. They taught us that they are very kind, peaceful, problem solvers, Saints, patient, lovers of humanity who possesses a thousand other good qualities. But now you have seen them in action for the last quarter of century in our poor country Iran. Now we hope you will be a good judge of what they are really doing in Iran and the region. What is difference between them and the second Islamic Khalifa Umar bin al-Khattab the Arab Abbasid dynasty ruler, or Yazeed Bin Mauwiyah the second Arab ruler of the Umayyad dynasty, or even Zohak before them? There is little difference if you look at the history of our Iranian people with regards to other Arab rulers in our land.

Now it has been over one thousand years since our beloved country, the Sassanin Empire, was conquered by Arab Imperialists under the pretext of the Islamic religion. Through all of this time we have seen so many different entities rule our people under many different names and politics.

None of them was directly related to Ahal Al-Bait, the descendent of the Prophet Mohammad or the children of Emam Ali ibn Abe Taliab.

Many of them claimed to be from Emam Ali family, for example the saviod Shahs, but none of them was identified like the current ruler of Iran to be directly related, what they call Sayeid in Islamic countries.

Since the Emam Kouhmany revolution in Iran we have had a direct ruler by the Emam Ali Family. Just remind the readers, our people in general, and the Shitt Muslims in particular that the Emam Ali family, the Sayeid, is running the country now with an iron fist.

For every problem there must be some kind of solution. For every health problem there must be some kind of medicine. To solve any problem you need to understand the root of it and try to come up with the solution either by an individual or accumulated effort of a group of people.

Just like the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and AIDS was facing humanity and the effort by international community to solve the problem.

When Prophet Mohammed bin Abdullah Al-Qweareyyshi, the founder of the Islamic religion from Arab origin, started the teaching of the new religion in Mecca his first enemy was his own relative from Arab tribes in Mecca. They forced him and his follower to move to Medina, another town in Saudi Arabia. There they clashed with the non-Arab Hebrew Jewish people. The campaign against the Hebrew Jewish people was lead by Ali Bin Abe Talib Al-Qweareyyshi, the cousin and the son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed, who later become the founder of Shiite Islam.

The campaign became very violent and productive for Islamic Army because the victims were non-Arab. This made the army unite and test their victory over non-Arabs, even though the Hebrew Jewish people were not their enemy. When they killed the Hebrew Jewish males they took the females, married them by force, and took their lands and their belongings. From that day until now it has become the tradition of the Arab warriors, which has been repeated over and over by Arab extremists and later by the Ottoman Turkish Empire against non-Muslim people in Europe.

The people who have suffered the most at the hands of the Arab nationalistic extremist movement since the beginning of Islam has been the Hebrew Jewish people and the Aryan (Eranšahr or later become known as Iranian) people that are known today as (Persian, Kurd, Azeri, Afghani, Tajik, Pashto, Pakistani and other Aryan nations) who suffered greatly under the second Islamic Khalifa, Omar Bin Khtab, known as the most violent ruler against the Aryan people who later become known as the founder of the Sunni Islam.

The Campaign continues on and affected Europe and later went on to affect parts of Asia. Today it is affecting the whole world one way or another. Calling yourself neutral won't solve this problem facing humanity.

If Iran or any other country with the same mentality has the Atomic Bomb or any other powerful destructive weapon, they are going to use it and that will be the end of the world as we know it.

To solve this problem facing humanity, the super power countries and individuals a like need to pay attention and confront the Arab extremists and their agents, like the ruler of Iran, today to stop the terrorist activity once and for all. Let them know about your feelings and understanding by raising your voices as individuals. This may make a difference with Arab people in the hope that they will join the rest of the civilization. Because of Arab oil too many leaders around the world are closing their eyes to this problem.

The Arabs and their agents in the Islamic world may realize that the people around the world do not like what they are doing against humanity on Earth. Then there will be hope that they will change their behavior and look back at their own violent history to see how unjust their hatred has been.

Only education will allow people to understand that inflecting pain and suffering upon other people is not the solution to your problems. Indeed, if the Arab and the Islamic world took a moment to look at the hard working Japanese people and take a lesson from their hard work and truthful efforts to serve their own people by building up their own country, they would see it is a much better solution than blowing yourself up and killing many other people.

In conclusion, every Iranian person (Aryan People) should face reality. Do some research and look at our peoples' history. Understand our own miserable lives under the iron rule of the so called Sayeid families in Iran (The descendent of Prophet Mohammad or the children of Emam Ali ibn Abe Taliab). Understand their lies.

They told us that the Sayeid are kind and gentle, they love human beings and humanity. Look at their actions against the political prisoners of Iran today, especially people like Abbas Amir-Entezam, and judge for yourself.

Do political prisoner deserve such treatment by Emams, religious teachers and philosophers? Where is their kindness and humanity?

Is this too the fault of Western countries??? !!!

Jaff Sassani are the spokespeople for the Sassanian Kurd Defense Committee (KDC) of Iran

To Go To Top

Posted by B. Taverna, August 14, 2008.

This was written by Matthew Wagner and it appeared in today's The Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218446197326&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

A man with tefillin.

Jordanian border officials refused to allow a group of Israeli tourists carrying religious objects such as talitot and tefillin to enter their country on Tuesday, saying it was "a safety measure" to avoid potential terror threats.

Thirty-six Israeli tourists on their way to Amman for a three-day tour were detained at the Sheikh Ali Hussein Crossing near Beit She'an at 6:30 a.m. and notified of a new regulation that prohibits entry into Jordan with tefillin, talitot, prayer books, Bibles or the Talmud.

"Our group was presented with two options," said Alan Novetsky, a recent immigrant from New York who was accompanied on the tour by his wife. "Either enter Jordan without religious objects or go back to Israel."

Novetsky said the group's suitcases were thoroughly searched for religious items. "They seemed to know exactly what they were looking for.

"It was very demeaning to have such a negative experience in what is billed as a friendly country. People in the group, including the tour guides, were quite shocked. No one had ever heard that Jordan imposed religious restrictions," he said.

"What made it worse was that the whole thing seemed to be directed solely at Jews. I saw Christians walking through into Jordan openly wearing crosses. Apparently, Christian religious symbols did not seem to be a problem for the Jordanians. I can well imagine the international outcry if Islamic tourists were to encounter such restrictions on their entry into Israel."

A Jordanian security official said the decision was taken only for "security reasons."

The official said that the decision had been in effect for a long time and Israeli authorities were aware of it.

"The Jordanian security authorities are responsible for the safety of all visitors to the kingdom and it is our duty to take all measures required in this regard," the official explained. He expressed regret that the tourists had been offended by the measure.

Novetsky said that at first the the guides tried to bargain with the Jordanian officials, promising to keep the religious items hidden and to pray inside the hotel. But the suggestions were rejected.

"The vast majority of the group decided that as proud Israelis, we were either going to be allowed to walk into Jordan holding our religious objects or we would not go in at all."

Contact B. Taverna by email at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Dan Calic, August 13, 2008.


In a move unprecedented in history, Israel offered to return land conquered in war.

No other country has been victorious in war only to return land to the loser.

Oh excuse me, this is incorrect. It did happen once before. Guess who the victor was that returned conquered land? Indeed it was Israel, that gave the Sinai and Alma oil fields back to Egypt.

For a period of time after this land for peace deal, there was a ray of hope.

Anwar Sadat visited Israel, and spoke before the Knesset. Yet he would pay for his boldness with his life.

Since those heady days, the "peace" between Israel and Egypt has been as cold as a meat locker.

Weapons have been funneled into Gaza by way of bribes, or through so many tunnels the border might as well be a huge piece of Swiss cheese. The influence of Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt has grown to the point that if elections were held today the Muslim Brotherhood would sweep to victory. The country has become a virtual dictatorship.

In 2005 Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. What benefits did this bring?

A string of rocket attacks into Israel, which continues to this day [over 6,000 and counting...],

an election which brought a terrorist group [Hamas] into power, who has vowed to never accept Israel's right to exist, and is committed to the destruction of the "Zionist occupier."

So we have two [albeit under different circumstances] land for peace situations.

How have either advanced the peace process? What benefit has either brought Israel?

In spite of two failed land for peace deals, the government of Israel is willing to make another incredible sacrifice by their offer to return 93% of Judea and Samaria [West Bank] to the Palestinians. It's actually more than that, because an additional 5.5% of West Bank land was offered to compensate for the 7% Israel wants to keep.

Plus Abbas has demanded the West Bank and Gaza be linked, so Israel has agreed to allow a highway link between the two, without security checks. This didn't even exist prior to '67. This is all in Haaretz in Aluf Benn's article:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1010812.html [1]


Aside from not addressing the status of Jerusalem, or the "refugees," the offer is less than 100% of '49 borders. And in spite of the foolish generosity of the Israeli government, what does Israel get in return?

The Palestinians are to complete a "series of internal reforms."

Meaning what?

No more Hamas presence in the West Bank?

Find and confiscate all the rockets which will be launched from just a few meters away, [with the new borders]

Arrest all the clan members, street thugs, and others who oppose a deal with Israel?

Disarm all the civilians?

Prevent the Imams, clerics, mullahs and other religious leaders from teaching vitriolic hatred of Jews and the destruction of Israel in the mosques?

In essence, do something which has never been done before, create a brand new society which abides by democratic principles and civil law, free from government and police corruption?

Does anyone actually believe this is going to happen? If you do, please consider attending my upcoming seminar on why Elvis is still alive. Dan


The Haaretz article elicited hundreds of comments. This one contributed some needed historic information:

From Gil #140 to Clickfool #103

Did you know that Mandatory Palestine includes Jordan!

The British Mandate of Palestine also known as Transjordan was an area that includes the Area of Israel and Jordan and all occupied territory!

By the way Clickfool,

1\ Can you tell me please what makes the So Called Palestinians (In Israel and the West Bank) a distinct ethnic group differentiating them from the Jordanians, which hold the bigger part of Mandatory Palestine?

2\ Can you tell me please what makes the So Called Palestinians (In Israel and the West Bank) a distinct ethnic group differentiating them from the Jordanians, Syrians, Saudi Arabians, and Iraqis? Were they not united behind one leader called Faisal (Faisal bin Al Hussein Bin Ali El Hashemi) that was known as the King of the people of Bigger Syria (Syria + Iraq + Saudi Arabia + Jordan + Palestine + Lebanon)?

3\ Can you tell me please was it not Faisal King of the people of Bigger Syria (Syria + Iraq + Saudi Arabia + Jordan + Palestine + Lebanon) that took his claims off the land of Israel in the known Faisal Weizmann Agreement?

4\ Can you tell me please; was it not the British whom curved ONE Ethnic group (Arabs = Palestinians) into so many nations (Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia)? Putting three Arab Leaders from the same family bloodline governing the different Nations of the Arab world. Faisal [briefly king of Syria and bigger SYRIA, became king of IRAQ] Ali [briefly succeeded to the throne of Hejaz, SAUDI ARABIA] Abdullah [king of TransJordan (Palestine + Jurdan), and desendents became kings of Jordan]

5\ Can you tell me please; would it not be fair to assume that poor Palestinians got their self-determination, Once in Jordan, Once in Iraq, Once in Saudi Arabia, and Once in Syria as those countries declared and got their independence!

6\ Can you tell me why was it OK for British to save a land for the Christians and call that Christian country Lebanon, and not do so for the Jews on an historic land, the land of Israel?

Contact Dan Calic by email at calic@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Sultan Knish, August 13, 2008.

The British press has been widely trumpeting a "settler attacked on a car full of British diplomats" as another example of "brutal settler violence". Reading sentences such as that you might get the impression that settlers had launched some sort of missiles or opened fire or done something. The reality of what actually happened is much uglier, for the British Foreign Office.

The British Foreign Office funds left wing and pro-terrorist Israeli groups which work to disrupt checkpoints, aid terrorists and harass Jewish residents living in Israel. The British Foreign Office also uses diplomatic vehicles which are not subject to inspection to smuggle their pet activists past Israeli checkpoints into areas where they can stage protests and disruptions and network with their terrorist allies.

The "Settler Attack" involved a number of Jewish Hebron residents who had grown sick of this to try and block an armored car containing British diplomats and their left wing activists in protest against the British Foreign Office's actions.

The "Settler Attack" and now I'll quote from the Times smear article itself, consisted of the following.

The diplomats, who were traveling in an armoured car, were trying to leave the city through the large settlement of Kiryat Arba, close to the city centre, when a settler's car pulled in front of them, blocking their way, a British diplomatic source told The Times.

A "well known settler trouble-maker" then jumped out and started kicking the vehicle, the source said. The British diplomats reversed and tried to leave the scene, but the settler jumped in his car and again pulled in front of them and started thumping and kicking the vehicle. Another group of settlers refused to open the gates to Kiryat Arba to prevent the British vehicle from entering.

So in essence the "Settler violence" consisted of one man kicking an armored car and several others who refused to open the gates for it. As "violence" goes, this ranks on the scale of minor irritation.

If the British senior diplomats in the car would like to see some violence, they might try being a Jewish resident of Hebron or any majority Muslim territory who face daily murder attempts by the BFO's "poor persecuted" Palestinian Arabs.

(The Times of course can't be bothered to get the man's name, though he's actually a major figure, let alone interview him or anyone on the other side of the story.)

In the Times article there are open admissions that the "Senior Diplomats" were ferrying left wing activists past Israeli checkpoints and that the British Foreign Office funds anti-Israel and pro-Terrorist left wing activists across Israel in the first place.

The attack came as British officials were being given a tour by Breaking the Silence, a British-funded organisation led by former Israeli soldiers who have served in the city — home to the tombs of several Biblical patriarchs — and who have become angered by the violence of the settlers.

Israeli human rights groups who monitor Hebron warn that settler violence has been increasing in recent weeks, partly as a result of the chaos within the Israeli government and partly because one of the Israeli human rights groups, B'Tselem — which also receives British Foreign Office funding — has distributed around 100 video cameras to Palestinians to document the violence, mainly by settlers but also by the Israeli security forces.

Filtering out the usual propaganda that casts Israel as evil and the Arabs as innocent victims, we have open admissions that the British Foreign Office is funding anti-Israel groups that do their best to undermine Israeli security, harass Israeli soldiers and agitate against security measures that prevent real violence, the sort of violence that leaves buses filled with Jews torn and shredded into bloody pieces that volunteers spend hours collecting for burial, not a lone man kicking an armored car.

Is it any wonder that Jewish residents of Hebron are outraged at the tactics of the British Foreign Office?

If Israel was funding Pro-IRA groups in England, I'm sure the British Foreign Office would have something to say about it.

If Israeli diplomatic vehicles in the UK were used to ferry anti-government protesters past security, I'm sure the British Foreign Office would take appropriate action.

The British diplomatic interference in Israeli politics is outrageous, all the more so when that interference is aimed at undermining Israel's ability to stop terrorism and at ethnically cleansing Jewish residents, both of which are the goals of B'Tselem.

Every time checkpoints go down, terrorism increases. The British Foreign Office's funding of left wing groups with the goal of dismantling Israeli security is nothing more than the murder of Jews by proxy. That is the naked truth.

The Foreign Office has no place in funding anti-government activity in a democratic country and if it insists on acting as if Israel is one of its colonies, the day may come when its diplomats face more in protest than a man kicking impotently at an armored car.

The real story is not "Settler Violence" but the perfidy of the Senior diplomats at the British Foreign Office, who have abused diplomatic privileges and are conducting a covert war within Israel against the Israeli army and the people it protects.

This is from yesterday's Sultan Knish website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 13, 2008.

This below is from Jishad Watch

One reader commented

We wonder, do Muslim women, children, and pets feel pain, or are they immune to the daily degradation, humiliation and terror that they experience? And why should we be so shocked by Muslims committing terrorist acts against our people to get their way? They do it to their own families every day.......

Imagine a religion designed by and for child molesters.
Imagine legally killing your own children because they "dishonored" you.
Imagine a religion that establishes sexual slavery.
Imagine a religion that endorses the murder of every Jew on the planet.... Christians .... in short ALL Infidels
Imagine a religion that has killed hundreds of millions.....
that religion is: ISLAM ....


"According to human rights lawyers, there are many cases of this kind before the Saudi courts."

"Saudi Arabia: Mother moves to block child marriage," from Adnkronos International, August 11:

Riyadh, 11 August (AKI) — The Saudi Arabian mother of an eight-year-old girl is trying to stop her marrying a middle-aged man who made a marriage contract with the girl's father in the province of al-Qasim, in the centre of the country.

The father's consent is needed to validate the marriage contract between the man, who is in his fifties and the child. He reportedly agreed to the union in exchange for an undisclosed sum of money.

According to the Saudi newspaper, Okaz, the news emerged after the mother of the child reported her husband and took him to court to prevent the marriage from going ahead.

Referring to another case where a man in his seventies was charged for marrying a ten-year-old girl in the area of Asir, south of Mecca, the woman also sought the help of local human rights groups.

The mother of the girl said her husband has two other wives, and considering the age of the child, asked for the contract to be withdrawn to allow her to have a normal childhood.

More normal than Aisha's childhood.

According to human rights lawyers, there are many cases of this kind before the Saudi courts.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Marc Samberg, August 13, 2008.

This is The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) Special Dispatch Series — No. 202. I


The Hizbullah-Israel prisoner swap was applauded in much of the Arab press as a victory for Hizbullah, with Al-Jazeera even throwing a birthday party for Samir Kuntar. [1]

Nonetheless, not everyone in the Arab press was uniformly favorable to Hizbullah. The liberal columnist 'Adnan Hussein, in a July 24, 2008 article in the Kuwaiti Awan daily, compared Hizbullah's celebrations to a fascist rally, and sardonically proposed that the group now turn its attention to liberating the Lebanese prisoners held in Syria.

The background to this article was a July 21, 2008 protest demanding the release of the Lebanese prisoners in Syrian jails, held outside a meeting in Beirut between Lebanese President Michel Suleiman and Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem. According to a list released by the National Organization for Human Rights in Syria, there are approximately 200 such prisoners. [2] When asked by the press about the protest, Al-Mu'allem answered: "It's a shame I didn't bring with me some of the families of Syrians who have disappeared in Lebanon to protest as well... Those who have waited patiently more than 30 years [i.e. since the Lebanese civil war] can wait another few weeks." He said further that the issue of prisoners in Syrian prisons would be treated by an impartial judicial commission, which had already begun its work. [3]

Others criticized the Hizbullah-Israel prisoner exchange itself. In a July 25, 2008 article in the Kuwaiti Al-Jarida daily, liberal columnist Hamed Nayyef Al-'Anzi wrote that Samir Kuntar and Dalal Al-Mughrabi were terrorists and that there was no reason to rejoice at their return. The following are excerpts from the two articles:


On July 24, 2008, columnist 'Adnan Hussein wrote in the Kuwaiti daily Awan: "The intoxication has passed and the time for reflection has arrived. Intoxication is what some of us felt at the new 'Divine Victory' achieved by Hizbullah over Israel. It was a great 'victory' in the opinion of the party and its followers, as is evident from the pompously enthusiastic celebration, with its gaudy colors, on the occasion of the return of the prisoners and the remains of the martyrs, in a deal that was not without cost.

"The prisoners were clothed in militia uniforms in a gesture of kindness and graciousness towards them and their families. The coffins were arranged in orderly rows, the brightest of colors were chosen, and the fighters responsible for the welcoming ceremony and transporting the coffins were trained to move exactly in step in order to add awe to the spectacle. And the organizers did not forget to complete the spectacle with herds of human masses so that the spectacle would have the traditional Nazi-fascist-Ba'thist character.

"This hullaballoo passed quickly and gave way to the shocking thought, expressed spontaneously and simply and without any fake coloring or verbal embellishment, by some Lebanese citizens who are Lebanese to the core: aged mothers and fathers, wives who have waited long, sons and daughters who grew up without ever having had the pleasure of seeing their fathers — fathers who had long ago been made to disappear into the Syrian prisons and graveyards, for a quarter century or more.

"This spontaneous gathering organized by the families of the Lebanese prisoners and those who have disappeared into Syria, on the day of the Syrian Foreign Minister's visit to Beirut, was what gave the lie to the myth of this new 'Divine Victory'.

"At a distance from Beirut that is perhaps much shorter than the distance from the Lebanese capital to where the prisoners and martyrs who returned in Hizbullah's deal were imprisoned or buried, there are hundreds of Lebanese who are either imprisoned or are martyrs buried in secret graveyards on the territory of the 'sister country' Syria.

"Their sole 'crime' was that they opposed, while in their own country, Syria's occupation of Lebanon and demanded it be put to an end. Naturally, and as Hizbullah and its followers know, every occupation is loathsome; it is patriotic to work to end the occupation, and every opponent of occupation is patriotic.

"The Lebanese who remain imprisoned, or whose remains are in graveyards in Syria, are patriots, and are worthy of having Hizbullah fight for the sake of their return to their homeland and their families.

"It can be supposed that, given the close relations between the party and Syria, it will not encounter difficulties of the sort that it faced with Israel in attaining its goal, and it will not be in need of intermediaries, witnesses, and secret negotiations..." [4]


Another liberal Kuwaiti columnist, Hamad Nayyef Al-'Anzi, addressed the Hizbullah-Israel exchange itself, revisited the actions of Samir Kuntar, and asked why bringing home a terrorist should be considered a 'divine victory':

"... It is truly saddening, and awakens pity, that an ancient nation like our own can reach such a state of gullibility and infatuation with victory, that we can consider a prisoner exchange between two parties a victory of one party over the other, just because one party is Arab Muslim and wears the clothing of struggle and resistance. This despite the fact that if we consider them in terms of gains and losses — and not in the lingo of glory, honor, and steadfastness that we never tire of repeating on all occasions and without occasion — [we see that] they have not achieved much in terms of real gains in the real world.

"By Allah, tell me, what is all this tempestuous and irrational joy, and all this talk of 'victory' at the return of the Lebanese prisoners, Samir Kuntar and his companions, such that there is no epithet denoting heroism that has not been showered on them?

"I can say with certainty, gentlemen, that 90% of those rejoicing and praising the return of the prisoners do not know who Samir Kuntar is and do not know the details of his inimitable, 'heroic' fedayeen operation. They don't know anything about him, and don't want to. The only thing that matters to them is that Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah has something to do with it, and he is always a 'victor'. His name is associated with glory, honor, and steadfastness. As long as he got them released, then they must be 'heroes' and 'victors', and their return a great 'victory', denied only by foreign agents, traitors, and kowtowers.

"So here is a short account of the stories of some of these returning 'heroes':

"Samir Kuntar, a Druze Lebanese citizen born in 1961, was, until he was captured, a member of the Palestine Liberation Front. He was a member in a cell that conducted a violent operation in the city of Nahariya on April 21, 1979. That night, Kuntar's cell snuck onto the Nahariya beach in a dinghy, and in the middle of the night attacked the home of the Haran family.

"They took hostage Danny Haran, the Israeli nuclear scientist, and his little 4-year-old daughter. In the meantime, the mother, her 2-year-old child, and a neighbor hid out in the bedroom. One of the hostage-takers took the father and the girl towards the beach, but they were surprised by police and army forces that had arrived. Samir Kuntar opened fire on Danny Haran from close range in front of his young daughter, then killed the young girl, Einat (though he denies this) by crushing her skull with his rifle butt. The other, 2-year-old girl, died of suffocation due to her frightened mother's attempts to keep her quiet so that the hostage-takers wouldn't find them.

"That, gentlemen, is the 'heroic' story of Samir Kuntar.

"As for the 'martyr' Dalal Al-Mughrabi, whose body was returned [to Lebanon], she was born in 1958. She commanded an operation that has come to be known as 'the Coastal Road Massacre' that took place in 1978.

"In this violent operation, 37 Israeli civilians of various ages were killed, young and old, when the bus they were on was hijacked. Dalal Al-Mughrabi and her group opened fire on 37 riders on that ill-fated bus, one after the other."

"Under No Circumstances Can Someone Who Targeted Innocent Civilians Be Considered a 'Hero'"

"No rational person can categorize these two operations as heroic acts. They are more like terrorist acts, or are themselves terrorist acts, whatever the justifications and the reasons. Terrorist acts have no nationality, and anyone of sound heart and mind condemns them and despises those who perpetrate them, whether they be Arab, Israeli, or of any other nationality.

"Under no circumstances can someone who targeted innocent civilians be considered a 'hero', nor can his 'triumphant' return be considered a national victory — except in the imaginations of some desperate souls whose hearts are hard as rock, and for whom human life is not worth a mosquito's wing.

"How plentiful they are in our Arab nation, these people who search for any wretched victory — even if it's just a prisoner exchange. And what prisoners, at that!" [5]


[1] http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1818.htm ; and article by Sultan Al-Qassemi, MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 2013, "Al-Jazeera and the Released Terrorist's Birthday Party," August 4, 2008,

[2] www.middleeasttransparent.com, July 27, 2008.

[3] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), July 22, 2008.

[4] Awan (Kuwait), July 24, 2008.

[5] Al-Jarida (Kuwait), July 25, 2008.

Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 13, 2008.


Israel is relying upon desalination to replenish its emptying aquifers. However, such factories pollute the water with hundreds of tons of iron, killing sea life. The government is demanding that the factories filter out the iron, but success there remains to be seen (Arutz-7, 7/29).

There was the usual rush into new technology, before it has been worked out. If only desalination recaptured the ocean's minerals!


Most of us were distracted by the power struggle in Lebanon, and automatically sided against Hizbullah. Caroline Glick, however, noted that the anti-Hizbullah politicians, usually called moderate, did not criticize Hizbullah's anti-Israel actions and intend to continue them. They celebrated the return of released baby-killer Kuntar. The Lebanese Army doesn't confront Hizbullah, but collaborates with it. The Army pays pensions to the families of Hizbullah gunmen killed in battle [as did Sadaam and does the P.A. with its terrorists]. She concludes that Lebanon is a state sponsor of terrorism.

Israel reached the same conclusion during the war. It started destroying Lebanese infrastructure of service to Hizbullah. Sec. Rice made Israel stop and agree to Hizbullah demands for a ceasefire. She claimed that the Lebanese government, of which Hizbullah was a partner, was decent, inasmuch as it got Syrian forces to leave. The US increased subsidy of the Lebanese Army, even though it was a collaborator of terrorism. In the same way, the US supports Fatah politically against Israel, calling Fatah moderate, even though Fatah collaborates in terrorism with Hamas. Lebanon has no legal claim to nearby, strategic parts of Israel, but Rice urges Israel to cede them. She believes that this would strengthen the head of Lebanon's coalition government not controlled by Hizbullah (IMRA, 7/29). Whatever Israel does for Abbas doesn't strengthen him, but it strengthens terrorists against Israel.

Will the burgeoning US deficit prompt the US to stop spending billions on Arab terrorists and imperialists?


P.A. forces have arrested hundreds of members and leaders of Hamas and closed many of their businesses, schools, and other institutions, in Judea-Samaria. This may be in retaliation for Hamas arrests of a couple of hundred Fatah members and closing their institutions in Gaza Arutz-7, 7/30). They fight as rivals. Do, not think that Fatah is moderate.


Noting the rise of terrorism by Jerusalem Arabs, rising terrorist control over Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem, Pres. Peres endorsed what PM Olmert and Vice-PM Ramon propose, giving the P.A. the Arab neighborhoods. Peres says the two peoples must be separated until the Arabs are educated. Arab doctors don't commit terrorism, he says, because they are educated.

Educated people commit terrorism. Examples of terrorism by a lawyer and a teacher were cited in opposition to Peres. [The head of one wing of the PLO was a doctor, and Arafat was an engineer. Educated people tend to be leaders and perpetrators of Islamic terrorism, though they recruit youths and women.]

Israeli security forces could secure Arab neighborhoods. There is no need to cede them. Instead, let he government stop prohibiting Jews from building on sites they own there! When Olmert was mayor of Jerusalem, he let the Arabs build illegally there, and let Fatah entrench itself. Now Olmert seems to be using terrorist incidents as propaganda in anti-Zionist proposals (Arutz-7, 7/30).

I agree that the two peoples should be separated. Encourage the Arabs to leave Israel and the Territories. One doesn't give up key parts of one's country because an enemy population has committed murder there. One gets rid of the enemy.


After seeming to accept a prisoner exchange with Hamas of 1000:1, now Olmert said he'd cede the Golan Heights to Syria if Syria merely agrees to negotiate with Israel (Arutz-7, 7/30). That's the craziest concession I ever heard. There would be nothing to negotiate. Will somebody please arrest Israel's leaders for treason!


The media published a prayer inserted by candidate Obama in the Western Wall. The media focused on the impropriety of filching the note, but one newspaper claimed that the Obama campaign had given out a copy of the note to the press, to make himself look good (Arutz-7, 7/30).

When I read the prayer, it seemed to me to have been written too carefully not to have been done for public relations. I think this is a major concern. If Obama's campaign staged this, then he has shown himself unscrupulous enough to use religion in behalf of his campaign in a sneaky way, and to do so by leaving a sour impression about the Jews, who are left accused of filching his note. Actually, the note seemed contrived, therefore, mendacious, like false self praise.


"A Palestinian (Arab) boy was shot and killed by Israeli security forces on Tuesday during a demonstration against Israel's security barrier near the W. Bank village of Naalin, Palestinian witnesses said."

The Israeli representative said the IDF had no knowledge of such a shooting (Isabel Kershner, NY Times 7/30, A8).

Given the detailed IDF reporting of combat, the likelihood is that when the IDF hadn't heard of such a shooting, there wasn't one.

The Arabs and the newspaper left unstated the circumstances. The Times lacks the decency to check whether it was an accident. Actually, Arab "witnesses" often are adjuncts to terrorism, making false propaganda against Israel. Until the usually reliable IDF checks, we can't be sure a boy was killed, was shot by the IDF, or was shot by anybody else. The reporter ought to wait for the IDF investigation and publish the whole story. By the time the IDF investigates, the newspaper would call it old news and not bother with the exoneration. That is one of the ways by which the Times damages Israel's reputation.

The Times does not damage the reputation of the Arabs, who deserve it. I'm referring to the many stories, that the newspaper ignores, of Arabs blowing themselves up because they store bombs in their houses. There are cases of terrorists fighting each other, and killing children in the process. For those children, there is no indignation. At least, there isn't indignation by the newspaper unless the Arabs blame it on Israel. That is why Israel needs to investigate these allegations. (The Times did report on 8/3 when nine Arabs killed each other and a couple of dozen were wounded. Too big to ignore.)


The headlines reported that PM Olmert resigned, but he didn't resign. Rather, as he has been doing by waiting for various commissions to report about his lack of stewardship of the country, he stalled for more months, saying his resignation would come after a primary and perhaps after a new election. Meanwhile, he remains Prime Minister.

He was thinking only of himself. His party, founded without an ideology, thinks only of keeping power. It shifts with public opinion, having no direction of its own. In making such shifts, it acts unthinkingly. Olmert's latest stall keeps in office an unstable and divisive regime incapable of making a nationally legitimate raid on Iran's nuclear facilities. Indeed, various menaces to Israel have grown, because the government failed to act; it is too distracted (Caroline Glick, IMRA, 7/19).

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

Posted by Shifra Shomron, August 13, 2008.

Sylvia OBM was a dear Neve Dekalim friend and neighbor We were blessed to have known her.


Once she gifted me with an elegant wallet. It was black leather with golden clasps. I thought it very handsome, but I was a mere teenager and didn't feel comfortable accepting it from an elderly lady. But she insisted I take it. And being Sylvia Mandelbaum, she won her point. She nearly always did... She was a determined person. Spunky too. She fell in love with Gush Katif when on a tour there at an advanced age ("my age is nobody's business but my own") and moved there. In the early days, while her villa was being constructed, she lived in a caravan adjacent to my family. And she determinedly brought back floor tiles for her house in order to move the building process along quicker.

Her Neve-Dekalim villa-neighborhood house was lovely. She had long, colorful, glass-stained windows, the house was spacious, and the furniture nicely arranged. Her garden was a dream. A well-kept lawn, large sweet-smelling rose vines, tall mimosas and several fruit-bearing tangerine trees. In the villa neighborhood the children all affectionately knew her as 'grandma' — a fact which filled her with pride. She would regularly host spaghetti dinners in her garden for them so their parents could rest from cooking. Sylvia laughed telling me that the mothers would show their thanks by sending her portions of the meals they made. Sylvia was amused saying that she certainly enjoyed the Israeli cooking, but what she enjoyed more was having the young children around her...

She had a fascinating history. Since I know I won't possibly do it justice, I'm quite reluctant to even try. She started by designing shoes. She told me that she was very good at it. But she didn't remain at that job. She married, she had children, she moved to California (for the climate), she was a real estate agent, later she made Aliyah and she also wrote many articles over the years and authored books. She also introduced Gishur (divorce by mediation) in Israel which is quite a feather in her cap. I'm convinced I don't know all of it. Despite my willingness to listen, she wasn't one to dwell much on the past — she was interested in the present. She listened to the news and kept herself up to date. And when the Disengagement Plan first breathed air she was very worried as to the future of the nation, and as to her own future. She had reason to be.

When I first started writing articles she insisted on reading them. She told me I was lucky; that I had discovered very early in life where my talent lay. And to my great embarrassment, she insisted on my autographing for her every article I wrote.

Mrs. Sylvia Mandelbaum has passed away today.

It is three years to the expulsion of Neve Dekalim.

She was buried in Jerusalem at 3:30 this afternoon in Har HaMenuchot, at the entrance to Jerusalem.

And what remains to me are memories of an ardent Zionist and independent thinker. She was certainly an activist and a doer in her lifetime. And I continue to fondly use the wallet.

Shifra Shomron is the author of the historic novel, Grains Of Sand: The Fall Of Neve Dekalim, (Mazo Publishers, 2007). "Travel beyond time and beyond location — into my Gush Katif" Visit Shifra's website:

The Shomro family was one of the thousands of Jewish families who were expelled from Gush Katif, Gaza, by their own government. The Shomrons now live in Nitzan Caravilla. Their homes were vandalized or destroyed or used to Arab terrorists after they were forced out.

This essay appeared on the Shilo Musings website
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/2008/08/ super-great-grandmother-of-jewish-gaza.html

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio, August 113, 2008.

This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and appeared in Arutz-7


(IsraelNN.com) An escalated Fatah campaign to stamp out opposition in Judea and Samaria has stoked fears that it is copying the Hamas authority in Gaza and turning the Palestinian Authority (PA) into a police state.

The tactics, including documented torture, also pose an obstacle to peace, according to former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky and Arab human rights activist Bassem Eid. They recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal an article under the title "There Won't Be Peace Without Democracy."

The increasing human rights violations and torture by Fatah as well as Hamas have been ignored by American and western governments that have financed police training for Fatah, the Associated Press pointed out Wednesday. It cited as examples of Fatah violence the recent "mistaken arrest" of a professor, who was beaten so badly that he suffered a concussion, and the use of clubs by PA police to break up anti-government protests.

"The West is supporting one Palestinian faction over the other. It's all about politics, not human rights," Bir Zeit University political scientist George Giacaman told AP. A citizens' rights activist told the news agency, "We have warned of [the PA] turning into a security regime, and there are indications that we are heading in that direction."

Sharansky and Eid, in their recent Wall Street Journal op-ed article, wrote that "the tragic peace process turned to farce" with deadly Fatah-Hamas clashes in Gaza. They pointed out the irony that it was Israel and not Fatah that worked to rescue a Fatah-aligned clan and then keep them from returning to Gaza, where they would be subject to the whims of Hamas.

The writers pointed out that the proponents of the Oslo Accords in the 1990s argued that a PA democracy, no matter how weak, would enable former PA chairman Yasser Arafat to vanquish Hamas and bring about peace. "In other words, a peace process that undermined Palestinian democracy created a 'peace partner' [Fatah] so hated by its own people that the Israeli Army must now protect them," Sharansky and Eid wrote.

"Where is the money that was supposedly spent on reforming the judicial system? Where is the international outrage as Palestinian leaders drag their own society further into the abyss?" they asked.

PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has stated that a crackdown on Hamas in Judea and Samaria is necessary to prevent an overthrow similar to last year's military coup in Gaza. Hamas has accused Fatah and Israel of collaborating to work against it.

The United States has spent tens of millions of dollars to build a training camp in Jericho and teach military skills to Fatah militia forces. Its initial training was a dismal failure as the well-armed Hamas militia pulverized Fatah in the militia war leading up to the Hamas takeover in Gaza.

The U.S. has continued to pump money and advisors into training Fatah, which has deployed hundreds of armed policemen in Jenin and Shechem. Israel has complained that they do very little to fight terrorism and that the IDF still has to conduct most of the counterterrorist operations in the areas.

Fatah has reacted by trying to remove all elements of public opposition to its authority, violently breaking up demonstrations, beating photojournalists and shutting down opposition media.

The Canadian National Post concluded, "The appalling fact, only fitfully reported in North America, is that the two major Palestinian factions are committed to an often murderous conflict.... This week, the third anniversary of Israel's wildly optimistic and ill-advised withdrawal from [Gaza], the situation is much as Steven Erlanger described in the New York Times at the second anniversary last summer: "Rather than a model for a future Palestinian state, Gaza looks like Somalia: broken and ravenous."

Contact Sergio at nutella59@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, August 13, 2008.

As the Russian bear plunges its claws into the heart of its much smaller neighbor Georgia, few outside the region seem to appreciate the danger posed by Moscow's latest aggression. While many might have difficulty finding Georgia on the map, that in no way detracts from the significance of the situation. Israel and the West would be making a grave error if they merely shrug and issue a few perfunctory press releases in response to this perilous development.

How this crisis plays out will have a direct impact on the ability of Israel and the US to confront an even greater menace that lies just around the corner — Iran and its stubborn drive to build nuclear weapons.

Here's why: Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is testing the West's mettle. He senses weakness, and is using the conflict with Georgia, a close ally of Washington, to see to what extent the US and Europe will stand up for their friends and their own interests.

In recent years, Russia has become increasingly assertive on the international stage, frequently seeking to undermine Western policy. From North Korea's nuclear program to Kosovo's drive for independence from Serbia, Moscow has taken stances directly opposed to those of the US.

But the invasion of Georgia constitutes a serious escalation, as Russia is no longer confining its mischief to the realm of diplomacy.

THE SMALL Caucasus nation has been an outspoken friend of Washington, steadfastly supporting the war on terror and maintaining a sizable troop presence in Iraq. Just four months ago, at a summit in Bucharest, NATO agreed to invite Georgia to join the alliance. By raping Georgia in public, Putin is thumbing his nose at the entire Western alliance.

So far, the success of his little experiment has been clear. Putin pounces on his neighbor with abandon, violating Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity and indiscriminately bombing innocent civilians with little more than ineffectual expressions of outrage from Paris, London and Washington.

Ostensibly, the Kremlin claims it is merely acting to protect the large Russian population that lives in the breakaway Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But it is easy to see through the smoke screen of Russian propaganda. For one thing, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili agreed over the weekend to a cease-fire and began withdrawing his country's troops from South Ossetia.

That didn't stop Putin from pressing forward with disproportionate attacks, as Russia sent armored columns deeper into Georgian territory.

Moreover, it is hard to take Russia's claims seriously, if only because of their transparent hypocrisy. When the province of Chechnya sought to break away from Russia, Moscow refused to countenance the idea and instead bombed the region into submission. But when South Ossetia and Abkhazia seek to secede from Georgia, Russia chooses to defend their right to do so, despite the glaring contradiction in Moscow's stance.

Russia is motivated by one principle alone: the pursuit of its own interests — even if that means storming an internationally recognized border and threatening to bring down the democratically elected government in Tbilisi.

This can not be allowed to stand. Russia's move into Georgia will have ramifications far beyond the Caucasus. It will send a shiver down the spines of decision-makers in countries such as Poland, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, all of whom might now think twice before deepening their romances with the West.

And if allowed to go unanswered, the attack on Georgia will strengthen Russia's resolve to further undercut key Western interests.

THAT IS where Iran comes into play. The ayatollahs are glued to their television screens, waiting to see how the West responds. After all, in recent years Moscow has stood by Iran's side in the face of mounting Western pressure. Russia has been supplying Iran with materials for its nuclear program. And the Kremlin is planning to ship advanced anti-aircraft systems to the Iranians that are aimed at making it harder for Israel or the US to take out their nuclear installations.

While Moscow has thus far voted in favor of three UN Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on Teheran, it has only done so after it succeeded in watering them down and delaying their implementation.

But a newly emboldened Russia will prove to be even more troublesome when it comes time to confront Iran and stop its drive toward nuclear weapons.

If Putin sees that the West is a paper tiger and allows Georgia to be trampled, then he likely will not hesitate to block additional Western efforts to strip Iran of its nuclear ambitions. An atomic Iran, Putin realizes, would further expose the powerlessness of the West, as well as heighten its sense of vulnerability. Consequently, he may be tempted to defy the West yet again, on an issue even closer to its heart, in an effort to push the envelope.

The ayatollahs know this all too well, and will be encouraged to continue their mad drive for atomic power, confident in the knowledge that they have little to fear.

It is therefore essential that strong and immediate measures be taken to punish Russia for its Georgian adventure and strip it of any illusions it may have about a lack of Western resolve. These might include moving quickly to bring Georgia formally into NATO, suspending Russia's membership in the "Group of 8" leading industrialized nations and freezing talks recently launched with the European Union on a new EU-Russia agreement.

Whatever course is decided upon, Moscow must be made to pay a heavy economic, political and diplomatic price for its actions, lest it persist in causing still greater harm.

As the crow flies, the road from Tbilisi to Teheran is more than 1,100 kilometers long. But if the West now fails to act, it may soon find that the distance between the two is far less than it imagined.

Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Contact him at msfreund@netvision.net.il This article appeared today in today's Jerusalem Post
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid= 1218446184666&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

To Go To Top

Posted by JO Halevi, August 13, 2008.

This was written by Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent and appeared today in Haaretz

A stunning reminder to Israel why it is so important to continue developing and maintaining the Israeli arms industry....!!!! Even though Israel is in great danger, Bush refuses to sell the arms that Israel needs in case they are attacked or threatened by Iran. Bush, you blooming idiot, I'm glad you are through after January of 2009. Unfortunately, you could do lot of damage to this country and Israel till then.


The American administration has rejected an Israeli request for military equipment and support that would improve Israel's ability to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted (and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran.

They therefore warned Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran.

As compensation for the requests it rejected, Washington offered to improve Israel's defenses against surface-to-surface missiles.

Israel responded by saying it reserves the right to take whatever action it deems necessary if diplomatic efforts to halt Iran's nuclearization fail.

Senior Israeli officials had originally hoped that U.S. President George Bush would order an American strike on Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office, as America's military is far better equipped to conduct such a strike successfully than is Israel's.

Jerusalem also fears that an Israeli strike, even if it succeeded well enough to delay Iran's nuclear development for a few years, would give Iran international legitimacy for its program, which it currently lacks.

Israel, in contrast, would be portrayed as an aggressor, and would be forced to contend alone with Iran's retaliation, which would probably include thousands of missile strikes by Iranian allies Hezbollah, Hamas and perhaps even Syria.

Recently, however, Israel has concluded that Bush is unlikely to attack, and will focus instead on ratcheting up diplomatic pressure on Tehran. It prefers to wait until this process has been exhausted, though without conceding the military option. Israel's assumption is that Iran will continue to use delaying tactics, and may even agree to briefly suspend its uranium enrichment program in an effort to see out the rest of Bush's term in peace.

The American-Israeli dispute over a military strike against Iran erupted during Bush's visit to Jerusalem in May. At the time, Bush held a private meeting on the Iranian threat with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and the Israelis presented their request for certain specific items of military equipment, along with diplomatic and security backing.

Following Bush's return to Washington, the administration studied Israel's request, and this led it to suspect that Israel was planning to attack Iran within the next few months. The Americans therefore decided to send a strong message warning it not to do so.

U.S. National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen both visited here in June and, according to the Washington Post, told senior Israeli defense officials that Iran is still far from obtaining nuclear weapons, and that an attack on Iran would undermine American interests. Therefore, they said, the U.S. would not allow Israeli planes to overfly Iraq en route to Iran.

The Americans sent a similar message to Iraq, which had objected vociferously to the idea of its air space being used for an Israeli attack on Iran.

These private messages were accompanied by a series of leaks from the Pentagon that Israel interpreted as attempts to thwart any possibility of an attack on Iran.

For instance, the Americans revealed details of a major Israel Air Force exercise in the Mediterranean; they also said they doubted Israel had adequate intelligence about Iran's nuclear facilities. In addition, Mullen spoke out publicly against an attack on Iran.

Two weeks ago, Barak visited Washington for talks with his American counterpart, Robert Gates, and Vice President Richard Cheney. Both conversations focused on Iran, but the two Americans presented conflicting views: Gates vehemently opposes an attack on Iran, while Cheney is the administration's leading hawk.

Barak presented Israel's assessments of the Iranian situation and warned that Iran was liable to advance its nuclear program under cover of the endless deliberations about sanctions — which have thus far produced little in the way of action. He also acknowledged that effective sanctions would require cooperation from Russia, China and India, all of which currently oppose sanctions with real teeth.

Russia, however, is considered key to efforts to isolate Iran, and Israeli officials have therefore urged their American counterparts in recent months to tone down Washington's other disputes with Moscow to focus all its efforts on obtaining Russia's backing against Iran.

For instance, they suggested that Washington offer to drop its plan to station a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic — a proposal Russia views as a threat, though Washington insists the system is aimed solely at Iran — in exchange for Russia agreeing to stiffer sanctions against Iran. However, the administration rejected this idea.

In an attempt to compensate Israel for having rejected all its proposals, Washington then offered to bolster Israel's defenses against ballistic missiles.

For instance, Gates proposed stationing an advanced radar system in Israel and linking Israel directly into America's early warning satellite network; he also offered increased American funding for the development of two Israeli missile defense systems — the Arrow-3, an upgrade of Israel's existing Arrow system for intercepting ballistic missiles, and Iron Dome, a system designed to intercept short-range rockets.

In addition, Washington agreed to sell Israel nine Super Hercules long-range transport aircraft for $2 billion. However, it would not agree to supply Israel with any offensive systems.

Now, Israel is awaiting the outcome of the latest talks between the West and Iran, as well as a formal announcement of the opening of an American interests section in Tehran. Israel views the latter as sure proof that Washington is not planning a military strike.

Contact JO HaLevi at AmericanZionists@yahoogroups.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, August 13, 2008.

This was written by Stan Goodenough and it appeared August 5, 2008 in the Jerusalem Watchman


Immoral then; it is indefensibly immoral now...

Kasejovice, Czech Republic — The border with Germany is 45 km west — and the Sudetenland just a few minutes' drive — from my father-in-law's small holding where my family and I are savoring the summer.

Forests cover this corner of the Czech Republic. In the tiny villages that dot the dales and straddle the hills, the snail's pace of life appears untouched by 21st Century modernity.

Bohemia is so undisturbed that it is difficult to envisage a more peaceful place. How much harder to imagine that 70 years ago next month, this tranquil territory was hand-fed to Hitler — an appeasement sacrifice that only served to whet his desire for more.

The shocking history is well-known: How the fearful Great Powers threw their trusting friends to the wolves rather than face down the belligerent who was out to devour them all.

In an attempt to placate the strident demands of the Sudeten Germans — who were being goaded by Hitler into seeking secession to Germany — Czech President Edvard Beneš had offered them a literal blank check: an empty sheet of paper on which they could list their demands, all of which he promised to grant if they would just end their provocations.

But the page came back empty. Peace was not in Hitler's mind.

Meeting him in Munich on September 29, 1938 — while barring governmental representatives from Prague — the leaders of England and France took it upon themselves to "give" Germany the Sudetenland — the high ground encircling Czechoslovakia on which stood the virtually impenetrable fortifications essential to the security of that country.

More than "just territory," what the Munich Dictate (or Agreement) gave to the Nazis — as British diplomat Harold Nicolson observed at the time — was "the whole key to Europe."

Winston Churchill was vehemently opposed to Hitler's possessing "the mountain defense line which marks the ancient boundaries of Bohemia and was specially preserved to the Czechoslovak state as a safeguard of its national existence."

On hearing of the fait accompli Churchill wept, then furiously denounced Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's actions as "sordid, subhuman and suicidal." It was, he thundered, "the grossest act of bullying treachery" that amounted to not only the sacrifice of England's honor but the resulting "sacrifice of lives — our people's lives."

Forty-eight hours after hosting Chamberlain, the Nazi leader ordered his forces into the abandoned land. Czechoslovakia lay ripe for the picking and, within months, the fuehrer would swallow it whole.

Instead of securing "peace for our time" (Chamberlain's ostentatious assertion upon returning from Munich), the sacrifice of the Sudetenland toppled the world into war. With Prague in his pocket, Hitler threatened, then invaded, Poland.

Adding shame to shame, Chamberlain fished around desperately for an excuse, any excuse, not to come to Poland's aid as a British-French-Polish treaty committed him to.

While he dilly-dallied, two million German troops smashed into the country, the Luftwaffe poured its bombs onto Warsaw, and panzers sliced up the Polish countryside. Tens of thousands were slaughtered in the blitzkrieg.

Trying to express his devastation and embarrassment to Polish Ambassador Edward Raczynski, a helpless Churchill (he was not yet prime minister) falteringly hoped "that Britain will keep...will keep its..."

Voice breaking, he began to cry. Britannia would no longer rule the waves.

Apologists for Chamberlain have argued that his persistent attempts to buy off Hitler should be commended and not condemned. The British people were still reeling from the terrible wounds inflicted by the First World War, they say. He was doing everything he could to keep from fighting a second.

But Churchill knew it was wrong to make Czechoslovakia pay for England's peace.

Pressuring another people to surrender their land to a mutual enemy in the hope it would bring peace was indefensibly immoral then. It is indefensibly immoral now...

In October 2001, addressing the American-led international effort to appease the Arab world by pushing Israel into giving away its historic lands, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon made an emotional appeal:

"I turn to the western democracies, first and foremost the leader of the free world, the United States. Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when the enlightened democracies of Europe decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for the sake of a temporary, convenient solution. Don't try to appease the Arabs at our expense. We will not accept this. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia."

His entreaty fell on outraged ears. The United States had long pursued a policy that sought to secure a quiet and stable oil-supplying Middle East at Israel's expense. It was not about to change course. Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, and its threat to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, have only added impetus to America's appeasement approach.

Today, in the waning days of the presidency that began the year Sharon lodged his appeal, President George W. Bush seems desperate to secure some form of initial agreement — a modern-day de facto Dictate — that will see Israel cede its biblical heartland for the creation of a Palestinian state so that the US can breathe easy for awhile.

As the Sudetenland did for Czechoslovakia, these threatened Jewish lands comprise the mountain defense line which marks the ancient eastern half of the Land of Israel and which is essential as a safeguard of its national existence.

And as Chamberlain hoped to placate the Nazis with Czech land, so Bush seeks to appease the Arabs with Jews'. (It is the Jews' land — by divine right, by historic right, and according to international law.)

There can be no acceptance of this policy; no understanding or excusing of it.

Let me say it again. Aloud:


How often it has been said that "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

The Bible puts it this way: That which has been is what will be, that which has been done is what will be done. And there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which it may be said, 'See, this is new?' It has already been in ancient times before us. (Ecclesiastes 1: 9,10)

History has damned what Chamberlain did, and history will damn what Bush is trying to do.

As the drums of war roll on in the Middle East, and the West strives to placate Islam, will all the warnings to Washington remain unheard?

Just as the surrender of the Sudetenland spelled the takeover of the rest of Czechoslovakia, and the fall of Europe, so would the surrender of Samaria and Judea precipitate the takeover of the rest of Israel, and threaten America's fall.

Hitler was clear about his intentions even before he took control of Germany.

Wrote Tory Junior Minister Kitty Atholl in 1935 after reading Mein Kampf:

"Never can a modern statesman have made so startlingly clear to his reader his ambitions..."

England's statesmen chose to ignore him. Years after Foreign Minister Anthony Eden had opposed forcefully quelling Hitler's first acts of aggression, he confessed his mistake: "I should have been...stiffer to Hitler," he said. Military intervention at that stage "would have been the right thing to do, and many millions of lives would have been saved."

In both their words and deeds, Israel's enemies — the PLO, Hamas, Iran — have been clear about their ambitions for Israel.

But America and Europe have not been "stiffer" to them, opting instead for the easier way and employing "bullying treachery" against Israel.

How many millions of lives will be lost because of their "sordid, subhuman and suicidal" approach?

Churchill's tears were for the loss of England's honor. They could do nothing to save those who would be swept away. The perhaps soon-to-be-shed tears of some ashamed and remorseful American leader will save no-one either.

No matter how hard he cries.

Editor's note: Readers' comments to the original article:

Bob .UK
August 6, 2008 | 6:30 pm

Anyone with an interest in Churchills faithfullness, and his calling to see the re-establishment of theland of Israel, needs to get a copy of Martin Gilbert's book, Churchill and the Jews, A Lifelong Friendship.

In an era of anti-semitism, Churchill was a stalwart defender of Jews, guided by a strong sense of conscience. That same conscience manifested above in Stan's reference to Churchill's tears.

Churchill fought almost singlehandedly to make sure that Britain honoured the Balfour declaration and the Mandate obligations against a hostile national and international establishment. Thank God for men like Churchill. He knew all his life that he was destined to high office, but he consistently served that which was right by his conscience, even when in low office, long before he ended up leading the nation and free world against Hitler. He declared repeatedly when his life was in danger, that he couldn't die because he had, "a job to do and it wasn't finished!"

We look at the bible and think that those days are gone, however I believe that this man was a judge in the very sense of the book of Judges. He served Israel and Britain, but at the end he was scorned and dumped.

Where are the men of conscience these days? They are all bowing down before yet another Baal, the altar of Political Correctness. It is impossible to hear the whisper of God in your conscience when the scream of P.C. is so loud.

Betrayal of the right choice of action, starts with betrayal of God in a man's heart.

We need to cry out to God that we have men of calibre in places of significance once again!


August 6, 2008 | 4:08 pm

One of the greatest crimes was also condoned by Churchill — a dishonouring of a solemn pledge before the world — and a fatal attack upon helpless Jews during their most critical phase of existence:


The corruption of the Balfour Mandate forever removed the prefix of 'Great' from Briton. And all for 30 barrels of oil. Today, Briton needs a super-computer and history book: she still calls another one again as a 2-state.

A Mandate is not negotiable or discretional — nor did the Arabs need a new gold course on soccer-sized Israel. I certainly don't wish Briton what she dished out.

Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Doron, August 13, 2008.

Dear Friends,

The attached piece deals with US foreign policy.

It is impossible, of course, to do justice to such a subject or explore it and all its ramifications in a short, 900 words essay. But we do our best, and we might return to the subject for further exploration.

Meanwhile, your comments, also criticism, will be most appreciated.



It is easy — as Ted Galen Carpenter illustrates in Smart Power: Toward a Prudent Foreign Policy for America — to criticize US foreign policy. It is indeed a mess of incoherent and ill defined goals, expressing the confused thinking of the State Department bureaucracy and its associated foreign policy establishment.

Carpenter's criticism is part of a growing debate in the US among several schools advocating different approaches to foreign policy. As Carpenter, who is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, rightly claims, present policies lead the US to try to "dictate outcomes everywhere and on every issue," a mission impossible even for a great power. US foreign policy gets enmeshed in relatively marginal conflicts as in Serbia or Somalia. It focuses far too many energies and resources on a putative Middle East peace process — on what strategically is really a neighborhood brawl — while neglecting crucial challenges, such as the uncertain future of the Saudi regime and its vast oil resources, or the devastating impact a nuclear Iran will have on the availability and the price of oil, namely on Europe's and America's economic and political future.

Carpenter's solution, however, is not the reordering of priorities to better focus on such prime strategic threats, but the application of a simpleminded libertarian, isolationist foreign policy. He recommends that the US withdraw from crucial areas of conflict and cut its strength rather than use it more effectively. Dangerously, he ignores or belittles serious threats to America and to the world like the spread of a triumphalist Islamic fundamentalism, especially by Iran, and the effective use it makes of oil and terrorism as strategic weapons against the West. Carpenter also overlooks the challenge posed by Russian and Chinese collusion with US enemies, notably Iran, and other such major threats.

'TERRORISM IS a tactic," Carpenter avers, "not an identifiable adversarial threat." Considering the adroit strategic use Iran — a definitely "identifiable adversarial threat" — makes of its terrorist proxies, instigating threats and attacks that have jacked up the price of oil and helped it reap huge profits that it uses for nuclear armament and ever more dangerous terrorism, Carpenter's semantic evasions seem ludicrous.

He is apparently so blinded by his ideological blinkers that he even tries to make light of the consequences of the use by terrorists of a dirty bomb. Since al-Qaida "has no realistic hope of obtaining thousands of nukes..." he argues, "the scope of destruction [of one such dirty bomb], while terrible, would still not begin to rival the horrors of last century's bloodletting..." This pathetic bid to minimize the danger of terrorist dirty bomb attacks on US cities by creating a one to 10 scale of horrors and claiming that since such an attack could not match the horrors of World War II it should not be taken seriously is typical of his attempt to shoehorn reality into his shallow analyses and then draw from them "alternative" foreign policy directives. Carpenter repeatedly draws questionable policy conclusions from analogies between vastly different events, occurring in entirely different circumstances.

ALTHOUGH THIS book is published by the economically oriented Cato Institute, it does not even consider the huge economic consequences that Iranian control of oil flow and price (which a nuclear Iran could impose) will generate. Nor does it consider the devastating economic consequences — beside the tremendous loss of life — a mega terrorist attack on US cities might cause. Carpenter may be correct that terrorists might not be able to get "hundreds" of dirty bombs. But might they not be able to acquire four or five, or succeed in spreading a smallpox epidemic or in setting off toxic gases?

Would Carpenter still insist then that radical Islamic terrorism is "minor league"? Would he still claim that if not for neoconservative "panic mongers" (the real enemies of peace in his book because they, and their support for Israel, are responsible for "provoking" Islamic rage), Islamic Jihad would be no more than a "nuisance," similar to the anarchists of yore? Would he still argue that while the Islamic threat may be "a little more potent" than that, it is nevertheless a "manageable" one? Manageable? With possibly hundreds of thousands of casualties and immense destruction?

Generally, Carpenter indulges in ad hominem attacks on his adversaries. Instead of facing neoconservative arguments, he tries to discredit them by calling them "shrill," "hysterical," "inflated," etc., not exactly a technique conducive to serious discussion.

Carpenter's shallowness becomes even more evident when his principle foreign policy prescription is examined: "Encourage multiple centers of power," he admonishes, which ostensibly will provide the world with "security buffers" and protect it.

Carpenter does not spell out who will do the "encouraging" and "protecting," nor how. Should it be US diplomacy or the UN, institutions which have demonstrated their efficacy in stopping the slaughter in Darfur or in imposing sanctions on Saddam Hussein or on the Iranians?

Carpenter writes that "ideally" such centers should be "stable and democratic." This rules out China, Russia and Saudi Arabia. It leaves one "pole" besides US — Europe.

But as the prolonged agony around the formation and role of NATO and the growing power of Islam within Europe indicate, Europe can hardly be counted upon to defend itself, let alone provide an effective "security zone." Moreover, in the past, "mulitpolarity," Carpenter's panacea, resulted not in "balance" or security and peace but in two bloody world wars and perpetual strife between multipolar entities.

Smart power? One wonders.

Daniel Doron is director of The Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress. Contact him at dorondum@netvision.net.il This article appeared Aug. 13, 2008 The Jerusalem Post

To Go To Top

Posted by Steve, August 13, 2008.

These are incredible times. We have to ask what our role should be. What will we tell our grandchildren we did when there was a turning point in Jewish destiny, an opportunity to make a difference?

START NOW — Send this to 18 other people you know and ask them to send it to eighteen others, Jew and non-Jew — it doesn't really matter.


Apparently, Benjamin Netanyahu gave an interview and was asked about Israel's occupation of Arab lands — his response was "It's our land."

It's important information to know since we don't get fair and accurate reporting from the media and facts tend to get lost in the jumble of daily events.

Here are overlooked facts in the current Middle East situation. These were compiled by a Christian university professor.

  1. Nationhood and Jerusalem. Israel became a nation in 1312 B. C. E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam.

  2. Arab refugees in Israel began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.

  3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 B. C. E., the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

  4. The only Arab dominion since the conquest in 635 C. E. lasted no more than 22 years.

  5. For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.

  6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Tanach, the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran.

  7. King David founded the city of Jerusalem. Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.

  8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.

  9. Arab and Jewish Refugees: In 1948 the Arab refugees were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders promising to purge the land of Jews. Sixty-eight percent left without ever seeing an Israeli soldier.

  10. The Jewish refugees were forced to flee from Arab lands due to Arab brutality, persecution and pogroms.

  11. The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands is estimated to be the same.

  12. Arab refugees were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own peoples' lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey.

  13. The Arab — Israeli Conflict: The Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.

  14. The P. L. O.'s Charter still calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank land, autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, and has supplied them.

  15. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.

  16. The U. N. Record on Israel and the Arabs: of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel.

  17. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.

  18. The U. N was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians.

  19. The U. N. was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.

  20. The U. N. was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.

Contact Steve at crestln@erols.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, August 13, 2008.


Hamas militiamen raided and damaged the P.A. news agency in Gaza and barred three P.A. newspapers (IMRA, 7/28).

Hamas is fastening its version of totalitarian dictatorship upon Gaza. It would take a major Israeli invasion to root out Hamas, now.


Smarting over Israeli raids in Nablus that highlight P.A. failure to crack down on terrorism, the P.A. arrested dozens of what it calls Hamas activists (IMRA, 7/28).

Are they terrorists? Will they be jailed for years? This would be the P.A.'s first significant step against terrorism. Arafat once was credited for some arrests, but he was seeking favorable headlines. He soon let them out, and Hamas rebuilt. Arabs say this instance is tit-for-tat with Hamas over its arresting Fatah men.


Hundreds of thousands of Israeli Jews are subject to the whim of an IDF commander whether they may travel into or within Judea-Samaria. Peace Now finds that this ban inconveniences them, too. The IDF long has restricted people by calling certain areas "closed military areas."

Some Jewish hikers from outside the area were barred from returning to Judea-Samaria and had to post bond, although there was no official complaint against them, no investigation, and no trial.

Bedouin claimed that some Jewish youths punctured their tires. They said that those hikers were in the area at the time, but did not identify them as having committed the vandalism. The police did not get witnesses nor check for alleged damage. Police didn't have a line-up or use photographs to get any of the hikers identified as having committed the alleged damage. The youth were being punished without evidence. Police asked the judge to punish those youths, to deter others (IMRA, 7/28). That's no reason. Sloppy police work or frame-up?


A French Court dismissed a libel suit against an investigator who called the al-Dura case, alleging IDF murder of an Arab boy, a fraud. This raises questions about Human Rights Watch and Amnesty Intl., which accepted Arab accusations against the IDF without investigating (IMRA, 7/28). Israeli officials and independents had found strong evidence of fraud and had complained that the organizations failed to check sources.

Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.


Some British officials have asserted that Muslim college students are like other students. The Center for Social Cohesion decided to find out by polling.

It found that a third of the Muslim students justify killing people in behalf of their religion, compared with only 2% of non-Muslims. The percentage among members of Muslim student associations is 40%. Britain's future?

40% of the Muslims approve of making their religious code the law of Britain.

70% of those polled said they respect Jews (Arutz-7, 7/28).

Answer? Oust those who'd wreck Western civilization, not let them immigrate.


"Senior officials in Jerusalem confirmed Monday that Syria has carried out a number of measures in recent weeks that reflect that it is taking talks with Israel seriously. The sources refused to say whether they were referring to such measures as lowering the alert levels of the Syrian army or stemming the flow of arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon through its territory, but they did say that the effects of the measures were 'tangible.'"

Dr. Aaron Lerner: "So after quadrupling the rockets deployed in Lebanon the Syrians may have taken a summer break on the level of the flow of weapons and have lowered the alert levels of forces near the Golan. Hardly permanent moves. In the same recent period we had border incidents involving Syrians..."

"...the whole story reflects the stunning absence of any Israeli initiative. Why didn't Israel set some benchmarks such as Syria seizing and destroying weapons on the way to Lebanon instead of the amorphous "stopping" the flow = reducing the observed "flow" (what is not observed may be a different story...)" (IMRA, 7/29.)

"Taking talks seriously" does not mean that Syria wants peace. Syria may be satisfied with giving such an impression or with a treaty that will cede it territory, facilitating invasion of Israel. Israeli officials peer anxiously at temporary, ambiguous, or deceptive enemy action, and see relief from the heat in the slightest breeze. It becomes self-deception. Israel has been fooled before. The shame is that its officials become co-conspirators in deceit. They set no standards for acceptable Arab performance, as in Oslo and the Road Map.


She claims to have the qualifications to be Prime Minister, having made difficult decisions under pressure (IMRA, 7/29).

She decided to enter a war with Hizbullah unprepared and without much strategy, and then to make a ceasefire that left Hizbullah extant and depended on the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL, both proven unreliable, to keep Hizbullah from re-arming and re-fortifying Lebanon. Now Hizbullah has four times as many missiles as before the war. It has re-fortified southern Lebanon. It has gained the dominant position in Lebanon. The Arabs consider the war a victory.

Now only did she make the wrong decisions. She still thinks they were the right decisions, despite their having put Israel into a strategic bind. She shouldn't have a job that requires decision-making. Perhaps she should work in the Foreign Ministry's mail room, where Olmert should be sweeping the floor.


Israel is developing a laser system for knocking out incoming, short-range missiles. Its prototype already has detonated explosives placed on the other side of the Gaza security fence. Israeli troops do not have to cross the fence and come under fire, to detonate them (IMRA, 7/29).

Russia is setting up a factory in Jordan, to which it will transfer the technology, to build armor-piercing grenade launchers. The same Russian company provided the weapons with which Hizbullah took a toll of Israeli tanks (IMRA, 7/29).

One of Israel's main military advantages is its superior tank. Is it becoming obsolete? Will countries have a more difficult time fighting terrorists provisioned by Russia? Israel missed opportunities to annihilate Hizbullah, Hamas, and Fatah when it was easy. If someone tells you that Israel knows what it is doing, remind them that Israel brought Fatah into the Territories in the first place.


Thanks to the Western boycott of Iran, Dubai has set itself up as a middleman, buying for Iran what the West supposedly bans. Dubai, and the many Iranians who come there for this purpose, make a couple of billion dollars doing so. You've heard the expression, eliminate the middleman. Here is a case of establishing middlemen. When governments plan statutes or administration action, they should anticipate the effect and the reaction, and adjust or stop.


Hizbullah demanded hundreds of prisoners in exchange for one Israeli. [srael does not know whether he is alive]. Several dozen demanded were master-minds. Israel rejected them. Now PM Olmert says he is would release some not on that list but who are more dangerous than ones usually released.

As he puts it, he is "ready" to "relax" the release criteria. He solemnly warns Hizbullah that if he thus compromises, he expects Hizbullah to compromise. He stated that the relaxation would not set precedent for future trades (IMRA, 7/29).

Having set a precedent for trading without knowing whether its men are alive, and accepted trades for corpses, Olmert now is setting a precedent for releasing more dangerous terrorists. Of course it's a precedent. Every time Israel claims it is not setting a precedent, it becomes a precedent. Thus, PM Begin said his ceding the entire Sinai to Egypt was not a precedent for other areas. However, Syrian and Palestinian Arabs now argue that having done it for Egypt, Israel must do it for them. Everyone says that once Israel makes a negotiating offer, it becomes the start for resumption of negotiations, in other words, precedent.

How nice to "relax! "Cave-in" would be more descriptive. Each such exchange greatly reinforces terrorist forces. After each exchange or gift called a "goodwill gesture" or necessary to strengthen Abbas, the Muslim Arabs resume reviling the Jews and the US continues advising new Israeli concessions to strengthen Abbas. Abbas actually is growing weaker. Why bolster him — he wants to flood Israel with hostile Arabs who'd take over and slaughter the Jews?


The New Israel Fund finances an Israeli organization called Gisha, that calls Israel an apartheid state that violates international law. Gisha has circulated a petition to the Defense Dept. urging elimination of any standards for barring Arabs from Israeli universities. The Defense Department wants to bar known terrorists and to bar other Palestinian Arabs from science courses, such as nuclear engineering, for obvious reasons.

Israel's Council of University Presidents endorsed the petition! A professor who agrees noted that Jews had been the victims of quotas, and should not impose them on Arabs. He didn't let on that Israel has quotas favoring Arabs (Prof. Steven Plaut, 7/29).

Past quotas against Jews were unjustified. Considering how much terrorism there has been on campus, and that terrorists are at war with Israel, the Defense Dept. bans are justified. The colleges are suicidal.

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

Posted by Daisy Stern, August 13, 2008.

The poster can be found at


180 Israelis were murdered since 2000 by terrorists who were released from Israeli jails! Will we ever learn the lessons? Will we let this massacre repeat itself?!

Also see the video by Almagar, the Terror Victims Organization :

Terror Organizations have long ago understood that they cannot win a country with military force, but they can win its citizens' set of mind and its mental strength, causing them to give up their principles and positions. The terror organizations have understood that one of Israel's central pillars is its citizens' mutual concern for each other. Our society cannot accept a lonely citizen's distress under the enemy's captivity, and it will do what it can to release him. Knowing this, terror organizations initiated many kidnappings, in order to break Israel's fighting spirit and force the government to fulfill their dangerous demands.

During its first ten years the country's leaders understood that in order to stop the waves of kidnappings, we must hold a firm position toward terrorists, using our military forces to rescue our kidnapped citizens. This position decreased the amount of kidnappings since the terrorists understood that they cannot profit from them.

This statement of Israel against the terrorists was shattered in the "Jibril Agreement" in 1985, when three Israeli soldiers were captured by Ahmed Jibril's organization in Lebanon. In exchange to them Israel released 1,150 terrorist, among them serial killers. These terrorists have formed the hardcore of the first intifada, a massive wave of terror attacks which started in year 1987. Since then, Israel has agreed time and time again to release terrorist in various irrational agreements, and terror organizations have since then dedicated their efforts for the kidnappings of soldiers and citizens. The results of these agreements are well known — the big majority of released terrorists continued their executions of terror actions, and Israel has been under a daily threat of terror attacks, by explosions, shootings, guns, stabbing, and these days by missiles. Since the first intifada, hundreds of people were killed and thousands were injured.

We, terror victims' families, decided to struggle stubbornly against the release of our relative's murderers, in order to prevent the suffering other citizens will experience if another massacre will appear on our streets.
  Please help us pay for distributing this poster

Tel: 02-5388999    fax: 02-5372616    E-Mail: victims1@gmail.com< /i>

BANK ACCOUNT IN ISRAEL: Branch: Pagi Shlomzion. Branch no. 182    Acc name: 692336
Acc#: "Almagor" — Terror Victims Ass.    Swift code no. FIRBILITXXX
There is no need for an ABA# or other identification.
Our US$ correspondents include the major New York banks
including: Citibank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Bankers.

Terror Victims Association,
219 Beach 140th st.
Belle Harbor, NY 11694

Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, August 12, 2008.

Michael Radu is Senior Fellow and Co — Chair, Center on Terrorism and Counterterrorism, at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia. This article appeared yesterday in Front Page Magazine
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID= 39A9CA87-450A-4A5F-93E9-6099A822EC48


While it is still not clear whether it was Georgia that escalated the conflict first, or Russia through its local puppets and mercenaries who provoked Tbilisi, the basic fact remains that the fighting is taking place exclusively within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia.

Despite the Western media's persistent description of the Russian military in South Ossetia as "peacekeepers," they are and have always been nothing but an occupation and invading force.

In fact, Russia has used the same method for years elsewhere.

In Transnistria, a secessionist area of Moldova, Russian "peacekeepers" have kept the local gang of unreconstructed Stalinist smugglers since the early 1990s, and in Abkhazia, another breakaway Georgian territory, it is the same "peacekeepers" and mercenaries who have ethnically cleansed the Georgian majority and de facto annexed the area.

The pattern has been the same in Abkhazia and South Ossetia — Russia has unilaterally granted citizenship to the secessionists and then, when Georgia has tried to recover its territorial integrity, claimed that it has the right, and duty, to defend its "citizens" — a claim repeated on August 8th by President Dmitry Medvedev, and reminiscent of the old Soviet "struggle for peace" in places like Afghanistan.

What is Russia's interest in controlling these regions?

The economic value of these small areas is close to zero — they are too poor to survive without Moscow's subsidies and, more to the point, without all being criminal black holes — Mafia ruled havens for smuggling and trafficking of arms and drugs to the mutual benefit of the local thugs and their Russian military overseers.

Transnistria specializes in the traffic of weapons, South Ossetia on drugs, cigarettes and weapons;

Abkhazia alone has anything resembling a local economy, mostly based on Russian tourism.

Ultimately, with Moscow paying the salaries, pensions and various subsidies to the local puppet "governments" in Tiraspol, Sukhumi and Tskhinvali (the capitals of Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia respectively) they are an economic drain — but a valuable political and strategic tool.

Domestically, the war in Georgia serves multiple purposes to the Putin-Medvedev regime.

It gives satisfaction, and something to do, to a newly vocal military, throws an ideological bone to the ultra-nationalists in the Duma (who have already voted to recognize the "independence" of Abkhazia and South Ossetia), and divert the attention of restive Muslim, and increasingly Islamist minorities in Northern Caucasus.

The fact that Russia's North Ossetia, the only mostly Christian and loyal to Moscow region in that area has a direct ethnic stake in the developments to its south, may also explain, in part, the decision to invade South Ossetia.

On a wider scale, through its control of Transnistria (and oil supplies), Moscow has transformed Moldova into an obedient annex; its activities in Georgia has not only mutilated that country's territory, but ensured that NATO membership, desired by most Georgians, will not become a reality.

Indeed, the Europeans, especially Germany, are naturally reluctant to admit a new member involved in a long term conflict with Russia.

That means that Georgia will remain vulnerable to Russian threats for the foreseeable future — and that its fate would be anxiously watched, and remembered by Ukraine, another former Soviet colony seeking strategic independence from a resurgent Russian imperialism.

It should be remembered also that a cowed Georgia will also mean the strengthening of Moscow's control over the energy supplies of Europe.

The only major pipelines for Caspian Sea oil and gas not controlled by Russia, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and Baku — Shupsha, will come under the indirect control of Putin & Co.

Not surprisingly, the West's response to the developments in Georgia has been unimpressive.

Washington and various European capitals have expressed alarm and demanded a cease fire, as well as the withdrawal of Russian troops from that country — something they have demanded for years, without noticeable results.

The United Nations, as usual and as could be expected, has taken notice and the Secretary General made the usual demands for a peaceful resolution, etc. — while everybody remains fully aware that the Security Council, the only body with any influence on the matter, will go nowhere, given the Russian veto.

What the world should keep in mind is that the present conflict is not over the 3,900 square kilometers of mostly barren South Ossetian mountains but over the fate of Georgia as an independent state and, even more importantly, over the West's ability, or willingness, to take a stand against the blatant revival of historic Russian imperialism.

If Georgia loses the current fight, and part of its territory, both of which are likely, in the longer term the main loser will be the United States and its credibili