HOME Featured Stories December 2010 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

NOTE: Links to Videos are at the bottom of this page.

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, December 31, 2010.


I've been writing this blog for three years and nothing gives me greater pleasure than reader feedback and receiving a hot photo tip. My cell phone rang on Oct. 12 with an ecstatic caller on the line: "Yehoshua, you have to come out here today. I've never seen a day like this before." With nothing on my calendar that afternoon, I seized the opportunity and made the 20-minute drive to P'nei Kedem in eastern Gush Etzion.

This beautiful area is on the edge of the Judean Mountains as they descend to the Dead Sea and merge with the Judean Desert. It's also right along the rain line, the zone where desert meets more temperate, wetter climate. The landscape is virtually barren of vegetation but rich in color and form variation. Unfortunately, security — often a constraint to would-be, free-roaming photographers — is a bit dicey in this region. I was stopped and interrogated by both an army patrol and local Bedouin, who must have thought me some kind of spy with my fancy cameras and tripod.

This week's photo features a view due east across the Judean Desert. The mountains at the very top of the frame are in Jordan and a small section of the Dead Sea, normally shrouded in thick haze, is visible just below them. The empty landscape left me few options for composing with a strong foreground element, so I chose this dark section of hill to give the image depth and to convey a sense of the multicolored landscape. I carefully cropped this part of the composition to form a triangle whose lower left point emerges directly from the bottom left corner of the photo, maximizing visual impact. Thank you, Tamar!

TECHNICAL DATA: Nikon D-300, 70-200mm zoom at 160mm, f11 at 1/640 sec., ISO 200.

Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website:
http://www.goldenlightimages.com. Reproductions of his work as cards, calenders and posters may be purchased at

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 31, 2010.

Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard could not have revealed the identities of American spies for Russia, because he did not have the necessary clearance to see such documents, American intelligence expert John Loftus revealed over the weekend in an interview with Ma'ariv.

Glitch 1. Jews backed off. Glitch 2. It wasn't Pollard. It was Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen. I So of course, Pollard served a couple of years and was released? No. He's still in jail.

This article was written by Sarah Liebowitz-Daar, It is the review of the Maariv interview with John Loftus. It appeared in Maariv Weekend Magazine. and has been archived by Independent Media Review Analysis (IMRA: http://www.imra.org.il/). It was distributed by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, November 28, 2010.



John Loftus a former US Justice Department attorney and intelligence expert is convinced that Jonathan Pollard is rotting in prison, not because of anything he did. He states that spies Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen are the ones who gave the soviets the lists of American agents in the USSR which led to their executions. Institutional intransigence caused the prosecution to continue to insist that information that Pollard provided to Israel came into the hands of Shabtai Kalmanovitch (a Soviet spy operating out of Israel) and from Kalmanovitch to the KGB. Pollard gave secret documents to Israel, Loftus says, but the punishment he received is totally disproportionate to the offense he committed.

Loftus says that Pollard did not even have the requisite clearances to have committed the crimes that he was accused of, yet the Americans will not admit it, nor take steps to correct this massive injustice. In his feature interview, Loftus takes Israel to task, saying that with all that is now known about the injustice done to Jonathan Pollard, Israel should have made a clear demand for his release, but never did.

The following essay by Loftus previously printed in an American magazine clearly outlines the stunning points that Loftus made in his interview with Maariv.

The Truth about Jonathan Pollard

When American intelligence broke the Soviet wartime code, we learned that the Soviets had infiltrated the American government. The American intelligence community's penchant for secrecy and its refusal to admit that it had been infiltrated was so great that it failed to disclose this to President Harry S. Truman. This is how Daniel Patrick Moynihan described it:

"The Soviets knew we knew they knew we knew. The only one who didn't know was the President of the United States. Our politics was injured for 30 years by this." — Quoted in the New York Times, March 30, 2002

There is a good reason why neither Congress nor the American Jewish leadership supports the release of Jonathan Pollard from prison: They all were told a lie — a humongous Washington whopper of a lie. The lie was first whispered in the "bubble," the secret intelligence briefing room on Capitol Hill, but it quickly spread.

Just before Pollard's sentencing, Senator Chic Hecht of Nevada, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, telephoned the leaders of every major Jewish organization to warn them not to support Pollard in any way. Pollard had done something so horrible that it could never be made public. Several senior intelligence sources confirmed the message: No matter how harsh the sentence, Jewish leaders had to keep their mouths shut; don't make a martyr out of Jonathan Pollard.

Washington insiders thought they knew the big, dark secret. David Luchins, an aide to Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, announced to reporters that he had seen "secret documents confirming that Pollard's spying had resulted in the loss of lives of U.S. intelligence agents." Luchins later recanted his statement, but not until the damage had already been done.

Pollard had supposedly given Israel a list of every American spy inside the Soviet Union. On several occasions Soviet agents in New York had posed as Israelis. The CIA reasoned that that was also true in Israel: The Mossad had been infiltrated by one or more Soviet spies. In the trade this is called a "false flag" operation: Your enemy poses as your ally and steals your secrets. In this case, the CIA reasoned in attempting to explain its horrendous losses, Pollard had passed the information to Israel he had stolen, which in turn fell victim to the "false flag" operation. Soviet agents in Israel, posing as Israeli intelligence agents, passed the information to Moscow, which then wiped out American human assets in the Soviet Union.

Pollard hadn't meant for this to happen, but the result of the "false flag" mistake was mass murder. In a matter of months, every spy we had in Russia — more than 40 agents — had been captured or killed. At least that was the accusation, but the basis for it had been kept secret from Pollard and his defense counsel.

The public could not be told the horrifying truth: American intelligence had gone blind behind the Iron Curtain — we had lost all our networks, as the intelligence community publicly admitted more than a decade later. The Soviets could have attacked the United States without warning. Everyone who knew at the time (including me) blamed Pollard.

On March 5, 1987, at 2:22 p.m., the sentencing hearing in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., began in Criminal Case No. 86-207, United States of America v. Jonathan Jay Pollard. The prosecutors produced a secret letter and memo from Secretary of Defense Caspar "Cap" Weinberger referring to the "enormous" harm that Pollard had done to our national security. In his memo, Weinberger directly accused Pollard of betraying America's "sources and methods," which is to say, he had betrayed our spies in foreign countries.

Weinberger publicly stated that Pollard was the worst spy in American history: "It is difficult for me, even in the so-called year of the spy, to conceive of a greater harm to national security than that caused by the defendant." Despite his plea agreement to the contrary with the government, Pollard was given the maximum sentence, life in prison. Weinberger later said that he wished Pollard had been shot.

A week after the sentencing, the Washington Times reported that the United States had identified Shabtai Kalmanovich as the Soviet spy in Israel who supposedly worked for the Mossad but was actually working for the KGB; he had betrayed American secrets to Moscow. Kalmanovich had been flying under a false flag. Washington insiders winked knowingly at one another: Pollard's contact in Israel had been caught.

Just to make sure that Pollard was blamed, U.S. intelligence sources, several months later, leaked word to the press of the Kalmanovich connection. "A Russian mole has infiltrated the Mossad and is transmitting highly sensitive American intelligence information to the Russians," was the report flashed around the world by United Press International on Dec. 14, 1987. Citing "American intelligence sources," the UPI announced that the "sensitive intelligence material relayed to Israel by Jonathan Pollard had reached the KGB."

But it was all untrue. Every bit of it. Pollard wasn't the serial killer. The Jew didn't do it. It was one of their own WASPs — Aldrich Ames, a drunken senior CIA official who sold the names of America's agents to the Russians for cash. Pollard was framed for Ames's crime, while Ames kept on drinking and spying for the Soviets for several more years. In fact, Israeli intelligence later suspected that Ames played a direct role in framing Pollard. But no one in America then knew the truth.

Ames was arrested in February 1994, and confessed to selling out American agents in the Soviet Union, but not all of them. It was only logical to assume that Pollard had betrayed the rest of them, as one former CIA official admitted shortly after Ames's arrest. Even one life lost was too many. So Pollard continued to rot in jail. No one dreamed that yet another high-level Washington insider had sold us out to Soviet intelligence. Years passed, and eventually a Russian defector told the truth. A senior FBI official — Special Agent Robert Hanssen — had betrayed the rest of our agents. Hanssen was arrested in February 2001, and soon confessed in order to avoid the death penalty. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Would the Americans now admit that they had been conned into blaming Pollard? Beltway bureaucrats do not readily admit to mistakes of this magnitude. Instead, they convinced themselves that Pollard might still be at least partly to blame for the worst debacle in U.S. intelligence history. One desperate analyst from the National Security Council, looking for something to pin on Pollard, had his own theory. Maybe the Russians didn't initially believe that their own spies (Ames and Hanssen) had procured all the names of U.S. agents in the Soviet Union. Maybe Pollard's list tipped the scales.

Such things had happened before. Once again, Washington insiders circled their alphabet agencies to fire back at the critics who dared to suggest that Pollard might have been innocent of the major charge against him.

Meanwhile, deep inside the Navy's intelligence service, a low-level decision was made to re-examine the Pollard case in view of the convictions of Ames and Hanssen. With sickening chagrin, the Navy discovered that the evidence needed to clear Pollard had been under its nose all along.

As my source in Naval intelligence explained, the list of our secret agents inside Russia had been kept in a special safe in a special room with a special "blue stripe" clearance needed for access. When I was a lawyer in the Justice Department and would be sent over to the CIA to do research, I was permitted to use only a blue-striped, CIA-issue legal pad for note-taking. Nothing with a blue stripe could leave the building without being scrutinized by CIA security.

But Jonathan Pollard didn't have "blue stripe" clearance, according to intelligence sources I spoke with. That was the bombshell that would clear him of any possible connection to the deaths of our Russian agents.

Just to make sure, I checked it out, even visiting Pollard in prison to confirm it. Sure enough, there is no way on earth Jonathan Pollard could have entered the file room, let alone the safe where the list was kept.

But the intelligence community's failure to catch this and thereby discredit a critical piece of prosecutorial evidence was, to put it mildly, a bit of an oversight. Some would say it was an obscene blunder. I regard it as an understandable mistake that was overlooked in the avalanche of phony evidence the KGB was planting that pointed to Pollard and away from Ames and Hanssen, whom the Soviets wanted to protect. Both of them had "blue stripe" clearance, as was well documented in several books that have been written on each man and his exploits.

The lack of "blue stripe" clearance was the final proof that Pollard could not possibly have betrayed our Russian agents. It should certainly have gotten him a new hearing. As a former federal prosecutor, I can state that it would be hard to rebut this kind of evidence.

The Justice Department, in one of its briefs, had specifically mentioned the "false flag" theory as grounds to support Pollard's heavy sentence, arguing in part, that spying even for friendly countries can be damaging if information ultimately falls into the wrong hands. In this, the Justice Department had unwittingly misled the judge. Weinberger also raised the "false flag" issue in his top-secret memorandum to the judge.

The only possible way to uphold the sentence might be the "harmless error" doctrine. The government could admit that Pollard had never stolen the Russian agent list, but so what? Maybe he had passed other information that was equally damaging, so he would still deserve to remain in prison for the rest of his life.

The problem with the "harmless error" strategy is that the rest of the material that Pollard gave the Israelis was itself pretty harmless.

In fact, the original damage assessment from the intelligence community confirmed that the impact on our national security — of the release of information other than the agent names — was not serious. This assessment came after Pollard's initial grand jury appearance, but before the Soviets began to frame Pollard with the phony Kalmanovich connection. No less a figure than Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Leeper had characterized damage caused by the release of the information that Pollard actually gave Israel as "minimal."

The reason America suffered so little harm is simple: Pollard was stealing Soviet secrets for Israel, not American secrets for the Soviets. Before the fall of communism, the Soviets were shipping guns to nearly every terrorist group in the Middle East. Pollard knew that U.S. intelligence had been ordered to share this information with Israel — under an executive order signed by President Reagan — but had not done so.

In fact, as Pollard himself admitted in one of my three prison interviews, many, if not most, of the documents he handed over were cover sheets showing the titles of files that the U.S. was supposed to share with Israel, but were holding back. (The U.S government, according to Israeli intelligence sources, mistakenly counted the cover sheets as if they were full files and came up with the mythical "room full of stolen documents," instead of the small boxfulls or so that Pollard actually passed.) In the long run, though, the issue is not how many boxes Pollard passed, but whether anything he gave Israel did harm to America.

After the government's "false flag" theory was blown up by the "blue stripe" discovery, the anti-Pollard members of the intelligence community had to come up with a new PR campaign for damage control. In order to justify Pollard's life sentence, they had to show that he did do some potentially catastrophic damage to America. What they came up with was a bit of a stretch. Pollard had given Israel a set of radio frequency guidebooks, a worldwide listing of short-wave radio bands. It takes a lot of time and money to compile one of these guides, but essentially they are just publicly available information, openly deduced by listening to who is talking to whom on which radio bands.

Seymour Hersh is a famous reporter and long-time friend. (I was his secret source in his 1983 book The Price of Power — Kissinger in Nixon's White House (Summit Books). But Sy had his leg pulled on Pollard by his CIA sources, as a result of which Sy published a story in the New Yorker in January 1999 claiming that these radio guides were just about the crown jewels of U.S. intelligence. The truth is that certain portions of the guide had already been sold to the Soviets by the Walker spy ring, according to courtroom testimony, which also revealed that the Soviets thought so little of the guides' value that they did not even bother to ask their top spies, Ames and Hanssen, to steal the remainder of the set. Moreover, as previously noted, the government's own damage assessment report originally concluded that the loss of the guides was a minor matter.

So much for the crown jewels. If that is the best spin the intelligence community can come up with, Pollard is probably entitled to immediate release for time served. The truth is that without the "false flag" theory, and the accompanying "worst spy in history" hysteria, Pollard would probably have been served no more than five years in prison. He has already served 18 years.

After 9/11, though, I began to realize that Pollard's tale was only the beginning of a much bigger story about a major America intelligence scandal, which is the subject of a book I am now working on. Although Jonathan Pollard did not realize it, he had stumbled across the darkest secret in the Reagan administration's closet. It is one of the reasons that I am serving as the intelligence advisor on a trillion-dollar federal lawsuit filed in August 2002 against the Saudis on behalf of the victims of 9/11.

Pollard in fact did steal something that the U.S. government never wishes to talk about. Several friends inside military intelligence have told me that Pollard gave the Israelis a roster that listed the identities of all the Saudi and other Arab intelligence agents we knew about as of 1984. (This has been corroborated by Israeli sources, as well.) At that time, this list, known in intelligence circles as the "blue book," would have been relatively unimportant to the United States — but not to Israel.

Since 9/11, however, Pollard's "blue book" is of profound interest to everyone, including the U.S. These particular agents are now a major embarrassment to the Saudis and to the handful of American spy chiefs who had employed these Saudi intelligence agents on the sly. Some of the names on this list — such as Osama Bin Laden — turned out to be leaders of terrorist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood and what we now call Al Qaeda.

In hindsight, we now know that Pollard stole the one book — that, incidentally, was alluded to in Weinberger's secret memorandum — that unquestionably proves that the Americans knew as early as 1984 about the connection between the Saudis and terrorist groups.

How does this all fit together? During the Reagan-Bush administrations, the National Security Council wanted to throw the Soviets out of Afghanistan using Arab soldiers instead of American. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but no one thought about the long-term consequences. In imitation of the Soviet strategy of hiring terrorists, we asked the Saudis to recruit a proxy army of Islamic terrorists whom we would supply with guns and pay indirectly, according to intelligence sources. By having the Saudis hire the "freedom fighters," we could avoid embarrassing questions in Congress about giving the taxpayers money to known Arab terrorists.

In 1982, I went on "60 Minutes" to expose Nazi war criminals I had been assigned to prosecute who were then working for the CIA. It was one of those Cold War blunders. The CIA didn't have a clue it was dealing with Nazi war criminals. It thought they were "freedom fighters." In 1985, I ended up testifying before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee about Nazis on the intelligence payroll.

Sadly, the only lesson the intelligence bosses learned was to put the bad guys on someone else's payroll (the Saudis for one), and then reimburse them under the table. Because of my whistle-blowing during the early 1980s, the CIA was still pretty sensitive about hiring Nazi "freedom fighters" without background checks, so they were mostly kept out of the loop about the Arab terrorists hired clandestinely by the Saudis to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989. The naive Americans walked away from the Frankenstein monster they had created, but the cynical Saudis kept the terrorists on the payroll. From the Saudi perspective, it was safer to keep paying the terrorists groups to attack Israel, Bosnia or Chechnya rather than letting them all back into Saudi Arabia. As one U.S. intelligence bureaucrat cynically confided to me, "Sure we knew that the Saudis were giving money to terrorist groups, but they were only killing Jews, they weren't killing Americans."

In this "Keystone Cops" affair, one wing of U.S. intelligence was hunting terrorists while another winked at the Saudis' recruitment of them. I have spoken to numerous FBI and CIA counter-terrorist agents, all of whom tell a similar story. Whenever the FBI or CIA came close to uncovering the Saudi terrorist connection, their investigations were mysteriously terminated. In hindsight, I can only conclude that some of our own Washington bureaucrats have been protecting the Al Qaeda leadership and their oil-rich Saudi backers from investigation for more than a decade.

I am not the only one to reach this conclusion. In his autobiography, Oliver North confirmed that every time he wanted to do something about terrorism, Weinberger stopped him because it might upset the Saudis and jeopardize the flow of oil to the U.S. John O'Neill, a former FBI agent and our nation's top Al Qaeda expert, stated in a 2001 book written by Jean Charles Brisard, a noted French intelligence analyst, that everything we wanted to know about terrorism could be found in Saudi Arabia.

O'Neill warned the Beltway bosses repeatedly that if the Saudis were to continue funding Al Qaeda, it would end up costing American lives, according to several intelligence sources. As long as the oil kept flowing, they just shrugged. Outraged by the Saudi cover-up, O'Neill quit the FBI and became the new chief of security at the World Trade Center. In a bitter irony, the man who could have exposed his bosses' continuous cover-up of the Saudi-Al Qaeda link was himself killed by Al Qaeda on 9/11.

Congress has been told repeatedly that American intelligence never knew the identities of the Arabs who threw the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Inadvertently, Pollard stole the ultimate smoking gun that shows exactly what the leaders of our intelligence community knew and when they knew it. The "blue book" Pollard stole flatly establishes that all the dots were connected many years before 9/11, and the only thing the intelligence chiefs did competently was cover up the fact that we had long known about the Saudi-terrorist link.

In the ultimate irony, Pollard may have to be let out of prison to testify before Congress about the negligence of his own superiors. Like O'Neill, Pollard had tried to warn his superiors that a wave of terrorism was coming out of the Middle East, but no one would listen. Pollard himself told me this. Pollard has admitted — to me and in writing to President Clinton — that he was wrong and stupid in passing the information to Israel on his own, but in the long run he may have committed the most unpardonable sin of all: he was right and the bureaucrats were wrong.

Pollard never thought he was betraying his country. And he never did, although he clearly violated its laws. He just wanted to help protect Israelis and Americans from terrorists. Now in prison for nearly two decades, Pollard, who is in his late 40s, grows more ill year by year. If, as seems likely, American bureaucrats choose to fight a prolonged delaying action over a new hearing, Pollard will probably die in prison. There are people in power inside the Beltway who have been playing for time. Time for them ran out on 9/11. Sooner or later, they are going to be held accountable. I hope that Pollard lives to see it.

John Loftus of St. Petersburg, is a former Justice Department Attorney and co-author with Mark Aarons of "The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People - 1920-1992" published by St. Martin's Press 1992.

THE TRUTH ABOUT JONATHAN POLLARD by John Loftus was originally published in Moment Magazine, June 2003. See Also: US Intelligence Expert: Pollard Wrongly Blamed - Gill Hoffman - Jerusalem Post http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=196999 The True Motives Behind the Sentencing of Jonathan Pollard: An Interview with Prof. Angelo Codevilla - The Washington Weekly http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2000/071700a.htm

To Go To Top

Posted by William Narvey, December 31, 2010.

That Israel is a democracy is what Israel and Jews harp on constantly. Little attention is paid to touting the Jewish character of Israel, save for speaking of it in the context of demographics such that Israel must maintain a large majority of Jewish Israelis in order to survive as a Jewish state. Jewish character I would think should be a lot more than just a head count of Israelis who call themselves Jews.

There's also the demographics. All EU nations are coming to realize what their greed for oil, multiculturalism and anti-Israel bias, whether heartfelt or used to get into the good graces of the Arabs and Muslim world, has brought them. Only a few nations like France and the Swiss have actually dealt head on with any aspect of the issues and those that have, are not anywhere close to fighting all out against their being Islamically transformed. They are too frightened, bewildered, overwhelmed or all the foregoing, to do much about the problem.

I expect when the EU's heels are right at the brink of the Islamic abyss and they know they either push back and live or step back and fall, there is a chance the EU will fight back for real. When that day comes, if the EU chooses to fight, it will be with desperation and anger, knowing that the moment they put off for so long had finally come and it as do or die time. The EU might however have by then lost its will to live and will just fall back into the abyss without as much as a whimper.


The issue of what weight Israel and Jews respectively attach to Israel's democratic and distinct Jewish characters, erupted with a bang a few weeks ago when 3 dozen Israeli Rabbis, called on Israelis not to sell or lease property to non-Jews.

That call sparked loud, angry and almost universal condemnation from PM Netanyahu, a great many Rabbis and Jewish organizations, inside and out of Israel.

These denunciations included any one or more statements that such views have no place in Israel's democratic multicultural equal rights nation, that they are counter to the values and teachings of Judaism and are racist, risking inciting more Jew hatred and violence against Israel.

A recent Washington Post article summarizes the controversy, Rabbi showdown: Nearly 1,000 condemn ruling about leasing land to non-Jews.
http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2010/12/rabbi_showdown_nearly_ 1000_condemn_ruling_about_leasing_land_to_non-jews.html

Four links in the article, all worth reading, include 1000 mostly U.S. Rabbis' Petition, claiming the Halachic justification these 36 Rabbis offer, is wrong.

Also linked is Rabbi Aviner's justification for his fellow 36 Rabbis' position that goes beyond their initial brief explanation. Agree with him or not, Rabbi Aviner makes a reasoned case.

If the 36 Rabbis were wrong on Halachic justification, then their position becomes a mere minority opinion. In a democracy however, what's so terrible with that?

Stephen Plaut raises that very question, Israeli Left Versus Rabbinic Freedom Of Speech.

Vic Rosenthal of FreznoZionism.org relying in part on an article by Daniel Gordis No more racist than you or me. has also written a piece, the nub of which is in Rosenthal's concluding words, "this is not a question of civil rights for Palestinian Arabs. It's a question of survival for Israeli Jews."

Surely, defending and strengthening Israel's Jewish character is of utmost importance to both Israel and all Jews.

Or is it?

The reason for the angry backlash against these 36 Rabbis, lies in the fact that a major plank of Israel's and diaspora Jewry's pro-Israel advocacy has always been that Israel is not just the region's only democratic state, but one that prides itself on its multicultural, tolerant democratic character where religious freedom is respected and all its citizens, Jew and non-Jew, have equal rights.

The position of these 36 Rabbis certainly did, for obvious reasons, not only run afoul of that major pro-Israel advocacy plank, but it also ran afoul of politically correct sensitivities.

PM Netanyahu however, has also made it a non-negotiable plank in peace discussions with the Palestinians that they must recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

If PM Netanyahu is serious about the importance of Israel's Jewish character, Israelis and Jews must put meat on that bone.

With that in mind, it is fair to ask, just what is Israel doing to ensure that Israel's Jewish character is being asserted, strengthened and defended and do those efforts play 2nd fiddle, as they sometimes appear to do, to Israel's very prominent efforts to ensure she appears even more democratic multicultural and tolerant than all other democratic nations?

It is in the context of these questions relating to Israel's Jewish character bound up in Netanyahu's demand that Palestinians recognize the Jewish state of Israel, that the 36 Rabbis expressed their views. It is however, only in the context of Israel's democratic multicultural character, that these Israelis, Rabbis and Jewish organizations have ganged up on the 36 Rabbis.

That is as unfair as it is foolishly self defeating.

Israel is a democracy like no other democratic nation and not just because it is the only Jewish democratic state.

Tiny Israel is situate in a virtual continental expanse of the great Muslim/Arab crescent from the West coast of Africa to Pakistan. Rampant Jew/Israel hatred marks that crescent, much of the rest of the Muslim world and a great many non-Muslim nations that speak out against Israel, as is most evident at the U.N.

Many Western powers, notwithstanding voicing support for Israel, pursue their own self interests in the region which brings them together with the Israel-hating nations to pressure Israel in a number of ways, including to make concessions to Palestinians that not only have the effect of weakening Israel, but also impacting against Israel's Jewish character.

Israel and her Jewish character are also existentially threatened like no other democratic nation, from forces within her borders.

Some forces Israel has already succumbed to and tolerates without imposing consequences include, the Muslim Waqf Trust's illegal excavations beneath the Temple Mount that destroys archaeological evidence of the historical Jewish presence, Arab/Muslim sensibilities that keep Jews from praying on the Temple Mount, Israeli Arabs' illegal building to expand exclusive Arab community enclaves, some or many Israeli-Arab citizens and their MK's putting their allegiance first to the Muslim ummah, Palestinians and Arab nations and the agenda of some Christians in Israel to missionize and proselytize Israeli Jews for conversion to Christianity, to just cite several examples.

Intimidated by the pressures of world opinion, moved by her own desire to appear more democratic, multicultural and tolerant than her fellow democracies or both, we have seen Israel fail to assert and defend her Jewish character against a number of manifest challenges as well as she should, if at all.

Has the world really been impressed with Israel's great efforts to be the ideal of what a democratic multicultural and tolerant society should be?

Not so much it appears, so why does Israel still try to be the best of the best multicultural tolerant democracies?

Mark Steyn in his book, America Alone argued that Western nations with Muslim populations far less than Israel's 20% plus, because of their political correctness, multicultural tolerance, appeasement and accommodation of Muslim demands and the disproportionately increasing Muslim population demographic, are already transforming culturally and politically into Muslim states, just as Bat Ye'or warned in her book, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.

Steyn's and Bat Ye'or's dire warnings have, especially since 9/11, been increasingly emerging into the political and social realities of Western democracies.

In a recent stunning admission, Germany's Angela Merkel stated that multiculturalism has utterly failed, that immigrants especially from Turkey and Arab countries are reluctant to integrate and that there is a rising anti-immigration sentiment in Germany. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451

Other EU nations have voiced the same concerns. Many have begun to resist Muslim demands for special accommodations such as Sharia being respected and incorporated into their laws. Some have taken legal measures, such as France's banning the burka, Switzerland's banning mosque minarets and some are tightening up immigration policies to lessen Muslim immigration.

We are witnessing Western democratic nations finally beginning to be pro-active to protect and preserve their cultural heritage, character and identity, that until now they did little more than claim they cherished.

These nations are unapologetic in doing so, even when their policy and legislative actions are infringing on Muslim citizens' rights, contrary to one of the hallmarks of their democracies, that all citizens have equal rights.

This then begs the question, why is Israel not following the lead of other multicultural democracies to assert, reinforce and defend her own Jewish character under attack by the several challenges aforementioned and those concerns raised by the 36 Rabbis?

The call by the 36 Rabbis to not sell or rent property to non-Jews, likely was not the best way for Israel to assert and defend her Jewish character.

Still, if Israel and Jews however, are serious about Israel's Jewish character, then the 36 Rabbis, instead of spurring Israelis and Jews to damn them, should have spurred Israel and Jews to become seriously engaged to find better ways to assure Israel's Jewish character remains distinct and strong.

The issue of asserting, strengthening and defending Israel's Jewish character has even broader implications for all Jews.

Jews certainly do talk a lot about wanting to survive and thrive as a Jewish people and about the need to ensure that happens.

If we truly mean what we say, Israel and Jews must find the courage to do whatever it takes to make that happen, even knowing that we may face daunting criticism from some or even many who will be offended by our so doing.

If Israel and Jews therefore do not go all out to assert, strengthen and protect Israel's Jewish character, her Jewish character seriously risks becoming the sacrificial victim of Israel's pride in trying to be the exemplar multicultural democracy.

Such risk materializing would render Israel a Jewish state in name only. Such a fate would not auger well for Israel's or Jews' long term survival.

Contact William Narvey at wpnarvey@shaw.ca

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 31, 2010.

This was written by Joseph Puder, a freelance journalist and the founder and executive director of the Interfaith Taskforce for America and Israel (ITAI). This article appeared October 21, 2010 in Front Page Magazine


A number of years ago, I encountered the Israeli author and Peace Now activist Amos Oz at a New Jersey forum. Following his lecture, I asked him — in his native tongue — to explain how he could possibly demand that peace be delivered "now," as if it would simply come by commanding it. He chuckled for a moment and replied, "The name might have been adopted a little hastily but peace is within our [Israel's] reach." Amos Oz was one of the original signatories of a letter sent to Prime Minister Menachem Begin in 1978, which marked the creation of Israel's left-wing Peace Now movement. In the letter to Prime Minister Begin,[1] the founders of Peace Now wrote:

[A] government that prefers the existence of the State of Israel within the borders of "Greater Israel" to its existence in peace with good neighborliness, will be difficult for us to accept. A government that prefers the existence of settlements beyond the Green Line to the elimination of this historic conflict through the...normalization of relationships in our region will evoke questions regarding the path we are taking. A government policy that will cause a continuation of control over millions of Arabs will hurt the Jewish-democratic character of the state, and will make it difficult for us to identify with it.

It is critical to note the naiveté of the left-wing Israelis that established Peace Now — especially in light of Khartoum's "Triple No" decision (no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel) delivered at the September 1967 Arab Summit. This move unequivocally demonstrated that the Arabs and the Arab-Palestinians were not at all interested in "peace" or in "good neighborliness." The Coastal Road Massacre[2] perpetrated by the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) on March 11, 1978, in which 38 Israeli civilians (including 13 children) were murdered, and 71 others were wounded, proved it as well.

Ironically, the left-wing Israelis who formed Peace Now did so against the center-right Likud government of Prime Minister Begin, despite the fact that it was the Likud government that had orchestrated and signed a peace treaty with the largest Arab state: Egypt. Moreover, PM Begin stated that he was willing to trade all of the Sinai, including its oil wells, and the settlement of Yamit (where the PM owned a home) for peace.

While this 31 year-old peace is cold and tenuous, it still holds. The Oslo Accords, signed by the Rabin-Peres-Beilin center-left Labor government and enthusiastically supported by Peace Now, were an unmitigated disaster and cost Israel over a 1,000 innocent lives. The murderers were Arafat's Palestinian terrorists — the same individuals with whom Peace Now advocated "making" peace.

Peace Now claims on its website that in 1988, upon the PLO's acceptance of UNSC Resolution 242 and the principle of the two-state solution, the group "led a massive demonstration of 100,000 persons calling on the [Israeli] government to negotiate with the PLO." A mere six months after the declaration, the PLO approved a terrorist raid on the Israeli coastal village of Palmachim with the intention of killing as many Israeli-Jews as possible.

In 1993, Peace Now (in its own words) "fully supported the break-through represented by the Oslo Accords," during which Israel and the PLO negotiated directly for the first time. As a result, Israel withdrew its military from areas of the West Bank and Gaza, and the PLO renounced violence and publicly accepted Israel's "right to exist." Again, only six months after Peace Now "celebrated" the Oslo achievement, suicide bombers began blowing themselves up in Israeli cities. Peace Now has also actively opposed Jewish settlements:

We (Peace Now) believe that the presence and expansion of settlements in the Occupied Territories and in East Jerusalem have the potential to corrupt the process of political negotiation about these disputed areas. These activities must not be allowed to derail the negotiated solution favored by the majority of Israeli and Palestinian citizens. The Settlement Watch Project was founded to monitor and report on these activities to the world, conduct aerial and ground surveys that monitor and expose settlement expansion in the occupied territories, create media reports, maps in English and Hebrew, and materials for briefings and press conferences based on information collected from our settlement monitoring activities.

Contrary to Peace Now's perception, the vast majority of Israelis support the settlements, as revealed by the election of a pro-settlement government in 2009. And, whereas Israelis favor a negotiated solution, they reject the kind of unilateral withdrawals that Peace Now supported in Lebanon (2000) and Gaza (2005). These withdrawals resulted in strategic land takeovers by Hezbollah and Hamas, which now jeopardize the lives of countless Israeli citizens. There are no prospects for peace with these radical Islamist groups, which are growing in power and have the support of the majority Shiite-Muslims in Lebanon, and the Sunni-Muslims in Gaza.

Former Palestinian Authority Chairman Arafat and now, his successor, Mahmoud Abbas have clearly demonstrated to the world their reluctance to make peace with Israel — even in the face of unilateral Israeli concessions. The left-of-center governments of Ehud Barak in 2000, and Ehud Olmert in 2008, agreed to part with 95%+ of the West Bank and Gaza (in addition to territory swaps for the remaining 5%), and to allow for a Palestine capital in East Jerusalem in exchange for the Palestinians agreeing to sign on to an "end of conflict" declaration. Moreover, Olmert secretly promised Abbas the "right of return" for thousands of Palestinians. Arafat walked out of these talks and launched the Intifada, and Abbas walked out and increased incitement against Israel.

The arrogance of Peace Now is in its assumption that it takes only one side to make peace. They willfully ignore the reality of every opinion poll that reveals the Palestinians support terrorism and want to displace the Jewish State with an Islamic-Arab state. Palestinians consider Israel a cancer in the Arab body, and a foreign object in the domain of Islam.

Peace Now has also actively opposed Jewish settlements:

We (Peace Now) believe that the presence and expansion of settlements in the Occupied Territories and in East Jerusalem have the potential to corrupt the process of political negotiation about these disputed areas. These activities must not be allowed to derail the negotiated solution favored by the majority of Israeli and Palestinian citizens. The Settlement Watch Project was founded to monitor and report on these activities to the world, conduct aerial and ground surveys that monitor and expose settlement expansion in the occupied territories, create media reports, maps in English and Hebrew, and materials for briefings and press conferences based on information collected from our settlement monitoring activities.

Contrary to Peace Now's perception, the vast majority of Israelis support the settlements, as revealed by the election of a pro-settlement government in 2009. And, whereas Israelis favor a negotiated solution, they reject the kind of unilateral withdrawals that Peace Now supported in Lebanon (2000) and Gaza (2005). These withdrawals resulted in strategic land takeovers by Hezbollah and Hamas, which now jeopardize the lives of countless Israeli citizens. There are no prospects for peace with these radical Islamist groups, which are growing in power and have the support of the majority Shiite-Muslims in Lebanon, and the Sunni-Muslims in Gaza.

Former Palestinian Authority Chairman Arafat and now, his successor, Mahmoud Abbas have clearly demonstrated to the world their reluctance to make peace with Israel — even in the face of unilateral Israeli concessions. The left-of-center governments of Ehud Barak in 2000, and Ehud Olmert in 2008, agreed to part with 95%+ of the West Bank and Gaza (in addition to territory swaps for the remaining 5%), and to allow for a Palestine capital in East Jerusalem in exchange for the Palestinians agreeing to sign on to an "end of conflict" declaration. Moreover, Olmert secretly promised Abbas the "right of return" for thousands of Palestinians. Arafat walked out of these talks and launched the Intifada, and Abbas walked out and increased incitement against Israel.

The arrogance of Peace Now is in its assumption that it takes only one side to make peace. They willfully ignore the reality of every opinion poll that reveals the Palestinians support terrorism and want to displace the Jewish State with an Islamic-Arab state. Palestinians consider Israel a cancer in the Arab body, and a foreign object in the domain of Islam.

Israelis on the political-right, as much as on the left, want peace. They too do not want their sons, brothers, and husbands, wives, sisters and daughters, to become victims of violence. They too yearn for a lasting peace. However, they reject the suicidal actions of the left, which would have Israel give up vital strategic territory, including the Judean and Samaritan ridges where a majority of Jewish settlements are.

Hebrew University Professor Yisrael Aumann, a game theory scholar and Nobel laureate, summed it all up in an interview with Israel National News: "The calls for peace which we have been hearing (mainly from our side) for the past 90 years, do not bring us closer to peace but actually take us further from it," said Aumann. "Peace is like honor. If you chase it, it runs away. This is not just game theory; it has been proven in history." One wonders what Amos Oz has to say about that?


[1] http://www.peacenow.org.il/site/en/peace.asp? pi=43&docid=62

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/coastal_road_massacre

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by David Horowitz, December 31, 2010.

This was written by Matt Gurney and published December 9, 2010 on Front Page Magazine
(http://frontpagemag.com/2010/12/09/britains-sad-decline/?utm_source= FrontPage+Magazine&utm_campaign=7316ad5974 RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email)

Matt Gurney is an editor at the National Post, a Canadian national newspaper, and writes and speaks on military and geopolitical issues. He can be reached at matt@mattgurney.ca. Follow him on Twitter: @mattgurney.


For centuries, Britain has been one of the world's pre-eminent military powers. A tiny island nation rode the riches of her merchants and the power of her Navy to the very top of global power and stayed there for 200 years. She fended off attempted invasions from much larger continental powers, founded new nations across the globe and had leading roles in both world wars and the Cold War.

Her leadership role in the Second World War is the stuff of legends, and rightly so: In most of the English-speaking world, the war meant sacrificing consumer goods and, for some, the lives of loved ones. For the British, it meant enduring Hitler's onslaught and remaining unbowed and unbroken even as London and other historic cities were laid waste. To the modern mind, it seems almost unbelievable that they could have believed in their cause so much that they'd absorb that kind of damage without seeking peace. Even 70 years later, the words of Winston Churchill, calling upon his people to fight and stay true to the struggle, are perhaps the greatest ever spoken in our language. Tiny Britain stood proudly alongside mighty America and the massive Soviet Union, and paid the price in blood and treasure.

Tragically, today, the United Kingdom's days as a global military power, and international leader, seem to be numbered. Crippled by the enormous deficits necessary to prop up its welfare state and a sluggish economy hobbled by the global financial crisis, Britain is embarking on a series of deep spending cuts in a determined effort to save the economy and financial credibility of their nation. The cuts are sweeping and widespread, and the British military has not been spared its turn at the chopping block.

The cuts are deep and will be spread across all the armed services. The Army is losing a sixth of its striking power, 40% of its tanks, a third of its artillery and 7,000 men. The Navy and Air Force will both lose 5,000 personnel. The Navy will immediately decommission one aircraft carrier and while it will still complete both of the new carriers it had begun to build, one will be immediately put in reserve. The Air Force will see some of its refueling and reconnaissance capability trimmed. The future participation of the RAF in the F-35 fighter program is in doubt; the Harrier jump-jets have already been yanked from service. The country's nuclear stockpile will be slashed by 25%, to 120 deployed warheads. Further, a series of military bases face closure, and over 20,000 civilian bureaucrats employed by the military will be let go. Even military pensions are being eyed for potential savings.

The cuts are arguably necessary, and as said above, they are targeting the whole of the British state. Over $130-billion U.S. dollars (Roughly €81-billion) will be cut from the federal budget by 2015, and a whopping 500,000 civil service positions will be cut. There are no sacred cows in the eyes of Britain's budget hawks, everything must be cut back if the state is to save itself from financial ruin.

Even so, it truly is a remarkable paring back of British military power. When the cuts are complete, Britain will still field a modern, large military force, particularly for its size, but it will have given up its ability to independently project power at long ranges. In future conflicts, the U.K. will be a particularly useful member of an alliance or ad hoc coalition, but never again the leader. It's future will probably be something similar to that of Canada and the Australia — modern, well-equipped forces capable of waging war or peacekeeping, but only as a partner in a much larger force.

To say that this is a negative development for Western security would be putting it mildly. The Free World is losing one of only two countries that had any real ability to generate effective combat power at long distances. As useful as a battle group from Canada or Australia might be, there are still things that only a true global military power can do, and while much smaller than the United States, Britain had that ability. It didn't just join coalitions, it could lead them, as it did when it commanded coalition troops in the south of Iraq after the 2003 invasion. At the height of its commitment there, soon after the initial invasion, 46,000 British troops were fighting in Iraq, a truly enormous effort.

Going forward, Britain will only be able to be part of a team, whether under the flag of NATO, the European Union or United Nations. That will leave Britain's remaining military capability at the mercy at the slow pace of international diplomacy. As has been shown repeatedly, by the time these organizations are ready to commit to a military operation, the crisis has either passed or been dealt with by a country capable of acting alone or with a few select partners... like Britain used to be. (A recent example would be the virtual flood of U.S. and Canadian soldiers that essentially took over Haiti after the devastating earthquake there last January.)

Or perhaps it will continue to fight, along with the other smaller English-speaking powers and motivated allies such as Poland and the Netherlands, under overall American command. Such is likely how Britain will fight future wars, while committing itself to collective European security through the EU and international humanitarian relief through the UN. That raises the question of how much additional burden the United States could possibly take on. Today, with enormous numbers of troops still in Iraq, a hot war in Afghanistan and tension in Korea, the U.S. military is stretched thin. This is a very difficult time for the United States to lose its most powerful ally.

But there are lessons here for Washington. The American economy is in no better shape than Britain's, and a fiscal reckoning is in its future, as well. And yet America continues to rush towards a fiscal cliff at maximum speed. So while the loss of British military strength will hurt the United States in the short term, if Americans take the appropriate lessons from the fall of Britain from the top-tier of global powerhouses and begin to get their own financial house in order, future cuts that could gut America's military might yet be avoided. If that's the case, then the sad decline Britain, one of the greatest nations the world has ever known, will not be in vain. It would be instead a final sacrifice to help prop up the very Western world that Britain created.

David Horowitz is president and founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, whose mission is to educate and inform and counter politically correct material that would reduce individual freedom in our country. Contact him at info@horowitzfreedomcenter.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Pastor Craig Lyons, December 31, 2010.

In reading a book recently entitled The Day America Told the Truth, by James Patterson and Peter Kim, I ran across a survey in which people were asked to rank 73 occupations for their honesty and integrity. Americans said that the four sleaziest ways to make a living in America are: drug dealer, organized crime boss, TV evangelist, and prostitute. Notice that prostitution was considered a more "honorable way to make a living than TV evangelism.

Answer for yourself: How could Christianity evolve into something that would allow such to occur?

The involved study that follows will thoroughly answer that question to your satisfaction.

The Rabbinic Sages were often heard saying "Kol hatchalot kashot;" which is Hebrew for "all beginnings are difficult." Fostering the renewal of Gentile Christianity to its Judaic root after being estranged from it for nearly two millennia, is no exception. Just as physical birth and spiritual growth involve pain, so too the revitalization of Gentile Christianity. Today, more than at any other time, there is a sense of urgency within the Gentile Church to understand in Hebraic terms its faith and calling. While the Rabbinic Sages maintained that all beginnings involve difficulty, they also insisted that the greater the degree of hardship, the greater the reward. In this case, continuity with the Olive Tree will bring the life, power and stability that the Gentile Church so desperately needs in our world today.

As Gentiles, we should long for a deeper and more fruitful relationship with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, with the King Messiah, and with Israel. We should long to be restored and reconciled to the Olive Tree of the Israel of God.

The purpose of this document is to provide Gentile Christians in multitudes of various denominations with a basic overview of the story of the Olive Tree of Israel as it has developed historically and theologically over the last two millennia. It is hoped that it will serve as a simple resource from which you can glean a better understanding of and appreciation of the condition of the Gentile Church which originally was conceived within Yeshua's Movement within Judaism in the first century. It is hoped that this study will act as a catalyst for further study and the development of a sincere desire for not only a understanding the Jewish roots of Christianity, but serve as a source of Biblical illumination that will lead the Gentile Christian to a more Biblical obedient life-style which is pleasing to our Father in Heaven. Ultimately, it is hoped that many will re-evaluate their existing religious belief system in view of the new facts that will not only be presented but which will illuminate and challenge the disobedience of the Gentile Church as it exists today. It is my hope that your congregational life in your existing church will be affected in such a positive manner that you will begin to adjust your lives and begin to fully engage yourself in the rich heritage and life of the Olive Tree of Israel. Lastly my prayer for you is that together we can begin to believe, practice, observe, and celebrate all that being "engrafted" into the Olive Tree of Israel offers us.

Now if the Root [of the Olive Tree] is holy, so are the branches. But if some of the branches were pruned, and you [Gentiles] were grafted in among other branches and have become equal sharers in the rich root of the Olive Tree, then don't boast as if you were better that the natural branches! However, if you do boast, remember that you are not nourishing the root, the root is nourishing you!

So you will say, "Natural Branches were pruned so that I might be grafted in," They were pruned, but so what! They were pruned because of their unfaithfulness. However, you keep your place only because of your faithfulness. So do not be arrogant; on the contrary, be terrified! For if the God of Israel did not spare the unfaithful Natural Branches, he certainly will not spare you!

So take a good look at God's kindness and his severity; on the one hand, severity toward those who were pruned; but on the other hand, God's kindness toward you Gentiles-provided you maintain yourself in that kindness [toward the Olive Tree]! Otherwise, you too will be cut off! Moreover, the pruned branches, if they do not persist in their unfaithfulness, will be grafted back in; because God is able to graft them back in. For if you [Gentiles] were cut out of what is by nature a wild Olive Tree and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated Olive Tree, how much more will these Natural Branches [Jews] be grafted back into their own Olive Tree!

For brothers, I want you to understand this truth which God formerly concealed but has now revealed, so that you will not imagine you know more that you actually do. It is that unfaithfulness, to some degree, has come upon some of Israel, until a fullness of Gentiles has come [to be grafted] in to the [Olive Tree] and that in this way all that is of Israel will be saved [that is share in the life and power of God in this world and the world to come].
([Paul], [Apostle] to the Gentiles Letter to believers at Rome 11:16-26).


The Olive Tree was a primary source of food, light, hygiene and healing during Biblical times. To the Gentiles in the west the Olive Tree, with its gnarled trunk and soft gray-green leaves does not appear to be an especially impressive tree. Yet to those in the Middle East, it is admired for its artistic appearance and its bountiful nourishment. Its fruit has been eaten as a major food staple for nearly 7000 years. In addition it has been the source of cooking and lighting oil (Exodus 27:20, Leviticus 24:2) as well as medicine and anointing for religious ceremonies (Exodus 30:25-26). As an export it brought great wealth to the nation (1 Kings 5:11).

Being cultivated in Israel for nearly 7000 years, the Olive has always been considered with special, almost mystical, significance. Both Traditional Jews and Gentile Christians believe it was the olive branch that the dove brought back to Noah from Mt. Ararat (Genesis 8:11). Even in Greek mythology, when the gods held a contest to see which of them could produce the most important of all gifts to mortal man, it was Athena who won the contest when she produced the Olive Tree. It is no surprise then, that Paul, a Jew with Roman citizenship, preaching to Greeks, selected the Olive Tree, to illustrate a central theological point of his gospel (Romans 11-26).

Of Israel, Jeremiah the prophet wrote, The Lord called you a thriving Olive Tree, with fruit beautiful in form, (Jeremiah 11:16). Hosea the prophet said, Israel's splendor will be like the Olive Tree, (Hosea 14:6). David, King of Israel, declared, I am like a green Olive Tree flourishing in the house of God, (Psalms 52:8).

Paul uses this symbol of the living and growing Olive Tree to show that the destinies of faithful Jews and Gentiles are inextricably bound together. Paul's analogy of the Olive Tree represents the proper relationship between the Jewish people and Gentile believers in the God of Israel. In Paul's mind, Gentile believers, find their true identity ONLY in connection with Israel, the Jewish people, and the Covenants of God. Paul implies that Gentile believers are spiritually fed, sustained and supported by their relationship with Israel, the true Olive Tree.

Answer for yourself: Paul, a Jew with Roman citizenship, preaching to Greeks and Gentiles, selected what as the example to illustrate the Gentile's being grafted into the people of God as seen in Romans 11-26? The Olive tree.

Answer for yourself: What did the prophets Jeremiah and Hosea use to compare the people of God in Jeremiah 11:16 and Hosea 14:6? The Olive Tree.

Answer for yourself: Paul uses what symbol to illustrate the intertwined destinies of faithful Jews and Gentiles who come together in the one faith in Yahweh? Olive tree.

Answer for yourself: In Paul's mind, Gentile believers find their true identity only in connection with what other people of God? Israel.

Answer for yourself: Paul implies that Gentile believers are spiritually fed, sustained and supported by their relationship with the true Olive Tree. To what nation of people did he refer? Israel.

Answer for yourself: Did Paul teach that the Gentile Christian Church supports Israel or did he teach that Israel supports the Gentile Christian Church? Israel supports the Gentile church.

Answer for yourself: Does Paul imply that Israel is spiritually fed, sustained and supported by their relationship with the Christian church or did he say that the Christian Gentile church is supported and finds its support in Olive Tree of Israel? The Christian Gentile church is supported by Israel.

Paul used the image of the Olive Tree because of some of its most remarkable features. It is a tree with extreme longevity, easily outliving all other fruit trees (notice the symbolism of Eternal Life). The tree is hearty and grows for centuries. In Israel, Olive Trees fall into three categories: very young trees (those planted 50 years ago), moderately young (50 to 300 years old) and mature trees, some of which grow from root systems 2000 years old. No matter what the conditions: hot, cold, dry, wet, rocky or sandy soil, the Olive Tree will live and produce fruit. Its most remarkable characteristic is its tenacity and long life. It is said that you can never kill an Olive Tree. Even when cut down, or burned, new shoots will emerge from the root (Psalms 128:3). Again, this parallels the history of the Jewish people who, because of anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism have been persecuted repeatedly by Gentile nations, wars, and invasions; yet continually outlive their captors. Nations that conquered and subjected Israel to repeated slavery are not to be found in the world today, yet Israel survives as a testimony to the eternal plan of God for Israel.

The Mount of Olives in Jerusalem is a testament to this longevity, where trees hundreds of years old can be found. In Matthew 26:36 Yeshua retreated to pray after the Passover meal to a place where abundant Olive Trees and an Olive press were located. It was called Gethsemane, or in Hebrew "gat shemen." The Hebrew term for press is "gat" and the word for oil is "shemen," thus "gat-shemen" or Gethsemane.

Herein lies Israel's likeness to the Olive Tree. Their longevity as a culture, is a derivative of their unique faith, tradition and commitment to Torah. Their understanding of God and His relation to their lives and history, gave them a sense of identity, destiny, and mission which in turn, sustained and enabled them to withstand hostile forces of assimilation and disintegration. It becomes obvious, why Paul, uses the Olive Tree image to illustrate the unity between Israel [the cultivated Olive Tree] and Gentile believers [wild olive branches]. Although denied by much of Gentile Christianity today, the most important point is that Gentiles apart from Israel [the Olive Tree] have no prospects of life [spiritual blessings] which is found in the rich sap of the life-giving root of the Olive Tree.

Answer for yourself: What was the rationale of the prophets and the Apostle Paul in choosing Israel to be likened to the Olive Tree? Its long life.

Answer for yourself: Although denied by much of Gentile Christianity today, is the most important point for understanding by the Gentile Christian is that apart from whom [the Olive Tree] the Gentile believer has no prospects of life [spiritual blessings] which is found only in the rich sap of the life-giving root of the Olive Tree? Yes.


The roots of the Olive Tree are extremely sturdy and are the reason why the tree is able to thrive in terraced hills or valleys, rocky or fertile soil. The roots run deep and allow the tree to produce fruit in great heat with a minimum of water. Some have argued that the root in Paul's analogy represents the Messiah or his Messianic movement. But this view confuses the expression root of Jesse (Isaiah 11:10) or root of David (Revelation 5:5) with Paul's root of the Olive Tree (Romans 11:17b). David Bivin, in his The Identity of the Root of the Olive Tree in Romans 11, published in Jerusalem by the Jerusalem School of the Study of the Synoptic Gospels, states that the context of Sha'ul's' letter supports the conclusion that the root represents the Patriarchs in general and Abraham in particular. God's sovereign plan in history was to establish his covenant with mankind through a man called Abraham. He was a semite, a descendant of Noah's son Shem (Genesis 11:10-32). The Patriarch Abraham was the first person to be identified as a "Hebrew" (Genesis 14:13). The Jewish people trace their ancestry to Abraham as the father (root) of the nation of Israel. It was Isaiah who proclaimed God's word, Look to the rock from which you were cut...look to Abraham your father (Isaiah 51:1,2). When God called Abraham he promised he would give the land of Canaan to his offspring (Genesis 12:7, 13:14, 17:8). He further promised that he would have numerous descendants (Genesis 12:2, 13:16,15:5).

Gen. 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Gen. 13:16 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, [then] shall thy seed also be numbered.

Gen. 15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

He also promised that All gentiles on earth would be blessed through his seed (Genesis 12:3, 18:18, 22:18).

Gen. 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Gen. 18:18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

Gen. 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice

Kefah [Peter] acknowledged that his fellow Jews were physical descendants of Abraham, and heirs of these promised blessings (Acts 3:25).

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

In Paul's mind, the Gentile believers in Yahweh were also heirs, partakers and sharers of Yahweh's promises as spiritual descendants of Abraham (Galatians 3:7,8,14).

Gal. 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed.

Answer for yourself: Is the "good" news given to Abraham concerning the death and resurrection of Yeshua or that all Gentile nations will have the opportunity of spiritual blessings in that they will have opportunity to come to Yahweh in faith; thus being blessed? Come to faith in God.

Gal. 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

1 Peter 1:21 Who by him (Yeshua) do we believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Answer for yourself: God worked mightily through Yeshua who commanded in the Great Commission that the Torah be taken to the Gentile in order that their faith and hope might be in Yeshua or God? God.

Their origin in Abraham is their faith in the message of the servant of the LORD (Yeshua), who is himself of the seed (Galatians 3:16) of Abraham (Galatians 3:16).

Gal. 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Thus the biblical phrase, our Father Abraham (James 2:21, Acts 7:2) expresses a family relationship that every person of faith has with Abraham, the man of faith (Galatians 3:6-9).

Gal. 3:6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. {accounted: or, imputed} 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

The argument is based on the belief that those who display Abraham's faith and deeds are Abraham's offspring (James 2:23).

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Answer for yourself: Sha'ul's' letters supports the conclusion that the root of the Olive Tree represents the Patriarchs in general and who in particular? Abraham.

Answer for yourself: God's sovereign plan in history was to establish his covenant with mankind through what man and what people? Abraham.

Answer for yourself: When God called Abraham he promised him in the Abrahamic covenant that besides the Jews, what group of people on the earth would be blessed through his seed (Genesis 12:3, 18:18, 22:18). Gentiles.

Answer for yourself: In Paul's mind, the Gentile believers in God were also heirs, partakers and sharers of God's promises as spiritual descendants of whom (Galatians 3:7,8,14)? Abraham.

Answer for yourself: According to James, those who display Abraham's faith and deeds are Abraham's what (James 2:23)? Seed.

Answer for yourself: To understand correctly how the Gentile Christian Church is to relate to the Israel of God we must begin with what epistles in the New Testament? Ephesians, Romans, Galatians.

Answer for yourself: Paul, the Apostle to the Gentile states that the Gentiles, like you and me, have been quickened or made alive in a spiritual sense by whom because our sins and trespasses had separated us from God? Yeshua.

1 Peter 1:21 Who by him (Yeshua) do we believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God (notice he did not say that one's faith need be in "Jesus").

If according to Peter you believe in God today because of Yeshua and his ministry which fostered a movement from within Biblical Judaism to the non-Jewish world whereby the non-Jew could come to the saving knowledge of the God of Israel then let us continue to search for deeper meaning as to our status in the Covenanted People of God....the Israel of God. Shalom.

Pastor Craig Lyons, Ms.D., D.D., M.Div. is a ben Noah, a Noahide. He is pastor of the Bet Emet Ministries, which is devoted to explaining the Covenant of Noah and the Laws of Noah. A Noahide is a non-Jew who accepts fundamental Biblical teachings that lay out the path of the Righteous Gentile. Visit his website:
http://covenantofnoah.netfirms.com/nonjewish_cx_fellow_ citizen_israel_with_jew.htm

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, December 31, 2010.

The year was 1887.

An Egyptian woman discovered a treasure-trove of over three hundred clay cuneiform tablets that would shake the world of religion and the study of ancient history.

Named for a local Bedouin tribe, the Tel el-Amarna tablets (which can now be found mostly in the Berlin and British Museums) were mostly the official correspondence between Pharaoh Amenhotep IV -- Akhenaten -- and his governors and vassals from places such as Canaan, Syria, Babylonia, etc. They date mostly from around 1380 B.C.E. and were written in Akkadian, the language of diplomacy of the era.

So, what does all of this have to do with Chanukah?

Patience, please...

Now, guess what repeatedly comes out in this official correspondence between Pharoah and his vassals in Canaan and the surrounding areas?

Complaints about invasions of the Habiru...the Hebrews.

While some scholars debate the details, most agree that the time -- with even newer confirmations by excavations in Jericho -- fits into the period of Joshua's conquests of Canaan.

Like many other accounts in the Hebrew Bible, we indeed have good supporting evidence from elsewhere to support the Jews' own version of these events. And what makes it even better is that this often comes from those viewing the events from the "other side" of the picture.

This is no small point.

Corroboration is very important to any serious scholar. Not many religious texts can match the corroboration found in those of the Jews.

Jumping ahead about eight centuries, Babylon became a powerhouse, and the Jews' remaining southern kingdom, Judah, fell captive to Nebochadnezzar. The northern kingdom, Israel, fell to the Assyrians a few centuries earlier.

The Jews would next find a hero in...hold onto your seats...an Iranian ruler, Cyrus the Great, who allowed their return to Judah in 539 B.C.E. Not exactly current Iranian President Ahmadinejad's type...if you know what I mean.

Again, while the Hebrew Bible gives the Jews' account of this episode, we also have it from the "other side" as well.

Take a look at this ancient quote from an Iranian source, The Kurash Prism, courtesy of the Iran Chamber Society and other historical sites...

I am Kurash ("Cyrus"), King of the World, Great King, Legitimate King, King of Babilani, King of Kiengir and Akkade, King of the four rims of the earth, Son of Kanbujiya...I returned to these sacred cities on the other side of the Tigris the sanctuaries of which have been ruins for a long time, the images which used to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I also gathered all their former inhabitants and returned them to their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Kiengir and Akkade whom Nabonidus had brought into Babilani to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their former temples, the places which make them happy.

Now, check out the Jews' own version of this in Ezra 1: 1-8 in the Hebrew Bible...

In the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord inspired King Cyrus of Persia to issue this proclamation throughout his kingdom, both by word of mouth and in writing: "Thus says Cyrus, king of Persia: "All the kingdoms of the earth the Lord, the God of heaven, has given to me, and he has also charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever, therefore, among you belongs to any part of his people, let him go up, and may his God be with him! Let everyone who has survived, in whatever place he may have dwelt, be assisted by the people of that place with silver, gold, and goods, together with free will offerings for the house of God in Jerusalem.


The names of Israel, Judah/Judaea, Hebrew kings, etc. and so forth are also found in the records of the Jews' ancient neighbors.

There are indeed many examples of this, but the last one I'd like to review for now before tying all of this together is one of my favorites. It involves the Arab claim that they were the original "Palestinians."

There was no country or nation known as "Palestine" during the time of Jesus. The land was known as Judaea and its inhabitants were Judaeans... Jews.

Tacitus and Dio Cassius were famous Roman historians who wrote extensively about Judaea's attempt to remain free from the Soviet Union of its day, the conquering Roman Empire. They lived and wrote during, or not long after, the two major revolts of the Jews in 66-73 C.E. and 133-135 C.E. They make no mention of this land being called "Palestine" or its people "Palestinians." And they knew the differences between Jews and Arabs as well. Listen to this quote from Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus:

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...

After the 1st Revolt, Rome issued thousands of Judaea Capta coins which can be seen today in museums all over the world. Notice, please... Judaea Capta... not "Palaestina Capta." Additionally, to celebrate this victory, the Arch of Titus was erected and stands tall in Rome to this very day.

When, some sixty years later, Hadrian decided to further desecrate the site of the destroyed Temple of the Jews by erecting a pagan structure there, it was the grandchildren's turn to take on their mighty conquerors.

The result of the struggle of this tiny nation for its freedom and independence was, perhaps, as predictable as that which would have occurred had Latvia taken on the Soviet Union during its heyday of power. Unfortunately, two thousand years later, the Jews are still in that same struggle.

Listen next to this quote from Dio Cassius

580,000 men were slain, nearly the whole of Judaea made desolate. Many Romans, moreover, perished in this war (the Bar Kochba Revolt). Therefore Hadrian in writing to the senate did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the emperors, ' I and the legions are in health.'

The Emperor was so enraged at the Jews' struggle for freedom in their own land that, in the words of the esteemed modern historian, Bernard Lewis:

Hadrian made a determined attempt to stamp out the embers not only of the revolt but also of Jewish nationhood and statehood... obliterating its Jewish identity.

Wishing to end, once and for all, Jewish hopes, Hadrian renamed the land itself from Judaea to "Syria Palaestina"-- Palestine--after the Jews' historic enemies, the Philistines, a non-Semitic sea people from the eastern Mediterranean or Aegean area.

So sorry Arabs...trying to hijack the latter's identity as you've tried with that of the Jews won't work either.


What does all of this has to do with Chanukah?

In the '70s, while a grad student at the Kevorkian Center For Near Eastern Studies (a consortium of Princeton, Columbia, and New York Universities based at N.Y.U's Washington Square campus), I had the privilege of having Dr. F.E. Peters as one of my professors. A leading expert of the ancient Near East (along with other related subjects as well), one of his specialties was ancient Greece.

Fluent in the language and immersed in the primary sources, Peters's The Harvest Of Hellenism largely supports the Jews' own accounts of their struggle for independence against their latest conqueror, the Seleucid successors to Alexander the Great. After the latter's death, his generals fought for the pieces of the pie. Ptolemy wound up with one of the main prizes, Egypt.

Follow these scattered quotes from Peters, who devoted a good portion of this over 800-page book to the same subject found in the Jews' own writings in the First and Second Books of Maccabees.

The Seleucids, like all other Hellenistic monarchs, with the exception of the Macedonian Antigonids, were worshipped as gods...Jew and Hellene clashed on the issue of conduct...Hellenism could allow almost any eccentricity in private behavior...however...the polis found it difficult to accept a large-scale and public refusal to share in its life and rites.

Whatever else may or may not have happened in Judaea during the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanies ("the god made manifest"), and while the good professor takes issue with some aspects of the Jews' own accounts,www.ekurd.netboth he and Jewish tradition agree that the clash he himself wrote about above inevitably led to the first war ever fought--at least partially--over religious freedom.

Proclaiming yourself a god among pagans was one thing. They could just add Antiochus to a long list.

But to do this with Jews, whose religion teaches that no man -- regardless of how great -- could be divine was explosive. Add to this his attempt at squashing their attempt to retain their own way of life and religious practices, and the revolt of the Maccabees became inevitable.

Here's the Roman historian, Tacitus (Volume II, Book V), again, a few centuries later on the same subject, writing after the Jews next took on the Romans:

The Jews acknowledge one God only, and conceive of him by the mind alone, condemning, as impious, all who, with perishable materials, wrought into the human shape, form representations of the Deity. That Being, they say, is above all, and everlasting, neither susceptible of likeness nor subject to decay. In consequence, they allow no resemblance of Him in their city, much less in their temples. In this way they do not flatter their kings, nor show their respect for their Caesars.

That above passage, by the way, involving the Jews' prohibition of the deification of man, explains the main schism between Judaism and Christianity as well. Corroboration.

At a time when the Jew of the Nations--who was making history and causing a revolution in religion, ethics, and morality millennia before most peoples made their historical debuts--still has to fight for its right to take its place among those newcomers on the world scene, the story of Chanukah and its message of rededication is as important today as it was when Judah the Hammer took on his mighty pagan rulers over two thousand years ago.

Chag sameach!

Happy Chanukah!

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

This article was published December 7, 2010 on ekurd.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 31, 2010.

This is by Caroline Glick, columnist and Deputy Managing Editor of The Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/). visit her website http://www.carolineglick.com/. This article was published December 7, 2010 in The Jewish Press (JewishPress.com) and is archived at


Imagine if 100 million Americans participated in the Tea Party movement. And then imagine that the movement had no impact on American politics. Finally imagine that in the wake of the Tea Party movement, Republicans embraced President Barack Obama's positions on spending and taxation.

These scenarios are of course, unimaginable. Anywhere from a million to ten million people participated in Tea Party protests in the US over the past year. That is, perhaps three percent of Americans.

Yet this was sufficient for the citizens' movement calling for fiscal restraint, spending and tax cuts to have a defining impact on the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives. The Republican establishment is being challenged and in many cases unseated by Tea Party politicians.

Owing in large part to the Tea Party movement, just two years after Obama was elected president the American political map has been transformed. The American people are abandoning leftist socialist domestic policy formulations in favor of supply side Reaganomics.

Now look at Israel. 17 years ago, the Rabin government adopted the radical and failed policy of appeasing the PLO. Since then, around two million -- or approximately 30 percent of Israelis have participated in protests against this policy. In four of the six elections since then, the Right has won by pledging to abandon this policy. And in one of the two elections won by the Left, the Left (under Ehud Barak in 1999), won by running on a rightist platform.

The resistance Israelis have demonstrated to the government's policies towards the Palestinians is arguably unprecedented in modern history. And yet, the unimaginable scenarios for the Tea Party movement in the US have been the glum reality in Israel for 17 years.

Currently, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is implementing the Left's appeasement policy towards the Palestinians with as much enthusiasm as Shimon Peres before him. Last Monday Ron Dermer, Netanyahu's most trusted adviser told Politico [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45466.html] that a leader is defined by the contempt he feels for his voters. As Dermer put it, "The test of leadership is doing things that are not popular with your base."

There are many explanations for what is going on. The most cited are Israel's indirect elections system in which leaders are unaccountable to voters, the weakness of Israel's politicians, and the poor quality of their advisors.

While all are true, another explanation is more compelling. In Israel the Left exerts almost complete control over the political and social discourse. Unlike the situation in the US - particularly in the era of Fox News - there are no significant communications outlets in Israel that are not controlled by the Left.

Even Yisrael Hayom, the free newspaper owned by Sheldon Adelson that has eroded the market shares of Israel's leading tabloids, is not a rightist newspaper. It senior editors, reporters and commentators are almost all leftists.

The Left's monopoly over the public discourse is not only expressed in the media. In the worlds of culture, academia and entertainment as well, all the leading figures are leftists. They cultivate one another in an elite universe that is affected neither by reality nor by the convictions of most of their countrymen.

This has led to a situation in which a small minority of Israelis behaves as if it were a large majority. They use their control over the public discourse to present the sentiments of the majority of Israelis as if they were the views of a small, fanatical minority.

This distorted presentation of the convictions of most Israelis has induced a number of pathologies within Israeli society. Most pertinently, it has caused leaders of the Right to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to win the support of the Left that despises them. And as Dermer made clear it motivates men like Netanyahu and former prime minister Ariel Sharon to betray their voters in favor of the leftist agenda they were elected to reject.

In a bid to begin contending with this dismal reality, in early 2009 I launched a Hebrew-language media satire website called Latma. Latma is an Arabic term for "slap" that has been adopted in Israeli slang.

Latma combines short, pithy blog posts ridiculing the daily media coverage of events with a weekly television show on Internet called The Tribal Update. The show parodies the broadcast media in Israel while exposing the absurdity of the leftist political and cultural narratives they trumpet.

The insight guiding Latma is that people do not fear what they laugh at. By exposing the failure of Israel's cultural elites in a humorous way, Latma empowers the majority of Israelis to express their views without fearing leftist demonization.

While Latma is only one small voice, entirely funded by charitable donations, its impact has been enormous. It is one of the most visited websites in Israel today with close to a million page views per month. Our broadcasts are eagerly awaited by tens of thousands of Israelis. Week after week, our shows become viral within hours after we post them on YouTube.

Our work is doing more than making the case for strong Zionism. It is undermining leftist stereotypes about the nature of the Israeli Right and making it cool to be Zionist again.

Latma's greatest international success to date was our clip "We Con the World," ( See it here..) which we produced three days after the IDF takeover of the Turkish-Hamas terror ship Mavi Marmara. We Con the World was seen by more than a million viewers in a week and has been viewed over five million times since we produced it. The song changed the tone of the media coverage of the operation. Perhaps most importantly, it empowered Israel's supporters to stand up to anti-Zionist intimidation throughout the world.

Building on that success, and subsequent successes with English language clips like "The Three Terrors," and "The Iranian Bomb Song," we are recruiting a team of English-language satirists to produce clips directed at the international audience on a regular basis.

Liberal media outlets and other cultural institutions in the US went to enormous lengths to belittle and demonize the Tea Party movement. They failed because over the past generation, American conservatives have developed alternative media outlets and cultural institutions that the general public and politicians alike pay attention to.

I believe that Latma's success must serve as a springboard for cultivating an alternative elite in Israel whose members reflect rather than demonize the convictions of the majority of Israelis.

Given the massive dimensions of the public's rejection of the Left's worldview, if these alternative media outlets and cultural bodies are properly conceived and managed, I am certain that like Latma, they will not only be rapidly successful. They will have a profound and salutary impact on the behavior of Israel's political leaders who will finally recognize that for embattled Israel, the true test of leadership is standing up to a hostile world and keeping faith with the Israeli people.

To Go To Top

Posted by Marc Prowisor, December 31, 2010.

SUBJECT: Thomas Friedman's article in the NY Times:
(http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/opinion/12friedman.html?scp=1&sq= reality%20check%20friedman&st=cse)

Oh Thomas, Thomas, Thomas, I am warmed by your strong patriotic feelings towards the economic troubles in the US. Even more so how you are sure that once the US stops it $3 billion dollar aid package to Israel, US towns will be a boomin' all over the US of A. If only Prime Minister Netanyahu would have agreed to another three-month building moratorium, everything would have been all right.

I also appreciate your care and concern regarding Israel's substance abuse problem, and I agree with you. We are also grateful for you in pointing out that Israel is the reason so many US cities are having budget problems. Yes the 3 billion Israel receives and spends in the US is the core of the problem. I was wondering if you might apply your patriotic feelings to other countries aroud the world, maybe to the UN also...but I digress.

Do you remember the Yom Kippur war of 1973? You know when Israel came close to being wiped out? Israel's friend and ally, the US came to it's aid and sent sorely needed ammo and equipment over and Thank Gd, this joint venture and friendship enabled a different outcome than that which the Arab and Soviet world had hoped for. Did I say Soviet? Maybe you forget, that it was in US interest that Israel existed as a US ally in the region, might I add the only true and stable US ally and friend in the region, something that was paid for in blood, lots of blood.

So when the Soviet Union started powering down in the Mid East, Uncle Sam came in and said to Israel, give 'em the Sinai, come on we're friends, don't worry, I'll watch your back, I promise. Israel said, but the lives lost defending our country, the oil, the natural resources, the military buffer zone, how could we, they have been attacking us since we declared ourselves a state? Uncle Sam said, tell ya what, I'm gonna compensate you all, it's on me, you compromise on your defense and resources, pull your people out and we'll back you up with Military aid and our support, don't worry, Trust us...and that is just part of the picture.

Never mind the technology that Israel and the US share, the numerous business ventures that benefit both countries and numerous towns and cities in the US, and so much more.

Never mind that Israel is the only true friend and ally the US has in the Middle East, and the only country around there that shares its value and rights systems, and so much more.

Now Israel has been pretty good at listening to it's friend's advice and requests, and I would say that refraining from defending itself to its ability against Iraq in the first Iraqi War was proof of that, and so much more. Making offers as you mentioned to the "Palestinians" and having them spit back, continuing in so-called "Peace Talks" while Arab schools teach destruction of Israel...sorry, I digress again.

But as you say "we're not their grandfather's America anymore". You say Israel should jump at anything the US should request, why should you care, you don't live in Israel, nor does the safety of Jews in Israel concern you, why should it. You believe that the US has bought the right to make the decisions in Israel because of the "bribe" that the US gave to Israel starting some years back...so, you believe the US has the right to decide for others based on money and aid that it distributes...interesting, I guess you mean that the US is bribing the world then, even more interesting... and I thought you were a "liberal", you closet conservative, you.

It seems to me you want Israel to behave as a whore and do what the US wants because of the "Aid" Israel receives...that's not friendship.

Dear Thomas, you fail to look at the big picture, you fail to see how the Palestinian Authority spits in the face of the world and dupes you and others like you because of your arrogance and Western elitism and lack of understanding the Arab and Muslim world. While extreme Islam is spreading it spheres of influence, and demonstrations and terror against the West increase daily, you choose to endanger the one true ally and friend that the US has and has always had.

But, guess what, I agree with you...almost. I think it is time that the US backs away from the Israel-Arab problem a bit, it is up to them, both the Israelis and the Arabs living there to figure it out and come to a solution on their own, without outside influence and pressure, and the threat of annihilation.

It is time that journalists such as yourself and peers stop presenting one-sided views and show the whole scene and background so that others might develop informed opinions and not the manipulated ones that you and others wish to show, or maybe you need wikileaks to assist.

I have to disagree with you when you state that you understand the problem, you don't, and you probably never will because you can't see beyond your tainted views, your mind is closed, despite how many alternative lifestyles and causes you may support.

Your patriotism and caring for the downtrodden of the US is a breath of fresh air, and I am sure that when you send your children into the US Armed forces to fight for the US, to put themselves in danger, just like the majority of Israeli parents do, and have been doing, they will be proud of you.

I think and agree with you that it is time that the US stops sending so much "Aid" around the world and redirects much of it back to the US and address the problems that you mention and more! One difference, I feel that you are only targeting Israel, which you are, by the way. Of course many of these countries that might not receive any more "financial assistance" will turn on the US quicker than a detonator on a suicide bomber. You can be sure Israel won't, you know why?

Because, Israel is a true friend.

Contact Marc Prowisor at marc@friendsofyesha.com and visit his website at
http://yeshaviews.blogspot.com This article was published December 14, 2010 on Yesha Views

To Go To Top

Posted by Mordechai Kedar, December 31, 2010.

Translation from Hebrew by John Quer.


Alexandria is a very old port city, founded 2344 years ago by Alexander the Great; it later became, by his son, the capital of Egypt. Jews settled there at the time of the Second Temple, forming a community that was large, rich and developed, managed by a council of elders who had 71 membersi, such as the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem. The community built institutions whose importance is evidenced by references in the Talmud and Mishna. In Alexandria the Tanakh was translated in Greek, the Biblia Septuagint, quoted by our texts. Until a few years ago there were two Jewish communities in Alexandria, one Sephardi and one Ashkenazi.

Since its inception Alexandria was a cosmopolitan city, like many other port cities, with ships from foreign countries, where they'd met sailors and traders who belonged to different people, speaking different languages and professing different religions, a place where different religious and ethnic groups lived together in peace and serenity. The clean air and a decent economy -- mainly based on fishing and port services -- has made the city peaceful and tolerant, offering its residents good economic opportunities.

Precisely because of social tranquility, a large community of Christians who are called "Copts" from the Greek word Aigyptos (Egypt), concentrated in Alexandria. Copts are considered the true native Egyptians, and Muslims consider the foreigners who have settled in Egypt after the Islamic invasion in the 7th century, when they imposed Islam; it became the majority religion. The Copts have remained faithful to their religion and their country, without surrendering to the persecution of Muslims and not taking the "culture of the desert" brought into their country. During the years of revolt against British occupation, Copts played a key role in the struggle for liberation by demonstrating their loyalty to the country along with the Muslims against the British occupation and despite the fact that the British were Christians.

However, in recent decades, the Egyptian company has abandoned this tradition, closer to Islam, for a number of reasons. Arab nationalism, whose most important leader was the Egyptian president Gamal Abd el-Nasser, was weakened by the Six Day War in 1967. He lost, and gradually, pan-Arabism's popularity in the Arab world decreased. Dictatorial Arab regimes have used and continue to use the symbols of nationalism to hide the truth about violations of human rights, repression of political freedom, the persecution of political opponents, so that the very idea of Arab nationalism has been accentuated by its negative connotations. The use of the army and security forces for the protection of national security has increased the anger of the Arab sectors of the population not involved in the corruption of the regime. The situation in Egypt is particularly serious because of the vast poverty and sense of abandonment that reigns everywhere, especially in the poorer neighborhoods, with no running water, sewage, electricity, communication tools, infrastructure for education and social services. This is where millions of people -- almost half of the 85 million Egyptian citizens -- live in poverty and hardship. Their humiliation continues to increase.

The best-known organization in Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood, which holds the anger of the public against the corruption of the regime. Egyptians and foreigners agree in thinking that if there were free elections members of the Muslim Brotherhood would gain most seats in parliament, and the debate is only on the percentage of seats, 60 or 80%. Most of the Egyptian population is identified with the "Brothers", both because of ideology and the religious traditionalism, which seeks to apply shari'a, or Islamic law, throughout the state, because of their opposition to the corrupt regime. But in elections to the Parliament that took place two months ago, the Muslim Brotherhood managed to win only one seat of 454. But it is clear that this was election fraud.Since the disclosure of the results of the elections, many believe that the restrictions imposed on the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the opposition party, will encourage them to illegal actions such as demonstrations in the square, at best, or actual violence, at worst.

A further cause of anti-government action by the Brethren is the fact that presidential elections will be held this year. It is almost certain that they will nominate Gamal Mubarak, the son of the president, as successor. For the people nothing will change, the state will continue to be ruled by an unelected president, as has been since the case since Mubarak took office in July 1952. The triumvirate, will continue, namely the triad of the so-called 'Free Officers'. Over the past 58 years in power following Nagib, Abd el'Nasser, Sadat and Mubarak are representatives of a corrupt regime. Gamal Mubarak is relatively young, 40 years old, and if he follows in the footsteps of his father, he could remain in power for another 40 years. From the perspective of the Egyptians that would be a tragedy, because corruption would continue as well as poverty and neglect. The Muslim Brotherhood understand the importance of the moment, and in the wake of the weakness of Mubarak. it is preparing for violent opposition to prevent power being handed to his son, as if Egypt were a private good of the Mubarak family.

The regime knows well the intentions of the "brothers" and security forces, army, police and intelligence services, are ready to respond with violence. The question is not whether this will happen but when. Every military unit knows what to do and has been trained per a city. When violence breaks out, each unit with its own areas of expertise, will occupy neighborhoods and street,s to restore order. The question, of which there is no reply, is: "Will the police shoot into the crowd?" or will the officers and soldiers decide that you can not kill in cold blood those who seek freedom and rights? You can believe that if the crowd prevails over the regime, the army will join the winners, transferring their loyalty to the Mubarak family group that has seized power.

Relations with the Copts

Over the last few years, with the consolidation of the religious movement among the Egyptian population, the relations between the Muslim majority, day by day is more fanatical against the minority of the Copts. And it is getting worse for several reasons: a) the Copts are Christians, and Islam considers Christians (as well as the Jews) a protected group, dhimmis, namely second-class citizens, living under Islamic protection in accordance with principles established in the early Islamic era, including the payment of the jizya (the infidel tax); b) the Copts are protected by the regime against the hatred of the "brothers", and collaboration with the regime does not make them well-regarded by the Muslims; c) sometimes there are unexpected links between Copts and opponents on a sensitive issue, namely religious conversion -- according to Islamic law, a Christian or a Jew can convert to Islam, but a Muslim, even if Christian or Jewish origin, can not leave Islam. The penalty for changing confession is death; d) the 'Brothers' claim that the Copts kidnapped two women who converted to Islam, and have hidden them in a convent to try to convince them to return to Christianity; and e) The Muslim Brotherhood also oppose the construction of churches, monasteries, and Christian schools, although the law allows them.

A few months ago there was an armed attack in a southern town, Hamadi, in which an Egyptian Muslim fired at a group of Copts who came from a church, killing seven people in cold blood. Egypt is still in shock. Many have condemned the murder, but the regime has not yet tried the murderer. This incident comes within the category of an infinite series of attacks against the Copts, attacks on people, women and girls, houses, shops and anything that belongs to them. The daily persecution caused the emigration of many Copts from Egypt, and today, millions of them live in exile.

Last Saturday when hundreds of Copts left the Church in downtown Alexandria, pouring into the street, a car was blown up, killing more than twenty people dead and dozens wounded. Observers immediately ruled that the attack was the work of Al Qaeda, and on the basis of this view President Mubarak has said publicly in the aftermath of the attack that the terrorists responsible for the attack were foreigners. But my feeling is that if it were the work of foreign jihadis, the attack, given its high impact and its great extent, may have been aided by someone who knows the area well. Someone who could move to collect information without being detected, finding the material, the car and explosives, perhaps even stealing from the army. Otherwise it would not be possible to make an attack of this size without help on the spot.

The Copts, victims of the attack, have directed their anger against the government, which they believe has failed to provide security and left them at the mercy of local and foreign terrorists. During the week the Coptic minority has organized many events to attract world attention on the growing repression of which they are the victims. Many Heads of State or Government expressed concern at the plight of the Copts. The Egyptian regime does not like these expressions of criticism and has rejected interference in the state's internal affairs.

Many observers believe that in Egypt the situation may deteriorate to the levels in Iraq, and in recent days, many talk about the danger of "Iraqisation of Egypt." Israel should follow the developments very closely because developments can negatively affect the peace agreements between the two countries. If the "Brothers" would rise to power, relations with Israel would be immediately stopped.

Mordechai Kedar is a historian with expertise in political science at Bar-Ilan,, where he has taught since 1994. He contributes to the BESA Center for Strategic Studies, the Inter-Disciplinary Center in Herzliyya and the Insititute for Israel Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

To Go To Top

Posted by Eye on the UN, December 31, 2010.

The Washington Budget Train Wreck Has Nothing On the U.N.

This was written by Ann Bayefsky and appeared today on FoxNews.com


The good folks at the U.N., the people with their hands on the money spigot and the never-ending demand for more U.S. tax dollars are hard at work in the hours leading up to the Christmas recess. Budget gurus at Turtle Bay could take on Washington money managers any day. Particularly since they are busy spending your hard-earned cash on such events as a New York City bash known as "Durban III" next September. And guess what, this includes inviting Iranian President Ahmadinejad to lecture Americans about ending racism and intolerance.

The U.N. budget process goes like this. First, the U.N. majority dreams up new ways to spend U.S. taxpayer dollars on conferences which are antithetical to American values. Durban III is a perfect example.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) invented the idea of celebrating the 10th anniversary of the anti-semitic jamboree held in Durban, South Africa in 2001. U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, a native of Durban herself, threw the full weight of her office behind the concept.

The idea blossomed into the suggestion that a meeting of world leaders take place on September 21, 2011 in New York. All heads of state and government will come together to embrace limits on free speech in the name of fighting "Islamophobia" and to declare Israel a racist state which should be isolated and disassembled like apartheid South Africa.

Ergo, the production in U.N. backrooms of resolution "A/C.3/65/L.60."


At the next step in U.N. policy-making, U.N. staffers are charged with determining whether the proposed resolution has financial implications. Any such implications are required to be declared up front, so that the vote for or against the substantive resolution takes the dollars into account. In the case of "L.60," however, the rules just happened to be thrown out the window.

The secretariat did not produce the "program budget implications," known as the PBI, fast enough for the likes of Islamic states. Rather than wait for the PBI, the vote went ahead oblivious to the costs. The United States voted against the decision to hold Durban III, along with such countries as Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, and most of the countries that had known Nazism at very close range: Germany, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania. They were outvoted, however, 121 for, 19 against and 35 abstentions.

U.N. sausage-making, however, does not end there. Once a resolution is adopted — and in the case of Durban III, the PBI produced after the fact — the money folks in another committee examine the costs and recommend to the General Assembly where to find those dollars and cents.

In practice, the U.N.'s budget committee recommends one of two things. Either the costs should be "absorbed" in the existing budget — a polite way of saying "no new money and if you do this, you have to drop something else." Or they say, sure, we can count on U.S., European Union and Japanese bankers rolling over, so let's add the new dollars to the budget and spend money from a practically inexhaustible "contingency fund."

Which brings us to December 17, 2010. The PBI on Durban III, or the cost of handing Ahmadinejad and company a global megaphone to spew anti-American and anti-Jewish vitriol, has finally made it into the public domain.

So here is what it is going to cost YOU...

The secretariat started by low-balling the charges, excluding all kinds of "regular" support that current staff can provide. Then the secretariat announced that celebrating the 10th anniversary of the 2001 Durban hate-fest will cost $322,500. Of that "$116,100 would be absorbed" by the existing budget — read, no new money — and $206,400 "would represent a charge against the contingency fund."

Yemen, speaking on behalf of the "G-77" or the bloc of 130 developing nations, was understandably enthusiastic. Another quarter of a million dollars in fun money. Yemeni representative Waleed Alshahari blamed the U.N. secretariat for not producing the budget implications earlier and suggested the glitch be resolved "in the future." Israel, the United States and Japan noted that the rule of procedure requiring costs be transparent and produced up front, had not been followed. The EU sat silently staring into space.

Everybody knows how the game will be played out. In the next few days, there will be a vote in the budget committee. The U.S. and Israel will vote against. They may be joined by some European Union countries that might just decide to translate their vote against holding Durban III into a vote against paying for it.

EU states, though, most often start trembling at the thought that 'putting their money where their mouth is' might harm the UN's image. The resolution will then be adopted by an overwhelming majority who couldn't care less how they spend other people's money. The package will go to the General Assembly plenary body next week, whereupon the decisions to hold Durban III and to pay for it will be rubber-stamped.

Then the Obama administration will pay up.

In other words, in September the world's demagogues (and as many frightened Europeans as they can gather) will line up just days after the 10th anniversary of 9/11 to declare — in the middle of New York City — that Muslims are the primary victims of intolerance, that Israel is the chief racist and that America must somehow be to blame for the violent anti-democratic tendencies of a few poor lost souls. And under the U.N. budget scheme, American taxpayers will be paying 22% of all the costs.

By the way, President Obama is invited to the big bash. But in marked contrast to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who announced weeks ago that Canada would take no part in Durban III, the president of the United States has remained deafeningly silent and still not declined to attend.

Editor's Addendum:

From: Buddy Macy
Sent: Wed, December 15, 2010
Subject: Sign Petition "No To Durban 3 in New York"

Urge European Union states to oppose the U.N.'s plan for a "Durban 3" summit of world leaders, to be held on September 21, 2011 in New York. The event would celebrate the 10th anniversary of the 2001 Durban conference on racism — a gathering that was hijacked by dictators and their allies, and which ended up promoting anti-Semitism and scapegoating America, the West, and Israel as racists. The U.S., Canada and Australia will oppose the resolution. But the E.U.'s vote, which is crucial, is still undecided. Urge France, Germany, the U.K., and other countries not to bestow the appearance of moral authority on an event that will give a dangerous platform to racist murders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi.

TO SIGN THE PETITION: please click here.

This article by Anne Bayefsky appears today on FoxNews.com
(http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/12/17/ washington-budget-train-wreck/#ixzz18OecP77R).

EYEontheUN monitors the UN direct from UN Headquarters in New York.
EYEontheUN brings to light the real UN record on the key threats to democracy, human rights, and peace and security in our time.
EYEontheUN provides a unique information base for the re-evaluation of priorities and directions for modern-day democratic societies.

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Smith, December 31, 2010.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has positioned himself as a left-wing whistleblower whose life mission is to call the United States to task for the evil it has wreaked throughout the world. But after poring through the diplomatic cables revealed via the site yesterday, one might easily wonder if Assange isn't instead a clandestine agent of Dick Cheney and Bibi Netanyahu; whether his muckraking website isn't part of a Likudnik plot to provoke an attack on Iran; and if PFC Bradley Manning, who allegedly uploaded 250,000 classified documents to Wikileaks, is actually a Lee Harvey Oswald-like neocon patsy.

With all due apologies to Oliver Stone (and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey), what the Wikileaks documents reveal is not a conspiracy of any kind but a scary and growing gap between the private assessments of American diplomats and allies in the Middle East and public statements made by U.S. government officials. The publication of these leaked cables is eerily reminiscent of the Pentagon Papers, which exposed a decade-long attempt by U.S. officials to distort and conceal unpalatable truths about the Vietnam War, and manipulate public opinion. The difference is that while the Pentagon Papers substantially vindicated the American left, the Wikileaks cable dump vindicates the right.

Here are eight of the most obvious examples from the initial trove of documents that has appeared online:

1. While the Israelis are deeply concerned about Iran's march toward a nuclear program, it is in fact the Arabs who are begging the United States to "take out" Iranian installations through military force, with one United Arab Emirates official even proposing a ground invasion. Calling Iran "evil," King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly urged the United States to "cut off the head of the snake" by attacking Iranian nuclear installations.

2. It is not just Israeli leaders who believe Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is reminiscent of Hitler; U.S. officials think so too, as do Arab leaders, who use the Hitler analogy to warn against the dangers of appeasing Iran.

3. North Korea, an isolated country that enjoys substantial diplomatic and economic backing from China, issupplying Iran with advanced ballistic missile systems that would allow an Iranian nuclear warhead to hit Tel Aviv-or Moscow-with a substantial degree of accuracy. Taken in concert with the North Korean-built nuclear reactor in Syria, it would appear that North Korea-acting with the knowledge and perhaps direct encouragement of China-is playing a significant and deliberate role in the proliferation of nuclear equipment and ballistic delivery systems in the Middle East.

4. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is not a model Middle Eastern leader who has found the right admixture of religious enthusiasm and democracy, as U.S. government officials often like to suggest in public, but "an exceptionally dangerous" Islamist. U.S. diplomats have concluded that Erdogan's anti-Israel rhetoric is not premised on domestic Turkish electioneering or larger geo-strategic concerns but rather on a personal, visceral hatred of Israel.

5. Tehran has used the cover of the ostensibly independent Iranian Red Crescent-a member of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, whose pledge of neutrality allows it access to war zones-to smuggle weapons and members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' Qods Force into Lebanon during the 2006 Hezbollah-Israel war, and into Iraq, to fight against U.S. soldiers.

6. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his intelligence chief Omar Suleiman are more worried about Hamas than about Israel and are staunchly opposed to the expansion of Iranian influence in the region.

7. The Amir of Qatar is a dubious ally, who plays Washington and Tehran off each other. "The Amir closed the meeting by offering that based on 30 years of experience with the Iranians, they will give you 100 words. Trust only one of the 100."

8. America's Arab allies do not believe that the Barack Obama Administration can separate Syria from Iran through any foreseeable combination of carrots and sticks. According to one cable, the UAE's Sheik Mohamed Bin Zayed "showed no confidence that Syria could be separated from the Iranian camp" and quoted him directly as saying "If you want my opinion... I think not." He advised that Syria would continue hedging on key regional issues (Iran, support for Hezbollah, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process) for the foreseeable future.

IF THESE CABLES MAKE MANY ON THE RIGHT LOOK PRESCIENT, or at least in touch with reality, it is hardly a surprise that their domestic U.S. rivals are trying to spin the Wikileaks cables to their own advantage. For instance, leftwing academic specialists on the Middle East who have argued that the peace process is the key issue in the region and that the Gulf Arab states do not want the United States or Israel to bomb Iran are nonetheless celebrating the Wikileaks documents, even as their argument is now vitiated. Some university professors claim that their analysis is better than those of Washington's Arab allies anyway. The New York Times is trying to make thecase that in the wake of George W. Bush's mismanagement the Obama Administration has managed to build a strong sanctions regime against Iran that includes Russia and China. Unfortunately, the cables prove only that Russian envoys are working to frustrate the U.S. effort by selling the Iranian position to the Arabs.

What comes through most strongly from the Wikileaks documents, however, is that U.S. Middle East policy is premised on a web of self-justifying fictions that are flatly contradicted by the assessments of American diplomats and allies in the region.

Starting with Bush's second term and continuing through the Obama Administration, Washington has ignored the strong and repeated pleas of its regional allies-from Jerusalem to Riyadh-to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

PERHAPS THE MOST DISTURBING REVELATION IN THE DOCUMENTS is the extent to which both the Bush and Obama Administrations have concealed Iran's war against the United States and its allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and the Arab Gulf states, even as those same allies have been candid in their diplomatic exchanges with us. U.S. servicemen and -women are being dispatched to combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are fighting Iranian soldiers and assets in a regional war with the Islamic Republic that our officials dare not discuss, lest they have to do something about it.

Members of the Washington policy establishment should be considerably less worried about how the foreign ministries of allied countries respond to the leaks than how the American electorate does.

Even in a democracy, we accept that a key part of our diplomacy depends on concealing the truth, or even lying, in order to advance the interests of one's own country. But it is hard to see how the public, mendacious, face of U.S. foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, serves American interests.

By systematically misleading the American people, our policymakers have undermined the basis of our democracy, which is premised on the existence of a public that is capable of making informed decisions about a world that is only becoming more dangerous.

Lee Smith is Senior Editor at The Weekly Standard, and author of "The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations". This articles appeared Nov 30 2010 in Israel Resource Review and is archived at http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/51628/deadly-fictions/

To Go To Top

Posted by Mechel Samberg, December 31, 2010.

Ima Mechaka Ba'bayit We don't even know for sure

Yo back in the eighties an atrocity occurred
Four men abducted, you may well have heard
See I think it's time for awareness to be raised
Of the plight of the Israeli M.I.A.s
1982's the first date to remember
Three boys taken — Katz, Baumel, Feldman
And then after only four more years
Ron Arad's kidnapping caused more Israeli tears
The worst part of it is the huge frustration
At the kidnappers refusal to give any information
About their prisoners status, their health and wellbeing
We don't even know for sure that they're living
It's disgusting how they cause so many people so much anguish
Any sort of news we'd be desperate to have it
But no, it seems that it's just too much to ask
The mothers have to stay waiting, kept in the dark


Ima mechaka ba'bayit
We've gotta keep trying
So we can stop these mothers crying
We've got to put our time and the money that we earn
Into making sure that the M.I.A.s return
Home, to their parents, to their wives,
Let them have a family and live a normal life
We've gotta get them back to where they belong
End this injustice, right this wrong

Just over one year ago the situation was compounded
On the Lebanese border security was flouted
Three more taken, this time by the Hizbollah
Their names — Adi, Benny and also Omar
And who looked on while terrorists stole our men?
It was those lovely soldiers representing the UN
I thought they were there in place as our friends
To help save us from terror, not to watch but protect
But no, we can't even expect that much
We should've learnt by now that the UN hates us
A clear indication of its ingrained impurity
Is that Syria has been put in charge of security
Now things had got worse, it wasn't four but seven
The lack of cooperation by the captors was so vexing
And three more families were missing a member
Their hope was failing, the fire was down to its embers
And what do we learn coming into November?
Israeli intelligence discovered that we'd never
See these three again, their lives had ended
Hizbollah had given false hope, they'd lied and pretended


So now that you're clear on the current situation
You might ask what's the point in a continued altercation?
If three have gone for a year and already have died
What's the chance that the other four are still alive?
This may sound insensitive but perhaps they're not
But even so there's no reason why we should stop
Our campaign, even if it's just for the remains
So we can bury them in Israel, in proper graves
To let the families know for sure
Whether to celebrate, or whether to mourn
If it's the latter, at least they'll get some closure
It'll will be such a relief, to finally know the
Truth, to be able to continue with their lives
Without having to wonder if the soldiers have survived
How can you help? Start by wearing a blue ribbon
Then you might want to sign or even start a petition
Write a letter of support to the families
Take the initiative, organise some rallies
What it all comes down to is raising awareness
Make important people really start caring
Write to Kofi Annan, make him earn his prize for peace
By getting him to fight for the M.I.A.s release
And if at any point you require motivation
Just think of the mothers, sitting there, waiting


A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. ~Herm Albright~

Israel should not be fearing world opinion. Israel should be making the world fear (respect) her!!! And remember, it is the rich oil cartels who rule the world, NOT the Zionists!!

Mech'el B. Samberg




Contact Mech'el B. Samberg by email at mechelsambergnew@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, December 31, 2010.

This was written by Marcus Dysch and it appeared today in The Jewish Chronicle Online.

The discovery of a huge natural gas field off the coast of Haifa could secure Israel's long-term energy security, according to experts.

The 16 trillion cubic feet of gas, 80 miles away from the Jewish state under the Mediterranean, represents the world's biggest find in the past decade.

One macroeconomist claimed the fuel could be worth as much as $95 billion and will allow Israel to avoid dependency on other states for their energy.

Dubbed "Leviathan", the field was discovered during drilling earlier in the year. Its size was confirmed this week.

But it is also predicted that Israel may find it difficult to sell the gas, as European consumption declines, and could face a struggle to successfully drill and export it.

The reserves could meet Israel's domestic energy demands for 100 years.

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 Richard H. Shulman, December 31, 2010.


Former Kadima MK Tzahi Hanegbi makes a case for President Obama to free Jonathan Pollard for diplomatic payment in the guise of a humanitarian gesture to recoup Jewish favor.

Mr. Hanegbi states some of the moral obligations by the U.S. to release Pollard, citing some of the ways it abused that prisoner. Not feeling that Obama would be motivated merely to do the decent thing, Hanegbi offers Obama selfish considerations.

Ignoring the fact that Israel already paid for Pollard to be released by the concessions PM Netanyahu made at the Wye negotiations, where President Clinton reneged on its promise of release but Netanyahu did not renege on concessions, Hanegbi urges Obama to demand payment all over again.


A civil war continues in the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). Under cover of preventing a Hamas coup in Judea-Samaria and a Fatah coup in Gaza, the regime in each half of the P.A. represses human rights. Abbas uses U.S.-trained troops to crack down.

By the hundreds or thousands, prisoners are held merely for membership in Hamas or Fatah, respectively. Nor are members of those terrorist organizations the only prisoners. Journalists and human rights activists who publicly criticize their regimes are arrested, not gently. The P.A. controls its newspapers. It warns employees not to speak with Jewish journalists or foreign journalists sympathetic to Israel. Most residents are afraid to speak out, now.

Why do the EU and U.S. let the P.A. get away with dictatorship? (IMRA,, 12/28/10 by Khaled Abu Toameh
December 24, 2010

The answers probably are: (1) Europe has given up on defending its civilization; (2) The EU and U.S. appease the Arabs, whom they prefer to Israel; (3) EU and U.S. foreign policy rest on misconceptions and make-believe; and (4) Governments are more comfortable continuing failed policies than admitting that their policies failed.

For example, they confuse Fayad's economic progress and nation-building with preparing for peace. They pretend vocally that negotiations aim at producing a democratic, peaceful, Arab state. The keep up that pretense, ignoring the stifling dictatorship that, on the day of statehood, is suddenly and miraculously supposed to be democratic. Not likely!

The pretense has dire consequences. The state they strive to unleash would remain totalitarian and jihadist. Jihad means war. Sovereignty facilitates war, as by importing heavy weapons. The expected boundaries of the new state would deprive Israel of the secure borders that the tank-barrier hills presently afford.

By statute, U.S. foreign aid to the P.A. is supposed to be suspended if the P.A. promotes terrorism. The P.A. promotes terrorism, one proof being the many instances of P.A. leaders honoring terrorists. Nevertheless, U.S. subsidy persists. U.S. presidents sign waivers attesting falsely that the P.A. is not promoting terrorism. State Dept. ideology overcomes truth. America, again, fosters enemies of mankind and in the name of idealism — peace, democracy.

By contrast with Arab jihadists, Israel does want peace. When it defends itself from the jihadists, then the U.S. and European governments and human rights NGOs wake up and espouse another pretense. They pretend that Israel is repressing Arab human rights. They act as if there were a human right to kill Jews.

In the totalitarian P.A., the admonition not to speak with "pro-Israel" journalists means more than it seems. It would include journalists who do not follow the extremely anti-Israel official line.

Assisting anti-Western fanatics, while we victims of anti-Western terrorists are struggling to win wars against jihadists, harms U.S. national security. Where are the supposed foreign policy "pragmatists" in U.S. ruling circles?


Iran finances military training in Lebanon and Syria for Hamas terrorists. In the past year, Iran smuggled into Gaza about a thousand mortar shells, hundreds of short-range rockets, and a few dozen advanced anti-tank missiles. One of those rockets already damaged an Israeli tank. Better protected tanks are being transferred to the Gaza front.

Hamas stores some of its weapons in the Sinai, now part of Egypt and therefore not susceptible to Israeli raids. Twice, weapons were fired from Sinai at Israel (IMRA, 12/31/10). http://www.imra.org.il/

Recent news revealed that Iran has subversive agents in Arab Gulf states, unilaterally seizes disputed land from them, and is cowing some Arab states into appeasement of it. For years, Iran has been aiding insurgents in Iraq. Iran and Syria built Hizbullah into a dominant position in Lebanon. The President of Iran boasts that Iran will crush any country not going along with it, and indirectly threatens Israeli survival.

Compare those facts about Iran's military subversion and religious imperialism with Iran's claim that its nuclear program is not military. The claim seems out of character with reality.

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 HandsFiasco, December 31, 2010.

This was written by Caroline B. Glick deputy editor of The Jerusalem Post. Contact her by email at caroline@carolineglick.com It is archived at
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2010/12/ hizbullah-and-the-information.php

On January 15 the UN's Special Tribunal for Lebanon is scheduled to issue indictments against a number of Hizbullah operatives for the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005. All of Lebanon and much of the region is waiting in suspense that grows with each passing day.

The news that Hizbullah would be fingered by the prosecutors was first made public in July. Since then, Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah has threatened repeatedly to set fire to Lebanon and perhaps Israel if Daniel Bellemare, the chief prosecutor dares to go forward. Given Hizbullah's track record of war, murder and intimidation, no one doubts that the Iranian-proxy force will keep its promise if it comes to that.

Almost immediately after Hizbullah was named as the central suspect in Hariri's assassination, Hizbullah's ally Syria began negotiating a deal with Saudi Arabia, which serves as the patron of Lebanon's Sunni community. The goal of these talks is to get Hizbullah off the hook, "in order to preserve stability."

Bellemare made clear this week that he will not be influenced by politics in dispatching his duties to the law. If he is true to his word, then Hizbullah members will certainly be indicted for assassinating Hariri next month.

What this means is that the most attractive option for Hizbullah and its allies right now is to discredit the tribunal. To this end, Hizbullah has repeatedly characterized the UN tribunal as an Israeli and American plot. Syria has insisted that the Lebanese who testified before the tribunal gave false testimony.

While these allegations may have convinced their supporters, both Syria and Hizbullah know that the only effective way to discredit the tribunal is to coerce Hariri's son, Prime Minister Saad Hariri to disavow the tribunal and withdraw Lebanese governmental support for its proceedings.

While such a move would probably have little impact on the tribunal's ultimate judgment, it might reduce the political impact of the indictments for Hizbullah in Lebanon.

And so according to Ha'aretz, Syrian dictator Bashar Assad and Saudi King Abdullah reached a deal in which Hariri Jr. will disavow the tribunal. In exchange, Hizbullah will agree not to murder him.

Hizbullah has not surprisingly announced its support for the deal. Hariri has given a series of contradictory statements that lend to the sense that he is trying to run down the clock. This week he met with Abdullah in New York where the Saudi despot is undergoing medical treatment. On Wednesday he travelled to Saudi Arabia for further talks.

In the meantime, just to underline its willingness to make good on its threats, last week Hizbullah had its affiliated trade union, the National Union for Labor Syndicates stage a protest against the government. As Hanin Ghadar at the NOW Lebanon news portal noted, in the days leading up to the terror group's coup in May 2008, it had its labor affiliates stage similar protests.

And that brings us to the basic question of why is Hizbullah taking the tribunal so seriously? What does it care if its members are indicted for murdering Hariri? This is a terror group that has always been perfectly willing to kill in order to get its way. And everyone knows it.

Hizbullah operatives killed Hariri because he was irritating Nasrallah and Assad with all his talk about Lebanese sovereignty. Then they killed parliamentarian after parliamentarian to deny Hariri Jr.'s parliamentary majority the power to form a government or do anything else without Hizbullah agreement. When even that was insufficient to force the government to slavishly do its bidding, Hizbullah carried out its bloody coup in May 2008 in order to take over effective control of the government and the Lebanese army. So too, after the June 2009 elections, Hizbullah coerced members of Hariri's coalition to change sides and so prevented him from forming a coalition without Hizbullah receiving veto power over all government decisions.

And even if Hizbullah did care about what its fellow Lebanese think of it, the fact is that Hizbullah is not an independent actor. It is an Iranian proxy. And the Iranians have made clear that they do not care what the tribunal does. Iran's supreme dictator Ali Khamenei announced earlier this month that as far as Iran is concerned, the tribunal's judgments are null and void. In his words, "This court is a kangaroo court and every verdict it issues is rejected."

So again, why is Hizbullah so concerned about this tribunal?

Hizbullah is concerned because Hizbullah understands the power of symbols. No, its operatives will probably never be jailed for their crimes. But the tribunal is a symbol. If Bellmare dares to defy Hizbullah, then others might consider doing so.

On the other hand if Hizbullah is able to coerce Hariri to withdraw the Lebanese government's support for the tribunal and disavow its work, it will have demonstrated its strength and authority in a way that will deter others from challenging it.

Hizbullah's response to the specter of the Special Tribunal is not only interesting for what it tells us about prospects for Lebanon's future and for regional stability and peace. Hizbullah's response to the threat that its members will be exposed as Hariri's assassins teaches us interesting lessons about the nature of information warfare.

Information warfare is not simply a question of competing narratives, as it is often characterized in the West. Information war is a form of warfare whose aim is to use words, symbols and images to force people to take real action. These actions can involve everything from war to terrorism to surrender.

In closed societies, information warfare is used to cause people to rally around the side of the group conducting the information operation and to mobilize supporters to act against the chosen enemy. For instance, when its leadership is interested in inspiring terror attacks against Israel, the Palestinian Authority broadcasts around the clock incitement against Israel.

On May 8, 2001a group of Palestinians from a village adjacent to the Israeli community of Tekoa in Gush Etzion got their hands on two Jewish children Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran from Tekoa. The two boys were bludgeoned to death with stones. The details of the butchery are unspeakable.

The question is what can make human beings butcher children? How can a person hurt a child the way that their killers hurt them?

The answer is Palestinian television.

In the weeks before the murder, PATV (funded by foreign donors) broadcast doctored footage around the clock of what they claimed were atrocities carried out by Israel. They showed doctored images of mutilated corpses and claimed that Israel had mutilated and abused them. Israel and Jews were so demonized by these false images that after awhile, the Palestinians watching these shows believed that Jews, including Jewish children, were all monsters who must be destroyed and made to pay for their imaginary crimes.

This was an act of information warfare that in the event, led Palestinians to butcher Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran.

As for information warfare aimed at Westerners, here too, the Palestinian Authority, like Hizbullah has a long track record of success. Journalists know that the PA has no compunction about kidnapping, arresting and beating up reporters. They do it to Palestinian reporters routinely. With their sure knowledge, Western reporters who come in to the PA recognize that if they want to be safe, they have to report stories that will make the PA happy.

For instance, after a television crew from Italy's Mediaset network broadcast footage of the PA police-supported lynch mob murdering and dismembering IDF reservists Vadim Nozhitz and Yosef Avrahami in Ramallah in October 2000, Ricardo Cristiani, deputy chief of Italy's RAI television network's Jerusalem bureau published an apology in the PA's newspaper Al Hayat al Jadida.

Among other things, Cristiani wrote, "We [RAI] emphasize to all of you that the events did not happen this way, because we always respect (will continue to respect) the journalistic procedures with the Palestinian Authority for (journalistic) work in Palestine and we are credible in our precise work."

Fearing Palestinian revenge attacks, Mediaset was forced to shut down its offices. This week, Swedish and Danish police announced the arrest of four Muslim terrorists who were en route to carrying out a massacre at the Jyllands Posten newspaper. The attack was supposed to avenge the newspaper's publication of cartoons of Muhammed in 2005.

A US diplomatic cable leaked by WikiLeaks and published Monday by Sweden's Aftonbladet newspaper reported that Syria's Assad himself directed the information operation in 2006 that led to rioting against Denmark and Jyllands Posten throughout the Muslim world in 2006. Assad reportedly ordered Syria's Grand Mufti to incite his fellow imams to attack Denmark for publishing the pictures.

The Arab world's response to WikiLeaks shows just how powerful the incitement against Israel and Jews on the Arab psyche is. According to Hazem Saghiyah from the NOW Lebanon news portal, the Arab world was beset by confusion because Israel was not exposed as demonic by the WikiLeaks documents.

As Saghiyeh put it, for Arabs who have come to believe that Israel controls the world through its satanic power, "these documents should have provided the decisive argument" against Israel.

The fact that it is the Arab leadership, rather than Israel that has been exposed as lying and two-faced, makes the Arab world writ large view the WikiLeaks operation as a huge Zionist conspiracy.

What all of this shows is that information wars are not just about getting out the facts. Like kinetic warfare, they involve power plays, intimidation and the use of subconscious and visceral manipulation.

Israel has recently awoken to one aspect of information warfare. It has recognized the consequences of years of demonization of Israel in Europe and international organizations. But Israel has yet to awaken to the fact that it is a type of warfare and has to be countered with counter-information warfare.

Obviously this doesn't mean that Israel should begin acting like its enemies. But what it does mean is that Israel must begin using more hard-knuckle techniques to defend itself. It must begin targeting people's emotions as well has their minds.

For instance, when Israel is confronted by threats of lawsuits for acts of self-defense, it responds with defense attorneys. When the US was threatened with lawfare by Belgian courts, then secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld responded by threatening to remove NATO headquarters from Belgium.

When Israel is accused of targeting Palestinian civilians, it responds by attaching legal advisors to combat units. What it should be doing instead is providing film footage of Palestinian children being trained as terrorists and exploited as human shields.

War is a dirty business. Information warfare is a dirty form of war. And if we don't want to lose, we'd better start fighting.

Contact HandsFiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Robin Ticker, December 31, 2010.

Dear Caroline,

You know I love all that you do. Let's make it simple. The Key is G-d and the Torah.

If it is as you say, the reason we claim the Land of Israel is simply because our enemies deligitimize us and wish to annihilate us... Does that really Legitimize our Claim to Our Land?

If for example someone has a bicycle and threatens to kill me if I insist it's my bicycle and show how much I really need the bicycle and the wonderful things I do with the bicycle, does that make the bicycle mine? But if I can show that indeed that bicycle belongs to me then, he is terrorizing and bullying me into giving it up. If I can't show that the bicycle belongs to me, then people will just tell me to shut up so that he won't kill me.

And, if as you so convincingly show that Latin America, South America Europe the Obama Administration the UN and various NGO's are supporting FATAH and Hamas directly or indirectly with money, militarily training or politically, not to mention Iran and Saudi Arabia and the Arab countries who are collectively funding Hamas and Taliban in the billions and all are engaging in political and/or military warfare against Israel, who will help Israel fight our battles if not the Creator of the World?

Let us acknowledge His presence in all of this by speaking about the Covenant between G-d and our Forefathers and the Nation of Israel. There are many Bible Believers in the world so we are not alone. We have a common denominator. G-d and the Torah. Many refer to Torah by the name "Scriptures". The Torah is our Guiding Light in this period of darkness. Only in the Land of Israel can Commandments be actualized to the fullest by the collective Nation Israel with support of the Bnei Noach and their commitment to the 7 Noahide Laws. When we observe the Commandments in the Land, G-d promises us security. And if we fail, then G-d has His agents to wake us up or G-d forbid throw us out. When we fulfill our obligations Laws and Statutes in the Land, then G-d protects us. How can we do that when we agree even in principle to give the Land away?

Can we put on Tefillin w/o a hand? The hand is the vessel for the commandment of Tefillin. The Land is the vessel for the benefit of mankind via G-d's Chosen People Israel. Without the vessel we can not accomplish our G-dly mission.

The time has come to put G-d and the Torah in the forefront and to make it a public proclamation to the World and not keep it a private acknowledgment in the privacy of our homes Because what is at stake here is the War of Terror on mankind. If Israel doesn't take the lead to be the Lion Kingdom of the World then the evil Scar and the Coyotes take over. And Israel can not succeed unless the Almighty Powerful One is fighting for us. Let's put our efforts and bucks in the Almighty with recognition and prayer and implementing many of your wonderful suggestions while Saudis, EU, USA, the UN, Latin America, South American waste their efforts and bucks in futility.

That is the key to our Victory.

Sincerely, Robin

The essay below is entitled "The wars of 2011" and was written by Caroline B. Glick, deputy editor of The Jerusalem Post. It appeared in the JPost December 28, 2010. Contact her by email at caroline@carolineglick.com


Israel must be prepared for two things this upcoming year: A missile war with Hamas and a political war with Fatah.

On Sunday thousands of Israel haters gathered in Istanbul to welcome the Turkish-Hamas terror ship Mavi Marmara to the harbor. Festooned with Palestinian flags, the crowd chanted Death to Israel, Down with Israel and Allah akbar with Hizbullah-like enthusiasm.

The Turkish protesters promised to stand on the side of Hamas when it next goes to war with Israel. They may not have to wait long to keep their promise. Over the past two weeks Hamas has steeply escalated its missile war with over 30 launches. Last week, a missile that narrowly missed a nursery school wounded a young girl.

Since Operation Cast Lead two years ago, Iran has helped Hamas massively increase its missile and other military capabilities. Today the terror group that rules Gaza has missiles capable of reaching Tel Aviv. It has advanced antitank missiles. As Hamas spokesman Abu Obeida said Saturday, "We are now stronger than before and during the war, and our silence over the past two years was only for evaluating the situation."

That evaluation has not tempered Hamas's aim of annihilating the Jews of Israel. As Obeida's colleague Ahmed Jaabari said Saturday, Israel's Jews have two choices, "death or departing Palestinian lands."

IDF commanders are taking Hamas's new brinksmanship seriously. In recent days several have said that Israel's deterrence has eroded. Another Cast Lead is just a matter of time, they warn.

In the meantime, Fatah — Hamas's sometime rival and sometime brother — is preparing its next round of political warfare with its many friends around the world. Despite some recent tactical repositioning, its goal is clearly to proceed with its plan to declare statehood with maximum international support within the next nine to 12 months.

To this end, Fatah and its allies are operating on multiple fronts. On November 24 the UN General Assembly passed a resolution to hold a Durban III conference on September 21. The first conference, held in Durban, South Africa in September 2001, is mainly remembered as a diplomatic pogrom against Israel and Jews which complemented the shooting war in Israel.

As Jews were being butchered in pizzerias in Jerusalem, Jew-haters gathered to deny that Jews have human rights. They used the UN's anti-racism banner to assert that it is not racist to kill and incite the murder of Jews. Jews were singled out and condemned as the only nation in the world whose national liberation movement — Zionism — is racist.

BUT EVEN more important than its service in glorifying suicide bombers and their political commissars just three days before the September 11 jihadist assault on the US, the Durban conference was the place where the blueprint for the political war against Israel was authored. At the NGO conference which took place as an adjunct to the governmental conference, self-proclaimed "human rights" groups from around the world agreed that their job was to criminalize the Jewish state to isolate it politically, diplomatically and economically. As key organizers put it, the "activists"' job was to conduct a nonviolent jihad to complement the work of the "resistance fighters" massacring children and parents in Israel.

The Durban II conference last year in Geneva was supposed to reinvigorate the political war that was launched in 2001. But it was a bust. The only head of state to address the proceedings was Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He used the occasion to again call for the eradication of the Jewish state.

To prevent another flop, last month the Palestinians and their supporters agreed that the 10th anniversary conference will be held in New York during the opening of UN General Assembly. Their goal is to piggyback on that conference to get heads of state that are in New York already to join in their anti-Israel political war.

And they have every reason for optimism. Although Canada and Israel have announced their plans to boycott the conference, the Obama administration has been noticeably unwilling to distance itself from it.

Given the swank locale of Durban III, the Palestinians and their friends trust they will enjoy a reprise of the virulently anti-Jewish NGO conference of a decade ago. The resolution clearly advocates such an outcome in its call for "civil society, including NGOs to organize and support" the conference "with high visibility."

For Fatah leaders like the Palestinian Authority's unelected president Mahmoud Abbas and its unelected prime minister Salam Fayyad, the Durban III conference will be the culmination of their current campaign to delegitimize Israel.

Last week the PA announced it will ask the UN Security Council to pass an anti-Semitic resolution defining Jewish building in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem as illegal. This move dovetails nicely with Abbas's statement over the weekend that "Palestine" will be Jew-free. As he put it, "If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won't agree to the presence of one Israeli in it. When a Palestinian state is established, it would have no Israeli presence."

To date neither of these racist bids to deny Jews basic rights to their homes and land just because they are Jews has been opposed by any government or human rights group. And if the Obama administration allows the PA's anti-Semitic resolution to go forward in the Security Council, the move would be a massive victory for the political war against Israel.

That war has already won some other significant victories of late. The decision by five South American governments to recognize "Palestine" along the 1949 armistice lines, like the decision by a number of European states — following the US — to upgrade the PLO's diplomatic status are tactical gains.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signaled this month that the Obama administration is wholly on board Fatah's political warfare bandwagon. In her speech at the Brookings Institute on December 10, she said the Obama administration supports Fatah's plan to build facts on the ground that will make it more difficult for Israel to maintain its control over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

After calling Jewish presence in the areas "illegitimate," Clinton pledged the US "will deepen our support of the Palestinians' state-building efforts."

Among other things, she pledged to continue training and deploying a Palestinian army in Judea and Samaria and pressuring Israel to withdraw the IDF from the areas.

As she put it, "As the Palestinian security forces continue to become more professional and capable, we look to Israel to facilitate their efforts. And we hope to see a significant curtailment of incursions by Israeli troops into Palestinian areas."

These then are the contours of the Palestinians' war plans for 2011. Hamas will launch an illegal missile war to provoke an IDF campaign in Gaza. Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Turkey, the UN and a vast array of NGOs and leftist governments from Norway to Brazil will support its illegal war.

Fatah will escalate its political war. Its campaign will be supported by the US, the EU, the UN and a vast array of NGOs and leftist governments.

The purpose of these two campaigns — which complement one another and which will likely culminate at the UN in September — is to weaken Israel militarily and politically with the shared purpose of destroying it in the fullness of time.

SO WHAT must Israel do? In the first instance, it must decide that its goal is not merely to weather this storm, but to win both of these wars.

In recent days we have been witness to a mildly entertaining fight between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and former prime minister Ehud Olmert. Olmert accused Barak of purposely failing to defeat Hamas during Operation Cast Lead. Barak, Olmert alleged, "did everything he could to defend Hamas and to prevent its downfall in the Gaza Strip."

Barak responded to Olmert's broadside by accusing the leader who failed to defeat Hizbullah in the 2006 war of "phony Churcillianism."

Ironically, of course, both are right. Both of them led Israel in war with extreme incompetence. Both refused to put together strategies for victory.

Now as the country contemplates a reprise of Cast Lead, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu must ensure that when the IDF acts, it acts decisively and emerges victorious. If this means firing Barak, then he must be fired.

The same is true in the political realm. The Palestinian offensive must be met by a counteroffensive that is informed by a strategy for victory. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman demonstrated the starting point on Sunday when he told Israel's ambassadors that peace with the Palestinians is impossible. But this is not enough.

Any strategy for victory in political warfare must begin with a clear recognition of reality. Peace is impossible because like Hamas, Fatah is the enemy. Its leaders and rank and file reject our right to exist. They are building a state that will be at war with us. They are avidly working to delegitimize us with the intention of destroying us together with their brothers in Hamas — whom they finance with US and other foreign aid.

A political war against Fatah would involve actively discrediting its members and leaders. Today Fatah is running a campaign libeling IDF soldiers and commanders as war criminals. Israel must file valid war crimes complaints against Fatah terrorists and political leaders in the international and foreign judicial bodies.

Fatah uses the UN to delegitimize us. Our delegations at all UN bodies must daily submit resolutions calling for the condemnation of the Palestinians for their efforts to criminalize us and carry out war crimes against us.

Israel must also rally its allies to its side. We must ask our friends in the US Congress to defund the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA. The PA is a terroristic and criminal syndicate that uses US taxpayer dollars to finance terrorism and pad the pockets of terror masters and apparachiks. UNRWA, which is supposed to be a welfare organization, openly acknowledges that it employs terrorists, allows its schools and camps to be used as jihad indoctrination centers, training camps and missile launching pads. The Congressional Research Service has stated that it is impossible to claim that US funds to UNRWA do not at least indirectly finance terror groups.

At home the government must stop all tax transfers to the PA. It must prohibit the deployment of the US-trained Palestinian army in Judea and Samaria. It must rebuff US pressure to curtail IDF counterterror operations in Judea and Samaria.

The government must outlaw all organizations assisting the Palestinians in their military and political warfare operations. It should support class action lawsuits against the PA by terror victims in local courts. It should withhold diplomatic visas to representatives of countries like Britain where Israeli politicians and military personnel are barred from travelling due to Palestinian lawfare operations.

The government should implement Netanyahu's open airwaves plan and encourage the launch of a private all news network along the Fox News model.

The Palestinians clearly see the coming year as a decisive year in their war to destroy Israel. The Netanyahu government needs to muster its forces to battle. These are battles we can win. But to do so, we must commit ourselves to victory.

Contact Robin Ticker at faigerayzel@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 31, 2010.

While my skepticism about the Katsav verdict was the subject of yesterday's posting, I thought you would find Ben Dror Yemini's take on it of interest. Yemini goes much further than I do in condemning it.

Yemini is the Deputy Editor of Maariv, Israel's 2nd or 3rd largest daily (depending on whether you count the freebie Israel Hayom as one). He is also a regular columnist and blogs. He is somewhat left-of-center, but not too far, and he is militantly Zionist. He grew up in a religious Yemenite family. He is strongly critical of the seditious Far Left and the "Post-Zionists" and devotes perhaps half of his weekly weekend columns to attacking them. (Some of the rest of the time he attacks the Israeli Right.) He admits repeatedly in his piece that he is not a fan of Katsav and Katsav's politics.

Yemini's two-page Maariv article on the Katsav verdict appears today in Maariv, Dec 31. It is too long to translate but I will summarize it and paraphrase parts of it for you. Perhaps someone will translate the whole thing into English — if so, I will post it.

Yemini's column is titled "Judicial Disgrace." He begins by paying lip service to feminists and to their attempts to make the public aware of sexual mistreatment of women and other grievances. (Ok, so I TOLD you he is Left of Center!) But he then reminds his readers of the long track record of the Israeli political and media establishment (meaning the Left) in bashing Katsav. It began when Katsav first beat Shimon Peres in the 2000 vote for the Presidency. Yemini recalls how numerous leftwing journalists (including leftwing ultras Gideon Levy and Ron Myberg) in Israel compared the Katsav vote victory to the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. Amos Oz published at the time a particularly offensive piece in Yediot Ahronot about the Katsav victory, as the triumph of unenlightened religious people and conservatives, and as the impudence of the "Second Israel" (meaning lower-income Mizrachi and working-class Jews). Israel's leading comedy television program, "Eretz Nehederet," essentially the Israeli "Saturday Night Live" (but not aired on Saturday night) then "Palin-ed" Katsav, turning him into their favorite butte of mocking.

Katsav was regularly vilified by the Israeli media. After all, he is not "one of us," not a leftwing Ashkenazi yuppie. He is a man who rose from humble origins and poverty in a religious family of Iranian Jews, living most of his life in an impoverished development town in the Negev. The three justices who just found Katsav guilty (they included two women and the radical outspoken Arab judge George Kara) can claim all they want that they were not influenced by the media frenzy and assault against Katsav (writes Yemini), but their denials are not persuasive.

Yemini then reminds his readers how the whole prosecution case got started. It has dragged on for so many years that most have forgotten. It began when Katsav himself filed a complaint against the woman (still nameless and referred to in the media as "A"), who had been his Office Manager, when she had wanted to return to her previous job and demanded back pay. She was extorting and threatening Katsav and he filed a formal complaint. When Katsav refused he demands, Ms. "A" hired herself a PR man and started issuing media attacks against Katsav.

That was when the first claims of sexual harassment were made by her. Note — they were being made by the same woman demanding to return to employment with Katsav! The PR people then linked "A" up with Shelly Yachimovich. The Shelly is the head of the Taliban wing of the Labor Party. She is a far-Leftist and ultra-feminist, dreams of restoring to Israel the Stalinist central planning system that operated here briefly in the 1950s. The Shelly realized she had media dynamite in "A". That led to the most disgraceful part of the whole story.

While "A" had never claimed she was raped, The Shelly appeared on Channel Ten TV and announced that she (Shelly) knew that in fact "A" had been raped by Katsav!! The leftist media then opened a blitz against Katsav and convicted him in the press (writes Yemini).

The Shelly was then joined by Mani Mazuz, the leftist Attorney General at the time, who pronounced Katsav guilty of rape even before the investigation of the allegations had been conducted.

Katsav attempted to defend himself in the media. He made errors. He bad-mouthed "A". He attempted to recruit Yemini himself to defend him, and met with Yemini privately to state his case. Yemini says that, unlike Yachimovich, he does not engage in journalist trial by newspaper. But he then writes that if he had, he would have gone public with a Katsav-is-Innocent proclamation. The evidence and material presented to Yemini by Katsav at the time, so Yemini writes now, completely debunked what the rest of the media were running about Katsav. While Yemini says he was skeptical about many of the things Katsav claimed to him at the time, later the Prosecutor conceded that most of those points were correct. Those confirmations came out when the state was defending its offer of a plea bargain to Katsav against the media onslaught that denounced the plea offer.

There were senior prosecutors in the Israeli system who opposed indicting Katsav altogether, and who were convinced that there was not enough evidence to make a case. The plea bargain offered Katsav, and rejected by him, would have involved no jail time and a mere concession by Katsav that he had sexually harassed or misbehaved. The prosecutors themselves did not believe "A". Their written response to the complaints about the plea offer remains classified but is thought to include detailed information on why the complaints about rape by "A" were not credible and why "A" herself was not a credible plaintiff. In any case, the whole prosecution case was full of inconsistencies, contradictions about facts and dates, and other problems.

None of this disproves the fact that Katsav often behaved badly and improperly, writes Yemini. (So did Clinton but the whole world treats Clinton as a cute if naughty juvenile whose private life is no one's business. — SP) It just means that the legal case, as opposed to the media case, against Katsav was completely un-solid, writes Yemini.

The end of the story was that Katsav, contrary to the legal advice he was getting, indignantly rejected the plea offer. Had he accepted it, it would long ago have been forgotten by a world that can barely recall who Monica Lewinsky was. Had he argued in court that at his age most men are physically incapable of carrying out a rape, he also might have been cleared. (I assume his machismo did not let him raise that claim!) Instead, he is now probably to be sent to hard prison time with actual criminals. The Hebrew university leftwing sociology professor accused by several students of raping them was never prosecuted and keeps his university job. The Haaretz journalist who taught at Tel Aviv University and was accused of rape was never prosecuted.

One can only imagine what this is doing to Katsav's wife and children. One can imagine how serious is the risk now that he could take his own life.

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 31, 2010.

This was writtten by David Lev and appeared in today's Arutz-7.

If you thought the Harry Potter series was an innocent children's fantasy story, you're wrong, an Irnian movie producer says: In reality, the Harry Potter books and movies are part of a "Zionist plot" to "spread their poison." With its emphasis on witches, warlocks, and wonders, he says, the Harry Potter series "serves to spread the dark and evil essence of Zionism and its goals."

[Shlomo Wollins notes there's a video link of Iranian TV and Harry Potter plot here.]

In a series of accusations that sound ridiculous to those raised in the West, Iran's Irinn TV channel produced a documentary that purports to show how the various elements of the Potter story — the use of magic, the struggle against the Dark Lord, and other themes — essentially reflect the tenets and goals of Zionism (read: Judaism), and encourage innocent people around the world to support those goals.

"Propaganda for purity of blood and race, one of the principles of global Zionism, is openly portrayed and emphasized in the second Harry Potter film," the film's narrator says, referring to the obsession of the film's villain, Voldemort, with pure bloodlines — symbolic of the Jews' parochial attitude to non-Jewish nations. "If we add this [film] to the other pieces of the puzzle — the beliefs depicted in the other propaganda and political products of the Ziono-Hollywoodists, the Satanic features of this inhumane movement will become more evident."

In addition to the blood theme, the series alludes to the Jewish desire to rule the world, says a prominent Iranian film critic quoted in the movie. "[The Zionists] support Harry Potter because he is the promised Messiah," Sa'id Mostaghasi says. "As you can see, he has the same traits and wants to defeat a dark force, which in this film is depicted as Voldemort. In the sixth episode, there is even mention of the War of Armageddon."

Perhaps worst of all, the documentary says, is the series' attempts to influence innocent Christians and Muslims to worship the devil, as the Jews do. "The creation of new stories, based on mythical themes leading to witchcraft and devil worship, has always been a tool used by contemporary Zionists, and is once again being used by them... targeting innocent children and youth" to join them in their Satanic ways."

The Iranians are apparently the first to make the three-way connection between Harry Potter, the Devil, and Jews, although they did not invent the two strands that make up that connection; Christian Europe has for nearly a millenium portrayed the Jews as the representative of the Devil on earth, while modern-day Christian evangelicals preachers have railed against Harry Potter because of its magic and fantasy related themes — although there have been a number of commentators across the spectrum of Christianity, including evangelicals and Catholics, who have rallied to the series' defense. Thus, while the Focus on the Family group has said that the Potter books contain some positive messages, "they are packaged in a medium — witchcraft — that is directly denounced in Scripture," evangelical author Connie Neal has written.

That the Iranians would connect the devil theme to the Jews is not surprising at all, given that Christians have been doing this for much of their own history. In his seminal work on the subject, "The Devil and the Jews," author Joshua Trachteberg laid out a sordid history of European anti-Semitism, which showed that much of Christian anti-Semitism over the past 1,000 years stems from a fear — and suspicion — that the Jews were working with the Devil to destroy Christianity.

"How is it that the Jews can be hated for being Communists and capitalists — at the same time," asks Trachtenberg, as he explores some of the most ridiculous beliefs that Christians have had about Jews: that they poison wells, desecrate the "host" (the wafer representing Jesus in Catholic ritual), and destroy morality, among many other sins. In his work, published in 1943, Trachtenberg builds a persuasive case that Christians have seen Jews as allies of the Devil, working against them, and that those vestigial beliefs are still around today — for example, in the accusation that Hollywood (which everyone knows is "controlled by the Jews") spreads moral perversion and unpatriotic attitudes.

Thus, it didn't take much for Iran to pick up on these themes in its battle against Israel and the Jews, says history researcher Morris Cohen. "Those themes were out there for the taking, so it makes sense that they would use them against Israel." The Islamic world, he said, is much more vehement in its condemnation of Harry Potter than the Christian world: In 2002, the books were banned in schools across the United Arab Emirates (UAE), on the grounds that its themes were contrary to Islamic values; in 2007, police in Karachi, Pakistan discovered and defused a car bomb located outside a shopping center where the final Harry Potter novel was scheduled to go on sale that day; and of course, Iran has harped on the Jewish connection to the sorcery themes in the books, saying that "Zionists had spent billions of dollars" on it in order to encourage devil worship, as described above.

The Jewish attitude to Harry Potter, it should be noted, has been a bit more varied. While some rabbis, especially in the hareidi-religious community, have spoken against the series, few have pointed to its emphasis on magic as the reason — and are more likely to lump it together with other popular culture phenomena that can draw the attention of children away from Torah study.

However, there are a fair number of rabbis and Jewish authors who have made deep analyses of the books and movies, and have found what they say are many parallels to Jewish philosophy and thought, with themes such as the power of good over evil, the importance of loyalty and friendship, and the value of doing right vs. the value of preserving light. In an article on Aish.com, for example, author Shira Albertson says that Harry "has to find the inner strength to act with independence and conviction," reflecting Hillel's famous saying, "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?"

While one would expect Judaism to be as vociferously opposed to Harry Potter as Christians and Muslims are — after all, magic and sorcery are capital crimes in the Torah — one reason that the Jewish towards Harry Potter is more relaxed may be because of the way Jews practice the Torah. "Jews are used to interpreting the Written Law through the lens of the Oral Law, and thus don't necessarily automatically jump on things that appear 'suspicious' on the surface," Rabbi Chaim Shapiro of New York told Israel National News. "For example, the death penalty is mentioned numerous times in the Torah for a wide array of sins, but the Talmud tells us that a Court of Jewish Law that killed too frequently — even once in 70 years — was condemned. The Oral Law obviates many of these penalties, so it makes sense that rabbis would look beyond the surface on the Harry Potter issue as well."

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 31, 2010.

This was written by Gil Ronen a columnist for Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) and it appeared today in Arutz-7.

Twenty rebbetzins (wives of rabbis) sent a public letter to Jewish girls Tuesday imploring them not to engage in romantic connections with Arabs. The rebbetzins warned: "Once you are in their hands, in their village, under their control — everything becomes different. The attention you wanted for yourself will be replaced by curses, beatings and humiliations."

The rebbetzins instructed girls not to go out with Arabs, not to work in places where Arabs are employed, and not to carry out volunteer national service in such places.

Rebbetzins traditionally hold leadership status alongside their husbands in the congregation and community, especially vis-a-vis women and girls.

The rebbetzins' letter joins an earlier letter signed by over 300 rabbis, calling on Jews not to sell or rent out homes to Arabs, and citing intermarriage as one of the negative results of allowing Arabs to move into Jewish neighborhoods. In addition, demonstrations have been held in Bat Yam and the Hatikvah neighborhood in Tel Aviv, which included signs asking Jewish girls to beware of Arab suitors.

Harassed in Ashkelon

Ashkelon Councilman Tomer Glam of the "Unity of Israel" faction sent a letter Thursday to the Minister of Public Security in which he said that Arabs routinely harass Jewish girls in the coastal city and asked for a greater police presence.

"Unfortunately," wrote the councilman, "we have recently become aware of a growing nationwide phenomenon of minority-members who harass young women, which has not bypassed the city of Ashkelon. Here, the situation is getting worse in the last few years, and one reason for this is the growth in the number of buildings being constructed throughout the city. We must stress that these incidents occur repeatedly, and once every few weeks, I unfortunately receive into my care girls who wind up suffering [from these ties]."

Glam went on to point out what he said was a new phenomenon, which manifests itself on Fridays on the cities' beaches and in certain neighborhoods. Arab construction workers who rent apartments in Ashkelon or are given apartments to live in by the contractors "bring girls aged as young as 12 into town and 'go out on the town' with them at parties that include, among other things, the serving of alcohol to girls."

Glam characterized the Arabs as sweet talkers who lavish girls with gifts in the initial stages of their courtship. He asked for an increased police presence in Ashkelon.

A breakdown of authority

Family-values activists in Israel blame decades of leftist brainwashing and legislation for breaking down parental authority in the Israeli Jewish family, thus hampering parents' ability to protect and guide their children. Leftist propaganda erodes family values by demeaning motherhood and demonizing fathers.

To Go To Top

Posted by Phyllis Chesler, December 31, 2010.

Jonathan Pollard

Although he was loyal to a Middle Eastern country, the American military hired him as an intelligence officer and translator anyway — partly because he knew an important Middle East language. Nevertheless, he was a poor choice. This man passed classified documents to "insurgents" in Iraq who were battling American forces; he also had conversations with members of Al Qaeda and kept their documents on his computer.

His name — one of five aliases — is Noureddine Malki. He pretended to be from Lebanon, the persecuted son of a Muslim father and a Christian mother, and on this basis allegedly sought and received asylum in America, naturalized citizenship, and a job as an Arabic translator for the Army. He received top secret clearance and was working in Iraq where he took bribes from various Sunni sheikhs and passed classified information on to them.

He was caught, tried and, in 2008, sentenced to — ten years. Currently, Noureddine Malki (if that is his real name) communicates with people from his jail cell. He claims that he was once held in solitary for six months and wants the ACLU to investigate.

Jonathan Pollard was held in solitary for seven years and has been held captive for twenty five years.

Pollard has absolutely no blood on his hands. He has been scapegoated for the considerable crimes of the non-Jewish American Soviet spy Aldrich Ames. Unlike Noureddine Malki and Ames, Pollard passed secrets to an American ally, not to a terrorist group with which America was or is now at war.

Since I published my first piece about Pollard, I have done some further research. The facts strongly suggest that Pollard is primarily guilty of being a Jew and a Zionist. The fact that he also behaved recklessly, criminally or, some might say, heroically on behalf of America's ally, Israel, is almost beside the point.

Why was Pollard given so long a sentence? Why was Noureddine Malki given so short a sentence?

Is racial (racist) profiling the issue? Is Judeophobia more of an issue than Islamophobia is?

Radio and television host Zev Brenner, who interviewed me recently about my previous Pollard piece, has been calling for congressional hearings on the "racial profiling of Jews in American military intelligence and in the CIA and FBI." This is a hot issue and a hotly contested one. (I may return to this in another column.) Brenner called my attention to the cases of David Tenenbaum and Adam Ciralsky, both of whom were targeted as pro-Israel and/or as observant Jews.

In 1997, Tenenbaum was wrongfully accused of being an Israeli spy. According to the Defense Department's own report, Tenenbaum was specifically targeted because he was an observant Orthodox Jew: "It was well known that Mr. Tenenbaum was Jewish, lived his religious beliefs and by his actions appeared to have a close affinity for Israel," the report said. "We believe that Mr. Tenenbaum was subjected to unusual and unwelcome scrutiny because of his faith and ethnic background, a practice that would undoubtedly fit a definition of discrimination." The 62-page report added: "Mr. Tenenbaum experienced religious discrimination when his Judaism was weighed as a significant factor in the decision to submit him for an increase in his security clearance." The investigation failed to turn up any evidence against Tenenbaum.

The report also explains that one of the reasons Tenenbaum was hired in the first place was because he speaks Hebrew — obviously another Middle Eastern language.

Here's another example of the kind of racial (and/or racist) profiling I'm talking about. In 1999, Adam Ciralsky was placed on unpaid leave because he had contacts with Israelis. His "ties" to Israel included supporting Jewish causes like the United Jewish Appeal and buying Israel bonds. Eleven years later, Ciralsky's lawsuit still has not been resolved.

One of the CIA documents accusing Ciralsky said: "I think that it is important that he state openly [that] he and his family support...the Likud Party," one document says. "He may simply be withholding on this issue, because it paints him and his family as extreme supporters of Israel's hard-liners in the Likud Party, and he wishes to avoid being seen as such a lover of Israel." Another accused him of having a "wealthy daddy" who supports Israeli causes.

Are we dealing with Judeophobia? If so, why have we heard so much more about alleged Islamophobia?

According to one report, despite a shortage of Arabic translators, the FBI turned down applications for jobs from nearly 100 Arabic-speaking Jews in New York after 9/11. Translation: Jews need not apply, Jews have dual loyalty. However, Arab Muslims are not seen as suspect. This remains true despite the many instances of Arabic-speaking Muslims who have attacked America and American interests.

An anonymous source just wrote to tell me the following:

"Our son became an officer in the U.S. Navy in August of 2009 and was immediately denied any 'top secret' clearance following our making aliyah to Israel at the end of that same year. He was informed that the CIA considered our living here a potential security risk and that Israel had not only stolen U.S. secrets but had sold them to other countries including some not so friendly to the United States. Then our daughter's husband, who has been a Chief Petty Officer in the U.S. Navy for many years, was stripped of his 'top secret' clearance for the same reason, which resulted in a loss of pay and a disruption in his workload. Needless to say, none of us in the family are happy about the situation and the lies upon which these actions were based."

Where are the liberals, where are the righteous Christians on Pollard? According to one source:

"In 1998 the late Arthur Schlesinger spoke at Toronto's Holy Blossom Temple where you spoke and where we first met. After going on for an hour pleading for the release of the Burmese woman human rights leader who at the time was under house arrest, I asked from the floor of the main sanctuary, where he spoke to an audience of about a thousand, if he would similarly campaign for the release of Jonathan Pollard. Schlesinger replied: 'oh no, after all, he was a spy.' After I reminded him that the maximum sentence for spying without permission for a friendly ally was 2-5 years, and Pollard at the time was in jail for at least 10 years in 1998; Schlesinger replied from the stage: 'The Supreme Court would not agree with you.' Then I reminded Schlesinger that the Supreme Court never heard Pollard's case; that this was a violated plea bargain, and if anything, the Supreme Court should have freed Pollard due to illegal procedure; Schlesinger, greatly embarrassed at being caught in a lie, asked for the next question."

Where is the Jewish community on Pollard? I recently spoke to two different Jewish-American intelligence officials, both of whom are still angry at Pollard — not at anti-Semitism — for shadowing and stalking their own careers. What Pollard did makes it harder for them as Jews. Neither expressed sympathy or compassion for Pollard.

Tough Jews indeed.

In 1987, Pollard was allowed by prison authorities to break his plea deal when they allowed Wolf Blitzer (a Jewish journalist) in to interview him. Blitzer, who wrote for the Jerusalem Post and was a supporter of AIPAC published his interview in the Washington Post. The hubris of the media and the misguided ego of the convicted man knew no bounds. Together with the prison authorities they gave Judge Aubrey Robinson, Jr. the rope he needed with which to hang Pollard.

In 1996, Rabbi Avi Weiss compared the Jewish reaction to the Pollard affair to the Korean-American community's reaction to the arrest of Robert C. Kim, also a Navy intelligence analyst, on charges of spying for South Korea:

"The American Jewish defense agencies could learn a simple lesson from these Korean-Americans. Don't be afraid. The argument that they have no responsibility to be involved with Pollard since the case is not a Jewish issue and does not evidence anti-Semitism is absurd. Korean Americans became involved with Kim despite the fact that there are no allegations of anti-Korean sentiment in Kim's accusations."

In 1998, Abe Foxman of the ADL wrote about Pollard in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot. "His blood is not on our hands, but on his own."

According to one of my informants,

"Ten years ago I interviewed Malcolm Hoenlein in Toronto and the first topic I brought up was that of Jonathan Pollard. He agreed that the sentence was 'unjust.' I asked if there should be a big Jewish march on the White House asking for his release, just like blacks successfully marched on the White House asking for the release of Bobby Seale and Huey Newton. Hoenlein replied by saying that mass marches are not the Jewish way. He urged 'quiet diplomacy!' Esther Pollard called me shortly afterwards and told me that this remark was typical of Hoenlein and other US Jewish leaders. (The Canadian Jewish leaders, especially Frank Dimant of B'nai Brith, have much more Koiach.)"

Over the years, first, orthodox Jewish rabbis and then slowly, cautiously, nervously, large Jewish organizations, began to call for Pollard's release and pardon. Recently, the Conference of Presidents has done so as have other large Jewish-American organizations. Over the years, Israeli Prime Ministers Rabin, Netanyahu, and Olmert have requested that Pollard be pardoned. Reagan (two terms), Bush, Clinton (two terms), and Bush Jr. (two terms) have all refused to do so.

Does Pollard stand a better chance under President Obama?

Editor's Notes: These are some of the comments by Readers of the Front Page Magazine posting:

Justin K 3 days ago

Your anonymous informant, Dr. Chesler, has supplied you with a very dubious quote from Esther Pollard — one that as an officer of J4JP I am certain she never made. However, your informant would like you to believe that she did say it, because it fits with the way that she has been slandered over the years in attempt to silence Jonathan by silencing his voice on the outside. Instead of printing dubious comments from anonymous informants why not ask Mrs Pollard? You can reach her c/o justice4jp@gmail.com Your recent articles about Mr. Pollard are deeply appreciated.

Please do not inadvertently contribute to the slander that Pollard has been fighting for years. Thank you. Justin for J4JP


Another great article by Dr Chesler! There are two reasons for the Pollard case and the cases of other Jews such as those in this article and others not mentioned yet and I strongly hope all of them sue our govt which appears to be full of bigots.

The other reason is that if everyday Americans realized the vast extent in which we are funding Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas, Taliban, al-Qaeda, the Muslim brotherhood and other such groups, to the tune of billions of our taxpayer funds, including having US Generals train such terror groups in Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, giving them super-sophisticated weapons at the same time, those Americans with high morals such as those Jews in this article, would let Israel know with solid evidence how their ally, America, is selling them out as fast as possible. Such bigots in our govt would be the first to sell out Jesus, too......who had obvious high morals. If everyday Americans knew the extent in which we are helping Islamic terror groups while 'fighting them' at the same time, there would be many loud protests and these bigots would be thrown out of work. That's exactly what the bigots fear.


the enemy is entrenched within all branches of the govt. i pray someday they will be expunged by any means necessary.


Kevin stroup is typical of those people who refuse to let the facts interfere with his opinions. Stroup calls Pollard a traitor. Yet, Pollard was not charged with or convicted of treason. Obviously, that fact means little to Stroup. Second, Korb who saw the secret documents that supposedly was the evidence that caused Pollard to such a harsh sentence, has declared that the information was never given to a thierd party and basically, the information contained witheld intelligence from Israel concerning Iraq. In addition, Weinberger's bias was so deep and his c9onscience so shallow that he refused to admit that the so-called information thatg Pollard supposedly took and wound up in the hands of the soviets was really not true. Aldrich Ames and other American spies were the culprits. So, anyone who continues to fight Pollard's release oon humanitarian grounds is either just plain ignorant, a liar such as Arthur Schlessinger, or something worse.



i'll let Pollard's former case handler explain the rest http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3223047...

In an exclusive interview with Ronen Bergman, Eitan flatly denied charges that Pollard handed over to Israel information used to expose American spies in the former Soviet Union.

"I'm willing to put my hand in fire and swear in everything dear to me that those charges are a blatant lie," Eitan said. "Nothing from what Pollard delivered leaked out of the Israeli intelligence community, nothing. Besides, he never provided us with information that could have exposed American agents in the Soviet Union or anywhere else."

"We weren't interested in those subjects, and he didn't provide the information," Eitan says.

The former agent says shortly after Pollard's trial ended, Israel discovered Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger sent a top secret memorandum to the judge, accusing Pollard of exposing 11 American agents.

"The information the charge was based on arrived from the CIA, and more accurately, from the counter-espionage branch of the CIA. Only years later it turned out the person who headed the branch and initiated the move against Pollard...was a person by the name of (Aldrich) Ames, who all those years was the top Soviet spy in the U.S.," Eitan says.

"He simply took advantage of the Pollard affair to cast the blame for the affair he (Ames) himself was guilty of on Pollard, thereby clearing himself of suspicion," Eitan says. "I have no doubt that had Pollard been tried today, in light of what is known about Ames and other agents who were exposed, he would have received a much lighter sentence." [...].

so there it is. Ames fooled everybody from the 80s till when he was caught in the mid-90s and scapegoated Pollard for the serious crimes Ames himself committed (see here for what Ames did http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Gcpu0zatk) and was wrongly sentenced to what Ames should have received, but by the time anyone figured it out Pollard's Anti-American supporters had bitten the hand that feeds them so many times that the U.S. decided to give then the finger.

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D. is emerita professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. Well known author of fifteen books, including Women and Madness (Doubleday, 1972), The Death of Feminism: What's Next in the Struggle for Women's Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005) and most recently, The New Anti-Semitism, she is the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology and the National Women's Health Network. Prof. Chesler is often on international media and is a frequent contributor to INN as well as FOX News, Middle East Quarterly and others.

This appeared in Front Page Magazine and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Bill Narvey, December 31, 2010.
  Do you believe that Islamophobia is spreading nation wide thus constituting an immediate, clear and present danger to American Muslims for which they are in desperate need of protection?

The L.A. City Council sure does.

The blogosphere and many pundits are on fire over a December 8, 2010 Los Angeles City Council New Year's resolution that was unanimously passed, committing the council, in its 2011-2012 State and Federal Legislative Program, to:

"support and sponsorship of any legislation which would OPPOSE Islamaphobia and repudiate random acts of violence against Muslim Americans and that the Commission for Community and Family services be requested to report to Council on the status of the Muslim American Task Force and any other initiatives impacting the Ecumenical Affairs of the City of Los Angeles and its constituents."

Blog comments from Jihad Watch, an article by Hicks and Lehrer, Hyperbole rules in Muslim debate and by The Investigative Project on Terrorism, exemplify the multitude of outraged voices over L.A. City Council's capitulation to the dhimmification initiative of Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) for promulgation and passage of this New Year's resolution.
See: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/los-angeles-city- council-condemns-islamophobia-ignores-hate-crimes-against- groups-victimized-far-mor.html
and, http://www.dailynews.com/ci_16943041?source=most_emailed
and http://www.investigativeproject.org/2455/la-city-council- islamophobia-resolution-challenged

The full text of the Resolution is linked in a self congratulatory December 15th, 2010 article by Marium Mohiuddin, MPAC's Communications Coordinator:
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/12/ mpac_commends_l.php

A more extensive article by Americans Against Islamophobia, that includes excerpted statements at the L.A. Council hearing favouring of this Resolution, is found at:
http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/2010/12/16/mpac-commends- l-a-city-council-for-unanimous-passage-of-resolution-on-religious- pluralism-islamophobia/

In both articles, MPAC gives thanks for the support it received in pushing the L.A. City Council to promulgate and pass this resolution, specifically identifying "Faith-based and community organizations who attended the hearing in support of the resolution included MPAC, the City of Los Angeles Human Relations Commission, Progressive Jewish Alliance, New Ground alumni, Progressive Christians Uniting, All Saints Episcopal Church Pasadena and California Faith for Equality."

The websites of some of these MPAC supporters, worth your while to check out are the Progressive Jewish Alliance, committed to social justice activism:
http://www.pjalliance.org/, New Ground — A Muslim-Jewish Partnership for Change: http://newgroundproject.weebly.com/alumni.html and California Faith for Equality, which appears to be an LGBT equality and justice movement:

So what is MPAC? It says of itself in the foregoing articles:

Founded in 1988, MPAC is an American institution which informs and shapes public opinion and policy by serving as a trusted resource to decision makers in government, media and policy institutions. MPAC is also committed to developing leaders with the purpose of enhancing the political and civic participation of Muslim Americans.

The L.A. City Council and the aforesaid MPAC supporters obviously agree that MPAC is a "trusted resource", so much so, that they all put their complete faith, hook, line and sinker in MPAC's patently false message, echoed incidentally by many Muslim organizations, that all Muslims are at dire risk from Islamophobia washing over America and that a great many American Muslims have already been so victimized.

It appears the L.A. City council, MPAC and its supporters were unaware of the FBI — U.S. Justice Department 2009 report on hate crimes in America where it was found that anti-Muslim biased crimes ranked at 8.4% and anti-Jewish biased hate crimes came in at a whopping 71.9%.

Even more astounding, L.A. City Council appeared unaware of California's own 2009 Hate Crime statistics report that revealed that of religious based hate crimes, Muslims and Christians were each victimized 13 times — 1.2%, other religious adherents except Jews, 25 times — 2.3% and Jews topped the list at 160 antisemitic based crimes or 14.5.%.

These reports prove beyond doubt that Muslim claims that rampant Islamophobia in America is a bald faced lie, just as are Muslim American claims that their entire community is at grave risk from growing anti-Muslim sentiments. These anti-Muslim sentiments in proven fact, are the least evident and least manifest in America.

What is also astonishing is that Jews involved in Progressive Jewish Alliance and in the New Ground interfaith partnership with Muslims, would be so gullible and support MPAC's activist initiative to spread their false message.

Surely they must know that they and their fellow Jews, as confirmed by the FBI and California studies, are far and away, the greatest victims of religious bigotry in America.

That said, it must be also be noted that Americans have good reason to take much pride in the fact that there is relatively little religious bigotry based crime in America. That fact is doubtless a comfort to America's Jewish community as it should be for America's Muslim and other ethnic/religious communities.

Progressive Jews' anti-bigotry activism, including activism against anti-semitism, achieves a laudable purpose. Their support however, for the likes of MPAC's propagandized false message to the L.A. City Council, makes them part of the problem of fostering false impressions that American Muslims are, amongst all American religious minorities, the greatest victims of religious bigotry and anti-Muslim sentiment.

The bottom line is that for a city that is famous for setting fashion trends for America and the world, L.A. City Council's greatest priority on the cusp of the start of this New Year, appears to be to set a new dhimmitude fashion trend for its La La land citizens.

One would have thought that the L.A. City Council would instead have been busily pre-occupied with promulgating and passing resolutions to improve the well being of all L.A. citizens who have been especially hard hit in so many ways by the devastating economic crisis hitting America.

If you thought that....well...., obviously you were wrong. Silly you.

Contact William Narvey at wpnarvey@shaw.ca

To Go To Top

Posted by Boris Celser, December 31, 2010.

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East. (From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)
From "Down Under" And Up Front Challenge To The Palarab State

The following article, obtained from the antipodean J-Wire news service, is by David Singer, a Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst, and is entitled "Palestine — Lawyers, Hot Air and no Clothes":


John V Whitbeck — described as "an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team" — has recently written an article published in Al Jazeera pointing out that 106 members of the United Nations have now recognized the State of Palestine, whose independence was proclaimed on 15 November 1988.

Whitbeck also tells us that such recognition covers between 80%-90% of the world's population.

Behind these apparently impressive statistics and the conclusion that Whitbeck draws from them — the story is strikingly different. Whitbeck's claim of international recognition is pure window dressing bereft of any clothes. It amounts to hot air and nothing more.

What Whitbeck claims as fact is fiction, a state that exists in the mind rather than in reality, an ideal eagerly sought without any current prospect of being achieved.

The declaration of independence proclaimed on 15 November 1988 by Yasser Arafat was nothing more than a public relations stunt since the Palestine Liberation Organization then controlled not one single centimeter of former Palestine. Such declaration sought to be justified on the basis of the United Nations 1947 Partition Plan that had recommended division of Western Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab States. That recommendation had been unanimously rejected by the Arab League. Relying on it 41 years later seemed a hypocritical exercise in diplomatic peace making.

A large part of the world was however prepared to forget and forgive the Arab aggression that followed the rejection of the 1947 UN recommendation and grasp this 1988 lifeline in a further effort to bring about a resolution of the conflict between Jews and Arabs. It has proved to be a waste of time in achieving what the Declaration sought to supposedly accomplish.

Whitbeck further reveals the fantasy world in which he is living when he states:

"While still under foreign belligerent occupation, the State of Palestine possesses all the customary international law criteria for sovereign statehood. No portion of its territory is recognized by any other country (other than Israel) as any other country's sovereign territory, and, indeed, Israel has only asserted sovereignty over a small portion of its territory, expanded East Jerusalem, leaving sovereignty over the rest both literally and legally uncontested."

Whitbeck's claim is a load of arrant nonsense.

The criteria for recognition of a state in customary international law were codified in Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention signed on 26 December 1933 which provide as follows:

"The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:

(a) a permanent population;
(b) a defined territory;
(c) government; and
(d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states."

There is indeed a permanent Palestinian Arab population living in the West Bank and Gaza. 55% of the West Bank Arabs live in 17% of the West Bank under the exclusive administrative and security rule of the Palestinian Authority (known as Area A) and so could be said to exist within a defined territory. 100% of Gaza and its entire Arab population is under the administrative and security control of Hamas and so would also meet the first two criteria.

However such a State possesses no government. Relations between Hamas as governing authority in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority as governing authority in the West Bank. are at rock bottom. Arab League efforts to effect a rapprochement continue to founder. Death, torture and false imprisonment continue to mark the three years long internecine struggle between the two governments to win the hearts and minds of the West Bank and Gazan Arab populations. Neither has the capacity to enter into relations with other states. Both of these criteria for statehood are non-existent and their fulfillment appears a hopeless dream.

Whitbeck's claim of international recognition of the State of Palestine is therefore meaningless — other than to indicate this is a result the world would like to see. But that was also the world view in 1947 when the Arabs then rejected an Arab State in an area much larger than the one contemplated by even the most optimistic of today's recognizing States.

Whether any such an option in any kind, shape or form is available in 2010 — given the new facts created by 500000 Jews now living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem — appears increasingly to be fated to consignment once again to the garbage bin of history.

Any suggestion that the West Bank be entirely cleared of its Jewish population would be a preposterous notion that has no place in the current interpretation of international humanitarian law.

America. Russia, the European Union and the United Nations have been actively involved in trying to overcome these obstacles during the last seven years — but all to no avail. There is no prospect on the horizon that this situation will change.

Whitbeck's claim that Israel has only asserted: "sovereignty over a small portion of its territory, expanded East Jerusalem leaving sovereignty over the rest both literally and legally uncontested".

is another self-serving piece of propaganda and is completely removed from reality. It completely ignores Israel's legal right to establish the Jewish National Home in both the West Bank and Gaza under the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter. Sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza resides in neither Jews nor Arabs at the present time. Sovereignty in East Jerusalem has been claimed by Israel but not internationally recognized. Efforts extending over the last 17 years to determine sovereignty in all these territorial areas have been unsuccessful.

Israel's claim as sovereign owner of the whole or part of West Bank and sovereign ruler of East Jerusalem cannot be summarily dismissed or written off by the pathetic bleating of a former adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team. Indeed one could reasonably conclude that with advice such as this — it is no wonder that the Palestinian negotiating team have been indoctrinated into believing that they are entitled to continue to claim sovereignty in 100% of Gaza and the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem to the total exclusion of Israel's claim. As one saying goes — "I can only act on my lawyer's advice".

As another saying goes — "I think you better change lawyers because the advice being given to you by your current adviser seems to be way off the mark"

Whitbeck's conclusions on the international recognition of the State of Palestine are not worth the paper they are written on.

Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, December 30, 2010.

To My Family, Friends, Colleagues and Beyond,

My [re]solution for the upcoming 2011 Year...

To send a message to our politicians that since our November 2, 2010 was not strong enough — they are already at politics as usual — we are raising I bar of dissent a ted higher... beware!

To abolish political correctness and stick to the truth...that is our only chance for the positive changes we seek...

That we all begin using the right lexicon; we no longer say "Palestinians", rather call them by who they are — Arabs or PalArabs; "occupation" — northern Cyprus is occupied; "east" Jerusalem" then we say "east" Berlin too; "settlements" — they are Jewish Communities... We do not use wrong terms and assist the enemy...!

That we demand the PalArabs to finally submit their peace plan they keep on blaming Israel does not want... we need to know what kind of peace they have in mind... until then, no "peace" talks charade that only humiliates us... Our sages said, wasted words shorten one's life...! We must end wasting our words...

That we begin thinking of OUR peace plan...[Arab] population transfer ... post WWII era, millions of displaced people were resettled; let us end the PalArabs' "Eternal Refugee Club"; they can be moved, they have 56 Moslem countries to call their home...

And for each of us, that we take a deep breath and say, 'I am in it to help accomplish all these [re]solution and make this upside world of ours a better place to live for all humanity, for generations to come!'


Happy New Year, a year of endless possibilities to ALL.

With all my loving heart,

Nurit Greenger

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, December 30, 2010.

This is from Morton Klein, President of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). The Zionist Organization of America (www.zoa.org), founded in 1897, is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States. The ZOA works to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations, educates the American public and Congress about the dangers that Israel faces, and combats anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses. Its past presidents have included Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis and Rabbi Dr. Abba Hillel Silver.

P.A.'s Abbas Reiterates — "We Won't Agree to the Presence of One Israeli" in Palestinian State

Palestinian Authority (PA) president Mahmoud Abbas has reiterated that a future Palestinian state, if established, will be Jew-free saying, "We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won't agree to the presence of one Israeli in it ... when a Palestinian state is established, it would have no Israeli presence in it" (Khaled Abu Toameh, 'Abbas vows: No room for Israelis in Palestinian state,' Jerusalem Post, December 25, 2010).

Abbas' Fatah-dominated PA, as well as leading Palestinian figures, including those often mistakenly regarded in the West as moderates, have insisted that a future Palestinian state must be judenrein and all Jews currently living in communities in Judea and Samaria must be uprooted:

Saeb Erekat, senior Fatah/PA official, former PA foreign minister: "...nobody should agree to Israeli settlers remaining in the Palestinian [state]" ('MEMRI: Saeb Ereqat: Over the Years, Israel Has Gradually Withdrawn from Its Positions; Therefore, We Have No Reason to Hurry,' Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), July 13, 2009).

Ahmed Qurei, former PA prime minister and former PA senior negotiator: "There can be no peace with the presence of these settlement blocs in the West Bank ... the settlers are dangerous and ... it's impossible to live with them ... Peace can be achieved only if Israel withdraws to the last centimeter of the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967" (Khaled Abu Toameh, 'Qurei: No room for Jews in West Bank,' Jerusalem Post, December 13, 2008).

Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, the Dean of Al-Quds University, widely touted as a Palestinian moderate: "The Israelis now living in the territories of the future Palestinian state should return to living within the borders of the state of Israel. No Jew in the world, now or in the future ... will have the right to return, to live, or to demand to live in Hebron, in East Jerusalem, or anywhere in the Palestinian state ... What's wrong with Taibeh [an Arab city in Israel], for example, being an integral part of an Arab Palestinian state? ... Jaffa [part of Tel Aviv] too" (Interview, Al-Jazeera TV, November 30, 2007, translation courtesy of Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)).

ZOA National Chairman of the Board Dr. Michael Goldblatt said, "Mahmoud Abbas has reiterated in stark terms the PA position that it intends to create a Palestinian state in which no Jews will be permitted to live. Whereas Israel has a large Arab and Muslim minority, the Palestinians openly demand that their state be judenrein.

"While speaking to Western audiences, Mahmoud Abbas and Salaam Fayyad might rarely — and only rarely — go through the motions of claiming to acknowledge the rights of Jews to live in Israel within the pre-1967 borders or in a future Palestinian state — they have pointedly refused ever to accept Israel as a Jewish state and daily tell their people that Jews are usurpers. In any case, to Arab and Muslim audiences, they are candid that they intend to uproot the hundreds of thousands of Jews living in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) if and when they obtain their own state.

"The Palestinian demand for a Jew-free state is not only obscene and anti-Semitic in itself, but it exposes their rejection of Israel as a Jewish state and thus the reason for the absence of peace. They refuse to accept the truth of the Jewish religious, legal and historical connection to Israel and thus the right of Jews to have their own state in their biblical homeland. They not only refuse to accept Israel as a Jewish state — something they have stated publicly and repeatedly, even to Western audiences — but also insist that no Jews remain in Judea and Samaria. To acknowledge the right of Jews to live in these territories — as Jews are morally as well as legally entitled to do under the terms of the 1920 Sam Remo Conference, a legal right that has never superseded by a subsequent, legally binding agreement — immediately invalidates the PA's rejection of the religious, legal and historical basis of Israel's existence.

"In the interests of working towards a future peace, which the Obama Administration says is its priority, the ZOA urges the Obama Administration to immediately and publicly condemn Mahmoud Abbas' statement that no Israeli will be permitted in a Palestinian state and to withhold all further diplomatic support and financial aid to the PA until it rescinds this anti-Semitic, anti-peace position."

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, December 30, 2010.

This is by Dr. Daryl Temkin and it appeared in Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/9886).


With great anticipation, we await the moment that Prime Minister Natanyahu says to President Obama, "Let My Pollard Go!" How strange that this event is slated to happen at the same time that synagogues around the world are reading from the opening chapters of the Book of Exodus.

After 25 years of prolonged imprisonment and 1,000's of articles written about the Pollard case and the miscarriage of justice, it has come to a point where Israel's Prime Minister will approach the American president and request to free Pollard.

For years, the anti-Pollard voices claimed that Pollard committed an unspeakable crime but no one seemed to know the significant details and no one had access to supposedly a locked secret allegation document. Yet, significant witnesses as well as Casper Weinberger who for years had enforced Pollard's life sentence confessed that the substance for penalizing Pollard was trite. Plus, now we know that the most serious charges were bogus.

It has been stated untold times that Pollard apologized for his actions of supplying information to the nation of Israel which has always been a friend to America. Further confusing, the information which Pollard brought to Israel was information which America was to legally provide Israel. Anti-Pollard people have claimed that Pollard's information went to a third party and resulted in the death of American agents in Russia. This claim was determined to be the basis of his life long sentence. When this claim was discovered to be a false, nothing was done to rectify punishing Pollard for the misdeeds of others.

It is despicable that Pollard has been imprisoned on false charges that have been known to be false for many years. The continued imprisonment of Pollard has been a crime upon the hands of all who keep him imprisoned.

President Obama is currently the only person with the power to end the Pollard injustice and to take an action which will at least bring an end to the wrongs of the past.

Once Netanyahu makes his formal request, we will wait to see if President Obama will respond with correct action or will there be a "hardening of the heart"?

Some political advisers state that Obama should wait and leverage the Pollard release when he can gain renewed Jewish support for the 2012 election. Others say Obama should only release Pollard if he can get Israel to make major political concessions with the Palestinian leaders including an extended building freeze in Jerusalem.

What happened to doing the right thing because it is the right thing? Why is it that the right thing has to be linked to a wrong thing or to another thing?

Pollard must be released because it is a flagrant injustice to give a life sentence for an uncommitted crime. Pollard has gone far beyond the duty of paying his debt to society. Society now has a much larger debt to pay Pollard.

The human race shares a value of justice and the responsibility to build a fair and just society. When justice is abused, the entire human race suffers and bares the responsibility to rectify the wrong.

It is time that every American not be silent till Pollard is pardoned and released.

We look forward to see the American Congress and the American people stand together to support the right decision of President Obama for the immediate pardon and release of Jonathan Pollard

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Tzvi Tauby, December 30, 2010.

This is by Rabbi J. Sacks.

A Freudian Slip

It was Freud's greatest Freudian slip, and for some reason his commentators, at least those I've read, haven't noticed it.

It appears in his last book, Moses and Monotheism, a strange work if ever there was one. It was published in 1939, by which time Freud had taken refuge in Britain. Had he stayed in Vienna, heaven knows what humiliations he would have suffered before being murdered along with his fellow Jews. For some reason, at this desperate time, Freud wrote a book (he originally described it as a "historical novel") in which he tried to prove that Moses was an Egyptian. There have been many speculations as to why he wrote it, and I have no wish to add to their number. Early on in the book, though, there is a most curious episode.

Freud notes that several scholars have identified a common theme in stories about the childhood of heroes. The hero's birth is fraught with danger. As a baby, he is exposed to the elements in a way that would normally lead to death — sometimes by being placed in a box and thrown into the water. The child is rescued and brought up by adoptive parents. Eventually, he discovers his true identity. It is a story told about Sargon, Gilgamesh, Oedipus, Romulus and many others. It is also the story of Moses.

At this point, however, Freud notes that in one respect the story of Moses isn't like the others at all. In fact, it's the opposite. In the conventional story, the hero's adoptive parents are humble, ordinary people. Eventually he discovers that he is actually of royal blood, a prince. In the Moses story, the reverse is the case. It is his adoptive family that is royal. He is brought up by the daughter of Pharaoh. His true identity, he discovers, is that he belongs, by birth, to a nation of slaves.

Freud saw this and then failed to see what it meant. Instead he changed tack and concluded that the story is a fabrication designed to conceal the fact that Moses was the son of Pharaoh's daughter; he really was a prince of Egypt. What Freud failed to realize is that the story of Moses is not a myth but an anti-myth. It takes a myth and turns it upside down.

Its message is simple and revolutionary. True royalty — the Bible suggests — is the opposite of our conventional wisdom. It isn't privilege and wealth, splendor and palaces. It's moral courage. Moses, in discovering that he is the child of slaves, finds greatness. It's not power that matters, but the fight for justice and freedom. Had Moses been an Egyptian prince, he would have been eminently forgettable. Only by being true to his people and to G-d did he become a hero.

Freud had mixed feelings about his own identity. He admired Jews but was tone-deaf to the music of Judaism. That is why, I suspect, he failed to see that he had come face to face with one of the most powerful moral truths the Bible ever taught. Those whom the world despises, G-d loves. A child of slaves can be greater than a prince. G-d's standards are not power and privilege. They are about recognizing G-d's image in the weak, the powerless, the afflicted, the suffering, and fighting for their cause. What a message of courage Freud might have sent his people in that dark night! Let us at least see what he did not, that the story of Moses is one of the great narratives of hope in the literature of mankind.

Contact Tzvi Tauby at tzvi@ivolunteerny.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report, December 30, 2010.

This article is about a report written by Ehud Rosen called "Mapping The Organizational Sources Of The Global Delegitimization Campaign Against Israel In The Uk" in which the global Muslim Brotherhood is seen to play a significant role. The report begins:

Part I. The importance of Ideology

Part of the problem with understanding the phenomenon of delegitimization, even after the organizations promoting it are mapped out, is that most political observers are not fully acquainted with the groups that are involved. The Muslim Brotherhood, for example, has been at the center of a large debate in policymaking circles in both the United States and the UK over whether it should be regarded as a moderate Islamist alternative to Al-Qaeda and other violent groups or as a precursor for all modern Islamic terrorism. Therefore, any effort to map out the sources of delegitimization must first examine the ideologies and background of its constituent elements. Subsequently this paper will consider how these groups, which were never at the center of British politics, have managed to "mainstream" these efforts and acquire the impact that is being witnessed today.

1. The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Brotherhood)

I. General introduction

The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Brotherhood) was established in Egypt in 1928 by the young schoolteacher Hasan al-Banna. Banna sought to reunite the Muslim nation (ummah) following the fall of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the division of the lands of the Middle East between the Western empires, and the abolition of the caliphate in 1924. In the process of constructing a new society, Banna took inspiration from both Islamic and Western ideologies.

Banna viewed Islam as a comprehensive order (nizam shamil) that encompasses all aspects of life. His vision aspired to mobilize a gradual sociopolitical and militant process, with Islamic revival implemented initially by individuals and families, and then by the entire nation; this would be followed by political participation, which, in turn, would facilitate militant jihad, thus enabling "Western imperialism" to be driven out from Muslim and Arab lands. The basis of the revival was a return to the salaf (the early period of Islam, which incorporated the Prophet and the four "rightly guided Caliphs") and to Islam through the Quran and hadith. The Quran and hadith, however, were to be reinterpreted using modern, "reformist" terminology, in order to suit the modern era. For Banna, the route to Islamic revival passed through active proselytization (da'wah), mainly focused on middle-class and lower-middle-class youngsters and students. His followers were recruited into da'wah groups and study circles comprising small numbers of activists (up to forty), who developed loyalty to the group, the Society, and its leader.

At first, the Brotherhood mainly concentrated on establishing educational, welfare, and religious institutions. The Brotherhood, however, also developed a "secret apparatus" that came to engage in political assassination and terrorism against senior Egyptian officials. Starting in 1936, after the outbreak of the Arab Revolt in Palestine, the Brotherhood launched a campaign that included anti-Zionist/anti-Semitic incitement in mosques, the collection of zakat money, and more. It introduced its "Ten Thousand Volunteers" campaign in 1947-1948, which enlisted volunteers to participate in the fighting in Palestine and ended after Banna's death (in 1949) with the 1953 international Islamic conference in Jerusalem. Focusing on Palestine, the conference's resolutions stated that the issue "should be considered the inescapable and immediate duty of all Muslims to the limit of their capabilities," adding that peace or any dealings with Israel should be considered "punishable treason." Ever since then, those who grew up in the Society's circles have seen themselves as the Islamic spearhead working for Palestine. The Brotherhood's main ideologue in the early 1960s, Syed Qutb, further increased the revolutionary dimension of the Muslim Brotherhood, making the revolution part of Islam itself. He gradually developed a theory under which the whole world is in a situation of a new jahiliyyah (ignorance), where neither the rulers in Egypt nor the religious establishment could be called real Muslims and even the Western world had realized that Western civilization was unable to present any healthy values for the guidance of mankind. Qutb maintained that only a place where an Islamic state is established, shari'a is the authority, Allah's rules are observed, and all the Muslims administer the affairs of the state through mutual consultation can be considered the Land of Islam (Dar al-Islam); the rest of the world is the Land of War (Dar al-Harb).

Download the report Mapping_Delegitimization-1.pdf at

This Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report is available at

To Go To Top

Posted by Ari Bussel, December 30, 2010.

A woman in labor is on a hospital bed, surrounded by teams of doctors and nurses. Outside, the hospital is overtaken by family members and pre-screened well-wishers. It seems the who's who of the global scene have assembled in anticipation. Throngs of reporters line the entrances to the hospital and beyond them police barricades and security forces.

Excitement is in the air. The world, it seems, is holding its breath, awaiting the arrival of the soon-to-be-born. Champagne bottles are chilled and banners raised everywhere. The scripts have been written. Crews are assembled in strategic locations to broadcast live the long awaited arrival. There is a celebratory anticipation, people are anxious for news.

An entire suite of rooms was prepared months in advance with a well rehearsed support staff. Money is no object, and the newly born will know nothing but gold-plated handles, the finest marble, Persian rugs, artificial warmth, delicacies and comforts. When he grows up of course. Until then, he will not recognize, let alone appreciate, the opulence surrounding him.

The future holds great things for him. He is the embodiment of so many misguided hopes, that the weight on him will be almost unbearable.

For many months the woman in labor has suffered. Freedom finally awaits, a liberating end of a road of misery and suffering and an insurmountable fear of what will take place. Her agony must be handled alone, those surrounding her are concerned only insofar as the health and safety of the baby in her womb is affected.

She is otherwise ignored like a disposable piece of furniture with a specific utility, used and then thrown in the garbage bin.

She is well aware she is dispensable, even despised. There were times when she tried to console herself, other times the magnitude of her role and eventual fate overwhelmed her to tears and submission. They would not let anything happen to her until the cry of the newborn is heard, so for now she is guarded from any ills. She must be strong for the baby and is under close scrutiny.

This will not be a normal birth, and the pregnancy is anything but usual. The expectant mother knows a monster grows within her: For him to survive, her heart, liver, kidneys and eyes must be harvested, extracted. This is why so many teams of doctors are standing by for the most complicated, most expensive, most evil experiment ever carried out.

The process will have to be done while she is still alive, eyelids torn out, the heart chambers removed, brain matter extracted. To succeed, she cannot be sedated or comforted as the world shows concern only for the baby. There is no mercy or compassion for her, only for the baby, such an integral part of her present and future.

It is the beginning of the end.

How successful it is turning out to be. Who would have thought, when the journey began, that this would be its outcome? We certainly did not; we refused to see. Almost everyone fell into the trap, and those few who still refuse to concede were treated as outcasts and literally ex-communicated from within normal society.

What can be purer than a mother about to give birth? What an amazing disguise, which has deceived the world and succeeded beyond the originator's wildest imaginations.

Nothing can stop this experiment. The arrival is imminent and it must not be stopped — for the good of the world community, for the absence of a mirror in which to see the horrors we are about to unleash, the price we are about to pay.

The woman about to give birth and die is none other than modern-day Israel, the Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel.

The baby within her womb is the soon-to-be-declared Independent Palestinian State. Its parts, one in Gaza, the other in Judea and Samaria, will have to be merged and united, created into one being in the image of Satan.

No expense was spared and the very best doctors employed (many are even Jewish). The baby presented to the world will seem perfect, with a heart called Jerusalem, with limbs called Tel Aviv and Jaffa, Nazareth and Tiberias, but with a soul so evil it is beyond further corruption, or redemption.

A baby that has cannibalized his mother's organs, cutting them mercilessly from her, letting her die in agony.

Those well-wishers gathered inside the hospital and throughout the streets, the billions holding their breath for the public announcement, are a strange mix. The do-not-want-to-knows and others so brainwashed they will believe what they are told. Some know the truth, but for them cruelty is a way of life, both expected and mandatory.

Then there are those who have been so blindsided by their own vision of a newborn King — "Peace on Earth" — they only care about the baby, the mother a token of empty words and promises never meant to be kept.

For many months we have warned of the pre-eminent arrival of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian Authority has not hidden its plans. The world community started acting — from Latin American countries recognizing Palestine and Europe upgrading the status of the PA delegation — anticipating and welcoming, acting on the arrival of a free, Independent Palestine.

Jewish organizations are calling for the establishment of two states, side by side, Palestinian and Jewish Israel. They too have joined the chorus of welcoming parties. How can they miss the fun, having advocated this as part of their "goals" for the safety and security of the Jewish State, bridge building and dialogue with the "other side?"

For the Palestinians, there is only one state: Palestine. It shows on their maps, in their literature and in their speeches. The idea of Jewish presence on Arab lands is unthinkable. There can exist a Muslim nation, made of dozens of countries, but a single Jewish state is equated to the height of racism.

They do not want borders. They want free movement. They want their homes in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa. They want the Jews driven to the sea and effectively eliminated.

There will not be borders and there cannot be separation. There cannot be separate water infrastructure and food sources, sewage basins, commerce or banking. Palestine is to come out of the womb of Israel, devouring her in the process. It will replace the Israeli-Jewish entity, abolishing it, possibly never creating anything in her stead.

There will not be any promise of a future, of continuation, once Israel is destroyed. Alas, that was never the intention; the goal was clear: the destruction of the Jewish people.

It is the woman in labor I care for and worry about, not the baby in her womb. I realize the baby is her end, and she must do everything to ensure she survives. To do that she will have to make up her mind: She or the baby, only one can live. There can be no attachment, for it is make-belief and falsehoods; a hostage who starts excusing her kidnappers.

Is it a cruel decision, an inhumane practice? Choosing to live ahead of an unnatural, unhealthy, evil other?

For me the choice is clear. Labor has been extracting a very heavy toll for the past 18 years. Some believe the end is in sight: a free, Independent Palestine. But is a new beginning an end in itself or the start of something healthy and beautiful? Will there be a reality of two states, side by side (like Jordan and Israel) or the remains of a Jewish homeland, smoldering and inhabitable for centuries to come?

To destroy Israel for the sake of Palestine is not to crave and bring about peace. To unleash the horrors of the Devil on this earth and call them "sexy" and "beautiful" does not change the true nature of the process or the beast. It is neither pure nor innocent. It is meant to deceive and mislead us, and what a great job has been done thus far!

Israel must make up her mind and no one can do it for her. She will not admit it yet, but she has started to realize what is at stake. What will she have to endure before she fully comprehends her state? Will it be too late when she finally makes up her mind and becomes determined and driven to act and save herself?

The clock is ticking. The sand in the hourglass is running fast. Only seconds remain.

Like those teams of experts on standby, making sure the mother survives to the very last minute, each iota of utilization extracted from her, there are those of us standing by ready, for the sake of the mother.

We know Israel will eventually make up her mind. When she does, we will be there. We are here, just an eye blink away, a strong, viable arm on her side, ready and willing to fight, ready to do all it takes to ensure her survival. We just await the sign.

If and when she decides, Israel will survive. We will make sure of that.

Contact Ari Bussel at busselari@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, December 30, 2010.

How stable is it? That's the question these days.

At one and the same time, the coalition embraces Labor, with Ehud Barak as Defense Minister, and Yisrael Beitenu (Israel Our Home) with Avigdor Lieberman as Foreign Minister. And each, in his turn, has voiced an opinion on "peace" consistent with his party's position. Needless to say, there is no unanimity in these positions.

The question has been raised many times as to whether these ministers are "loose cannons," or are floating trial balloons — saying things unofficially that Netanyahu wants said. I myself have pondered this from time to time. But the two positions are so at odds that they cannot at one and the same time both represent covert opinions of Netanyahu. (And I'm not even mentioning Shas and Eli Yishai as Interior Minister here.)


In the last several days, Avigdor Lieberman has been in the media spotlight. At a meeting Sunday of Israel's ambassadors and counsels-general, Lieberman, who is their boss, said that because of current diplomatic and political realities, there is no chance of reaching a comprehensive agreement with the Palestinian Arabs. At least in part, he said, this is because the PA government is illegitimate [having postponed elections so that terms for the president and the legislature have expired].

"I don't think we can reach a comprehensive agreement that solves all questions of security, territory and end of conflict. I think this impossible under present conditions."

Said Lieberman, it is a mistake to create false expectations by implying that a final peace can be achieved in one to two years (which is what Netanyahu has said repeatedly): it is time to work for an interim agreement instead.

His recommendation was that there be cooperation in areas of security and economics, with core issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, and borders tabled.


I will note here that I am not in total agreement with Lieberman, who espouses the idea that reducing the economic gap between Israel and the PA would significantly help to resolve the conflict. This is myth. Ideology trumps economics — this has repeatedly been demonstrated. Additionally I wish he had said that there should be no further discussion on Jerusalem, which is Israel's eternal, united capital. But, nonetheless... he comes closer to espousing a reasonable position than anyone else in the government.


Netanyahu quickly responded that only he speaks for the government and that government positions are determined via Cabinet decisions. Lieberman's words "represent his personal assessments and positions, just as other ministers in the government have different positions from each other."

On Monday evening, in a TV interview, the prime minister said that if conditions were right, "no coalition considerations would stop me" from pursuing an historic peace agreement. The right conditions? According to Netanyahu, these are recognizing the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state, giving up on the right of return, and then additionally arriving at satisfactory terms on security.

"But up until now they are just trying to run away from negotiations...If they...accept those two basic conditions to reaching an agreement, I will not hesitate."


Netanyahu is playing word games, telling the world, "see we are not the stumbling block, look how eager we are to proceed. Don't pay attention to Lieberman, who suggests we reduce our efforts." But of course Lieberman is correct. There is not a snowball's chance in hell that the Palestinian Arabs will renounce the "right of return" and acknowledge that Israel is the Jewish state.

But neither is there the remotest possibility that Netanyahu, even as he plays these games, really believes in what he is saying. For, on Monday, along with his statement above, he also offered this:

"There could be a situation in which talks with the Palestinians hit a brick wall over the issues of Jerusalem and the right of return, and in that case the result would be an interim agreement.

"It certainly is a possibility."

(Is this, or is it not, a back-handed acknowledgement of the correctness of what Lieberman said?)


Both Labor, inside the coalition, and Kadima, in the opposition, expressed horror at Lieberman's words. "The government of Israel, headed by Netanyahu, has committed itself to the vision of two states for two peoples," read a (delusional) statement put out by Labor.

In spite of this protest and his own alleged anger with Lieberman, however, Netanyahu declined to discipline him for speaking his mind.

Thus followed a flurry of public and media statements — including a JPost editorial calling for Netanyahu to remove Lieberman from his position. The concern is that there is no coherent Israeli policy with these "wildcat" statements being advanced, and that this makes it impossible for Netanyahu to govern effectively.

That concern has some legitimacy.

Lieberman himself addressed it: "Can Israel put out a clear plan?" he asked. "That is...a good question in the political reality. With the current system of government and coalition contradictions, I don't think you can reach a common model, a common denominator..."


There are predictions that internal dissension within the government will tear it apart. But it is premature to predict this. Netanyahu is, first, an astute and tough-minded politician, guarding his own power base. He trades off one thing for another to keep his coalition intact. This is, indeed, built into the nature of coalition politics, but Netanyahu is particularly adept at manipulating the system.

That this weakens him and interferes with his ability to chart a clear course is obviously the case. In the end, as has happened so often before, we'll be saved by the Palestinian Arabs who are so totally intransigent that Netanyahu can hold tight even without that clear course.


And what are the Palestinian Arabs doing these days?

For starters, they immediately let it be known that they would not accept any interim agreement. Chief negotiator Saeb Erakat declared: "interim solutions are rejected part and parcel."


Then there are serious tensions between Mahmoud Abbas and Muhammad Dahlan, former security commander in Gaza, and until the present an active member of Fatah. Now the Fatah Central Committee has voted unanimously to suspend his membership pending an inquiry into allegations that he was planning a coup against PA leadership. I cannot speak for the authenticity of these allegations, but it is clear that the figurative crown rests uneasily on the head of Abbas, who indeed tends to be paranoid. Abbas has shut down a radio station Dahlan ran in Ramallah.

Dahlan, at not quite 50, is considered a possible successor to Abbas — he is a "Young Turk," part of the generation that rose up in the party from local roots — in his case in Khan Yunis in Gaza — as compared to the older Arafat associates such as Abbas who came here from Tunis. He will be coming to Ramallah from Cairo, where he lives, to face the charges.

Let me emphasize that there are no good guys to root for here, they are all bums. Dahlan has documented links to terrorism, and was connected to the Karine-A weapons ship. Either way, internal dissension further weakens the ability of Fatah and the PA to function. One story has it that Abbas is angry at Dahlan for insulting his sons, saying they became rich by utilizing Abbas's influence.


By the way, George Canawati of Radio Bethlehem was detained for five days by Palestinian security forces because he broadcast a news item regarding friction within Fatah party.

What is it the US says, regarding a democratic Palestinian state?


Most significantly, the PA is now preparing to bring a resolution to the UN Security Council declaring our "settlements" illegal.

There are still several unknowns regarding the precise wording of such a resolution and what the ramifications would be. It is exceedingly unlikely that it would be brought under Chapter 7, which would give the UN enforceability, and the expectation is that the US would oppose the settlement resolution.

While not specifically committing the US to a veto of such a resolution, State Department spokesman Mark Toner declared: "We have consistently opposed taking these kinds of issues to the UN Security Council.

"Final-status issues can only be resolved" through direct negotiations, he declared.


At the same time, Erekat is saying there are no plans in the near future to ask the SC to recognize a Palestinian state.


Yesterday, President Obama appointed Robert Ford, a career diplomat, as the first US ambassador to Syria since 2005. He utilized a recess appointment (i.e., appointment while the Senate is in recess) to bypass opposition from Senate Republicans. They are not amused. Ford can serve only until the end of the next session of Congress.

This is a bad move by Obama, as it rewards Syria for the wrong things. But how typically "Obama" it is.


"The Good News Corner"

There is actually — Baruch HaShem — lots of good news.

Moshe Ya'alon, Deputy Prime Minister and Strategic Affairs Minister, gave an interview to Israel Radio yesterday. Among the things he said:

— As a result of the technological damage done to its computers by the cyberworm, Iran has no capability to create a nuclear weapon now. He estimates it will take three years to develop that capacity again. (Although the US is reportedly worried about the installation of more effective centrifuges that might shorten that time.)

— The US and Europe are "straying away" from the idea of a unilaterally established Palestinian state.


An offshore natural gas reserve of great size was discovered about 129 km. northwest of the coast of Haifa about a year ago. The Leviathan, located 1,650 km into the water, has been evaluated over a period of several months, and has now been declared the largest find of it kind discovered in the world in the last decade. "It has the potential to position Israel as a natural gas exporting nation." And this, understand, is some 47 km. south of another somewhat smaller gas reserve, called "Tamar," that is said to worth $15 billion.


Israel's gross domestic product increased by 4.5% this past year, a rate of growth larger than had been anticipated. We are faring better than many countries in the OECD


A record number of tourists visited Israel this year, and Tourist Minister Stas Meseznikov hopes to see four million visitors annually by 2013.


We are witnessing a growth in aliyah, as well. More than 10,000 people moved to Israel in 2010, many from free and democratic Western nations. I.e., people are coming because of a positive connection with Israel and not because they are fleeing persecution. The average age of new olim (immigrants) is just under 30.


I confess, the secular new year passes me by with little note. Particularly here in Israel, and most especially because it falls on Shabbat this year.

For all those readers who will be taking note of this event, or celebrating, I most certainly extend wishes for a happy and healthy new year!

For those observing Shabbat tomorrow night, Shabbat Shalom.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, December 30, 2010.

Elisheva Federman mother of 10 children, and wife of activist Noam Federman, was given a 4,000 NIS fine or three-months in jail sentence after she was convicted of what the prosecution termed "incitement to racism."

Among her statements were: "Kahane is Right", "Arabs who kill Jews are not human, but act like animals". You can see that those statements and similar ones are daily uttered by many Jews, and much more inciteful ones used by Leftist against Right-wing Jews.

Noam does not have the 4,000 NIS to keep his wife who also has a health condition out of jail. Why? Read on to understand:

The Federmans speak out. They will not be silent. They cannot be crushed or broken. And this the authorites cannot tolerate.

The Federman family is a constant target of the government. Two years ago in the middle of the night 1,000 soldiers were brought to the hills of Hevron where their house was located and used physical force on Elisheva, Noam and the children when throwing them out of their home, and then destroying their house, including all furniture, toys, family pictures and clothing inside. The 10 children, one as young as 9 months-old were without jackets, shoes or socks and shivering in the bitter cold in the Hebron Hills.

A few months later the Federmans lived in a house built from metal containers in the hills of Hebron, right outside of Kiryat Arba, and again the army was sent to destroy even those temporary living quarters.

The vendetta grew against Noam and his family when Noam distributed a pamphlet instructing resistance activists how best to handle themselves when interrogated by the security forces.

The resentment of Noam Federman continued when he passed the law-bar exam and then did stash (apprenticeship) which is mandatory in Israel. The government stopped him from practicing law by convicting him of one of the many charges brought against Noam. All nonsense charges, which Noam won easily by defending himself, but one charge was mandatory to convict Noam to stop him from practicing law. A charge of "incitement" Noam was rcorded when he said, "soldiers should not follow orders in Gush Katif."

Still trying to crush Noam, the government gave Noam Ccompulsory Community Service for the "incitement" conviction. He has to travel every day from Hebron to Jerusalem's Bichor Cholim Hospital to do his Community Service and use his own money for transportation to get to Jerusalem.

In short, the authorities want to stop the Federmans from speaking out. They want to break their spirit. This I know they can never do.

Now, you can understand why Noam does not have the 4,000 NIS to keep his wife out of jail.

Noam is asking for your help. It will be dangerous for Elisheva to sit in jail and the 10 children will be without a mother and father when he is doing his Community Service.

Help a family who has the courage to say what has to be said. Don't allow a woman with 10 children and health problems to be incarcerated.

You can send as little as $18 or 18NIS. Send as much as you can. All money will be appreciated. Send check written to Elisheva Federman and mail to:

Elisheva Federman,
Kiryat Arba, Hebron, 90100

or transfer money to:

Bank Leumi #10
Branch 797
Acct.# 611544/70

Thank you from the Federmans
Please contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com and visit my website at

Barbara Ginsberg

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, December 30, 2010.

This was written by Nurit Greenger and posted by GS Don Morris, Ph.D. on the DocStalk website

The Duran III Conference is scheduled to be held in September 2011, and hopefully a broad based coalition will be there to protest and draw attention to the UN's charade.


The United Nations Organizations (U.N) is nothing but a rat hole housing the worst type bureaucrats.

The U.N practices and actions should make any democratic nation disassociate itself from it, better yet, cancel its membership.

As Jews were being butchered in pizzerias in Jerusalem, the U.N Jew-hater members gathered in 2001 at the Durban World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, that took place in Durban South Africa, to deny that Jews have human rights. They used the U.N's anti-racism banner to assert that it is not racist to incite the murder of Jews or kill them. The U.N is singling out Jews and condemns the Jewish Nation as the only nation in the world whose national liberation movement — Zionism — is racist. Just three days before the September 11, 2001 jihadist assault on the US occurred, the U.N glorified suicide bombers and their political commissars.

The Durban conference was the place where the blueprint for the political war against Israel was authored and launched.

As an adjunct to the U.N governmental conference, at the NGO conference which also took place, the self-proclaimed "human rights" "activists'" groups from around the world agreed that their job was to criminalize the Jewish state and to isolate it politically, diplomatically and economically. As key organizers explained it, the "activists'" job was to conduct a nonviolent jihad to complement the work of the "resistance-jihadi fighters" massacring children and parents in Israel.

When an organization, founded to stop wars between countries, and to provide a platform for dialogue, allows the ruthless and immoral Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stand in front of its members and call for the eradication of the Jewish state — a call for one of the worst kind of crimes known to man — then all that this organization suppose to stand for annuls itself.

The U.N Durban II — known as the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) — a continuation of the First Durban Conference, took place in 2009, in Genève, Switzerland. The conference ended up a failure.

ALONG its questionable activities, the U.N is now serving as fertile grounds for the Palestinians political war — stealth jihad — against the State of Israel. Soon to come, the U.N General Assembly will hold another Durban Conference — Durban III — in New York City and the antisemitic theater will continue with hardly any criticism from remember nations or the media.

We are to anticipate that the Palestinians and their supporters will piggyback on that conference and their ultimate goal is to get heads of state, already in New York, to join in their anti-Israel political war.

Participating at the Durban III conference will be the Palestinian Authority (PA) unelected president Mahmoud Abbas and the PA unelected prime minister Salam Fayyad culmination of their current aggressive campaign to delegitimize Israel.

The U.N is acting as the pouting Palestinians' big daddy. These spoiled brats are planning to ask the U.N Security Council to pass an anti-Israel-antisemitic resolution to define Jewish building in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria illegal. Since Abbas already declared that the "Palestine" he envisions will be Jew-free — it would have no Israeli presence — the U.N is assisting in promoting the precondition of establishing a state that will be ethnically cleansing of Jews. Christians ending up within the "Palestine" borders will be forced to move out anyhow.

The U.N racist bids to deny Jews basic rights to their homes and land, just because they are Jews, has not been seriously and challengingly opposed by any democratic government and/or human rights group. To date, no U.N nation member has stood up to rebuff the U.N organizational sanctions.

One would have expected that the Unites State — where the concrete plan for a new world organization of allied countries, under the tutelage of Franklin D. Roosevelt, was first coined — would have come out against the U.N bigotry and illicit behavior. But no; as of this writing, the Obama administration will in fact participate in the Durban III Conference and will allows the PA's antisemitic resolution to go forward in the Security Council, a move that would be a massive victory for the political war against Israel.

In a world that its moral compass is fast fading away, where an organization — the U.N — that was established to make good on the world's stage, instead, is causing nothing but upheaval and evil, what can one say but shame on humanity it has arrived at this point.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by M.S. Kramer, December 30, 2010.

In this, the first decade of the 21st century there has been a change of focus on the Middle East. Pundits previously saw Egypt and the Arabian peninsula as the foci of power. Now, power is shifting away from the Arabs to the non-Arab states of Turkey and Iran, each located along the northern rim of the Middle East. A paradigm shift in power has come to pass.

So says Professor Uzi Rabi of the Department of Middle Eastern and African History at Tel Aviv University. Rabi, who received his three degrees from TAU, is currently the chairman of his department and is incoming head of the university's prestigious Moshe Dayan Center, an interdisciplinary research center devoted to the study of the modern history and contemporary affairs of the Middle East. I recently attended a lecture given by Professor Rabi: "The Middle East in the 21st century — Iran, Israel and the Arab World," which was the featured monthly event of the English Speaking Friends of Tel Aviv University.

Rabi told the audience that Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, developed the strategic principle, the Alliance of the Periphery, which declares that Israel should seek alliances with the non-Arab states of the Middle East periphery in order to counteract the opposition of Israel's bordering Arab states. In the 1950s Iran and Turkey were two such "peripheral" states with which Israel had good relations.

The close connection with Iran changed drastically when the ayatollahs replaced the Shah in 1979, creating an Islamic republic run by clerics, intent on exporting their revolution. After returning from exile in France, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini abolished the monarchy and led his Shi'ite followers in transforming the Middle East. (Iran is a predominately Shi'ite Muslim country, unlike most Arab countries, which are Sunni Muslim. The two sects violently oppose each other.) Khomeini widened the Sunni-Shi'ite cleavage when he started the indecisive 8-year war with Iraq in1980. Iran received a major boost in Iraq with the West's 2003 invasion of Iraq. Three million Iranian Shi'ites immigrated there, joining the large Arab Shi'ite minority which had suffered under Saddam Hussein's Sunni government. In addition, Iran began to make major industrial investments to bolster its influence.

In 2004 Jordan's King Abdullah cited the impending threat of a "Shi'ite Crescent." Rabi, pointing to the map, reminded us that the Shi'ite Crescent — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon — corresponds closely with the ancient and storied Fertile Crescent. He emphasized that Iran is a proud, ancient civilization of 3,000 years which objects to the anti-Iran foreign policy of the relatively young American state. Iran's goal is to dominate the Arabs, to make them "second best to Iranians," just as the Shi'ites will come to dominate the Sunni.

Rabi pointed out that Iran is using Israel as a tool to demonstrate Iran's role as the dominant power of the Middle East. Like the Arabs, Iran sees Israel as a Western infiltrator into the Muslim world. Since 2005 Ahmadinejad has challenged Israel, a fact which Rabi surprisingly thinks is beneficial for Israel. He explained that Ahmadinejad's outrageous behavior gives Israel room to maneuver strategically, which it wouldn't have if Iran weren't such an obvious threat. Ahmadinejad's stated aims are to end Israel's nuclear monopoly in the region and to free the Palestinians from "paying the price for the Holocaust" (if it even happened) by undermining and eventually eliminating Israel.

Time is not on our side via a vis Iran, said Rabi, but the situation is in flux. Westerners and even some Arab rulers are waking up. Because Arabs, especially oil-rich Arabs, know they are in jeopardy from Iran, Saudi Arabia would likely turn a blind eye if Israel used it as avenue for attacking Iran. Describing the animosity between Arab states and Iran, Rabi gave us an example: the ongoing dispute over the name of the body of water separating the Arabian Peninsula from the Iranian plateau, historically and most commonly known as the Persian Gulf after the land of Persia (now called Iran). At a conference more than twenty years ago, Arab scholars told Rabi that the proper name of the gulf is the Arab Gulf, a designation that Iran ferociously rejected, then and now.

Again referring to the map, Rabi showed us how the emphasis on the Middle East is actually moving eastward, from Palestine-Israel to the Persian Gulf — which is a new focus. Iran is using Iraqis, Afghanis and Pakistanis as proxies, in addition to Hamas and Hizbullah, against Israel and the West. Iran doesn't need to fight the West directly, preferring to utilize its proxy armies. There is a Cold War in the Middle East and Iran is very busy manipulating behind the scenes.

Turkey, until recently an ally, has become threatening to Israel, but not at the same level as Iran. The influence of Turkey's great Westernizer, Ataturk, is on the wane after nearly a century. Turkey is emulating Iran in trying to regain hegemony over the Arabs, which were under Ottoman Turk rule for four hundred years, until the First World War. As a sign of the times, Rabi told us that Israel's students of Middle Eastern Studies are learning Turkish and Farsi, where they once would have concentrated on Arabic. Rabi said that Israel has many opportunities in this new, evolving game, which is of vital concern to Europe and America as well as to Israel.

Rabi noted that Ahmadinejad's power has lately weakened, as exemplified by the recent election results in Iran. However, the current Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, still supports him. The potent Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is becoming increasingly powerful, at Ahmadinejad's expense. (The IRGC is a combined arms force with its own ground forces, navy, air force, intelligence and special forces and is separate from the regular Iranian armed forces. It is also a multi-billion dollar business empire which has control of the borders.) Iran is at a crossroads, on the crux of victory or setback, fluctuating between revolutionary dogma and pragmatic rule. The economy is floundering and many of the young people, who make up two-thirds of the population, are swayed by Western influences, which are readily available via the Internet, cell phones, and satellite dishes. Turkey has become a big rival of Iran by its strident opposition to Israel and is a hero to the Arabs. Iran remains a dangerous, regional power but Israel has Arab backing, regardless of what Arab leaders say out loud. Distant powers, such as the EU, are belatedly waking up to Iran's threat, adding pressure on the current regime.

Professor Rabi concluded his excellent presentation by reiterating that Iran's President Ahmadinejad is an asset for Israel. Still, Israel needs to speak with one voice on foreign policy — if that's possible. Israeli diplomats must identify with and think like the Arabs do, to try to emphasize our common interests, reducing the wide gap between us, so that Israel and the Sunni Arab states can work together to prevent a takeover by revolutionary Iran. Israelis must immerse themselves in the Middle Eastern milieu by fielding open-minded diplomats who should be able to wend their way between the regional extremes.

After hearing the professor's presentation, I'm hopeful that the Department of Middle Eastern and African History at Tel Aviv University is doing just that: educating smart, capable, and flexible graduates, be they diplomats, business people, educators, writers, or whatever.

Stephen Kramer is Author of "Encountering Israel — Geography, History, Culture."

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, December 30, 2010.

For if you refuse to let them go, and hold them still, behold, the hand of G-d is upon your cattle which are in the field, upon the horses, upon the donkeys, upon the camels, upon the herds, and upon the flocks; there shall be a very grievous disease. And G-d shall make a division between the cattle of Israel and the cattle of Egypt; and there nothing shall die of all that belongs to the children of Israel.. And G-d appointed a set time, saying: 'Tomorrow G-d shall do this thing in the land.' And G-d did that thing on the morrow, and all the cattle of Egypt died; but of the cattle of the children of Israel not one died. (From this week's Torah portion, Va'eirah, Exodus 9:2-6)

We can easily understand Pharaoh's insistence on keeping the Jewish slave-nation in Egypt as the determination of a dictator intent on maintaining the existing regime's order. The liberation of the Nation of Israel would certainly destabilize the entire Egyptian hierarchy and would eventually cost him his throne and probably, his head. Archeological research points to the fact that this is indeed what happened to Pharaoh after the Jews were liberated from Egypt.

The verses, however, point to a more underlying struggle; a conflict over the very recognition of the G-d of Israel.

"And Pharaoh sent and behold, not one of Israel's livestock had died." (Exodus 9:7)

Pharaoh remains obstinate, but nevertheless wants to know if the plague really did skip over the Jews. In other words, not only is Pharaoh determined not to follow G-d's orders, he is also determined not to believe in Him!

One could possibly think that Pharaoh's ruling position had made him so obstinate. But as the story unfolds, we see that even among the simple Egyptians, some believed in G-d and others did not — despite the plagues that they endured. Some of the Egyptians were so blindly stubborn that they did not even heed an exact, time-defined warning issued by the man who had foreseen all the previous plagues. These Egyptians were willing to endanger all their possessions when they could have easily brought them indoors.

Those of Pharaoh's servants who feared G-d made his servants and flocks scurry into the houses. But those who did not heed the word of G-d, left their servants and flocks in the field. (Exodus 9:20-21)

How can this lack of faith be explained? Would anybody we know today be willing to endanger his life and possessions in the face of explicit warnings issued by those who have already proven that they are connected to reality?

The Egyptians continued to believe in their religion. They attached some sort of idolatrous explanation to each of the plagues. They had their own magicians to face off against Moses' staff. True, Moses' staff defeated the Egyptian staffs, but the bottom line was that the idolatry belief system emerged unscathed in their eyes.

There are Israelis today who "do not heed G-d's word" and continue to believe in their own religion. They are determined to continue with the diplomatic process. It makes no difference at all that all the plagues foreseen by those who "fear G-d's word" were completely fulfilled. It does not matter that they see with their very own eyes how their belief system has shattered on the hard rocks of reality, bringing with it a Palestinian state on the one hand and the loss of Israel's existential legitimacy on the other. All this, mind you, without "peace." It simply makes no difference. Their religious fanaticism is strong enough to allow them to continue to suffer and to bring this suffering on their Nation.

To understand the Egyptians, all that you have to do is listen to the news.

Shabbat Shalom,
Moshe Feiglin

Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell)

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, December 29, 2010.

This was written by Hagai Segal and it appeared in YNET News.


A short time after the Gaza disengagement in 2005, then-IDF Chief of Staff and current-day Kadima member Dan Halutz declared that "at the end of the day we shall have an answer to the Qassams."

Five years have passed since then, yet the end of the day is late in coming. For the time being, there is no answer to the Qassam rockets. It also doesn't seem like we'll have an answer anytime soon.

Meanwhile, the Iron Dome anti-missile venture is slowly emerging as an expensive screw-up. It is unable to intercept primitive mortar shells and it is also not built to stop upgraded missiles. Besides, seems like it's aimed at protecting military bases more than it is meant to protect population centers.

When IDF forces were deployed on the outskirts of Gaza City and Rafah, western Negev residents were much safer and happier. Yet one day the State of Israel decided to get out of there, because it was unpleasant to deal with stone throwers, instead betting on Iron Domes.

Instead of controlling the territory, Israel set up fences around it.

Experts say that the US military industry has much better answers to missiles. However, at this time already the IDF possesses many great weapons made in America, yet they have not helped the military resolve the Gaza problem.

Again, we are learning the hard way that there are no technological substitutes to primitive control of territory; in fact, we're not really learning.

There are still many geniuses around here who propose that we adopt the Gaza model in Judea and Samaria as well and get out of there. For the sake of our future, it would be best to make these people retire already.

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 Barbara Taverna, December 29, 2010.

This was written by Yoel Meltzer and it appeared in Ynet News
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/ CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-4005008,00.html


In recent years the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the world has been gaining considerable strength. Boycotts of Israeli products and even Israeli professionals have become commonplace in some parts of Europe. Harsh protests against Israel can be witnessed in city squares or on university campuses in North America, Australia and South America. Hollywood icons and even former presidents employ one-sided language in publicly chastising Israel and blaming her for the lack of regional peace.

In such an environment, the question begging to be asked is whether the majority of the current anti-Israel sentiment is in reality just a disguised form of underlying anti-Semitism, or whether the two items are unrelated?

When I hear firsthand stories of Jewish students on American campuses being afraid to openly identify with Israel, is this because of a threatening anti-Israel environment and nothing more? When Arabs enter into a large well-known French store outside of Paris and openly trash Israeli-made products without any police interference, is this solely an anti-Israel act? Similarly, when a local Arab group performs a flash dance in front of holiday shoppers in a St. Louis mall singing against "Israeli Apartheid" and calling for a boycott of a company that operates in Israel, are these people only against Israeli policies and nothing more?

These and a thousand other stories make it hard to believe that such blatant acts, as well as the atmosphere which seems to be nurturing them, are driven by feelings that are merely anti-Israel without any connection to being anti-Jewish.

Why wait?

Our long history in exile was periodically punctuated by times of acute anti-Semitism in our various host countries. Sometimes this was due to seemingly blind hatred while at other times it was the result of domestic problems in our host nation. Whatever the specific reason, and with the adage "those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it" in front of our eyes, it's time that the anti-Israel wave currently sweeping large parts of the world be examined more closely.

Moreover, as it is hard to believe that anti-Semitism is not a factor in the current trend, then no Jewish community in the Diaspora — be it in America, Australia, France or Argentina — should be excused from addressing the issue and no community should be lulled into thinking that things cannot get worse in their host country.

It is more difficult today to identify genuine anti-Semitism today, as in the past there was no State of Israel and thus there was no opportunity for concealing anti-Semitism under the guise of only being anti-Israel. Nonetheless, this complexity does not mean that the current situation should be foolishly ignored or denied. Therefore, to continue placing one's head in the sand and to think that all the anti-Israel sentiment sweeping large parts of the world is exactly that and nothing more, as many of the apologists would like us to believe, is being a bit naïve.

Moreover, as according to many observers both the American empire is currently teetering and economic disarray is a real possibility for many of the Euro bloc countries over the next few years, and nobody knows with certainty what will happen or who will be blamed should the situation there suddenly deteriorate, why risk it all by remaining in the Diaspora?

While the State of Israel was unfortunately not a reality during the dark times of the past, today it exists. True, it's full of many problems and difficulties and it's not always so simple to live here, but nonetheless it is an open and available home for the Jewish people. Moreover, as it is always preferable to come live here from one's own volition rather than being forced to flee here, why wait and take the chance?

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 29, 2010.

This comes from today MEMRI Special Dispatch 3477.


Egyptian Journalist 'Ata Abd Al-Aal: 'The U.S. Will Be Transformed into an Islamic Republic'; The Most Important Place For the Future of Islam, After Mecca And Medina, is the U.S.

In a recent TV interview, Egyptian journalist 'Ata Abd Al-Aal, said that ultimately "the U.S. [will] be transformed into an Islamic republic." Abd Al-Aal told the Egyptian Al-Rahma/Al-Rawdha TV that the rate of conversion to Islam in the U.S. is very high, which is "of great alarm to the Zionist circles in the U.S.," and is rising "on a daily basis."

In the interview, which aired on December 12, 2010, Abd Al-Aal, a journalist for the Al-Ahram government daily, who visited the U.S. in 2002,[1] said that the da'wa institutions in Islamic countries should stop inciting Muslim communities in the U.S. to refrain from taking part in elections, and should instead send preachers familiar with the American mentality and better equipped to encourage conversion to Islam.

Abd Al-Aal is the recipient of two awards of the Egyptian journalists' union — the first in 2004 for an interview he conducted with his 108 year-old father,[2] and the second in 2007 for his investigative research of mistakes in translations of the Koran in 15 languages.[3]

To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit here.

"The Rate of Converts to Islam in the U.S. Is Very High"

'Ata Abd Al-Aal: "The rate of converts to Islam in the U.S. is very high. This is of great alarm to the Zionist circles in the U.S., because this rate is rising on a daily basis. These converts adhere to Islam with total conviction. They become preachers themselves, and convince others to convert to Islam. You are more knowledgeable than me in this issue, and you know that many Americans convert to Islam every day."

Interviewer: "To conclude this show, let me ask: Even though Islam has a strong presence and deep roots among the Islamic communities in the U.S. and Europe, what is required of the da'wa institutions in our countries?"

'Ata Abd Al-Aal:

"They should send religious guides, as the Americans call them, or preachers, who should put an end to the calls not to participate in the elections. Some of the sheiks who go to the U.S. during the month of Ramadan or on other religious occasions incite the Muslims living there not to take part in the elections, because they are living among infidels. This is very troubling, and runs counter to the rights of the Muslims in the U.S.

"The Islamic institutions in the Islamic world should send preachers who are well versed in Islam, who know how to preach to the American mentality, and who are proficient in English and can communicate with the Americans. Over there, they must forsake their own material and personal interests, and must act for the sake of Allah."

"The U.S. Will Be Transformed into an Islamic Republic"

"[Ultimately,] the U.S. will be transformed into an Islamic republic, as a sheik in the U.S. told me. He said that the most important place for the future of Islam, after Mecca and Medina, was the U.S. [...]"


[1] http://cairo.usembassy.gov/webchat/wc052908.htm.

[2] http://www.arabicnewsarchive.com/cached-version.aspx?id=hrm-90777.

[3] http://www.almasry-alyoum.com/article2.aspx?ArticleID= 68952&IssueID=738.

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, December 29, 2010.

The fact that Jews insist on giving their land to their avowed enemies convinces people who straddle the line that Jews are not worth caring about. Anyone that has as many rights to the land as the Jews, and who nevertheless insists on ignoring their rights and powers, just aren't worth spit in many a mind. Why cannot Jews educate themselves? Why do Jews behave like sheep when it comes down to scourging and embarrassing themselves. Why do they choose to follow fallow, brain-dead leaders who haven't got enough sense to pack sand in a rat hole? Since when does one have to "play fair" with a stone-hurling hyena, which is what stone-hurling arabs are.

For goodness sake! You people slavishly adopt the foul false language of your enemies, thereby allowing them to usurp your rights by shaping the argument in their favor with their self-serving semantics. (Unfortunately, Jews who speak Hebrew are no match for Cambridge educated arabs.) Jews lack words to describe the arab invaders who smuggle themselves into the Jewish Homeland and then smile when the next Jew who observes their presence refers to these invaders as "palestinian."

Everyone with a grain of sense knows that the Jewish Homeland includes all the land between the ocean and the sea and then some. Gaza belongs to Israel and Olmert is a criminal who handed off Gaza and thereby sullied not only Israel's sovereignty, but convinced the entire world that a Jew would rather be humiliated and whipped and scourged than deprived of his or her morning nosh.

Please take the time to read your own history. Open your eyes. Read Prof. Howard Grief's seminal analysis of international law: The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law. Most knowledgeable Christians have read his book, so there's no excuse for the ignorance, cupidity, cowardice, and stupidity of Israel's government.

If the Palestinians draft a UN Resolution, stop whining about how unfair it is. Sure it's unfair, because all you're going to do is "whine and complain and weep like a Jew." That's what arabs count on you doing. This time, "think different."

YOU write a UN Resolution demanding the resettlement of all arabs occupying the lands of Israel and this time, use the boundaries recognized under the San Remo Resolution.

With all the Jewish lawyers that abound, one would think that at least a few of them would stop fiddling and swishing and finally write up a manful demand for the recognition of the boundaries confirmed under the San Remo Resolution. The arrest Shimon Peres for sedition.

We're not joking. Remember this: Arabs despise weakness. They despise mercy. The venerate power. You've got it. So use it!

Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z. Not Left. Not Right. Just 4 Justice 4 Israel.

Today, Eli E. Hertz posted the article (see below).


Calls for a freeze on Jewish construction in disputed Territories — while Arab construction, which far exceeds Jewish development, continues unfettered — are clearly biased.

Arabs claim that Jewish settlements "change the status" of the Territories and represent a distortion of the Oslo Accords. The phrase applies to acts that change the political status of the disputed territory — such as outright Israeli annexation or a Palestinian declaration of statehood. Since Jewish settlements are legal, any halt in construction should be reciprocated.

The Oslo Accords do not forbid Israeli or Arab settlement activity. Charges that further Jewish settlement activity preempts final negotiations by establishing realities, requires reciprocity. If the West Bank and Gaza were de jure part of the British Mandate, and if the Mandate borders are the last legal document concerning this territory; and if Jews were forcibly expelled from the West Bank and Gaza in 1948 during a war of aggression aimed at them — then these Territories must be considered disputed Territories, at the least.

The Israeli-Palestinian border dispute is like every other major and minor boundary dispute around the globe. Since the West Bank and Gaza were redeemed in 1967 in a defensive war and are not "Occupied Territories" gained illegally by a bellicose power; and since this fact is recognized in the wording of UN Resolutions 242 and 338 that call for a settlement to institute "secure and recognized borders," calling for a construction freeze on Jewish settlements should, logically, be paralleled by a freeze on Arab construction in the West Bank.

According to a former policy planning official, the tempo of Arab construction is "more than 10 times the number of buildings under construction [in the Territories] than those approved [by the Israeli government] for the [Jewish] settlers."

The Oslo II Agreement recognizes de facto the special status and security needs of Jewish communities in the West Bank.

The agreement regulates the relationship between Palestinians and Israelis by establishing three types of administration: full Palestinian self-rule in totally Arab areas (Area A); Israeli civil and military control in totally Jewish areas (Area C); and civil Palestinian self-rule and Israeli military control in intermediate areas (Area B). The final status remains to be established, which is why "Legally Held Disputed Territories" represents the appropriate and accurate term.

Rather than negotiate a settlement, as agreed to in September 1993, Palestinians elect to break their commitment and to intensify the use of terrorism as a political vehicle in a low-tech war of aggression.

The status issue has been co-opted and warped by the Palestinians in an attempt to curtail Jewish settlement. Neither the 1993 "Oslo I" (the Declaration of Principles) nor the 1995 Oslo II (Interim Agreement) stipulate that the construction of settlements, neighborhoods, houses, roads or other building projects cease — pending a peacefully negotiated final settlement between the parties. According to a former policy planning official, the pace of Arab construction is "more than 10 times the number of buildings under construction [in the Territories] than those approved [by the Israeli government] for the [Jewish] settlers." Calls for a freeze on Jewish construction in the Territories — while Arab construction continues unfettered, are unfair — all the more so, in light of the fact that Jews were forcibly expelled from these Territories in 1948.

Legalities aside, before 1967 there were no Jewish settlements in the West Bank and for the first ten years of so-called "occupation" there were almost no Jewish settlers in the West Bank. And still there was no peace with the Palestinian Arabs. The notion that Jewish communities pose an obstacle to peace is a red herring designed to blame Israel for lack of progress in the Peace Process and enable Palestinian leadership to continue to reject any form of compromise and reconciliation.

Because the Arabs were clearly the aggressors, nowhere in UN Security Council Resolutions 242 or 338 — the cornerstones of a peace settlement — is Israel branded as an invader or occupier of the Territories and there is no call for Israel to withdraw from all the Territories. Palestinians allegations that the wording of 242 was "deliberately ambiguous" or misconstrued are unfounded.

Professor, Judge Schwebel, a former president of the International Court of Justice, wrote in What Weight to Conquest:

"Where the prior holder of territory [Jordan] had seized that territory unlawfully; the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense [Israel] has against that prior holder [a] better title.

"As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem."

The world should take notice: Arab illegal aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel cannot and should not be rewarded.

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 29, 2010.

This was written by Daniel Pipes and was published December 14, 2010 on National Review Online
(http://www.danielpipes.org/9182/wikileaks-arab-leaders). Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

Pipes believes that what the Arabs tell us stupid/naive westerns may not be their innermost thoughts but a way of trying to manipulate us. That may often be the case. But isn't a concern about receiving the fallout of an atomic bomb aimed at Israel — or be hit by a bomb with a faulty GPS — in a different class? And the Arab leaders seem to understand better than we do that an Iran that has nuclear weapons it can release in a minute is in a strong position politically as well as militarily.


Of all the WikiLeaks revelations, the most captivating may be learning that several Arab leaders have urged the U.S. government to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. Most notoriously, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia called on Washington to "cut off the head of the snake." According to nearly universal consensus, these statements unmask the real policies of Saudi and other politicians.

But is that necessarily so? There are two reasons for doubts.

First, as Lee Smith astutely notes, the Arabs could merely be telling Americans what they think the latter want to hear: "We know what the Arabs tell diplomats and journalists about Iran," he writes, "but we don't know what they really think about their Persian neighbor." Their appeals could be part of a process of diplomacy, which involves mirroring one's allies' fears and desires as one's own. Thus, when Saudis claim Iranians are their mortal enemies, Americans tend uncritically to accept this commonality of interests; Smith maintains, however, that "the words the Saudis utter to American diplomats are not intended to provide us with a transparent window into royal thinking but to manipulate us into serving the interests of the House of Saud." How do we know they are telling the truth just because we like what they are saying?

Second, how do we judge the discrepancy between what Arab leaders tell Western interlocutors sotto voce and what they roar to their masses? Looking at patterns from the 1930s onwards, I noted in a 1993 survey that whispers matter less than shouts: "Public pronouncements count more than private communications. Neither provides an infallible guide, for politicians lie in both public and private, but the former predict actions better than the latter."

The Arab-Israeli conflict, for example, would have ended long ago if one believes confidences told to Westerners. Take the example of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt's strongman from 1952 to 1970 and arguably the politician who most made Israel into the abiding obsession of Middle Eastern politics.

According to Miles Copeland, a CIA operative who liaised with Abdel Nasser, the latter considered the Palestine issue "unimportant." In public, however, Abdel Nasser relentlessly forwarded an anti-Zionist agenda, riding it to become the most powerful Arab leader of his era. His confidences to Copeland, in other words, proved completely misleading.

The same pattern applied to specifics. He spoke in private to Western diplomats about a readiness to negotiate with Israel; but addressing the world, he rejected the very existence of the Jewish state as well as any compromise with it. After the 1967 war, for example, Abdel Nasser secretly signaled to Americans a willingness to sign a non-belligerency accord with Israel "with all its consequences" while publicly rejecting negotiations and insisting that "That which was taken by force will be regained by force." The public statement, as usual, defined his actual policies.

Not only did Abdel Nasser's shouts offer a far more accurate guide to his actions than his whispers, but he tacitly admitted as much, telling John F. Kennedy that "some Arab politicians were making harsh statements concerning Palestine publicly and then contacting the American government to alleviate their harshness by saying that their statements were meant for local Arab consumption." Thus did Abdel Nasser precisely describe his own behavior.

Contrarily, when speaking privately not to Westerners but to their own, Arab leaders do sometimes reveal the truth. Memorably, the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat publicly signed the 1993 Oslo Accords recognizing Israel but he expressed his real intentions in private when he appealed to Muslims in a South African mosque "to come and to fight and to start the jihad to liberate Jerusalem."

It's intuitive to privilege the confidential over the overt and the private over the public. However, Middle East politics repeatedly shows that one does better reading press releases and listening to speeches than relying on diplomatic cables. Confidential views may be more heartfelt but, as Dalia Dassa Kaye of the Rand Corporation notes, "what Arab leaders say to U.S. officials and what they might do may not always track." The masses hear policies; high-ranking Westerners hear seduction.

This rule of thumb explains why distant observers often see what nearby diplomats and journalists miss. It also raises doubts about the utility of the WikiLeaks data dump. In the end, it may distract us more than clarify what we know about Arab policies.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jim Kouri, December 29, 2010.

A vocal and politically powerful Muslim advocacy group is pressuring the Departments of Homeland Security and the Defense to cease using terrorism experts the group deems "anti-Muslim extremists" as trainers for counterterrorism officials.

With the help of the Washington Post editors, who support the allegations of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the newspaper stated: "Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism, some law enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies."

However, the Post does not mention that the FBI uses one of the men CAIR labels an extremist, the renowned terrorism expert Robert Spencer.

CAIR also made the same allegations against former CNN reporter Steve Emerson, who founded the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a resource recognized and used by news media organizations, law enforcement agencies, police forces and security organizations.

CAIR routinely sends its requests in letters to DHS Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, while releasing dozens of press releases condemning the same individuals. Last week, the Washington-based Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization sent a similar request to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.

According to a report from the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security: The Council on American-Islamic Relations and its employees have combined, conspired, and agreed with third parties, including, but not limited to, the Islamic Association for Palestine, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the Global Relief Foundation, and foreign nationals hostile to the interests of the United States, to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, to advance the Hamas agenda, and to propagate radical Islam.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, and certain of its officers, directors, and employees, have acted in support of, and in furtherance of, this conspiracy, said the Senate report.

Dr. Daniel Pipes, a foremost expert on radical Islam and terrorism cites several criminal cases involving CAIR officials: A senior staff member, Randall Royer a/k/a "Ismail" Royer, pled guilty and was sentenced to twenty years in prison for participating in a network of militant jihadists centered in Northern Virginia. He admitted to aiding and abetting three persons who sought training in a terrorist camp in Pakistan for the purpose of waging jihad against American troops in Afghanistan. Royer's illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.

CAIR's Director of Public Affairs, Bassem Kafagi was arrested by the US due to his ties with a terror-financing front group. Khafagi pled guilty to charges of visa and bank fraud, and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Khafagi's illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.

Ghassan Elashi, a founder of CAIR Texas chapter and founder of the Holy Land Foundation was arrested by the United States and charged with, making false statements on export declarations, dealing in the property of a designated terrorist organization, conspiracy and money laundering. Ghassan Elashi committed his crimes while working at CAIR, and was found guilty.

CAIR Board Member Imam Siraj Wahaj, an un-indicted coconspirator in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, has called for replacing the American government with an Islamic caliphate, and warned that America will crumble unless it accepts Islam.

Whenever CAIR is accused of wrongdoing, their spokesmen are quick to tell Americans that its leadership have been guests at President Bush's White House and that they are regularly consulted by US officials on matters involving homeland security.

The Washington Post also noted that the Center for Security Policy, an extremist right-wing think tank — headed by Frank Gaffney — that recently published an inflammatory report targeting American Muslims, has spoken to many law enforcement forums. Truth be told, the Center for Security Policy is neither extremist nor right-wing. It is recognized as a non-partisan think tank and a resource for the news media and counterterrorists.

While CAIR attempts to discredit Gaffney, they avoid acknowledging that he once held the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy in the Reagan Administration.

In 2010, Gaffney, along with co-authors such as former deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, Jr., released a book entitled Shariah: The Threat to America, that angered Islamists throughout the world.

"It is important that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security have access to accurate and balanced information about Islam and Muslims," said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad.

Awad added that a coalition of Muslim, Sikh, Asian-American, and other civil liberties groups recently called on FBI Director Robert Mueller to explain why Robert Spencer, a leader of an anti-Islam hate group, was invited to train state and federal law enforcement officers.

Earlier this year, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) was pressured to cease using a training film CAIR found offensive. CAIR contacted NCIS after receiving a report that a three-day NCIS surveillance detection course at the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C. Jim Kouri, Vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. Jim writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement Journal, and others. Jim can be reached at jkouri@thenma.org.

This article is archived at
http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/cair- pressuring-secs-gates-napolitano-to-stop-training-counterterrorists

To Go To Top

Posted by Asher Eder, December 29, 2010.

This below is a Women in Green News Release and it appeared December 29, 2010. See http://www.womeningreen.org


Let's make clear to us and to the Americans that the latter owe thanks to Jonathan Pollard not less than we Israelis:

Had Israel (with Jonathan's help) not bombed Saddam's atomic facilities, and had he succeeded in building the A-Bomb, he would not have merely destroyed Israel (America's ally) — rather, the Americans would have been forced to overthrow him not merely with the help of conventional weapons: they would have been dragged into an atomic war with Iraq. May they consider that well — and release Pollard finally, not merely out of clemency but in gratitude.

Dr. Asher Eder


On the evening of 21 Tevet (Monday, December 27), a special visit to Joseph's Tomb was held. Hundreds of people from all parts of Israel made their way to Shechem, to the tomb of the righteous Joseph, including a large group of Women in Green from Jerusalem, Gush Etzion, Kiryat Arba Hevron.

A special prayer for the release of Jonathan Pollard was passed among the members of the group. There is no place like Joseph's Tomb to feel for Jonathan, who like Joseph was cast into the pit by his brothers. Now the brothers repent, and ask to release him and return him to his land, on whose behalf he acted with tremendous self-sacrifice.

It was a pleasant surprise to see the renovated Joseph's Tomb, the organization and order there. Our compliments to Gershon Mesika, the head of the Samaria Council, who acted, and is still active, for the Jewish return to Joseph's Tomb.

Women in Green, in their previous tour of the area, could only look upon Joseph's Tomb from the peak of Mitzpeh Yosef (Joseph's Lookout Point), while now it is possible to return and cling to the tomb of the righteous Joseph.

There was also a frustrating feeling — of a nocturnal entrance, like thieves in the night, but simultaneously it was uplifting — remembering that progress, "the redemption of Israel comes little by little." When people exert themselves and act — the Holy One, blessed be He, helps.

May it be His will that the prayers for Jonathan Pollard will be received by merit of the righteous Joseph and he be speedily released, unconditionally, healthy and whole, to his family, his people, and his land.

Editor's Note: Joseph's Tomb, on the outskirts of Nablus (ancient Shechem) in Samaria, has been torched, desecrated and vandalized by the Arabs several times since the Palestine Authority (PA) obtained control of it in 2000, after having promised to protect and preserve the holy site and allow Jews to pray there. The Jews has restored it each time, despite harassment from their own government, which has sought to keep them from the Tomb of the Biblical Joseph.

Palestinian youth dancing after burning Joseph's Tomb.

Read more about the arab vandalism and destruction at
http://buffalo-israel-link.org/page9.html and

For the photographs by Gemma Blech: go here.

Contact Dr Eder by email at avrason@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, December 29, 2010.

Britain revealed Tuesday that it arrested nine terrorists last week, five days before a planned "Christmas bomb blitz" that would have targeted two rabbis, among others. The names of the rabbis were not released, and authorities did not reveal several details of the planned attack.

All nine terrorists were either born in Britain or grew up there. Some of them are of Bangladeshi origin, according to the London Daily Mail.

Besides two rabbis, whose addresses were written on a list, other targets included a London tourist attraction, the London Stock Exchange, Mayor Boris Johnson, the dean of a cathedral and the American embassy.

The terrorist gang also had visited Big Ben, a McDonald's restaurant and other sites where large crowds gather.

They already had tested explosives in preparation for the bomb blitz, according to evidence presented in court. All of the men are under the age of 29 and were arrested in a series of dawn raids after London intelligence officers conducted a surveillance operation and recorded the cell's conversation.

Publication of the arrests and charges against the terrorists coincided with charges by the Israeli Defense Ministry that the "Palestinian Return Center" is operating in London as the organizational arm of Hamas.

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu writes for Arutz Sheva, where this appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis, December 29, 2010.

For the past month I`ve been on the road, crossing continents and addressing Jewish communities wherever they are. I go from the airport to the local synagogue or some other venue where the people gather.

Invariably, I am asked, "Rebbetzin, how do you do it? People younger than you can not keep up with such a schedule. Nowadays, travel is so difficult. Don`t you find it exhausting?"

Exhausting?" I answered, "it`s far beyond that. Travel nowadays has become a nerve wracking nightmare."

DURING THESE past weeks I have spoken in Brazil, Hungary and Eretz Yisrael. But allow me to describe to you just one small part of what I experienced. As some of you may know, there are no longer any direct flights from New York to Budapest, so our travel agent suggested that we go through Paris. We had quite a lot of luggage because from Budapest we were scheduled to fly directly to Eretz Yisrael, and the climate on these two continents is totally different. Hungary was in the throes of bitter cold and Israel was experiencing an unprecedented heat wave.

I must admit that I usually run late. My schedule is so tight that it does not permit me to be early. In addition to packing, there is much to do before I depart, not the least of which is writing this column ... So, as usual, we arrived at JFK just in the nick of time. We went through the endless security check, removing our jackets and shoes, etc. etc. and finally, when we arrived breathless at the gate, we discovered that our flight to Paris had been delayed two hours. We tried to explain to the agent that we had to make a connecting flight. "Don`t worry," she assured us, "they know that. You'll have plenty of time."

Finally, we boarded the plane and it started to taxi down the runway, but suddenly, it came to a stop. "We are very sorry for any inconvenience" came the polite announcement, "but due to the weather, there will be a further delay!" And with this, we were consigned to sit on the runway for another hour.

Would you say that that was enough to aggravate you? ... Wait — that was just the beginning!

So what do I do to protect myself from stress? I tell myself, Baruch Hashem that I didn`t listen to those who said that I could depart on Thursday night rather than on Wednesday and still arrive in Budapest in time for Shabbos. Baruch Hashem, I never forgot the teaching of my revered father, HaRav, HaGaon Avraham Halevi Jungreis, Z'tl who was careful never to schedule any travel that would bring him to his destination on erev Shabbos. "The Satan is on the road erev Shabbos, "he would say, "and places obstructions in one's path". So I smiled to myself and in my mind said, "Thank you, Tatie" and that thought, in and of itself was calming. B'ezrat Hashem, I would still arrive in Budapest in ample time to speak at the Shabbaton.

Finally, we arrived at Charles De Gaulle Airport in Paris, and of course missed our connecting flight. I do not know if you are familiar with that airport. It is one of the biggest and most difficult to navigate in Europe. We were sent from gate to gate, airline to airline, even to Malev, the Hungarian national airline, only to discover that there was no longer a Malev desk. Not only were the distances between these gates enormous, but the agents were, for the most part, discourteous and arrogant. We called our hosts in Budapest, Adrienn and Robie, who had visited our Hineni organization in New York and become totally inspired and committed. They were at the airport awaiting our arrival and worried as to what could have happened to us. They suggested that we take a flight to Vienna where they would pick us up by car.

There were only two problems with that suggestion — our luggage, which was ticketed for Budapest, had yet to be located, and heavy snow was falling in Vienna as in most of Europe.

At another airline counter it was suggested that we buy new tickets which would perhaps get us to Budapest on time. We called our travel agent in NY, but there was not much he could do. But before we could even consider purchasing new tickets, we were informed that there were no seats available on that flight! The web of aggravation tightened around us. Another thought from my childhood gave me some comfort..."Let it all be a kaporah! (Perhaps the best way to convey the meaning of this word is to ask that the aggravation that we experienced would be a substitute — an atonement that would spare us from all other problems).

To make a long story short, we finally arrived in Budapest at 1:00 AM only to discover to our dismay that all of our luggage was missing! We were directed to Lost and Found where the agent searched the computer and curtly informed us that she was very sorry, but she had no idea where our luggage might be.

"Is it still in Paris?" I asked hopefully.

"No," she responded coldly.

"Then where is it?" I persisted.

"I already told you. It did not come up on the computer. I have no further information to give you!"

"When do you think you will know?" I asked again, and this time, there was a definite sound of annoyance in her voice as she said, "If we find it, we will let you know."

Now, bear in mind that while we were supposed to arrive in Budapest on Thursday morning, it was now erev Shabbos. I did not have a change of clothing or shoes (I always travel in sneakers). And worse, from Budapest we were scheduled to continue on to Eretz Yisrael, and all our clothing was missing! To console us, the agent offered us a little kit containing a toothbrush, toothpaste and a T-shirt.

As we left the airport, I once again asked, When can we expect to get our luggage?"

Again, she repeated, "I cannot tell you. I will be searching, but so far the computer shows nothing."

How could I go into Shabbos wearing these crumpled clothes? How could I speak before a large audience? Would you agree that this was surely enough to test anyone's nerves? Once again, I tried to muster my strength and say to myself, "Kaporah". Somehow, it will all come to right. Is it not written that he who is on a mitzva mission cannot fail? And surely, reaching out to our brethren who are on the brink of disappearing in the deep sea of assimilation is one of the greatest mitzvahs!

On our way to the hotel we were told that while it had snowed the entire day, and it stopped on our arrival, heavy snow was forecast through Shabbos. Now I had a new concern. "Will we have an attendance?"

"Oh Rebbetzin, don't worry," Adrienn assured me. "Everyone will come. Nothing will keep them away."

Just the same, I couldn't help but worry because I knew that, under the best of circumstances, in countries like Hungary, Jewish awareness is so minimal that you can consider yourself fortunate if 40-50 people show up.

We fell asleep from sheer exhaustion, but to our relief, in the morning, we saw the sun trying to emerge and melt away the snow. Hopefully, we called to see if there was any news of our luggage. "No," they told us, we are still searching, but if we locate it (and the word "if" had an ominous ring) we'll contact you." At this point we had no choice but to resign ourselves to reality and try to clean and iron our clothes in honor of Shabbos.

When I arrived at the synagogue, I understood the meaning of "kaporah". It all paid off! The shul was packed with countless secular young people — a rare sight in European countries where Judaism is disappearing. I very much wanted to address my audience in Hungarian, but while I speak Hungarian, my vocabulary is limited since I was deported to the concentration camps at a young age. I told our hosts that initially, I would make a few introductory remarks in Hungarian, but would then continue in English, pause after every few paragraph, and have a translator to convey my thoughts. Miraculously however, no sooner did I start speaking in Hungarian, than Hashem gave me the words and I was actually able to dispense with the translator and speak freely

The response was electrifying. Suddenly, the loss of luggage, the aggravation in Paris, the stress at Kennedy, all disappeared. Nothing was important except the Jewish light sparkling in their eyes. This blessing was repeated at the Shabbos lunch — seudah, and again motzei Shabbos — Saturday night, when we had a huge gathering in one of Budapest's theaters. Jews came from all over Hungary and the large hall quickly filled to capacity. We showed our film, "Triumph of the Spirit" which portrays my experiences during the years of the Holocaust. Amazingly, once again I was able to speak in Hungarian and dispense with the earphones that had been prepared for simultaneous translation.

Young and old, men and women, were all awakened. The pintele Yid in their souls became a flame from Sinai. Perhaps never before, since the Holocaust, was there such a gathering of Jews in Hungary. To this very moment, I receive letters from our Hungarian brethren who are now embarking on a life of Torah and mitzvos.

Would I do it again?

Of course — When you weigh the joy and brocha of seeing Jewish people who, only yesterday, were on the brink of spiritual death come to life again.... when you see our Torah saturating their hearts, kindling their souls with commitment and faith, then aggravation is replaced by spiritual joy, exhaustion by exhilaration and despondency by energy. And so, once again, would I do it again? Am I ready to undertake the next journey? Of course! It's already set.

Am I tired? Of course — but the fulfillment in my heart is much more powerful than any exhaustion and I believe that this holds true for all of us. It's all a matter of looking beyond the moment and seeing the greater picture of our life`s journey.

Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis is founder of Hineni which includes the Hineni Foundation Center in New York City (http://www.hineni.org) and a Jerusalem chapter. She writes a column called "The Rebbetzin's Viewpoint" for the Jewish Press.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ido Pachter, December 29, 2010.

The essays below are archived at

A recent poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research showed interesting trends in the attitude of Arabs of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip in a number of fields: confidence in government, understand of public and personal situations, expectations for the future, and more. The survey took place after the US government announced that it will stop trying to convince Israel to freeze building in settlements and the poll's editors explained that "pessimism about the restoration of unity between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip increases, and... more people now believe that they cannot criticize the authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip without fear... while the credibility of the authorities in the two regions diminishes in the eyes of the public."

The results of the poll can be found here:

One interesting result of the survey, which is not new for our readers, is the high percentage of Gaza, Judea and Samaria residents that are interested in emigration. According to the poll, no less than 45% of Gaza residents and 24% of those from Judea and Samaria expressed a desire to emigrate, due to the current unstable political, security and economic situation they live under. This percentage rose by 8% in Gaza in the last three months, while in Judea and Samaria it remained the same.

In addition, only 10% of Gaza residents believe that their central problem is the Israeli naval blockade, while 28% think that poverty and unemployment are the main problem. Another 26% think lack of national unity is the biggest problem, while 10% responded that corruption in government institutions is the central problem for Palestinians.

These numbers clearly show that ideology and armed conflict are not the biggest issue for Gazans. Rather, they are concerned with their socioeconomic situation and the despair that they have lived in since Hamas took over the Strip. One can assume that a large percentage of them would favor an agreement to accept Palestinian refugees in other countries, should such a plan be proposed. These people are less concerned with Palestinian nationalism — but rather with living a better life. The world cannot ignore this, especially when, as the poll says, fear of Hamas is higher than ever.

The numbers in this poll have been repeated in polls by international research institutions. They all show the Palestinians' true need: not a state or removing the blockade, but to live in peace and security, enjoying conditions that allow a normal life.

Everyone — governments around the world, human rights organizations and the international media — must give attention to this need, and allow refugees to be rehabilitated in host countries. Anyone interested in humanitarianism should open his or her eyes and ears and listen to what this public is saying, what they really need, and help them immediately.

What's the alternative?

In the last month several countries announced they recognize a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. Argentina and Brazil announced it in the past, and recently Ecuador and Bolivia made similar remarks. Their act was not backed by the European Union or the US, due to pressure from Israel and from Israel's allies in the American Congress.

This phenomenon is disturbing. When Arafat declared Palestinian statehood in 1988, no state outside of the Arab League took him seriously. Now, 22 years later, the idea has approval from countries around the world before the Palestinians have even made a declaration...

Support for a Palestinian state is only growing as PA President Mahmoud Abbas tours the world and gains political support and PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad works on the infrastructure of a future state. The US — Israel's greatest ally — has publically announced its support for the Palestinians, and everything is done with the generous sponsorship of the nations of the world, who donate funds in order to promote this cause.

How did Israel fall into this trap? How did an idea that was once considered impossible get so much support?

The answer is clear. Since his speech at Bar-Ilan Univesrity, in which Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced his support for a two-state solution, many arguments against such a state have become irrelevant. The whole world, including many citizens of Israel, have undergone a long process since the Oslo accords and have fallen into the trap of the two-state concept, unaware to the great tragedy that this idea has brought and will bring to the entire Middle East.

It's interesting to see a document from July 2009, leaked by WikiLeaks, which quotes French President Nicolas Sarkozy as telling Netanyahu: "You think you have time, but you don't. You think there is an alternative solution, but there isn't. You think that you are stronger than the Palestinians, but you are not."

Unfortunately, there is a lot of truth in what Sarkozy says. Today, Israel is invested in proving to the world why the Palestinians are the "bad guys," and we aren't, but this effort is useless: the Palestinians, as the representatives of the weak, oppressed side, undeniably have more power in the world's conscience than Israel does. Any attempt to prove otherwise is doomed to failure.

The only solution is that Israel goes from passiveness — waiting until the world imposes a solution on us — to political activeness. There are other solutions, alternatives to a two-state solution that will bring us to an agreement from a position of power and not weakness.

It is not too late to prove to the world that we can bring an end to conflict in other ways. In order to do so, we have to stop being passive, we have to stand strong on our two legs and form a solution that will defend and protect the interests of the State of Israel.

UNRWA and the Bedouins

In our previous newsletter, we reported that UNRWA supported the Bedouin camp of Khan al Akhmar after a court ordered that its central school be closed. We warned against UNRWA's anti-Israel activities and called upon the Israeli government to pay attention. Now, it turns out that UNRWA's connection to the Bedouins — which were never refugees — has gotten even stronger.

Muhammad Al-Kurshan, the president of the Jerusalem Bedouin Board, spoke recently at a conference of the UN Forum for Minorities in Geneva, saying that the UN should recognize the Bedouins' right to Area C, and that they are "Palestinian refugees" and "a minority under occupation". Kurshan even invited UN representatives to visit Bedouin camps.

How did the Bedouins become refugees and Israel their occupiers? The answer can be found in the organization that funded Kurshan's stay in Geneva and his participation in the conference — UNRWA, of course. Yes, with a bit of money and a trip to Geneva, even a Bedouin can become a Palestinian refugee, and tearing down illegal buildings can become persecution of a minority.

The connection between UNRWA and the Bedouins is getting closer, and this is not good for Israel. Israel needs to speak up against the UNRWA's cynical methods of taunting Israel in international forums. This connection should be broken.

As always, we're happy to hear your questions and comments.

Ido Pachter is with The Israeli Initiative. Contact him at by email at hayozmaNL@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 29, 2010.

This is a news item:
News number: 8910070858 12:45 | 2010-12-28

TEHRAN (FNA) — Two Iranian nationals who were convicted by the Revolutionary Court earlier on charges of supporting the anti-Iran terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) and spying for the Israeli regime were hanged Tuesday morning.

Ali Saremi was arrested in 2007 for the fifth time since 1982 for repeated active presence in anti-revolutionary gatherings organized by the MKO and sending information for the group. The Iranian security forces discovered a number of CDs, footages, pictures and notes related to the MKO at his residence.

Tehran's Islamic Revolutionary Court after hearing his defense sentenced Saremi to capital punishment.

Also, Ali Akbar Siadat, another person arrested for having contacts with Mossad since 2002 was hanged on Tuesday morning in Tehran.

He was accused of transferring classified information of Iran's military and aviation activities to his Israeli bosses. The Revolutionary Court charged him with measures taken to strengthen the Zionist regime, confrontation against the Islamic Republic and corruption.

In October, Iran arrested seven individuals on charges of spying for Israeli intelligence services. According to security and judiciary officials, one of the spies was involved in counterrevolutionary activities, and one was working on issues pertaining to the country's domestic affairs.

Five others were arrested for infiltrating the country's administrative institutions and passing classified data to foreign countries.

These spies supplied the enemy with information on Iran's judiciary, military and space agencies, among other things, prior to their arrest.

Tehran's Prosecutor Jaffari Dolatabadi said that other cases of espionage were being investigated by the prosecutor's office.

Also in October, Iranian Minister of Science, Research, and Technology Kamran Daneshjoo warned that the spy agencies of several enemy states were striving hard to infiltrate and influence the country's academic centers.

"...enemies are trying to change the Islamic atmosphere of the universities into their own favorite atmosphere of liberal-democracy and to give a new definition for Islamic values based on their own views," Daneshjoo said.

The Iranian minister further reminded the alarming remarks of the Supreme Leader about the continued efforts made by the enemy spy agencies to influence Iranian university students, and stated, "How can one rest under such conditions? Enemies are active in this regard because they have realized the importance of universities."

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul LaDemain, December 29, 2010.
  We are the Secular Christians for Zion. We reviewed the video of Helen Thomas' rant against Jews and now wonder about you and your organization, given that you people entertain the notion of conferring honorariums on this dyspeptic old fraud of Lebanese extraction.

Thomas Video here.

Your desire to venerate this poisonous old frog has us wondering if you are brethren to the small sect of Jew-hating Australians who include that foul-mouthed bigot, Mel Gibson. Y'now, the faded former film star who sucked poison from his father's Jew-hating lips and then spewed it all over Malibu. Or are you merely politically-correct sycophants, grateful to the Saudis who still nestle under BHO's wing, thus all the more frightened of arabs because you fear they will yank their patronage?

Helen Thomas didn't emote as she did out of a sudden bout of senility. This rabid old Jew-hating croaker has harbored her long-held anti-Jew agenda in check so that she could join without note the club of Saudi-sponsored bureaucrats who shill for the Saudis at the US State Dept. And you people who want us to think of you are journalists were afraid to out them? Seems so! And shame upon the Kissinger-jews amongst you. And how shameful you all are for hiding the truth about Jimmy Carter and his punk pal, Brzezinski, both of whom helped the Egyptian-born terrorist, Yasir Arafat, promote the entirely false notion that there is a special sect of arabs known as "palestinians" and that only arabs are "palis" and that they owned what has long been recognized as Palestine, the Jewish Homeland.

Which means that you people who want us to believe you are journalists are the ones who helped Jimmy Carter invent the foul rubbish that would have the world believe that Jews have no connection to the lands of Israel.

We know history because we are older and wiser than you brats. Brats who never knew rationing, brats who never collected tin foil to help the troops during WWII; brats who uncritically squawk the arabist's talk, just like the bad old days when the fascists rose to power and Neville Chamberlain sucked up to them. Ignorant brats who have no memory of and thus no respect for the tens of thousands of Americans who laid down their lives so that our generation could be free of fascism. And now you ignorant brats want to honor a woman who pretended to be an American all the while harboring her fascist longings to be seen as a part of the so-called "master race"?

She should go back to Lebanon and let Hezbullah feed her face.

We are the Secular Christians for Zion. Unlike yourselves, we are not poisoned by "political correctness." Unlike yourselves, we are not afraid to read Prof. Howard Grief's seminal analysis of international law: "A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the land of Israel — The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law."

We guarantee you won't like it because it speaks truth to Helen Thomas' lies.

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Bedein, December 28, 2010.

Nahum taught be how to be a brother. When I came to Israel, he said that he missed me. And he meant it. That was forty years ago.

35 years ago, I came on special trip to America. To suggest that Nahum come on a summer program to Israel. His first words I will never forget: "That means that we'll be together", he said.

He was a regular 20 year old guy, coming also for the social amenities of a summer in Israel. And then I asked him, as gently as I could, would he like to try out a yeshiva.

"That sounds cool", he said.

And on Nahum's second day in Israel, we went to the Western Wall, where Rav Meir Shuster whisked him off to a yeshiva.

Nahum was never the same. Israel was in his blood. Judaism was in his blood. Nahum went back to Temple University with a new thought, that he would complete his degree in the department of religion, and that he would become a Rabbi.

Well, Nahum came to Israel, registered for Pardes, with the intention of going back to study at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College.

He had confided in me that he wanted to bring happiness to people, and that this was why he wanted to be a Rabbi

In 1977. I saw him on his first day in Israel, on the grass at Hebrew University.

"I'm here to stay, David, I am here to stay"

."I am going to misrad hapinim (ministry of interior) to change my status", he said. He had fire in his eyes.

Something had happened when he hit the ground in Israel.

And within a few months, he had made that second decision, to become an observant Jew.

And when Nahum chose the profession of being a hotelier, he would always say to me that this was his way to bring happiness to people.

And he brought happiness to me as a brother, always helping, always there.

He would conclude every conversation, very simply, "I love you Dave".

And every trip abroad, from every landing, it was Nahum whom I would call to say that I arrived OK and Nahum who would look at every aspect of my work, so that it would come through OK. Nahum, you might say, was my private Rabbi.

And I ascribe my ability to succeed in the rough and tumble world of business to the advice that my brother gave me.

And when I walk into the new office that I am now facilitating at the new media center in the Malcha Technological Center in Jerusalem,

It will be an honor to place Nahum's picture in the corridor and to call it the Nahum Bedein Center for Near East Policy Research.

There is a popular Israeli song.

" Be my friend, be my brother, be there to reach out to my in a moment of my distress..."



That was Nahum.


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

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, December 28, 2010.

For those still unaware in these post 9/11 times, dhimmitude describes the status of peoples conquered by both Arabs and other successive Islamic armies since the former burst out of the Arabian Peninsula waging Jihad in the name of the Dar ul-Islam against the rest of the world from the 7th century C.E. onwards.

If the conquered were "People of the Book" (mostly Christians and Jews) and submitted peacefully, many survived without conversion to Islam. Not so, however, for those to Arabia's east...Hindus, Buddhists, and such either converted or were slaughtered.

Now, if you were a dhimmi, there were lots of regulations and things that you had better learn quickly — beyond the obligatory special taxes you had to pay to simply be allowed to live as a "protected" person on your own land.

Rather than get into a long list of what dhimmitude entailed/entails (Bat Ye'or is the essential historian on the subject), let's just sum it up in a few words...subjugation, humiliation, subservience, ingratiation — for starters. The dhimmi better well know his place.

While the circumstances of dhimmitude have varied in severity depending upon place and time, among other things, the overall effect was to create a specific frame of mind in those caught in its embrace. Think Uncle Tom blacks for an imperfect analogy.

And in this discussion, the condition of the Jew was unique in some very important ways...

He was not only a dhimmi to Muslims, but a much despised one at that since Jews rejected Muhammad's overtures to them from the very beginning of his leadership.

Jews fleeing the Roman conquest in Judea had established the date palm oasis at Medina in the Arabian Peninsula centuries before Muhammad was born. Their influence was so significant in southern Arabia that Yemen had Jewish kings not long before the rise of Islam.

When Muhammad fled his Meccan enemies during the Hijra, it was the mixed pagan Arab/Jewish town of Medina which granted him refuge. To win the important support of the People of the Book, he even had his early followers pray in the same direction that the Jews did — towards Jerusalem.

After the Jews rejected Muhammad's religio-political claims as the Seal of the Prophets and such, he turned on them with a vengeance... mass extermination of the males and enslavement of the women and children soon followed. And the direction of prayer, the qibla, was changed towards the Ka'ba in Mecca.

So, the Jew as dhimmi was already predisposed for extra special problems of later conquest. Forced conversions, massacres, and such were not strangers to those whom Arabs would label killers of Prophets, kilab yahud (Jew dogs), sons of apes and pigs, and so forth.

For fourteen centuries before the rise of modern political Zionism, Jews indeed had to tread very carefully in the Dar ul-Islam. It's therefore no accident that, among the staunchest Zionists (i.e., Jews wanting the resurrection of their own, sole state as Arabs wound up with almost two dozen), are Jews whose origins are in the so-called "Arab"/Muslim World.

Now, add to the above condition of dhimmitude in the Muslim East, the plight of the Jew in the Christian West. There, the Jew was declared to be killer of G_d and child of the Devil...and treated accordingly. Scholarly estimates show as many or more Jews slaughtered prior to the Holocaust than during it — and with no machine guns or Zyklon B gas to assist in the earlier process.

As centuries of dhimmitude helped to shape the dhimmi Jewish and others' mindset, centuries of forced subjugation, dehumanization, ghettoization and such of the Jews did likewise in Christendom.

So, for the Jew, the reality has been that a case of double dhimmitude has had to be dealt with.

One of the greatest scholars any civilization would ever produce, Islam's Ibn Khaldun, had this to say about this very topic six centuries ago...

Students, slaves, and servants brought up with injustice and tyrannical force are overcome by it... makes them feel oppressed... induces them to lie, be insincere... their outward behavior differs from what they are thinking. Thus they are taught deceit and trickery...become dependent on others... their souls become too indolent to acquire... good character qualities. Thus they fall short of their potentialities and do not reach the limit of their humanity.That is what happened to every nation which fell under the yoke of tyranny and learned the meaning of injustice. One may check this by observing any person not in control of his own affairs with no authority on his side to guarantee safety. One may look at the Jews (as an example)... The reason is what we have said.

Keep all of this in mind as we proceed...

Lately, Egypt's ongoing oppression of its non-Arab Copts (about ten million pre-Arab, native Christian people) has increasingly been making news — in at least some media outlets. Not enough news, mind you, for anyone to really do anything about it. After all, Israel is not involved here...But enough to give you another hint of some of what dhimmitude still consists of.

For a good look at dhimmitude Egyptian-style, please follow the conversation below between the late President Sadat's Foreign Minister, Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and a visiting Israeli author, Amos Elon (Flight Into Egypt). A Copt, it was largely believed that Boutros-Ghali was chosen for this post precisely because of his unquestioned, assured loyalty. Centuries of dhimmitude could be expected to have done its thing — and it most certainly did. Here's some excerpts from Elon...

In his office, there is a map of the Middle East on which Israel is still blacked out. Israel must integrate by accepting the nature of the area...that nature that is Arab...In a tape of a long discourse delivered in 1975 to Professor Brecher he proclaimed that...in the vast area between the Persian Gulf and the Atlantic Ocean everyone had to be Arab or risk continuing strife...Still, Boutros-Ghali felt that there might be a solution. How?...Well, Israel could become an Arab country. Most Israelis were (Jewish) immigrants from Arab countries anyway.

As I like to say...Uncle Boutros instead of Uncle Tom (a chapter in my own new book, by the way).

Now, let's move on to how all of this has affected dhimmi Jews — whether in the West or the East. While Christians outside of the Middle East have illustrated this behavior too, it's the Jews who will be the focus of the rest of this essay, for a number of troubling reasons.

The term Court Jew came to symbolize, over the ages, the Jew who, apart from the vast majority of his brethren, was able to gain influence and some measure of acceptability among his rulers. Most were bankers and businessmen who could be used, and there was often competition among these folks for the Court's favor.

In modern times, Jews who serve in public positions and such have often been expected to bend over backwards, sideways, and forwards to prove their disconnect to anything Jewish.

Think Uncle Boutros again as you contemplate those who served as Secretary of State James (F' the Jews, they don't vote for us anyway) Baker's stick-it-to-the-Jews "Jew Boys;" Cap Weinberger (even though a convert); both old and new sickening revelations about Kissinger; the current White House's Jew stooges; and so forth.

To get ahead, too often Jews are expected to be apathetic to anything Jewish...especially if it has to do with the resurrected Jewish nation.

For Jews to get simply be accepted in too many other places, this pattern too often persists as well. Think media and academia, for example...

In courses pertaining to the Middle East, in particular, too often the Jew who uses one set of lenses to scrutinize Israel and a far different set in the study of the "Arab"/Muslim World" which surrounds it is the Jew who gets to teach the subject. The same story holds true for most of the mainstream press and media.

And that brings me to the second half of this essay's title...


What mainstream newspaper, which now specializes in double dhimmitude, not only has a favorite yes man working for it, but has him as a featured no man as well?

As some of my friends would say...the (dhimmi) Jew Yawk Times!

See if you can guess the author of this gem. While discussing Iraq, he wrote...

"What part of 'no' don't you understand? You Kurds are not breaking away."

Okay, that was back on March 26, 2003. So, here's a more recent hint...

"Israel, when America, a country that has lavished billions on you...and has taken up your defense...asks you to halt settlements for three months to get peace talks going, there is only one right answer...It is: 'Yes, whatever you want, because you're our only true friend in the world.' (December 11, 2010)."

The author, of course, is Thomas L. Friedman.

And, by the way, Tommy boy, for many years now, America has spent more for Arabs in Iraq alone, in one week, than Israel gets in one year. Not to mention American lives and limbs lost for the former as well.

Having said this, the December 11th op-ed still had merit to it. I too believe that it's time to let Arabs and Jews work out the issue themselves with less meddling from the outside.

But Friedman does his usual shtick in which he places blame equally on both parties.

While no one side guilt free, the blame is not equal in this conflict.

Whether Friedman — who likes to see himself as the origin of the Saudi Peace (of the grave) Plan — likes it or not, Israel is not obligated to return to the suicidal armistice lines — not borders — forced upon it in '49. UNSC Resolution 242 called for it to finally gain secure, defensible, real borders after the Arabs renewed attempt on its life in 1967. The settlement and building freeze issues are all about whether Israel gets a reasonable territorial buffer/compromise, a la 242, or is forced to return to its 9-15 mile wide sub-rump state status. Friedman knows this, yet expects Israel to simply cave in to all that Arabs and their other Saudi Peace Plan fan, President Obama, demand.

As I continuously remind folks, two main points in that Saudi plan call for a total withdrawal of Israel to the '49 lines and, after it again becomes virtually invisible on a world globe, Israel is next expected to agree to accept millions of real and alleged Jihadi refugees.

Geez, given the above, why can't those unreasonable Hebes just say what Friedman demands..."yes, whatever you want..."?

By the way, more Jews fled the "Arab" world and left far more property and wealth behind because of the combined Arab attack on a reborn Israel in 1948 than vice-versa, but without almost two dozen other states to go to as Arabs now have.

Now, contrast Friedman and the Times's obsession with creating Arab state # 22 with his quote from 2003.

Despite the fact that Arabs have a long history of subjugating and massacring hundreds of thousands of them, the only thing Friedman could say to 35 million truly stateless, used and abused Kurds in the region about their one best hope for independence (in Iraq) was...

"what part of 'no' don't you understand..."

Like others of his hypocritical ilk, the Times's Mr. Yes & No Man has no trouble lecturing Israel to take steps towards suicide for the sake of creating Arab state # 22 (and second, not first, in "Palestine"...since 1922 Jordan sits on almost 80% of the original 1920 mandated territory). Yet he behaves deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to discussing the plight and rights of scores of millions of non-Arab peoples in the region.

Incidentally, the Kurds were promised independence in at least part of the Mandate of Mesopotamia after World War I, but a collusion of Arab nationalism with British petroleum politics nipped it in the bud. Arab Iraq was created and wound up with the entire territory instead, the oil of the Kurdish north included.

Why is it that the Friedmans and their Lefty media enablers can only see justice through Arab eyes?

Where are the op-eds and editorials demanding, for example, that if Iraq erupts into civil war upon America's withdrawal, independence for the vulnerable Kurdish north should, at long last, be supported?

Why is yet another partition of the Mandate of Palestine demanded to create that 22nd Arab state, but no partition whatsoever is required of the much larger, former Mandate of Mesopotamia — today's Iraq — so that tens of millions of Kurds in the region can finally attain one state? And Kurds are not the only non-Arab folks treated by the new "Liberals" this way.

Recall, once again, the dhimmi Copt, Boutros-Ghali's, advice (quoted by Amos Elon)stating that Israel must consent to Arabization to gain "acceptance." And, after you do this, please take another look at what the Times and its favorite mouthpiece have been up to.

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 Boris Celser, December 28, 2010.

This was posted yesterday by Ned May at
http://bigpeace.com/nmay/2010/12/27/i-am-the-mother of-the-boy-that-was-brutally-slaughtered-by-your-son/

This letter was forwarded to a blogger on a Dutch news site. It was written by a woman in Antwerp to the mother of an imprisoned Moroccan criminal. The woman wrote the letter after seeing the criminal's mother on a Flemish television news program.

Many thanks to Timo of the Dutch Defence League for the translation:

Dear Madam,

I saw your vehement protests in front of the TV cameras against the transfer of your son from a prison in Aarlen to a prison in Leuven. I heard your complaints about the distance that separates you from your son and the difficulties you have in visiting him.

I also noticed the media attention from journalists and reporters about other mothers in similar situations: they are defended by several organization for human rights and such.

I am also a mother, and I completely understand your protests and discontents. I want to join you in your battle because, as you will see, there is also a large distance between me and my son.

I work hard, earn less, and have the same financial difficulties in visiting my son. With a lot of effort I can reach him on Sundays, because I work all the other days, even Saturdays, and besides that I have my family duties towards my other children.

In case you didn't understand it yet: I am the mother of the boy that was brutally slaughtered by your son, in the gas station he used to work for at night to pay for his studies and support his family.

I will visit him again next Sunday. While you hold your son in your arms and cuddle him, I shall only lay some flowers on his modest grave at the city cemetery.

Oh, and I almost forgot: you don't have to worry, the state keeps a part of my lousy wage to pay for a new bed for your son, because he burned the two previous ones in his cell where he is doing time for the brutal crime he committed.

Finally, also as mothers, maybe we can contribute something to stop the inversion of human values. Human rights should only be there for the rightfully deserving.

So much for a letter from a grieving mother. Maybe this is something that we, in these dark days, should think about more often!

Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, December 28, 2010.

This was written by Rabbi Meir Kahane and appeared in the magazine of the Authentic Jewish Idea March-April 1989/Adar-Nissan 5749.

If you did not receive this article personally and would like to be on my weekly Rabbi Meir Kahane article e-mail list, contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com Previously sent articles can be viewed on: www.barbaraginsberg-barbara.blogspot.com

In the days when men were humble enough to know what they were — and what they were not; what they knew — and what they did not, the ignoramus knew his place. Whatever arrogance existed was the province of those who were, at least, nominally scholars. And so, while ignorance and arrogance are both attributes to be shunned, their separation was at least a small favor for which to be grateful. But, times have changed and we are today, victims of the ultimate curse — the arrogance of ignorance. The unabashed and haughty readiness to display one's abysmal and absurd ignorance before people and congregation is the symbol of our wretched times.

The latest exhibitionist of sheer nescience is one Yitzhak Ro'eh, a leftist writer for the Histadrut Daily Davar. What prompted his latest outburst of superficiality was anger. Mr. Ro'eh is angry.

And why is Mr. Ro'eh angry? Because, following an attempt by four Arab terrorists to infiltrate into Israel and murder Jews, the Israeli Army superbly met them and eliminated all of them. And then — and this is what causes the blood to rise in Mr. Ro'eh's head — and then, photographers were allowed to snap photos of the dead terrorists who had sought to murder Jews.

"Gevald!" shouts Mr. Ro'eh who — as we will soon see, is a very moral person. What an outrage against decency and morality to rejoice and exhibit the bodies of four people who attempted to murder Jews and were killed by the Jewish army. Or in his words:

"Every person and his own associations. When I saw the large color photos of the four terrorists who were eliminated in Lebanon, the following line from the Passover Hagada, began to ring in my ear: 'The work of my hands are drowning in the sea and you sing?'"

And Mr. Ro'eh then spends the next four paragraphs detailing all the things that were outrageous about those photographs, and concludes: "All this adds up to a growing insensitivity, a deepening dulling of the senses... The one who wrote 'do not rejoice when your enemy falls,' would, probably, agree with me: When your enemy falls do not be photographed with him.

One hardly knows where to begin to plough through this trash heap of utterly foul ignorance and arrogance. But we shall try. To begin with, the words, "the work of My hands are drowning in the sea..." do not appear anywhere in the Hagada but are to be found in the Babylonian Talmud (Megila 10b and Sanhedrin 39b), an area of Jewish knowledge that remains for Ro'eh the ignoramus, a dark, exotic, virgin area, untouched by him or his study. Indeed the utter superficiality of the man leads one to wonder whether, when he writes "the one who wrote 'do not rejoice,' etc...," does he really know who did write it.

In any event, one more thought before disposing of the arrogant ignoramus. I am always impressed by the intellectual fraud that is an inevitable part of all the secular haters of Judaism of observant Jews. They are blessed with an amazing ability to selectively choose what they wish from the very same books of Judaism that are filled with verses, sayings, concepts and laws that run counter to the most basic things in which they believe. The very same religious books they despise for "racism," "cruelty," "barbarity" and "obscurantism," suddenly become proper repositories of truth when they spy in them a thing that apparently agrees with their own warped concepts. Intellectual honesty was never the strong suit of the schizophrenic secularists, leftists and Hellenists who lack the courage to entirely drop the Jewishness they so desperately despise.

In any event, back to Mr. Ro'eh, so that we can dispose of him before the same people and congregation in whose presence he so arrogantly displayed his naked ignorance. The need to do this is compounded a thousand times over by the fact that the ignoramus Ro'eh is joined not only by so many semi-ignorant others, but worst of all — by so many tortured Moderdox types who cannot bear to accept the stark truth of authentic Jewish values

As always, the Ro'ehs (and others) of the world selectively and very partially quote the Talmud. The selection they bring down really begins with R. Yeshoshua ben Levi starting his lecture on Megilat Esther with the verse "As the L-rd rejoiced over you ("sas") to do you good, so the L-rd will rejoice over you ("yasis") to cause you to perish." (Dvarim 28). And the Talmud asks: Does the Almighty then rejoice over the fall of the wicked? And to prove that he does not rejoice, the story of the angels asking to sing praise is brought. And this is where Ro'eh, the ignoramus, stops. But there is more. The Talmud continues with answers as follows:

"Rabbi Elazar said: it is true that He does not rejoice, but he causes others to rejoice."

Ah, what a difference. And a clear answer to the obvious question: If G-d does not want us to rejoice and praise Him when our enemy falls why in the world does it say: "Then Moses and the children of Israel sing this song unto the L-rd...?" (Shmot15)

And a clear answer to why the rabbis say: (Mechilta, B'shalach, II): "The L-rd shall perform for you miracles and glories and you will stand and do nothing? Said Israel unto Moses: What are we to do? Said he unto them: You will glorify and praise and give song and glory and greatness to the One to whom wars belong."

Of course the Almighty, the totality of compassion, the Father of all, grieves for His children — all of them. He does not sing. His angels, who are not of this world, do not sing. But the Jews do. Not only are they allowed to, they are commanded to... For the very same reason that the very same Almighty, though He does not sing, does destroy the work of His hands because they are evil.

Yes, of course He grieves. He grieves that those who were made in His image have so perverted and destroyed the greatness of that image. That those who were made in the image of good, were so evil. And so, He grieves for the perversion of His purpose in making the world, for His works that have so gone astray. And in His grief He does not have pity: He destroys them: He knows that evil and He cannot share the same world, as our rabbis say: "As long as the wicked rule in the world, the Holy One Blessed be He, so to speak, cannot sit on His throne." (Yalkut Tehilim, Chapter 47).

And so, because the arrogance of the enemy of the Jewish people, their brazen persecution of the people of G-d with no fear of G-d, is the very essence of Hillul Hashem, the Almighty in wrath destroys them and the Children of Israel must sing and glorify G-d. And thus do the rabbis declare (Shmot Raba 23): "then did Moses and the Children of Israel sing," this is what is meant by the verse (Psalms' 9): "The L-rd is known by the judgment He executes." This speaks of Egypt whom G-d smote at the Red Sea."

The seal of the Almighty is truth and only that truth will emerge from His lips and His teachings. One imagines the agony of the soul that Ro'eh must endure every Purim as all the misguided and insensitive and sense-dulled Jews celebrate, rejoice and drink to the death of their enemy, Haman. One sees the lonely Ro'eh the lost of the Just sitting gloomily alone in his apartment, bemoaning the spiritual fall of the Jew and the spread of Kahanism among us all. Even as the Jewish people rejoice on Purim. Mr. Roe'h sits with the following ringing through his ear: "The work of My hand..."

Donkey, Immoral Moralist, Arrogant Ignoramus. He opposes rejoicing over the death of those who would destroy us. The Donkey of Morality — Yitzhak Ro'eh.

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 28, 2010.
This was written by Phyllis Chesler and it appeared in Front Page Magazine

According to the Arabic media, in the course of questioning a suspected male Al Qaeda terrorist, the Iraqi police in Diyala were given the name of an Iraqi woman, Shahlaa Al-Anbaky, as someone who would soon be perpetrating a suicide bombing. The police immediately went to look for her in Mandali, a town sixty miles northeast of Baghdad. On Christmas Eve, 2010, when they could not find her, they pulled her father, Mohammed Najm al-Anbaky, a small-time trader of chickens and sheep, in for questioning.

According to the English language press, once in police custody, Mohammed admitted that he had killed his daughter as a matter of "honor" because she was presumed to have a "boyfriend" in Al Qaeda. This Mohammed was also reported to have killed one of his sisters in 1984 as a matter of "honor." Mohammed admitted that he had strangled Shahlaa and then, for good measure, had slit her throat. Finally, he had buried her in his own backyard — not in a good Muslim cemetery — just as if his daughter was one of his chickens or sheep.

In this case, English-language readers only learn that the "honor" killing of a woman has taken place in the Arab Middle East. Arabic-language readers learn that the police were not investigating an honor killing at all but were, rather, looking into a possible terrorist attack by an Al Qaeda operative.

Indeed, earlier this year, the so-called "First Lady of Al Qaeda" (Haila Al-Qusayyer) was arrested in Saudi Arabia presumably for recruiting girls and women to become suicide killers. In addition, in December, 2009, the wife of Al-Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, issued a call for Muslim women to support violent jihad: "Jihad is [incumbent] on every Muslim man and woman... and [we women] should keep ourselves in the service of the Mujahideen, and we should fulfill whatever they ask of us, may it be through monetary aid to them or any service or information or suggestion or participation in fighting or even through a martyrdom operation. How many sisters have performed martyrdom operations in Palestine and Iraq and Chechnya, and vexed the enemy, and caused them a great defeat!!"

Meanwhile, back in Baghdad and Baquba, Iraq, we learn that Mohammed Najm Al-Anbaky is the kind of father and brother who is not ashamed to have murdered his female relatives for "honor" and that in neither instance was he arrested for such cold-blooded murders.

More than this is mere conjecture. Would this kind of man view a woman's membership in Al Qaeda as "dishonorable"or is his belief that his daughter may have had a "boyfriend" the prime motive for murder?

Based on my research into honor killings, I would suggest that this, indeed, was probably the only motive. On the other hand, there is a possibility that if Mohammed al-Anbaky is a Shiite, he might view a Sunni "boyfriend" as objectionable above and beyond the fact that he had not personally chosen him as a husband for Shahlaa. It is also possible that Shahlaa had been recruited by Al Qaeda as a suicide killer. In fact, this is a growing problem both in Iraq and in the Islamic world.

Female suicide killers, like their male counterparts, may be brutally brainwashed or threatened with blackmail by wealthy, educated, serial killers by proxy. The recruits may be clinically depressed, or frustrated by lives in which they have known little tenderness, no love, and absolutely no hope of change.

Wafa Idris, the first Palestinian suicide bomber, was probably in a clinical depression. Her first and only child had been a stillborn and, as a result, she was now sterile. Her husband, who was also her first cousin, had divorced her over this and had already taken a second wife. She was mocked by family and friends and she understood that she had no future in Palestinian society. As a divorced and infertile woman, she was doubly "tainted." Her bleak prospects — due to Islamic and Palestinian misogyny and not to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — were used to trap her into redeeming her dishonor by becoming a murdering martyr.

In 2002, Idris blew herself up in the middle of Jerusalem, injuring one hundred people and murdering and eighty-one year old man. The fact that she was a trained paramedic in no way gave her pause (or anything to live for). The Saudi Ambassador to London wrote a poem glorifying her deed as exceptionally praiseworthy. However, she was probably not a political extremist or revolutionary in a Western sense. She grew up in a tribal, Islamic society in which women are expected to sacrifice themselves in terrible and medieval ways.

The case of Reem al-Riyashi suggests a similar and horrifying scenario. Several Israeli sources have discovered that this young mother of two very young children "was forced to carry out the suicide attack as punishment for cheating on her husband." Allegedly, al-Riyashi's husband was a Hamas activist and her lover was a Hamas operative who had carried out the love affair with the express purpose of recruiting her. According to the British Sunday Times, al-Riyashi's husband himself drove her to the border crossing.

In 2004, pretending to be crippled, al-Riyashi killed herself and four Israelis at the Erez crossing. Her "choice" was either to be honor murdered for having had an affair — or to go out in a repentant blaze of glory.

Such jihadic terrorism is a death force battling life and the life instinct. Female suicide killers have recently (in 2010) blown themselves up in Baghdad in women-only areas, especially where women are on religious pilgrimages and have small children with them. At such a moment in history, the Muslim jihadists are showing us that one may be raised as a (presumably) peaceful woman; one can even become a biological mother; or be trained as a paramedic — and none of this will matter. Hate and death with triumph over normal, rational decency, and against all positive human instinct.

Indeed, I was recently told about a ranking Hamas official whose son had been treated for cancer by Jewish doctors in an Israeli hospital. They saved the boy's life. He was asked whether this had in any way changed his political and religious views about Israel and Jews. "Absolutely not," said the ungrateful, possibly unnatural father.

We deny this at our peril.

I want to acknowledge my resident Arabist, my assistant Nathan Bloom.

Contact Laura by email at LEL817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Family Security Matters (FSM), December 28, 2010.

This was written by Duggan Flanakin and it appeared today in FSM
(http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.8266/pub_detail.asp). Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and a former senior fellow with the Texas Public Policy Foundation and Arkansas Public Policy Foundation. He holds a Masters in Public Policy from Regent University, for many years published a popular trade newsletter on environmental regulation in Texas, and previously was the lead science editor for the now-defunct U.S. Bureau of Mines.

As conference delegates shivered in Cancun during its coldest weather in 100 years, power-hungry elitists labored behind the scenes to implement the real goal of this "global warming" summit, this sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP-16), this clever political con job.

That the Cancun summit was never a climate conference at all has become increasingly obvious. Even before it began, IPCC Working Group III co-chair Ottmar Edenhofer said COP-16 is actually "one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.... One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy." In fact, it has "almost nothing to do with the environmental policy." Its real purpose "is redistributing the world's wealth and natural resources."

A few days later, IPCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres told conference attendees, "The world is looking for new answers to the political, economic and social challenges which all countries face." That the "new answers" focused primarily on how much more money and technology developed nations "owe" poor countries further affirmed the proceedings' true nature.

As Viscount Christopher Monckton has accurately noted, the entire UN IPCC process is a "monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations" ... to the corrupt, unelected Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The grand design — built on the model of the European Union — is to give the Secretariat power to compel once-independent nations to compile and submit vast quantities of information to the UN, pay ever-increasing taxes to unelected internationalists, and do the bureaucrats' bidding on a host of issues. They are especially keen to compel the replacement of affordable, reliable hydrocarbon energy with "eco-friendly," "sustainable" wind, solar and biofuel power.

Claims that "the science is settled" and there is "scientific consensus" on manmade climate disasters have already been demolished. The ClimateGate emails, revelations that numerous "peer-reviewed" IPCC "studies" were actually environmentalist press releases and student papers, and admissions by alarmists themselves took care of that. "There has been no statistically significant warming" since 1995, Dr. Phil Jones of East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit admitted to the BBC in February 2010.

"No kidding," his fellow Brits would tell him now, amid one of the UK's coldest winters in a century.

In fact, there is not now and never has been a "consensus" on manmade global warming. A new report by Marc Morano, of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and ClimateDepot.com, lists more than 1,000 scientists who have openly challenged the IPCC and its claims that humans, hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide are causing a climate crisis. One of them, Swedish climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, accused the alarmist community of relying on inadequate computer models to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming, to generate funding, gain attention and influence public policy.

"If this is what 'science' has become," he added, "I as a scientist am ashamed."

However, these cold realities have done little to chasten the alarmists or temper their tone. Far too much money, power and prestige are at stake. Confronted in Cancun with Dr. Jones' admission, a startled IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri pointed to the discredited Fourth Assessment Report (of which Edenhofer was a lead author) as his sole source for "scientific" information — and refused even to say whether he agreed that warming had stopped 15 years ago.

During the widely covered CFACT press conference in Cancun, climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer addressed some of the reasons so many scientists dissent from IPCC orthodoxy. Many of the scary scenarios and predictions of imminent crisis, he explained, are based on computerized climate models that assume carbon dioxide drives climate change, but are deficient or erroneous in reflecting major climate mechanisms. For example, clouds cause negative feedback (cooling effects), and not just the positive feedbacks (heat trapping effects and warming) assumed by nearly all climate models.

Dr. Spencer also challenged a recent paper that continues to insist that clouds only trap heat and warm the planet. This paper defies science and common sense, he noted, and is "one more reason the public is increasingly distrustful of the scientific community, when it comes to research having enormous policy implications" for energy use, jobs, economic growth, and human health and welfare.

In short, debunking alarmist climate science is relatively easy. The much harder job has always been to expose the true intentions of the UN climate cabal. CFACT and others did this in Cancun, by demanding an end to "energy poverty," condemning phony "climate change" obstacles to affordable energy, and insisting that poor countries be encouraged and helped to achieve the health, prosperity and modern living standards that only hydrocarbons can ensure and sustain.

When billionaires Ted Turner and Richard Branson tried to discuss ways to profit from global warming hype, "renewable" energy and CO2 emissions trading, a team of CFACT college students exposed their hypocrisy and anti-people climate profiteering. Wind, solar and biofuel companies are "producing products people don't want and can't afford," the students pointed out. Even more immorally, they are conspiring to keep poor families impoverished and afflicted by malaria, lung infections, dysentery and other diseases of poverty.

Meanwhile, champions of "climate ethics" and "environmental justice" in dozens of rich countries are all too happy to provide what Lord Monckton called "bailout bucks for bedwetting big businesses," to ensure their continued cooperation with the wealth redistribution scheme. He also slammed the notion of giving kleptocratic governments $100 billion a year — which will do little except perhaps keep poor families from starving. If they are to achieve their hopes and dreams, they need abundant, reliable, affordable energy: i.e. fossil fuels.

Climate alarmists say poor families will be devastated by global warming, unless we slash carbon dioxide emissions. No. The world's poor are being devastated right now by climate alarmism. US Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) and others who say poor countries must live "sustainably" and rely on "renewable" energy are rich, callous hypocrites, Canadian policy analyst Redmond Weissenberger said. They would never live that way themselves, but they want Earth's poorest people to forego "the energy, wealth, health, clean water, safety and longer lives we enjoy, thanks to fossil fuels."

A CFACT-organized bus tour drove this fact home. Delegates and journalists visited a village whose residents work at lavish Cancun hotels, but whose own houses are built of cardboard, plywood, rope and sticks — and lack electricity, running water, sanitation, trash pickup or even a functional public school.

"It is wrong to erect obstacles to progress for communities like this," CFACT President David Rothbard told tour participants. "And yet, global warming campaigners are in Cancun, proposing treaty provisions that would permanently trap these families in energy poverty, while doing nothing to stabilize the Earth's constantly and naturally changing climate."

"The UN has always been about the politics of [climate science]," Morano told Fox News's Neil Cavuto. "They produce the best science that politics can manufacture, and their goal has always been global governance. They openly admit it and are using climate scares to achieve it."

Decent people everywhere must help ensure this does not happen. The battle will continue through COP-17 in Durban, South Africa and COP-18 in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, during the 20th anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit that launched this power grab. We hope you will join us on the ramparts.

Contact Family Security Matters (FSM) at info@ familysecuritymatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, December 28, 2010.

This article was written by Pamela Geller, the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs website and former associate publisher of the New York Observer. She is the author of The Post-American Presidency. It was published today on American Thinker

It was hardly noticed at the time, but its consequences could be catastrophic. Late last September, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which assigns internet domain names, approved a huge change in the way it operates. Europe and North America will now have five seats on its Board of Directors, instead of ten, and a new "Arab States" region will have five seats as well.

How big a deal is this? ICANN at the same time took a reference to "terrorism" out of its Draft Applicant Guidebook. Why? Because Arab groups complained. And so now jihad terror websites can grow and prosper, as ICANN has removed its own ability to police them.

This has been a long time coming.

Back in October 2009, I warned of a seismic transformation in internet regulation and free speech. Under the transnational-happy Obama administration, the U.S. relinquished control of the net at that time. ICANN ended its agreement with the U.S. government.

If not America, who? Now we know the answer to that. The new agreement gave other countries (including dictatorships and rogue nations) and the U.N. the ability to set internet use policies. At the time, I wrote, "[W]atch for Sharia law to find its way into this."

Well, that didn't take long. The ICANN action in September gave the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and other unfriendly nations a prominent internet role — something they never could get during the administration of George W. Bush.

News analyst Daniel Greenfield explains:

The OIC has already effectively used the UN to push its censorship agenda. But the UN is virtually toothless when it comes to the United States. However if the Muslim world can dominate ICANN the way it dominates the UN General Assembly, then free speech on the internet is dead.

In practice, the new arrangement makes it much easier for Muslim countries to dictate what stays on the internet and what doesn't. The removal of the material about "terrorism" was just muscle-flexing; there is much more of that kind of censorship coming. If this stands, anti-jihad sites like my own site AtlasShrugs.com and the JihadWatch.org site run by my colleague Robert Spencer will likely lose their domain names. It will become harder and harder to find the truth about jihad activity, or any resistance to it, on the internet or anywhere else.

Why is this necessary at all? Why should the U.S. relinquish control of its own invention? The internet was our extraordinary gift to the world. We kept it free. And now, like some depraved drunk, we are tossing it away and relinquishing control to the vultures and destroyers.

The new "net neutrality" rules approved last week by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will just make that easier as well. Columnist Jonathan Gurwitz explains:

Net neutrality is anything but neutral. It takes the operation of the Internet away from the heterogeneous and diversified interests of the private sector that has created it and concentrates it in the hands of an unelected and unaccountable board of political appointees atop a federal bureaucracy.

"Few proposals in Washington have been sold employing such deceptive language — and that's saying something," observed James G. Lakely, the co-director of the Center on the Digital Economy for the Heartland Institute, a free-market think-tank. "But few public policy ideas can boast the unashamedly socialist pedigree of net neutrality."

Lakely charged that FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, an Obama crony, wants to "claim for the FCC the power to decide how every bit of data is transferred from the Web to every personal computer and handheld device in the nation." While net neutrality advocates advertised their plan as one that would ensure a "free and open internet," in reality, net neutrality was an attempt to limit the freedom of internet users by subjecting what had always been a free-market give-and-take to government regulation. In short, the FCC would control how all information reached personal computers.

An internet censored by Muslim ideologues and controlled by the feds. Do you see your freedom of speech slipping away?

John Bolton said at an appearance at Duke University in 2009, "[I]t's not American strength that's provocative, it's American weakness." Now we are reaping the poisonous fruit of Obama's skulduggery: Islamic takeover.

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 28, 2010.

This was written by Elad Benari and it appeared in today's Arutz-7.


According to MK Zevulun Orlev (The Jewish Home), the contents of a recent report by the State Comptroller which outlines the destruction of antiquities on the Temple Mount by the Waqf should be made public.

Speaking to Arutz Sheva's daily Hebrew journal on Monday, Orlev responded to comments made last week by MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima), who heads an internal Knesset committee whose task is to decide if and what to publish of the State Comptroller's report. The report was written approximately six months ago, but until now it has not yet been determined which sections of it, if at all, would be made public.

Schneller told Arutz Sheva last week that most of the shortcomings regarding Israel's ineffectiveness in dealing with the Waqf's excavations on the Temple Mount have been corrected. As such, Schneller said that he believes that most of the report should not be published as such a publication could damage Israel's international standing.

However, Orlev, who was one of the members of the same committee and who has read the entire contents of the report, disagrees with Schneller and said that he believes that there is no reason to hide any of the report's findings.

"This report is of outmost importance," said Orlev. "It touches upon the most holy place for us. It's a hard report. Although the committee has not yet decided what part of it will be published, the facts are known to the public. The Waqf makes every effort to undermine the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount."

Evidence has surfaced that the Waqf has taken control of the Temple Mount over the past ten years, conducting illegal digs and building mosques in the area.

In fact, Dr. Gabi Barkai, senior lecturer at Bar Ilan University and recipient of the Jerusalem Prize for Archaeology, recently told Arutz Sheva that "Some years ago they took 400 truckloads of dirt from the Temple Mount and dumped it into the Kidron Valley — totally illegally. This is dirt that is filled with Jewish history from many periods: the Canaanites, the First Temple, the period of the return to Zion [from Babylonia], the Second Temple, including the Hashmonaim period and King Herod, and up to now."

Barkai also said that the Muslims clearly have the goal of detaching Israel from its past and Holy Temple connections: "They wish to undermine Jewish ownership and bonds to the Temple Mount. They've built a giant mosque there in Solomon's Stables [under the Temple Mount] and another one nearby — but aside from that, they have an ideological goal which is even making inroads to naïve circles in the west, and it is called 'Holy Temple denial.' They act as if there never was a Holy Temple. This is very very grave."

Jewish residents in the area have confirmed Barkai's statements and have reported that Waqf works are taking place 'under cover'. They said that despite attempts by the Waqf to conceal the work, it is not hard to see what is happening on the Temple Mount.

"I thought that we should reveal as much as possible of what is happening on the Temple Mount," said Orlev, who reiterated his position that the only passages in the report that should not be made public are those which relate to the measures taken by the police and the state to prevent the continued destruction by the Waqf. "The State Comptroller has also mentioned the importance of the report. It would be appropriate for the whole world to be made aware of the level of vulnerability on the Temple Mount."

Regarding the question of the possible risk to Israel's status in the world following the publication of the various parts of the report, Orlev said that he believes that the exact opposite would happen and that making the report public would strengthen Israel's status, as it would reveal "the criminal acts of the Waqf on the Temple Mount. It will not hurt but rather help us. Archaeology is a global science and everyone knows that there are certain things which should not be touched. We could use this report as leverage in our favor."

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, December 28, 2010.

This was written by Evelyn Gordon and it appeared in Commentary Magazine Contentions:
(http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/ evelyn-gordon/385074).


The recent wave of deadly attacks on Iraqi Christians must have cast a pall over Christmas celebrations worldwide this year. But one can't help wondering whether it also prompted any soul-searching at the Vatican.

After all, it was just two months ago that a synod of Middle East bishops proclaimed Israel the main source of Middle East Christians' woes. As the Jerusalem Post reported, it "blamed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for spurring the flight of Christians from the Middle East" and "laid much of the blame for the conflict squarely on Israel." The synod's president, Archbishop Cyrille Salim Bustros, even implied that Jews had no right to a state here at all and that Israel should be eradicated through the "return" of millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees. And though the Vatican disavowed that comment, Pope Benedict XVI also said that Middle East peace — a term usually synonymous with "Israeli-Arab peace" — was the best way to halt Christian emigration.

In reality, of course, the plight of Palestinian Christians pales beside that of their Iraqi brethren. More than half of Iraq's Christians — hundreds of thousands in all — have fled their country since 2003, after being targeted in numerous deadly attacks. And not even Al-Qaida has tried to link these attacks to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, though it's not shy about inventing "justifications": For instance, it deemed October's bloody siege at a Baghdad church retaliation for an alleged offense by Egypt's Coptic Church.

Compare this to the booming business scene in Bethlehem, where tourism is up 60 percent over 2009 despite Israeli "oppression." One astute Palestinian businessman attributed the boom to the Palestinian Authority's efforts to reduce violence — a tacit (and correct) acknowledgement that what previously destroyed the PA's economy was not Israel, but Palestinian terror. Or compare Iraq's Christian crisis to the fivefold increase in Israel's Christian population, from 34,000 in 1949 to 152,000 in 2009.

This month, the New York Times reported that many fleeing Iraqi Christians "evoked the mass departure of Iraq's Jews" after Israel's establishment in 1948.

"It's exactly what happened to the Jews," said Nassir Sharhoom, 47, who fled last month to the Kurdish capital, Erbil, with his family from Dora, a once mixed neighborhood in Baghdad. "They want us all to go."

It's eerily reminiscent of Pastor Martin Niemoller's famous statement about the Nazis: "They came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me. And by that time, there was no one left to speak for me."

But there's one crucial difference. The Church, as the synod statement shows, isn't merely remaining silent; it's actively speaking out against the Jews — and thereby collaborating with its own enemies, the radical Islamists.

It evidently hopes to thereby turn the Islamists' wrath away from Christians. But as the recent attacks show, appeasement hasn't worked.

So perhaps it's time for the Church to learn from its mistakes in World War II and instead try speaking out against its true enemies — the radical Islamists who seek to cleanse the Middle East of both Jews and Christians.

The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 28, 2010.

This below was written by Eve Wineglass.

A cable from the US Ambassador in Egypt to the US State Department revealed by Wikileaks this week reveals at best incompetence, at worst a vicious plot to destroy Israel.

In a confidential memo dated December 21, 2008, US Ambassador to Egypt Margaret Scobey complains that a Minister in the Egyptian government is a "Chief impediment in the face of US efforts to transform the Egyptian's military mission to meet emerging security threats".

The only "threat" Egypt faces is...Israel. Adjacent Libya does not have a military force of substance (though they are quite good at Terrorism). Who else is an "emerging security threat"? Adjacent Sudan? Nearby Chad? Iran is some 4,000 miles and several countries away.

The US has built the Egyptian military into an unwieldy colossus that threatens the stability of the "moderate" Mubarak regime. America has pumped vast sums — more than $70 Billion American taxpayers' dollars of the latest US military equipment — tanks, planes and missiles into Egypt. Everything that will encourage Egypt to start a war with Israel.

According to another memo from Ambassador Scobey dated September 23, 2008 President Mubarak of Egypt "may well be trying to weaken the military" — built up to unwieldy proportions by US diplomats, to insure that Mubarak's successor will be his "moderate" son — a former banker. An Army several orders of magnitude bigger than anything Egypt could use threatens the civilian leadership of Egypt, and the Egyptians seem to know it.

Of course, the prospects that Egypt will be taken over the radical Muslim Brotherhood is not at all unlikely. What do you imagine this radical Islamic group will then do with the vast military colossus that the US has built up over the years?

What "role" is Egypt being groomed for? The target in sight is Israel. Why on earth would American diplomats want to encourage Egypt to start a war with Israel? Particularly in light of the damage that will accrue to both countries?

The nefarious answer can be found in the US State Department doctrine as formed by Henry Kissinger. The historical record strongly indicates (awaiting confirmation from Wikileaks) that Kissinger encouraged President Sadat of Egypt to mount a secret attack on October 6, 1973 — Yom Kippur, declaring war on Israel. Kissinger then sought to delay American resupply of weapons, ammunition and spare parts to Israel. Kissinger is on record having said he wanted "Israel to be 'bloodied' so they would be more receptive to Kissinger's grandiose Machiavellian "peace plans". It is known that in the early days of the 1973 "Yom Kippur" war, Secretary of State Kissinger told Defense Secretary James Schlesinger "the best result would be that Israel would come out a "little" ahead but get "bloodied in the process".

Israel lost thousands of lives and subsequently surrendered the strategic buffer zone of the Sinai Peninsula — in exchange for a "cold peace" with an Egypt that has been rearming itself to the teeth.

(The fact that Kissinger is 'genetically' Jewish is irrelevant. The interesting psychological phenomenon of "self-hating" Jews is well-known. These sorts of Jews are so traumatized by anti-Semitism that they actually become anti-Semitic themselves — known psychologically as "identification with the aggressor". These Jews can turn on their own people in a most vicious, sometimes lethal manner. The recently released batch of tapes from the Nixon White House, as reported by the New York Times, report Henry Kissinger — an erstwhile Jew saying: "If they put Jews into gas chambers in the Soviet Union, it is not an American concern". A classic case of self-hate.)

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, December 27, 2010.

RE: "Zalman Shoval, U.S.-Israel Relations after the American Midterm Elections", JCPA, Vol. 10, No. 18, 27 December 2010. The full article is available on the JCPA website: http://www.jcpa.org/. Summary is below.

The only road to peace is the path that avoids the Saudi's "Final Solution." To avoid the imposition of the Saudi's "Final Solution." Jews must grow up, become politically sophisticated, understand that the Saudis are cold and patient killers, and strap on their balls and demand that both the US and Europe comply with international law that established the boundaries of Israel during the Twenties, long before the misbegotten propaganda of the Kissinger-Jews (Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Neve Gordon, Yosi Beilin, Henry Kissinger, Casper Weinberger, etc.) held sway over both established international law and reason, thereby undermining the sovereignty of their adopted nation over the lands these errant fools allowed the invading arabs to claim for themselves. The arabs have no rights to the land confirmed as the Jewish Homeland per the San Remo Resolution and confirmed in subsequent treaties. The UN is bound to enforce the San Remo Resolution and the treaties confirming same, and Peres and Rabin's craven actions and activities are and remain ultra vires.

Israel must, at the very least, demand restoration of the lands the British illegally divided and handed away to the Hashemites. That demand will initiate a true path toward peace which entails Israel exercising its rights. This should lead to a new treaty recognizing major portion of Jordan as the nouveau palestinian state. If this fails, then the arabs cannot claim any land that was accorded to Israel by the San Remo Resolution. But to accomplish these objectives, Israel must rid itself of its Jewish seditionists who, like crazy woodpeckers, have been compulsively and illegally pounding holes in the hull of Israel's ship of state. We believe some of these Jews have already arranged their next hide-away — a place to flee should their arab brothers unsheath their daggers, other "running Jews" are too old to care about the future of innocent Israelis who will be dragged into the watery graves being dug by Israel's woodpeckers.

Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z.

  Summary of Shoval article:
* After the end of the Cold War, Tom Friedman wrote that this meant the end of the strategic relationship, that America does not need Israel anymore since the Soviet Union is no longer there. In fact, the dangers from Muslim fundamentalism and terrorism may be greater than those of the Soviet Union. The Islamists seek to change the world, to create a new situation wherein the free Western democratic world will be under the thumb of a revived Islamism.

* In the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, America has never changed its positions on Jerusalem, borders, and settlements, although over the years there have been different points of emphasis. Even the Bush-Baker Administration never declared the settlements to be illegal. As construction in the territories and Jerusalem continued at full strength, the U.S. and Israel agreed that certain amounts were to be deducted from U.S. loan guarantees an example of how things can be worked out in spite of the basic position of the United States.

* In the U.S. 2010 midterm elections, almost all the members of the unofficial Jewish caucus, who are mostly Democrats, were re-elected. This means that their proportionate weight inside the Democratic group in the House of Representatives is actually greater than it was in the past.

* Israel does not want to see a weakened American presidency, which means a weakened America, especially in the Middle East where the only possible alternative to a weakened America is a strengthened Iran.

* The Palestinians now want the UN Security Council to adopt a new resolution which will supersede Resolution 242. It will not mention secure borders or that Israel is not required to withdraw from all the territories. If the proposal passes, this would create a new reality and put an end to the peace process, which depends on the agreed formula of 242. If this is done away with, neither peace nor any sort of interim solution is likely.

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, December 27, 2010.

Struggle for Freedom by Walid Phares

After the 9/11 Commission concluded in 2004 that the U.S. was engaged in a war with terrorists and never realized it, they reasoned that "a failure of imagination" had prevented us from seeing terrorism coming. In effect, Americans were simply unable, or in fact disabled, to fathom that there were people who hated and opposed our democracy with such ferocity. But after billions of dollars and almost a decade fighting a war in the Middle East, will we miss the threat again?

...Yet not a failure of imagination, but rather, of education has left Americans without essential information on the real roots of the rising Jihadi threat. Western democracies display a dangerous misunderstanding of precisely who opposes democracy and why. In fact, the West ignores the wide and disparate forces within the Muslim world — including a brotherhood against democracy that is fighting to bring the region under totalitarian control — and crucially underestimates the determined generation of youth feverishly waging a grassroots revolution towards democracy and human rights.

As terror strikes widen from Manhattan to Mumbai and battlefields rage from Afghanistan to Iraq, many tough questions are left unanswered, or even explored: Where are the anti-Jihadists and the democrats in the Muslim world? Does the (Islamic) Middle East really reject democracy (and peace)?

Religion of 'Peace' at its Best!

Why doesn't this outrage liberals, so-called moderate Muslims and the Obama administration? Moderate Muslims say that radical minority misinterpreted the Koran to justify their political aspirations. There are 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide. Why are they quiet about the 'correct' interpretation of the Koran? Where is global Muslim outrage against radical Islamic terror?

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

It is alarming to see how after decades of anti-Israel brain-washing that many Jews do not know that in 1922 all land known as Palestine — including Gaza, Judea, Samaria and trans-Jordan — was designated by the League of Nations, predecessor of the UN, in order to create the Jewish state — Eretz-Israel! Similar mandates were issued at the time for the establishment of Muslim states: Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria and others. Jews were robbed by international hypocrisy of their land! Must we accept this ugly injustice or correct it and reclaim what is rightfully ours?

Anti-US Purge Conducted by the PA

Mahmoud Abbas has carried out a massive crackdown on a strongman within his own Fatah party. The move could have a significant impact on future US security coordination with the PA, which until now has been largely run through Mohammad Dahlan. Also, the move is expected to strengthen Hamas in Gaza, since Dahlan controlled the main Fatah militias in that territory which opposed the Islamist organization.

Helping Hand of Eager anti-Semitic Bigots

The French government confirmed that Paris plans to transfer to Lebanon 100 anti-tank missiles for use in gunships. The missiles will be handed over free of charge by the end of February. It is likely that French arms will go to Hizbullah. The United States has given Lebanon approximately $400 million over the past year to purchase arms, despite Israel's objections.

Arabs Deny the act of Horror they Also have Intention to Commit

Studying the Nazi genocide is mandatory in Israeli schools. Six decades after the Nazis murdered 6 million Jews many of Israel's 1.2 million Arabs, like their 'Palestinian' brethren in the West Bank and Gaza, resentfully deny the horror of the Holocaust or undermine its scope.

Will America Condemn?

Kaye Susan Wilson, reported that she and the American woman Christine Logan were attacked by two Arabs deep inside the Green line near Mattan. Sixteen hours later the body of Logan was discovered bearing marks of extreme violence. (SBS news in Australia made a deliberately ambiguous report that "Arabic speaking", not Arabs or so-called Palestinians, perpetrated the attack. No condemnation so far!)

Quote of the Week:

"Any territory, which in some historical period was under Muslims, is considered a Muslim land forever. Therefore, creation of the State of Israel on the territory that once belonged to Muslims was a historic revolution for them. Muslims cannot accept this fact in principle. Nevertheless, they are still realistic politicians... They do not hurry. They are waiting. Their actions depend on the situation, on the difference of their military might and that of the enemy." — Moshe Sharon, Arabic studies researcher, a professor of the Oriental studies department of the Jewish University in Jerusalem.

Abbas Speaks of Non-Violence — in English Only

Abbas met on Sunday with dozens of ex-generals, Kadima and other MKs, and other pro-PA-state activists, urging them to tell the Israeli public that he opposes violence. This, just hours before PA leaders charged Israel with "attacking our people" when it targeted Islamic Jihad and other terrorists preparing to fire missiles at Israel. Binyamin Lipkin, editor of the religious newspaper BaKehilah, asked Abbas "When will we hear you say these nice things against violence and the like — in Arabic, to your own people, and not just in English to foreigners?" (Never!)

Money is a Major anti-Semitic Motivator

A confidential cable written in July 2004, after New Zealand imposed high-level diplomatic sanctions against Israel in retaliation to a Israeli spy ring "flap", said: "Its overly strong reaction to Israel over this issue suggests the GNZ (government of New Zealand) sees this flap as an opportunity to bolster its credibility with the Arab community, and by doing so, perhaps, help NZ lamb and other products gain greater access to a larger and more lucrative market."

The Essential Issue Many Jews Ignore!

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took a rare public jab at his successor, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that Israel should agree to the US demand to halt settlement construction in the West Bank in order to restart Mideast peace talks. (He is still refusing to face reality and admit that the destruction of Israel is the main goal of the so-called Palestinians. This is truly "the essential issue"!)

If it is Done by Muslims, it is not News-Worthy!

There are increasing reports that African refugees in Sinai are tortured, assaulted, raped and held for ransom by smugglers hired to bring them from Egypt to Israel. According to Physicians for Human Rights there are now 220 refugees who fled conflict, genocide, famine or torture and are being held hostage in Sinai. (This news was widely ignored by world media. Why? It was not done by Jews, but by Muslims with the blessing of the Egyptian government!)

Friend or Another User:

Netanyahu reaffirms support to India in fight against terror... — India is getting enormous, economic and military benefits from good relationships with Israel. But quite often this biggest world democracy is playing political games at Israel's expense, making 'supporting' statements for the fake Palestinian cause!

True Intention of 'Flotilla' Unvailed

The director of the IHH in Gaza said that "the day will come when the Arabs will build their homes in Jaffa, Tel Aviv, and Haifa." He added that his organization represents Turkey and its goal is not to provide food for PA Arabs, but to provide political support against its enemies.

No Sensitivity or Fear of Harming Diplomatic Ties with Israel

The British government has refused to release documents containing information on the fate of three Israeli soldiers missing in Lebanon since 1982, because it claims the sensitive material could harm diplomatic ties with Syria. The three Israeli soldiers, Zachary Baumel, Yehuda Katz and Zvi Feldman are still officially missing in action.

Christmas and Occupation of the West Bank


As a believing Christian, I made a recent pilgrimage to the Holy Land. I was profoundly disturbed by the Jewish state and its criminal occupation of the West Bank. How can you justify usurping land that belongs to others?


You are entitled to your opinion on the matter. But I hope you are consistent in your beliefs. Being that you oppose a Jewish presence on the West Bank, I assume you will not be participating in any celebrations during the coming days. According to your view, there is no reason to be merry on December 25.

The Christian holidays celebrate an event that you have named a criminal act — the birth of a Jewish baby to a Jewish family living in the West Bank town of Bethlehem. Your views should not allow you to have any part in this cheer, for if you did you would be giving retroactive approval to a Jewish settlement on the West Bank that dates back more than two thousand years.

Perhaps you will be joined by the UN and other humanitarian organizations around the world condemning any celebrations this week that are connected with this controversial birth, as such events would be recognizing the rights of a Jewish family to live on what you see as occupied territory.

But keep in mind, while you accuse Israel of occupying land, there will be two billion Christians around the world celebrating the fact that the West Bank has always been the home of the Jewish people.

Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Moss

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement and currently lives in Melbourne, Australia. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 27, 2010.

This article comes from FresnoZionism and is archived at
http://fresnozionism.org/2010/12/us-endorses-absurd- postcolonialist-resolution/


President Obama announces US endorsement of UN indigenous peoples declaration, at White House Tribal Nations Conference Dec. 16, 2010.

In 2007, the UN General Assembly passed resolution 61/295, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.[1] This past week, the US endorsed the resolution,[2] after initially voting against it along with Australia, Canada and New Zealand. All four nations have now endorsed it, making it unanimous.

The intent is purportedly to protect people like Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians against exploitation and denial of rights by the majority culture. In fact, it represents a breathtaking invasion of the sovereignty of any nation that contains a subculture that defines itself as 'indigenous'.

The declaration has a long preamble and 46 articles. It does not contain a definition[3] of 'indigenous', because

According to the Chairperson, Ms. Erica Irene Daes, Rapporteur of the Working Group, this was because "historically, indigenous peoples have suffered, from definitions imposed by others" (E/CN.4/Stib.2/AC.4/1995/3, page 3).

The 'working group' which developed the declaration did provide a definition,[4] but it was never officially adopted by any UN body. Here's part of it, which may give you an idea of their thinking:

Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them.

They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.

Naturally, the Palestinian Arabs claim to be an indigenous people. By way of illustration, if this claim were to be upheld, what would the declaration imply?

Article 3 Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Article 4
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.

Palestinian Arabs can declare autonomous enclaves in the territories or even in Tel Aviv. These Palestans may be financed by contributions from Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Article 15
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.

Palestinian Arabs can write their own history, which must become part of Israel's school curriculum.

Article 19
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.

Israel can make no law or take any action that affects Palestinian Arabs without first getting their consent.

Article 26
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.

2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.

3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.

Lands that Palestinian 'tradition' says belong to them do in fact belong to them.

Article 36 1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders.

Palestinian Arabs can communicate with Hizballah guerrillas if they want to.

The declaration and definition above represent the product of postcolonial political theory,[5] according to which an 'oppressed' people is defined as always right, and is entitled to 'resist' its 'oppressors'. Note that the working definition of 'indigenous' excludes the 'dominant sector' of society, even though a dictionary definition[6] only refers to origin, not socio-political status.

Indeed, by a non-political definition, a good argument could be made that the Jewish people is indigenous to the land of Israel, since there has been some Jewish presence even from Biblical times. A large number of the ancestors of the present-day 'Palestinian people' immigrated into the area in the 1800′s and afterward — just prior to and concurrent with the Zionist immigration — and thus are much less indigenous than they would claim. But of course a non-political definition wouldn't serve the purposes of the UN.

There are other groups that have a much better claim to being 'indigenous' than the Palestinians; for example, the Kurds. I find it hard to believe that Turkey, Iraq, Iran or Syria would be prepared to grant them their 'rights' under this document.

It is absolutely certain that the great majority of Americans would not agree with radical postcolonial theory. But our politically correct officials have decided to sign on to this absurd document, perhaps out of guilt for their historical mistreatment and subsequent betrayal of responsibility to their own indigenous population.

If the President and the Congress wanted to actually improve the conditions of Native Americans, they could do so in many concrete ways. Most of these cost money, so instead they chose a bit of theater.

The UN is more and more becoming a venue for the application of radical political principles by the cynical non-democratic states that dominate it, in order to weaken or damage Israel and the West. The US has continued to participate in and support this institution over the years on the grounds that overall it does more good than evil. I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that this is not so.


[1] http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html

[2] http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples

[4] http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web& cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2F www.un.org%2Fesa%2Fsocdev%2Funpfii%2Fdocuments%2F workshop_data_background.doc&rct=j&q=un%20definition%20of%20 Indigenous%20Peoples&ei=ZPQQTaH0Io6isAOrmYzICg&usg= AFQjCNFMb2Ln4AqUEFKk_8ozGuEM8LvcYw&cad=rja

[5] http://fresnozionism.org/2009/10/postcolonialist- dogma-doesnt-fit/

[6] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/indigenous

Contact Laura by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 27, 2010.

Negotiators push surrender of territory twice used to invade Jewish state

This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in World Net Daily


TEL AVIV — The Obama administration is pressing Israel to enter into negotiations with Syria aimed at compelling an Israeli retreat from the strategic Golan Heights, WND has learned.

Syria is in a military alliance with Iran. The country twice used the Golan, which looks down on Israeli population centers, to mount grounds invasions into the Jewish state.

Informed Middle East security officials tell WND that Dennis Ross, an envoy for the White House in the Middle East, visited both Israel and Syria last week to discuss specifics of a deal in which Syria would eventually take most of the Golan.

According to the security officials, Ross is slated to become Obama's main envoy to the Israeli-Palestinian affairs issue, with the current envoy, George Mitchell, expected to step down.

With Israel, Ross discussed specifics of a deal with Syria, including which territory Israel would be expected to evacuate in both the Golan and the Jordan Valley, the security officials said.

The officials said that Ross told Syria it needs to scale back its relationship with Iran and stop facilitating the re-armament of Hezbollah. The Iranian-backed Hezbollah reportedly now has over 10,000 missiles and rockets, including a large number that can reach Tel Aviv and beyond.

During the 2008 Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah's rocket attacks against the Israeli north in 2006 killed 43 Israeli civilians and wounded more than 4,000.

The Middle Eastern security officials, meanwhile, told WND there were some signs U.S.-led economic sanctions against Iran are having an effect on the regime in Tehran. The officials said that in recent months, Iran decreased its funding to Hezbollah as well as to the Palestinian terrorist organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

The Jewish Golan

News media accounts routinely billed the Golan as "undisputed Syrian territory" until Israel "captured the region" in 1967. The Golan, however, has been out of Damascus' control for far longer than the 19 years it was within its rule, from 1948 to 1967.

Even when Syria shortly held the Golan, some of it was stolen from Jews. Tens of thousands of acres of farmland on the Golan were purchased by Jews as far back as the late 19th century. The Turks of the Ottoman Empire kicked out some Jews around the turn of the century.

But some of the Golan was still farmed by Jews until 1947, when Syria first became an independent state. Just before that, the territory was transferred back and forth between France, Britain and even Turkey, before it became a part of the French Mandate of Syria.

When the French Mandate ended in 1944, the Golan Heights became part of the newly independent state of Syria, which quickly seized land that was being worked by the Palestine Colonization Association and the Jewish Colonization Association. A year later, in 1948, Syria, along with other Arab countries, used the Golan to attack Israel in a war to destroy the newly formed Jewish state.

The Golan, steeped in Jewish history, is connected to the Torah and to the periods of the First and Second Jewish Temples. The Golan Heights was referred to in the Torah as "Bashan." The word "Golan" apparently was derived from the biblical city of "Golan in Bashan."

The book of Joshua relates how the Golan was assigned to the tribe of Manasseh. Later, during the time of the First Temple, King Solomon appointed three ministers in the region, and the area became contested between the northern Jewish kingdom of Israel and the Aramean kingdom based in Damascus.

The book of Kings relates how King Ahab of Israel defeated Ben-Hadad I of Damascus near the present-day site of Kibbutz Afik in the southern Golan, and the prophet Elisha foretold that King Jehoash of Israel would defeat Ben-Hadad III of Damascus, also near Kibbutz Afik.

The online Jewish Virtual Library has an account of how in the late 6th and 5th centuries B.C., the Golan was settled by Jewish exiles returning from Babylonia, or modern day Iraq. In the mid — 2nd century B.C., Judah Maccabee's grandnephew, the Hasmonean King Alexander Jannai, added the Golan Heights to his kingdom.

The Golan hosted some of the most important houses of Torah study in the years following the Second Temple's destruction and subsequent Jewish exile; some of Judaism's most revered ancient rabbis are buried in the territory. The remains of some 25 synagogues from the period between the Jewish revolt and the Islamic conquest in 636 have been excavated. The Golan is also dotted with ancient Jewish villages.

Contact Laura by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 27, 2010.

This appeared in IsraPundit


Israeli diplomat ambushed by NY Times staff

The New York Times, flagship of the liberal American media, has never been a friend of the Jewish state. But the newspaper's aversion to Israel turned to open hostility this month when its top editors ambushed and tore into an unsuspecting senior official from the Israeli Consulate in New York City.

The Israeli official was invited by the Times editors, among them rabid columnist Thomas Friedman, to meet with them at their office. Being a veteran at dealing with the American media, the official assumed the invitation was for a friendly discussion and perhaps an interview regarding the peace process and other matters of importance to Israel.

The Israeli had no idea he was being invited for what he described as a lynch.

As the meeting started, the Times editors — most of them Jews, and one of them a former Israeli — began to attack the Israeli diplomat, and refused to give him even a moment to respond.

They blamed Israel for everything, the diplomat told Israel Today.

The Times editors insisted the breakdown of the peace process was Israel's fault, that the lack of peace was Israel's fault, and were adamant that Israel had given nothing to the Palestinians. They accused Israel of being an extremist and racist state, and blasted the diplomat for Israel's "ill-treatment" of President Barack Obama.

In short, the Times staff informed the Israeli in no uncertain terms that they were sick of his country.

The diplomat told us he was shocked by the attack. He tried to respond, but the Times editors were not interested in hearing his arguments.

"I asked them," said the diplomat, "We haven't given the Palestinians anything? How can you say that? Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu broke with his party platform and implemented a 10-month Jewish building freeze, and what did we get in return? More Palestinian refusal to negotiate."

According to the Israeli, the Times editors responded: "Yes, yes. Of course you are going to start telling us about how Israel's security needs are not being met. You just don't get it that we are sick of hearing about that."

There is little doubt that this ambush was led by Friedman, whose hostility toward Israel in his recent columns has surprised even his liberal friends in the Jewish state.

In recent articles, Friedman has accused Israel of being a spoiled child, crazy and extremist. He insisted that the US stop being Israel's "enabler," and pointed out that the rest of the world is fully on the side of the Palestinians, so why not America?

Wrote Friedman in one of his columns: "Israel, when America — which has given you billions over the past 50 years and defended you in the international arena — asks you to stop building settlements for three months in order to jump start peace talks, there is only one correct answer, and that is `yes, whatever you say.'"

Contact Laura by email at lel817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by American, December 27, 2010.


Let's not spin this blunt issue, aiming at Israeli Jews specifically to be killed or hurt, in their homes, in cars passing by, in a restaurant or at a bus stop, is what it is: racial hatred against Jews. I don't know which racist part of ot is difficult to comprehend to cast it as such.


Arab Muslim leaders such as the head of the Islamic movement was arrested and charged of racism and inciting violence, to assume that his influence doesn't "live" on among Israeli Arabs is beyond naive.

One of the icons of pushing racism is Arab MK Ahmed Tibi, who's inflammatory mouth has uttered the word "racist" and "apartheid" for almost as many days [in the decade or so] he's serving as an official in the Jewish-Democratic state.

Of course, everything Israel does is "racist" this Arab racism notion that dates from the infamous anti-Israel campaign in the UN by the Arab lobby in the 1970s to demean Zionism which is about a return of a people to its historic homeland as "racism," The very racist Arab nations that oppress or at least discriminate against non-Arab minorities (including: Kurds, blacks, Copts, Jews [where they haven't been ethnically cleansed], Assyrians, Berbers, etc.) had/have the audacity to charge Israel that gives equal rights and freedom to its 25% Arab citizens, and at times giving preferential treatments to them, in employment, education, etc., those Muslim nations that practice Islamic apartheid in its supremacy against non-Muslims, all have joined to call the very victim of Arab racism [which is the only bond that binds the divider Arab world who discriminates against Arab-Palestinians] as "racist."


Speaking of hypocrisy, Arab republics and Islamic Republics are also against the notion of a 'Jewish' state, even though Israel's official laws are in fact anything but Jewish.


The political motivated left in Israel says, said some outrageous things in order to 'win' symbolic [and beyond] politics.

They made sure to use the "racism" slur at each right wing step it takes to deter it from advancing.

Preying on the weakness of the sensitivity to the charge, the Jewish people — probably more than any other nation — the very victim of racism (most recent WW2's Nazis and the Arab-Islamic leaders like the Mufti of Palestine that joined them) they managed to use it or rather abuse it to advance their lefty ideology on the back of super-guilt ridden Jews, all the while successfully suppressing the real racism going on in the past and in the present, Arab racism that is from outside or from inside Israel.

Try this, perform a search in Haaretz for 'Arab racism' see what comes up, if not the exact opposite, How come?

Why is an Arab on Jews attack described as [if at all] a "disturbance" or a "nationalist" incident and not 'Anti-Jewish racism' when selectively aiming at Jews only, yet, if anti-Jewish feelings and acts motivate a Jew to manage in voicing concern the Jewish victims is a "racist?"

The sad thing is, Haaretz writers and the like, never learned that exaggerated use of outrageous terminology does more of a serious damage than one might assume.


Can one not understand a sincere parent in 'under-constant-threat-country' Israel that is genuinely worried about the safety of the family? Is awareness, caring and responsibility all of a sudden now "racism?"

As goes the above factors and "racism pushers" as I like to call them, so does the overall tension.

The conclusive point is that the anxiety that Israeli Jews feel from a hostile intolerant Arab world that has fought to annihilate it and still can't seem to recognize this "stranger' in their midst, is only growing, add to that the behavior of Arabs inside Israel and to top it all with the Israeli-"Jewish" anti-Israel leftists`-extremists such as Haaretz.'

Contact American at american1627@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, December 27, 2010.

HaRav Shlomo Aviner, Rosh Yeshiva of Ateret Yerushalyim and Chief Rabbi of Bet El recently visited Jonathan Pollard in prison as part of a delegation led by Rabbi Pesach Lerner, Executive Vice President of the National Council of Young Israel. Rav Aviner was interviewed by Olam HaKatan and the interview published for Parshat Vayigash, December 10, 2010. An English rendition of the interview follows.


How does one arrange a meeting with Jonathan Pollard?

"I do not know the process, since they arranged it for me, but I do know that it takes many months to receive permission such as this. The one who arranged all of this is Rabbi Pesach Lerner, Vice President of 'Young Israel'. He displays self-sacrifice to visit Jonathan at every opportunity, and he also accompanied me on this visit."

Can Ha-Rav describe the entrance and checking process before one reaches Jonathan?

"There is a serious checking process there, and it is forbidden to enter with anything. Not a pencil, not a camera, not even a handkerchief or a piece of paper. Nothing. You enter and a metal door is closed. You then enter a hallway, and a metal door is open and then another door and another door, and the place is filled with cameras. They also stamp your hand with an invisible stamp, and when you leave, they check, with the help of ultraviolet, that it is you, in order that you do not switch with the prisoner. It seems that there are people who are willing to switch places with a prisoner... In brief, it is impossible to escape from there, it thus appears."

People say that Pollard is not so healthy. Did Ha-Rav observe this?

"In general, he is quite ill and he recently had another medical crisis, but he goes out of his way to hide his pain and one does not immediately sense this about him. He smiles, speaks in moderation, quietly and with knowledge. He possesses a sharp, analytical mind, creativity, and also a good sense of humor. He tries hard not to let visitors see how sick he is. This required great strength, when we were there since the next night, we learned he was desperately ill and in crisis. But when one comes to see him, he strengthens himself, and does whatever he can so you do not see any of it."

Does he succeed in having any hope?

"He has hope. Firstly, because he is a man of great faith. Additionally, as is known, there was been an awakening both in Israel and outside of Israel. A senior aide to Caspar Weinberger (Secretary of Defense of American during the time of Pollard's arrest), named Korb, was the person who presented the memo, following which Jonathan received a life sentence with a recommendation not to grant him clemency. This same Korb recently said that this memo was not true, i.e. Jonathan was blamed for things he did not do. There is therefore an awakening in the US and in Israel."

What did you talk about?

"He spoke and to a large extent I just listened. At the end of the conversation, he said that he knows me, because every week he reads the Parashah Sheet of Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim. This sheet is distributed on the internet in Hebrew, English, Russian, French, and Spanish. Someone prints it and mails it to him since he does not have access to the internet. He therefore knows what I think on all subjects.

"In general, Pollard knows everything that is happening in Israel and America. He said that he is concerned about the Nation of Israel. This man is in love with the Nation of Israel with a great yearning. He said: "I want to get out of here not necessarily for myself but for the Nation of Israel. Since the Nation of Israel needs to withstand future tests, which will not be simple, I want to be together with her." These are not merely words. If another person said such things, people would say to him that his words don't amount to much. But since Jonathan has displayed such self-sacrifice for the Nation of Israel and endangered himself for the sake of the Nation of Israel, it is therefore possible to believe him.

"By the way, he also displays self-sacrifice in the service of Hashem. It is not easy to observe Shabbat in an American prison, but he observes Shabbat, eats Kosher, and also acts modestly with self-sacrifice. There are people, when faced with hardships in life, who begin to raise objections against the Master of the Universe, but he is the exact opposite. When he entered prison, he was not as religious as he is now, and here — of all places — he became even more religious. He has to drink large quantities of water on account of a medical problem, and he says: 'This is an opportunity for me to recite a lot of blessings.'

"Obviously, it greatly pains him that the Government of Israel ignores him and does nothing for him. What bothers him is not only how they relate to him, but that the Government of Israel does not act, as one would expect, in a Jewish and ethical manner in this matter. He says: 'If the Government had said that it could not help, this would be something else.' But the sense they transmit is that they do not want to help. It took approximately ten years until the State of Israel officially recognized its agent, and this was only following a ruling of the Supreme Court, which he approached and convinced. Only for this reason is there a document today which testifies that he is an official spy of the State of Israel. But this document has not been brought to the U.S. And as long as there is not official statement of responsibility from the State of Israel, in the U.S., he is presumed to be a common criminal, and not an agent of a friendly country, with which it has a special relationship."

It always seems that there is a detail which we are missing in this story. Why was he abandoned by the Government of Israel?

"I do not understand political matters such as this. Some claim that if he is released from prison, he may open his mouth and say things, but after 26 years in prison what is there to say? So this excuse makes no sense. All of these excuses are nothing more than theories. Regardless, the most surprising thing is why we do not bang on the table and say: Give him to us. Until this day, we have not said to the Americans officially, even once, that we want him.

"There was a request, signed by 109 Knesset members, but this request was not passed on to the Americans. The Americans are not able to know this on their own. It is therefore correct that something here is not understandable. It is also not understandable why the Americans do not want to release him.

"Nevertheless, none of these issues relieve us of our obligation to make this demand."

Did Ha-Rav update him about things being done for him in Israel?

"He knows everything better than I do."

What can we do for him, at least on a personal level?

"Firstly, we can send him letters. And in this area, his words have been published in the newspapers, that the letters he receives are oxygen to him. Therefore, please write him. Everyone can write him, but you must write in English, since everything has to pass the censor. But it does not necessarily have to be in clear English. Just the opposite, he said that when he receives a letter in beautiful English, he understands that someone exerted effort to write in an artificial manner, but when it is in English with mistakes and errors, then he knows that this was an initiative that came from the heart. For a long time now, I personally write him a letter each week. I don't know English so well and I am sure that there are mistakes in my English, but after I heard this from him, I was comforted — it is not so bad that I write with errors."

In general, does he feel betrayed?

"He feels betrayed by the Government of Israel but not by the Nation of Israel. He knows that the Nation of Israel loves him and is interested in him. And if we send him letters, he sees that the Nation of Israel remembers him."

And this is despite the fact that only a small percentage of people send him letters and act for his release?

"This is true, but he does not expect to receive letters from everyone. He sees this as a credible representative sample of the Nation of Israel. He knows the direction of the winds among the Nation and if we ask a simple person among the Nation of Israel, he will answer: "Yes, certainly, Pollard is a good person, etc."

Did Jonathan ask Ha-Rav for something in particular?

"Yes. He humbly said: 'I have an extremely big request from you — when you return to Israel can you plant a fruit tree.' I said that I will certainly make sure to plant a fruit tree for you, and I will ask other communities to do so as well. This is therefore an opportunity to publicize that every community should plant a fruit tree. Every city, every Jew, just one tree. It is also worthwhile to inform him through the site www.JonathanPollard.org And this will make him happy.

"In any event, I have two other requests: One request — as we said — is to write him letters in English, and a lot of them. And the second request — to make others aware. Since many people do not know about this story, the more we speak about it the more it helps. The fact is that someone spoke about it here and someone else spoke about it there, and a snowball was created and an awakening occurred in the US. It is therefore important to tell friends and relate it at every opportunity."

Does Ha-Rav know how often Pollard receives a visit such as this?

"I have no idea, but I know that the day after our visit, he was going to have a visit from a group of scientists from America, in order to discuss a scientific matter, which he has been thinking about."

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, December 27, 2010.

Last night was the Hadar-Israel seminar, "What Are Israel's Security Needs for a Viable Peace?"

The over-arching messages of the evening was that it's time to be very clear and specific and vocal with regard to what Israel's security needs are. As moderator Dan Diker (Secretary-General Designate for the World Jewish Congress) explained: We have been living in a time of ambiguity with little attention paid to Israel's needs.

Each speaker in his own way returned to this.


The first speaker was Maj. Gen. (res) Yaakov Amidror — former commander of the IDF's National Defense College and former head of the IDF's Research and Assessment Division, and now program director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

He addressed the issue of foreign troops in Judea and Samaria — a very bad idea that is being proposed by some as a way to provide "security" for Israel without an Israeli military presence.

There is a matter of a significant principle, first, said Amidror: Israel operates on the basis of self-defense. We must be able to defend ourselves. With just four minor exceptions (e.g., there is American radar in the south now that is operated by Americans), we have never had foreign troops on our soil.

We don't need foreign forces to protect us and we must not rely upon them.

In this vein, Amidror made a most interesting comment. He said he was asked whether Israel is pressuring the US to attack Iran. He knows the answer to this is "no," because Israel is preparing to do it herself.


Then there is the practical aspect: It would be very naive to exchange territory for international protection. In the end, no nation would be willing to pay the price to protect us. What we need is control of critical areas.

In point of fact, we have had no experience with international forces that have defended us as they were supposed to, but quite the contrary:

-- UN forces evacuated the Sinai in 1967 at the demand of Nasser, just when they were needed because Nasser was preparing for war.

-- UNIFIL in Lebanon has been a farce with regard to blocking Hezbollah: The goal of these troops is to survive and to that end they have compromised with "insurgent" forces. Three Israeli soldiers were kidnapped 100 meters from a UN checkpoint (in 2000, at the Israel-Lebanon border). Re-arming done by Hezbollah was never stopped. There has not been a single instance of assistance provided to Israel by the UNIFIL forces.

What is more, UNIFIL's presence has interfered with Israel's ability to act and react. International forces in Judea and Samaria would create the same situation — they would interfere with our ability to react to terrorists and would provide an umbrella for them.

Lastly, foreign forces fighting and dying for Israel would have multiple ramifications for international relations. This is with regard to the US and Israel, and the US and the Arab world. Amidror posed a hypothetical situation in which US troops chased after Hamas terrorists in the narrow alleys of Nablus. When American boys, killed by Hamas, were brought home in boxes, what, he asked, would the American people's response be? How would this impinge upon Israel's relationship with the US?


The second speaker was Maj. Gen. (res) Uzi Dayan — former commander of Sayeret Matkal (an elite special forces unit), and then, in turn, head of Central Command, Deputy Chief of Staff, and head of the National Security Council (until 2005).

He spoke about defensible borders. Borders and security arrangements constitute the most tangible issue to be addressed, he said.

The US understands that it has failed twice in attempts to move negotiations along. Now there is talk of the US presenting a plan of its own. And so now is the time for addressing very clearly what our security needs are. We have both the need and the right to defensible borders.

UN Security Council Resolution 242 did not require Israel to return to the 1967 line, but spoke instead about "secure" boundaries."

The famous letter given by President Bush to PM Sharon in 2004 (Note: which declared that "the United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders...") was endorsed by both Houses of Congress — and then Senator Hillary Clinton voted for it.


The primary issue is one of strategic depth:

There are only 64 km (about 40 miles) from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. This is the minimum that Israel requires in the way of strategic depth. We require the Jordan Valley and a presence at the river in order to defend ourselves.

We must prepare for an attack from the east. The future of Iraq and Jordan are in doubt. No one knows what Iraq will be like in years ahead. There are one million Iraqis in Jordan. And the Kurds are awakening.


Additionally there is the issue of counter-terrorism:

If a Palestinian state is to be demilitarized, this requires control of boundaries so that weapons cannot be brought in. And there is, further, a question of control of air space.


Various suggestions regarding ways to ensure Israeli security without actually stationing Israeli troops on site will not work. These suggestions include listening stations, trip wires, and permission for the IDF to deploy in a crisis.

Said Maj. Gen. Dayan:

You cannot replace the soldier fighting on his own land. "It's our land, and we will defend it."


Third speaker of the evening was Dr. Dore Gold — former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, advisor to prime ministers, and for the last ten years, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

He addressed the strategic and diplomatic ramifications of the current situation. We are at a crossroads and must rethink our diplomatic strategy.

Until now, Israel was behaving as if there was the possibility of entering negotiations imminently. Thus we tended to be vague so as to not tip our hand, and to offer confidence building measures. (Note: the question of whether this was ever a good idea was not addressed.)

But now there is the emergence of a new set of circumstances. Some countries are beginning to recognize a Palestinian state (in some cases, specifically with a '67 "border"). There is concern about the possibility of the US advancing its own peace plan or a bridging proposal.

It is Gold's observation that Saeb Erekat, the Palestinian's chief negotiator, has been pushing the issue of refugees of late in order to establish the claim when the US makes a proposal or in anticipation of unilateralism. This is a new diplomatic stage.

We must put our cards on the table now — we must talk about issues such as defensible borders and Jerusalem.


An aside: Dayan noted, during questions, that when a Palestinian is asked what he expects from negotiations, he will say, refugee return, Jerusalem as the capital, '67 borders. People may disagree but there is no doubt about what is being demanded. But ask an Israeli what is expected, and you may get an answer like, "Well...we want peace. It's complicated... we'll have to see how it works out..." There is not clarity.


Gold then addressed the issue of Jerusalem, which went on the negotiating table only with Oslo in 1993. Notably, however, by 1995, then Prime Minister Rabin, in his last address before his assassination, laid out Israel's future, and included a united Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Rabin, after initial enthusiasm, had already pulled back after assessing the realities on the ground.

There are several myths current with regard to dividing Jerusalem:

1) The myth of the "blue and the green": the idea that Jerusalem can be divided into east and west, or Arab Jerusalem and Jewish Jerusalem. Demography won't allow this, as Jerusalem is a checkerboard. There are 189,000 Jews who live in Jerusalem neighborhoods past the Green Line.

2) The myth that the Palestinians might accept the village of Abu Dis — which is not within the Jerusalem municipal boundaries but is immediately adjacent — as an alternative location for its capital. This proposal may have first been advanced during unofficial talks between Yossi Beilin and Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), but the bottom line is that the Palestinians saw Abu Dis as no more than a springboard to the Old City of Jerusalem. Their claim is to Har Habayit (the Temple Mount).

3) The myth of demography. The argument is made that the Jewish majority of Jerusalem is declining because of the higher birth rate of Arab residents of Jerusalem. Thus, it is said, we have to remove the Arab neighborhoods. But the reality is that lack of affordable housing is driving Jews to move out of the city. And thus the solution is the construction of housing — including in the eastern part of the city. Additionally, Jerusalem should be a priority in terms of economic development so that jobs are available.


An interesting, and not insignificant, aside by Gold that connects to the points made earlier by Maj. Gen. Amidror: In 1947, as part of the UN partition plan, Jerusalem was supposed to be international. But when the Arab League attacked after Israel declared independence, no one in the international community lifted a finger to protect Jerusalem.


Jerusalem has strategic value as it provides a key route for forces into the Jordan Valley.

But most significantly, Jerusalem is tied to our purpose here: We must believe in the justice of our cause, and no where is this more the case than with regard to Jerusalem. If Israel were to give up on Zion, it would constitute a heavy blow to Israeli national self-assurance.


A final last word from Maj. Gen. Dayan, which was the most enthusiastically received line of the entire seminar. During questions, he was asked about what would happen if certain steps were taken for the Palestinians. He stepped to the podium and declared:

"I'm sick and tired of trying to please the Palestinians!"

Let's work to please the Israelis, he suggested. Nothing pleases the Palestinians.


For further excellent information on the issue of Israel's Critical Security Needs, see here:

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 27, 2010.

This was written by Dr. Efraim Zuroff, Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center-Israel Office, and Coordinator of the SWC Nazi war crimes research worldwide (www.operationlastchance.org). Dr. Zuroff is also an author; his most recent book was Operation Last Chance: One Man's Quest to Bring Nazi Criminals to Justice, published by Palgrave/Macmillan.


The visit to Israel this past week of Lithuanian Prime Minister Andrius Kubilius went virtually unnoticed by the Israeli media. In fact, the report by David Lev on Friday on Israel National News ("Is Lithuania Sincere About Owing Up to its Holocaust Past?") was, to the best of my knowledge, the only attempt to assess the most important aspect of current Lithuanian-Jewish relations, the attitude of the Baltic republic to its bloody Holocaust past and the extensive complicity of Lithuanians in the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of Jews (both in their own country and outside her borders), in the light of recent attempts by Lithuania and its Baltic neighbors to rewrite the history of the Shoa [Holocaust, ed.] in a totally distorted manner.

Unfortunately, however, rather than exposing this insiduous campaign, which has strong and very dangerous anti-Semitic undertones, the article was an interview with Yisrael Rosenson, the author of a recent book on LIthuania, which contained a totally opposite assessment of the current situation. Rosenson is not only woefully misinformed, but tried especially hard to paint present a positive assessment of Lithuanian intentions and policy on Holocaust issues, for reasons I can only surmise.

Thus, according to Yisrael Rosenson of the Efrata Teachers College in Jerusalem, "at least some elements of the country's society are making a very sincere effort [my emphasis-EZ] to reevaluate their behavior, to make an honest accounting of their crimes against the Jews." Apparently Rosenson is referring to the government officials in charge of Holocaust education in Lithuania, who according to him have established a national "Holocaust educational center which coordinates programs for all children in all the country's schools." In addition, he claims that "There are Holocaust research centers in Lithuanian universities, with many studies discussing the Lithuanian people's failures regarding the Jews."

If these facts were indeed accurate, there be a basis for Rosenson's positive appraisal of the sincerity of at least part of contemporary Lithuanian society in this regard, but unfortunately his information is all wrong and in fact the situation in this regard is far worse than he could ever imagine.

First of all, there is no national center for Holocaust education. The subject has been entrusted to three institutions, which instead of preserving the accepted narrative of the Shoa, have been leading the campaign to equate Communist crimes with those of the Nazis in an effort to undermine the status of the Holocaust as a unique historical tragedy. I am referring to the International Commission For The Evaluation Of The Crimes Of The Nazi And Soviet Occupations, whose name clearly indicates its agenda and stance on the false equivalency between Nazi and Soviet crimes being actively promoted by the Lithuanian authorities.

The second is the Genocide and Resistance Research Center, whose attitude toward Holocaust issues is clearly manifest in its Museum of Genocide Victims in the heart of Vilnius, which does not even mention the Holocaust or the mass murder site of Ponar, but stresses the Jewish origin of Communist officials in blatantly anti-Semitic cartoons in its permanent exhibition.

The third organization involved is the Vilnius Tolerance Center headed by Emanuel Zingeris, a Jewish member of the Seimas, who no longer is a member of the local Jewish community and is one of the key operatives in the efforts of the Lithuanian government to promote the Prague Declaration of June 3, 2008, the main manifesto of the false equivalency movement.

As far as Lithuanian universities are concerned, not a single one has a Holocaust research center, nor are there any courses on Holocaust history. In fact, just this past summer, Vilnius University purged its most prominent Jewish professor, world-renowned Yiddish expert Prof. Dovid Katz, who has been teaching there the past eleven years, and whose primary sin was his courageous defense of several elderly Holocaust survivors who fought with the Soviet anti-Nazi partisans and who were accused in the local nationalist press of committing "war crimes" against innocent Lithuanian civilians.

These trumped-up charges against Jewish heroes, whose only hope of survival was to join the partisans, is part of the false symmetry being promoted by the Lithuanian authorities in order to relativize the Holocaust crimes of Lithuanians, as if they were the mirror image of similar or equivalent crimes by Jews against Lithuanians, and thereby deflect the fully-justified criticism of Lithuanian behavior during the Shoa. Of course, if the campaign to equalize Communist and Nazi crimes were to succeed, that would turn the Lithuanians from a "nation of killers" into a "nation of victims," which would do wonders to erase their guilt for Shoa crimes.

Rosenson is also wrong when it comes to the important issue of the prosecution of Nazi war criminals. He correctly points out that there was very strong resistance to doing so in Lithuania, but offers the explanation that there was similar opposition to such trials in other countries, pointing to France which did not try Lyon Gestapo chief Klaus Barbie until the eighties. What he neglects to mention is that the only reason there were any trials whatsoever of Lithuanian Nazi war criminals in independent Lithuania was external pressure from the US, Israel, and the Wiesenthal Center and that the local authorities did everything possible to prevent any of the criminals from actually being punished, turning the entire judicial process in these cases to a total farce. Instead of serving as an important history lesson, like the trial of Jasenovac concentration camp commander Dinko Sakic in Croatia, the Lithuanian attitude toward their Nazi collaborators was one of understanding and sympathy for the last people on earth to deserve such treatment.

In view of all of the above, and given Rosenson's efforts to describe Lithuania in a positive light, one can only wonder why a respected religious Zionist educator would defend the truly-indefensible behavior of a country which had the highest percentage of Jewish victims in the Holocaust and is trying its hardest to erase or at least minimize the memory of those crimes? The only possible answer is that in recent years the Lithuanian government has allocated enormous sums to try and improve its image in Jewish communities the world over. Can it be that the year-long program on Lithuanian Jewish history which culminates with a trip to Lithuania which is organized by Rabbi Rosenson personally and sponsored by Efrata Teachers College has been the recepient of Lithuanian government largesse? I hope that the existence of this program and nothing more explains why Efrata hosted the previous Lithuanian ambassador to Israel (currently the Deputy Foreign Minister) despite the terrible acccusations made at that time by the Lithuanain government against Jewish anti-Nazi partisans.

I do not know the answer to this question and I would like Rabbi Rosenson to explain. I can only hope that Rosenson's interview was the result of ignorance rather than funding, but something is very seriously wrong when a respected Zionist religious educational leader publically provides patently false information to defend those who are, in my opinion, in the process of inflicting serious damage on the interests of the Jewish people and the memory of the Holocaust.

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Babu Suseelan, December 27, 2010.

We are living in a world of open system, democracy, and different philosophical positions. The fundamental choices are available for dealing with human problems including politics, economics, ethics, and working with human beings. Each system we follow will have implications and consequences. Democratic countries provide free choice, open systems, pluralistic philosophies, and individuals can enjoy freedom of thought. In our open system, liberty thrives, creativity is encouraged and individual can concentrate on creating conditions conducive to effective problem solving.


In contrast to our open systems, Islam disapproves critical thinking, logical analysis, individual freedom, democracy, secularism and rationalism. Islam is a closed dogma. It is a closed system where free will of the populace is not recognized. Muslim's behavior and their goals in life can be stated as "oughts" or "shoulds". Islamic objectives are often expressed in terms of specific acts or behaviors and subjected to precise assessment by the Mullahs, Muftis, ulema, qadis, or Imams. As a closed system, Islam allows no individual freedom and its followers are required to follow precisely defined, orderly, step by step sequence designed in Arabia in the seventh century. Muslims are forbidden from introspection or to follow transcendental needs or rely on individual intelligence or motivation to reach for higher ideal.

Islamists criticize our open, systematic, freedom loving life style as mystical, pluralistic and irresponsible. Few people in our open society understand that Islamic closed system can cause colossal damage to our society. Unfortunately, the general public continues to regard Islamists who commit terrorism, and promote Islamic tyranny and martyrdom is a religion of goodness.

The history of Islamic faith, invasion plunder, looting and community life and individual life is tied directly to Mohammed's messages. His messages are in the Islamic trilogy (Koran, Hadith, and Sira) Mohammed's messages shape Muslim thought and practice. Muslims maintains that those who submit to Islam live in accordance with predetermined Islamic law. Muslims consider Islam as a complete and completed religion and that the Koran is the foremost authority in all matters, personal, family, social, spiritual and legal. A person faced with any problem need only consult the revelations from the Koran for solving common human problem. The Koran as it stands today is compiled in the seventh century in Arabia. It is puzzling to say that the outdated Koran passages can be applicable even in this 21st century. Muslims demand that the Koran text need to be followed by people who follow different culture, belief system and spiritual tradition.

Central to Muslim life is the application and interpretation of sharia law and conversion of infidels into Islam. The political undertones of Muslim's plans for Dar-ul-Islam are clear. Those who question, criticize or disobey Islamic sharia law are labeled apostate, and beheaded.

There is no separation between Islam and the state. And since Islamic states follow imprecise and unsophisticated way of defining human freedom and reject rationality, Islamic states act brutally against infidels. Blasphemy law is common in all Islamic states. Islamic states allow polygamy, limb amputation, genital mutilation, stoning, oppression of women and discrimination against infidels. Islamic states are fundamentally aberrant and the consequences of imposing sharia law have severe disastrous consequences.


Large numbers of Muslim immigrants are now living in western democratic countries. Israel and India have substantial number of Muslims. While infidels are harassed, murdered, or kicked out of Islamic countries, Israel and India provide all opportunities to live in a democratic, pluralistic society. Muslim immigrants in Europe, America and indigenous Islamic population in India and Israel are demanding special privileges and want to implement Islamic sharia law. We allow Muslim immigrants to construct Mosques, practice their religion and convert our population, Islamic states have no reciprocity.

How Muslim immigrants behave in democratic countries is a function of what they think and think about themselves and the world. No matter how strongly we bombard them with democratic principles, common civil law, liberty and open thought system, Muslim immigrant's perceptual field of feelings, attitudes, ideas, and convictions remain forever. Any one Muslim in our country is what he/she believes is so. Since Islam forbids rational thinking, pluralism, secularism and religious tolerance, it is unwise on our part to expect that Muslims will integrate and adapt democratic principles.

We are democratic, secular and civic minded because the world around us is members of a common culture. So long as we stay in the same culture and follow our constitution and rule of law, we can enjoy our freedom and follow our own creativity.

Large number of Muslim immigrants with tunnel vision who want to establish dar-ul-Islam and sharia law may pose a threat to our culture, democracy and rule of law. Why are we unwilling to see the threat? The threat is great. Many people feel threatened by Jihadists in our community. It takes time to discover Jihadist threats if one is not directly faced the consequences of Jihad terrorism. If we believe Islam as a real religion inevitably determines the techniques we employ when dealing with Muslim immigrants. A clear understanding of Islam as a closed Arab political dogma for invasion, plunder, mass murder and looting and its brutal history may enable us to develop some logical and possible way of dealing with Islamic terrorism. There is a need for proper understanding of Islamic belief system, and how it affects their practices in a democratic society. We should not allow those immigrants who never believe in freedom to exploit our freedom to introduce Islamic tyranny.

The wish to kill infidels and destructive instinct is reinforced at the Islamic religious schools. Instead of inhibiting their aggressive and sadistic Islamic impulses, Muslims in democratic countries are exploiting our liberal legal system and ostensible kindness to continue their primitive behavior. Islamic communities in democratic countries provide opportunities for amplifying Islamic hatred against infidels.

Islam leaves no room for human freedom and moral responsibility. Muslims around the world including immigrants in our country are forced to follow the directives and interpretations of ulemas (those learned in Koran), quadis (Islamic Judges) and muftis (advisors) for proper behavior. They are concerned with what Muslims should do, not what Muslims must know and follow in a democratic country with constitution and civil laws. Muslims do not want to compromise with our constitution, administrative directives and state ordinances. Muslims advocate a return to the Koran as the standard of government and social life. Muslims claim that the Koran meets all of man's needs. Muslim theologians insist that peace, progress and economic greatness can be achieved not by technological advances and scientific research but by confirming to the laws of the Koran. The statements in the Koran may be emotionally significant to Muslims, but they are not significant for non-believers.

Muslims act spontaneously from the passions or emotions and their whimsical actions produce discomfort, pain for law abiding citizens. One of the most complicated problems facing us is how we understand Islamic obscurantism and intransigence. How does sharia law deal with elements of authority, human rights, and liberty? Majority of American citizens are perplexed when Muslims demand and force county authorities to introduce ordinance to endorse sharia law and Islamic blasphemy law. In this age of political correctness there are several instances where cities submit to Muslim demand for Mosque construction (New York), accommodation for Islamic holidays (Eid-al-Fitr-in Tennessee) and arbitrary demand for anti Israel advertisement (Seattle). Muslims can terrorize phony liberal politicians and intimidate the public, but they could not necessarily convince or justify their dastardly behavior.


The fact that most infidels are ignorant does not entitle Muslims to intimidate, terrorize and attempt to introduce Islamic tyranny. The massive ignorance of Islam should not be allowed Muslim Jihadists to think that we approve of their deviant behavior. Many pseudo liberals praising Jihadists does not mean that the majority accept Islamic absolutism.

Why do our phony liberals and political leaders ignore political, social and cultural threat from the Jihadists? It is a national malady that citizens are indifferent to our freedom, individual liberty, constitution and cultural values. Democratic countries fought against Nazism, Fascism and Communism and liberated millions from their shackles to freedom.


Freedom loving people must make a choice. If they choose to disregard Jihad terrorism, give a damn about Islamic sharia and Islamic Blasphemy laws, or willing to fight the culture war, we will be subjected to Islamic brutality and political decay. Free citizens of democratic countries must think again not as subservient to Islamists. Freedom loving people should not tolerate intolerant ideology and intolerant people. Tolerance and compromise is not a panacea for dangerous political dogma paraded as a religion.

Dr. Babu Suseelan is a professor of clinical psychology and the director of a drug and alcohol treatment program in Pennsylvania. A former Muslim, he writes on the subject of Islamic terrorism and its effect on Hindu society.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, December 27, 2010.

This was written by Bill Levinson and it appeared yesterday in IsraPundit


The Palestinians are, by Arab design, an open wound in Israel's body that the Arabs and their left-wing enablers deliberately keep open to bleed Israel dry no matter how many years it takes. Israel needs to close this wound by removing a good two out of three Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with the minority that is willing and able to live in peace being allowed and even encouraged to remain.

Most of the world already falsely accuses Israel of ethnic cleansing and other atrocities. If the world is going to punish you unjustly for something you didn't do, you may as well do that something and it is past time for Israel to take off the gloves. Ethnic cleansing or even genocide is a crime against humanity only if you end up on the losing side. Hitler was unfortunately right when he said, "Who remembers the Armenians?" and it is telling that Abraham Foxman's Anti-Defamation League, a group that should have been foremost in the exposure and denunciation of genocide, recently did its best to get the world to forget the Armenians. This shows that expulsion of the Palestinians should be practical; more importantly, expulsion or deportation of an ethnic group to protect one's citizens against an ongoing litany of mindless violence from the group in question is not a crime against humanity or anybody else, just as it is not a crime to disable or even kill another human being to stop him from killing you or somebody for whose safety you are responsible.

In his book What about Germany?, Lochner offered the following English translation of the document then in his possession:

Genghis Khan led millions of women and children to slaughter — with premeditation and a happy heart. History sees in him solely the founder of a state. It's a matter of indifference to me what a weak western European civilization will say about me. I have issued the command — and I'll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad — that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formation in readiness — for the present only in the East — with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space (Lebensraum) which we need. Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?

Well, Abraham Foxman of the ADL certainly did not want Congress to speak of the annihilation of the Armenians lest it offend Israel's "ally" Turkey. (How did that work out for you, Abe?) There are meanwhile statues of Genghis Khan in modern Mongolia, so the unpleasant truth is that mass murder and even genocide are crimes against humanity only if you lose. The Nazis were punished at Nuremberg only because they were on the losing side. General Tomoyuki Yamashita was executed because of atrocities some of his soldiers committed without his approval or even his knowledge, but Soviet generals who allowed their men to rape German women were never held accountable — nor was the Soviet Union ever held accountable for its unprovoked invasions of Poland and Finland.

To put matters in perspective, the Nazis murdered about 10 million people because of who they were (Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, homosexuals) or what they believed (Jehovah's Witnesses, White Rose Society). Joseph Stalin murdered seven million people because of who they were (Ukrainians, Poles) and more than ten million others because of what they believed, and he was never called to account for his crimes because he was on the winning side. A new Russian textbook, in fact, seeks to justify Stalin's killings. Mao Tse Tung meanwhile killed 20 million or so Chinese, and nothing happened to him as a result.

More recently, Cambodian mass murderer Pol Pot died of old age, while Idi Amin Dada reputedly died of venereal disease as opposed to the hangman's rope. North Korea recently murdered South Koreans with a blatant act of war, and the United Nations did nothing because China wanted it to do nothing. Iran routinely stones people, mostly women, to death for crimes such as "adultery" (which includes being a rape victim) and "world opinion" says nothing and does even less. Iran also kidnapped three American citizens in a blatant act of war, and released one (Sarah Shourd) only after receiving half a million dollars in ransom: the modus operandi of the Barbary Pirates. Russia on the other hand just applied Rule 303 to Somali pirates who attacked a Russian ship, and the world did not say much about that either. That is a hint to Israel on how it should handle terrorists.

Even more recently, it was revealed that Henry Kissinger said "And if they put Jews into gas chambers in the Soviet Union, it is not an American concern. Maybe a humanitarian concern." Why should this come as a shock or a surprise? The sainted Franklin Delano Roosevelt (God the Father to the National Jewish Democratic" Council) did not think it an American concern when the Soviet Union starved seven million Ukrainians to death, and he himself put Japanese-American citizens into concentration camps. Little was said and less was done when Saddam Hussein used poison gas against the Kurds. How did the world community "punish" Iran for hanging Baha'i s and stoning women to death? It gave Iran a seat on the United Nations' Human Rights Council. Libya also suffered no consequences for holding several Bulgarian nurses hostage and threatening to shoot them.

As of this very day, Mainland China's perversion of medical science — specifically the blood typing of political prisoners to facilitate the harvesting of their organs for China's rulers and perhaps anybody who has enough money to buy a transplant organ — is as bad as anything the Nazi "doctor" Joseph Mengele ever did. China is a member of the UN Security Council, and again the world says very little and does even less.

If the Arabs succeed in wiping Israel off the map, they will not be punished by any Nuremberg court or any other agency; the only punishment they fear involves the consequences of failure. These consequences were not sufficiently severe in 1948, 1956, or 1967 to act as a deterrent. The other side of this coin is, however, that Israel can probably get away with simply removing the Palestinians in a relatively humane matter.

As an example, Israel could pack the Palestinians onto ships with whatever they can carry on their backs plus some money in the currency of whatever country to which they are to be sent. A "reverse Gaza flotilla" could drop them off in Turkey, which seems to like them and would doubtlessly be happy to accept a couple of hundred thousand of them. Saudi Arabia should be more than willing to extend Arab hospitality to another few hundred thousand fellow Muslims, and so on. This would remove the open sore that Israel's enemies are currently using to bleed it dry, and are using an excuse for violence against Israel — much as Hitler used the Sudeten Germans to justify his attacks on Czechoslovakia.

The bottom line is that the Athenians' observation in Thucydides' Melian Dialogue is correct: "You know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." The fact that everybody knows about Athens while very few know about the Melians is yet another example of Hitler's observation about the Armenians. Or, as a German proverb puts it, you must be either the hammer or the anvil; if you don't do the beating, you will be beaten.

It is past time for Israel to become the hammer so it will no longer be the anvil. Israel must use its physical power to do what it can to protect its safety and security; the Palestinians, having chosen collectively to take the path of violence and hatred, will have to suffer what they must. If Israel fails in the basic duty of a sovereign state to protect its citizens and its own existence, a future Adolf Hitler may say, "Who remembers Israel?" and he will be just as correct as the original Hitler was about the Armenians. It is better that future historians say instead, "Who remembers the Palestinians?"

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. He lives in Jerusalem. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Amil Imani, December 26, 2010.

Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims' systemic cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights have a different meaning, and its protective provisions are reserved strictly for Muslims — primarily for Muslim men. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

Oppression of women, for one, is so systemic in Islam that to this day women are, at best, second-class citizens under Islamic law. Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islamdom, denies women the right to drive, vote or hold elective offices — the most basic rights of citizens in democratic societies. Arabs and Muslims are masters of double-acts. They do all things in private, yet the public display of morality, decorum, and even piety is something you wear as you would your Keffiyeh even under the sizzling sun.

In model Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, for instance, women do not dare complain about their Allah-decreed chattel status. If they protest in the least, they are beaten by their husbands. And if they dare to demonstrate in public for equal family rights with men, they get severe beatings by the police and are hauled to jails for additional indignities and violence.

One may wonder then why is it that millions of Muslim women meekly submit to their subservient rank and thank Allah for it. These women are virtually imprinted by their parents and the clergy from birth to adopt the gender inequality as well as the entire pathological Islamic ethos.

Islam can be a "forgiving" religion, specifically for the male. If you neglect to say your prayers or you simply don't want to, you can hire someone, preferably an imam or a mullah, to pray on your behalf. Going to the Hajj is too onerous and takes you away from the pleasures and comforts of your life? You can deputize someone else to go in your stead. You have a few drinks of the forbidden brew and it is time to say your prayer? Simply rinse your mouth and go ahead with praying. But, always remember the will of Allah and serve him. Do your duties to vanquish the unbelievers, promote the rule of the Sharia, and make the earth Allah's.

In Islamic societies, freedom of expression, worship, and assembly are taken away. Women are indeed treated as chattel. Young girls are subjected to barbaric genital mutilation to make them sex slaves and birth channels without the ability to enjoy intercourse. Minors are executed, adulterers are stoned to death, thieves have their limbs amputated, and much much more. Isn't that everyone's idea of paradise?

Women, by the very nature of their second-class status expressly stipulated in the Quran, are occasionally allowed a token high position in government, while non-Muslim minority citizens are virtually barred from securing any positions at all.

"Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme." Quran 4.34

This misogynist religion of Allah is custom-made for the savage male. A faithful follower of Allah is allowed to have as many as four permanent wives-and replace any of them at any time he wants-as well as an unlimited number of one night or one-hour-stands that he can afford to rent. But, woe unto a woman if she even has a single love affair with another man. Nothing less than death by stoning is her just punishment.

In the Islamic Republic of Iran and under the Islamic Sharia that became the unofficial law of the land, a religiously sanctioned ceremony immediately filled the void. Many mosques provided the service of Seeghe — temporary marriages — . Women interested or forced by circumstances beyond their control to seek this type of 'marriage' would register with a local Mullah. Men seeking a temporary wife would contact the Mullah and specify what kind of woman they desired and for how long. Depending on the marketability of the candidate woman, a fee is levied on the man and the Mullah pronounces them husband and wife for a stipulated duration. Once the patron satisfies his urges, the same Mullah simply annuls the marriage. Viola. No problems. The pair parts company and the Mullah, a replacement for the former pimp or madam, pockets his fee.

Thanks to Western technology, the Seeghe business has also joined the 21st century world. In some of the bigger cities and Tehran, a man can pick up a woman and call in for a Seeghe authorization which is granted over the phone and the fee is charged to the patron's credit card. Islam is a custom-made religion for men. Well, as long as men rule and the rule serves them, the horrific plight of women plays out. It is a great deal for men.

What is incredible is the gall and audacity of Muslims in demanding that Western and other democracies legalize Sharia in their societies. Due to large populations of Muslims, mostly recent arrivals, in countries such as Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden, these countries are experiencing the insistent demands by Muslims to have Sharia rule their Islamic communities. This is just the beginning and it may seem relatively harmless to the simpletons in our midst. Yet, once Sharia is recognized to any extent, it will reach out to rule not only on matters that concern Muslims, but also those that may involve a Muslim and non-Muslim. Under Sharia, a Muslim man married to a non-Muslim woman is able to divorce the woman at will, automatically have custody of the children, and literally toss the wife out of "his" home with practically no compensation.

"Death to the Islamic Republic, Stop stoning women, Death to the Criminal Mullahs and Democracy for Iran," are the banners read almost routinely in most European countries by the Iranian ex-patriot sympathizers condemning the Islamic Republic's brutality against women. They demand equal rights and treatments for the largest oppressed minority in the world.

As the world turns, we become convinced that the Islamic system is custom-made for men, by men and for the pleasure of men. And the men in power, the clergy, the prime beneficiary of the system, do not intend to voluntarily relinquish their privileged status.

There is a hope that Muslims themselves may leave this Bedouin slaveholder religion. Yet, the hope is slim. Islam has a stranglehold on its slaves and will neither let them go, nor do the Muslims seem to have the insight or the will to leave it in large numbers. But hope, as slim as it is, keeps me sounding the alarm before the fire of Islam engulfs us all.

Amil Imani is the author of the riveting book "Obama Meets Ahmadinejad". This article is archived on his website:
http://www.amilimani.com/index.php?option=com_ content&task=view&id=196&Itemid=2&show=1#comments

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Mandel, December 26, 2010.

In dealing with the mullahs, put U.S. interests first.


WikiLeaks' exposure of 250,000 diplomatic cables has stimulated a debate on how the U.S. must deal with Iran's drive towards nuclear weapons and the region's democratic deficit. Both issues originally came to the fore on George W. Bush's watch. Neither were resolved before Barack Obama assumed office. Do the WikiLeaks clarify what the U.S. should do?

To judge from their statements, most Arab leaders, other than those of Iran-allied Syria and Syrian-dominated Lebanon, are decidedly queasy about an Iranian bomb.

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah pleaded with Obama to "cut off the head of the [Iranian] snake." The king of Bahrain declared that the Iranian nuclear program "must be stopped" and that "the danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it."

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) defense chief, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin-Zayed of Abu Dhabi, urged the U.S. to take action against Iran "this year or next," stating flatly that "Ahmadinejad is Hitler." UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan warned a congressional delegation last February that "if Iran goes nuclear, others in the region will move forward on the same track, and the nuclear nonproliferation treaty will completely break down."

Yet taking these statements at face value produces no agreement on what U.S. policy should be.

For example, the Ethics and Public Policy Center's Peter Wehner argues that WikiLeaks clearly demonstrates an Arab fear toward Iran and a lack of interest in the Palestinian issue. He suggests we should therefore strike Iran if necessary, irrespective of the Israeli/Palestinian situation, to the benefit of U.S., Israeli, and Arab interests.

In contrast, the New America Foundation's Peter Beinart cites a survey to argue that, while Arab leaders dread a nuclear Iran, the Arab masses do not. He concludes that U.S. interests are in conflict with the goal of democratic change in the Middle East.

Wehner and Beinart both take the words of Arab leaders at face value. But should we?

Arab leaders are as adept as any — arguably better than most — in the diplomatic art of seduction. When Arab diplomats tell their American counterparts what they think they want to hear, we should react with suspicion rather than relief.

Our disbelief should not, however, be automatic. We should not assume that Arab heads of state are lying simply because they may not, at any given moment, find it necessary to utter the truth.

Put simply, Arab leaders can detest America, and even work to see America out of the Middle East, without wishing the U.S. to fail against an ascendant Iran that threatens them too. Similarly, they can hate Israel and U.S. support for it, without wishing to make U.S. action on Iran hostage to the Sisyphean task of Israeli-Palestinian peace-making.

Arab leaders know better than most that a conflict whose fires they themselves stoke — through funding radicals and anti-Israel incitement — isn't about to be solved.

For these leaders, seeing off America is a long-term issue, whereas stopping Iran going nuclear is an urgent one.

In other words, WikiLeaks tells us little beyond what many already surmised — that a nuclear Iran disturbs some of our fair-weather Arab friends, but not their publics.

Does that leave U.S. interests and the goal of democratic change in the Middle East in conflict?

No — unless we take the simplistic view that, because we want a more liberal, humane Middle East, we need to defer to whatever point of view emerges from its streets.

This is something we can't always do even with our closest friends. Can we expect to do it when we have little in common with societies that are illiberal and angry — and kept that way by their governments?

To think that we can is to make the same mistake the Bush administration did in Iraq and the Palestinian Authority, to name two examples, by prioritizing means (elections, constitutions, referenda) over ends (civil society, political and religious pluralism).

Pluralism and civil society must precede democracy, not the other way round. A pluralistic, civil society is less likely to hate America, loathe our military presence, or be brainwashed into obsessing about Israel. Yet the U.S. can't suspend its vital interests until this evolution occurs. Nor can the U.S. make their attainment conditional on the endorsement of the Arab street.

Daniel Mandel is a Fellow in History at Melbourne University, Director of the Zionist Organization of America's Center for Middle East Policy and author of H.V. Evatt and the Establishment of Israel: The Undercover Zionist,

This appeared today on Pajamas Media
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/routing-americas-iran- policy-past-the-arab-street/?singlepage=true

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 26, 2010.

This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and appeared today in Arutz-7


A Jordan Valley Arab farmer has exposed the tactic of leftists accepting Arab claims and falsely accusing Jews of attacking Arabs. He admitted that the "burning sheep" libel against Jews was meant to disguise his own blunder of losing control of a brush fire.

Last week, left-wing groups in Israel and counterparts in the United States spread a story that that an Arab shepherd "saw settlers light a fire in the field where his herd was grazing, burning to death 12 pregnant ewes, and then drive away."

The story of the sheep burning was so extreme that the police immediately doubted the claim. The supposed burning of the sheep occurred on the Sabbath, when observant Jews, the usual scapegoats, are forbidden to drive.

The Arab farmer, Samir Bani Fadel, claimed that four armed Jews approached him, chased him away, set fire to his field — which also is forbidden on Sabbath — and drove away as the fire spread and burned to death 12 pregnant ewes while injuring others.

Regardless of the doubts, the left-wing B'Tselem and Yesh Din human rights group rushed to allege that the supposed attack was another one of hundreds of supposed acts of vandalism by Jews against Arabs.

New York-based writer Philip Weiss promptly reprinted the libel on his Mondoweiss blog, and the image of sheep being cruelly burned aroused sympathy for Arabs and anger against Jews. "It was an awful sight," the farmer said. "I've lost at least $12,000."

The Palestinian Authority called on the international community to pressure Israel to stop "settler violence."

The tale began to unravel when Arabs pointed their fingers at residents of Itamar, an easy target as it is a religious community, but located almost an hour's drive from the scene of the fire. The story then was changed, with the blame being placed on the closer community of Maaleh Ephraim, most of whose residents are professionals and who almost never have been accused of any activities against Arabs.

Fadel finally admitted to police the whole story was a lie and that he was responsible for the fire, which he set to burn thorns before it spread beyond control. Blaming Jews not only would have saved him from the embarrassment of having burned his own sheep, it also would allow him to claim damages from the government while being hailed as a hero among Palestinian Authority Arabs and left-wing anti-Zionists.

Hundreds of accusations against Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria have been leveled in recent years, usually in claims that Jews attack or destroy olive trees, although evidence has been produced that in most cases the Arabs have simply pruned their trees, counted on lack of agricultural knowledge on the part of the media and leftwing groups, and then accused Jews of damaging them. Olive trees look hacked when they are pruned and months later, the supposedly damaged orchards have been seen to be full of fruit.

Another tactic has been to instigate violence, especially on the Shabbat when Jews are forbidden to take pictures, and then accuse Jews of attacking them.

Yossi Dagan, adviser to the Samaria Regional Council, commented, "There is a system among left-wing groups who campaign for financial contributions from foreign countries, many of whom are hostile to Israel. They use European Union money, which has reached billions of dollars the past few years. Many of the workers for left-wing groups enjoy high salaries and use reports from so-called human rights organizations and then travel throughout Judea and Samaria and blow up or change facts to spread libel against Jews."

Dagan explained that Jews are blamed for burning cars in Arab villages when in fact they are damaged as a result of fights among Arabs.

David Ha'Ivri, who heads the Shomron (Samaria) Liaison Office that handles public relations for the Jewish communities in Samaria, said, "We have a very difficult task up against a bunch of well-funded NGOs like B'Tselem and Rabbis for Human Rights, whose agenda is to hurt the image of the State of Israel and the Jewish residents of Yehuda and Shomron (Judea and Samaria).

"Their slanderous claims are always given the benefit of the doubt by international media agencies who jump at an opportunity to project a Satanic image of the 'evil Jewish settlers.' The events reported in this story are a perfect example of blood libel promoted by NGOs who claim to be humanitarian and peace activists."

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 26, 2010.

This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and appeared today in Arutz-7


Hamas revealed statistics on Saturday that contradicted predictions by supporters of the "Disengagement" program in 2005 that the withdrawal from Gaza would led to peace. Hamas also says it was behind the 2008 Mercaz HaRav Yeshiva massacre in Jerusalem.

Abu Obadiah, spokesman for the Izz al-Din al-Qassam military wing of the Hamas terrorist organization, confirmed predictions by nationalists that the expulsion of 9,000 Jews from Gush Katif and the withdrawal of the IDF from the area would be followed by an escalation in missile attacks.

He admitted for the first time that Hamas was responsible for the massacre of young men, most of them teenagers, at the yeshiva. The attack was carried out by a Jerusalem Arab.

Obadiah also said Hamas was responsible for the murder of seven other Jews in attacks in the Hevron area and Samaria. He warned Israel that Hamas will continue to attack Israelis, who he said have to choose between "death and leaving Palestinian lands." He also called on Israeli Bedouins, many of whom have been involved in terrorist attacks and arms smuggling, to help carry out attacks against Israelis.

His statistics on the number of missiles, rockets and mortar shells fired at southern Israel since the expulsion in 2005 thoroughly contradicted claims by the Sharon government and supporters of the "Disengagement" program that the withdrawal would led to peace. Sixty-nine percent of nearly 11,000 mortar and missile attacks were executed after the expulsion, according to his figures.

He also said that of the 1,808 Hamas terrorists killed since the founding of the terrorist group 23 years ago, 1,053 died after 2006, when Hamas won the first and only Palestinian Authority legislative elections.

The escalation of missile attacks on southern Israel after 2005, which brought the metropolitan Tel Aviv area within the range of attacks, surprised political leaders who had banked on the expulsion as the road to peace.

"I did not imagine that we would leave Gaza and they would fire Kassams from there," President Shimon Peres commented in July 2008.

To Go To Top

Posted by Chaya Lipschutz, December 26, 2010.

HELP save a life!

If you ever tested in your life for Bone Marrow and was not a match — you are badly needed!

Your results from your Bone Marrow testing can be checked to see if you are a match for someone in need of a kidney! You wouldn't even have to go initially to the hospital to test, unless you are found to be a match.

You may be able to save the life of the following who desperately need a kidney!

1. Young mother of 6 kids — blood type B
2. Father of 9 kids — blood type A
3. Mother of 3 kids — blood type O

These people are having such a hard time finding a match! Please HELP save their life!

Please contact me for more information.

Tizku L'mitzvos.

Best wishes,

Chaya Lipschutz
(917) 627-8336
E-mail: KidneyMitzvah@aol.com
Website: KidneyMitzvah.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Babu Suseelan, December 25, 2010.

Pakistan is the ideological, financial and training centre of global Jihad terrorism. Carried on the wings of Saudi, Libyan, and American largess, Pakistan has established thousands of Jihad training schools in occupied Kashmir and remote areas of Pakistan.

America, under Obama administration has transferred billions of dollars to Pakistan since 2010. This week, America has transferred $633 million to Pakistan under the Coalition Support Fund (CSF). The payment covered the first six months of this year, Pakistan had now received approximately 8.76 billion dollars since 2001. American taxpayer's dollars is at work against India, and the west.

The Pakistan administration is utilizing American taxpayer's money for training and deploying Jihad terrorists around the world for suicide bombing, planting explosives, burning passenger trains, buses, hijacking and bombing. Pakistan secret service (ISI) is recruiting, training and arming Islamic terrorists from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir in secret terrorist camps in remote areas of Pakistan. The theatre of the absurd is being played in Pakistan with American taxpayer dollars.

Since Islam is inherently violent, more than 100 people are murdered daily in Pakistan by Islamic extremists. Since 2001 violence, bombing, homicide, and terrorists incidents are on the increase in Pakistan. Pakistan diverts American funds for training Islamic jihadists and sends them clandestinely to India and Kashmir state to kill innocent infidels.

In this context, one wonders why American government should divert funds from the treasury to Pakistan to train terrorists. While American schools are starving for taxpayer money for education, President Obama is channeling American taxpayer funds for Pakistani schools to teach America is the source of all misfortunes of the Islamic world.

America is now in a predicament. Pakistan created the dangerous Jihad terrorists group and export abroad for terrorism. The Jihad terror monster is also creating havoc in Pakistan financed by American tax payers. America cannot but finance Pakistan or leave it as it is. Americans are caught in the theatre of the absurd of their own making, inexorably, the exit is difficult.

Dr. Babu Suseelan is a professor of clinical psychology and the director of a drug and alcohol treatment program in Pennsylvania. A former Muslim, he writes on the subject of Islamic terrorism and its effect on Hindu society.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, December 25, 2010.

Some of the more interesting Wikileaks concern the U.S. diplomatic perspective on the succession in Egypt from President Husni Mubarak to his son, Gamal. Let's remember that Egypt is the single most important country in the Arabic-speaking world. Dramatic instability there would be disastrous for U.S. interests. And it might happen.

Even compared to Jordan and Saudi Arabia, Egypt has been remarkably passive in the region's international affairs over the last two decades. It has not acted as one might have expected, by taking the lead in organizing the Arab nationalist opposition to Iran and revolutionary Islamism.

But Mubarak has certainly been aware of the threat. While Jordan's King Abdallah compared Iran to an "octopus" reaching out its tentacles to seize control of the region, Mubarak called it a "cancer." A U.S. State Department cable of April 28, 2009, reports:

"President Mubarak has made it clear that he sees Iran as Egypt's-and the region's — primary strategic threat. His already dangerous neighborhood, he has stressed, has only become more so since the fall of [Iraqi dictator] Saddam [Hussein], who, as nasty as he was, nevertheless stood as a wall against Iran, according to Mubarak. He now sees Tehran's hand moving with ease throughout the region, 'from the Gulf to Morocco,' as he told a recent congressional delegation."

Yet Mubarak also stresses the immediate danger is not so much Iran getting nuclear weapons as it is Tehran's subverting almost everyone else in the Middle East:

"While he will readily admit that the Iranian nuclear program is a strategic and existential threat to Egypt and the region, he sees that threat as relatively 'long term.' What has seized his immediate attention are Iran's non-nuclear destabilizing actions such as support for Hama, media attacks, weapons and illicit funds smuggling, all of which add up in his mind to 'Iranian influence spreading like a cancer from the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council countries] to Morocco.'"

But President Barack Obama also frightens Mubarak:

"[The Egyptians] are worried that [the United States is] going to strike a 'grand deal' with the Iranians....The prevailing [Egyptian government] view remains a principled rejection of any diplomatic rapprochement."

Sounds like Mubarak's been writing Rubin Reports! Or to put it another way, Mubarak (and the Saudis, Jordanians, and others) are more worried about Tehran than is the United States. Well, they should be! After all, not only are they closer to Iran but they are also dependent on U.S. protection. Nowadays, that's enough to scare anybody.

But the 82-year-old Mubarak won't be around too much longer. The assumption is he will give the presidency to his 46-year-old son, Gamal Mubarak. Yet even now Gamal remains only the head of the ruling party's policy committee and is its assistant chairman. He has not been given any high-ranking governmental responsibility.

In 2011 there will be a presidential election. Will Husni run for reelection again or will he give the spot to his son and retire? If Husni, obviously reluctant to yield power, doesn't make that transition the country will possibly face instability.

Ambassador Francis J. Ricciardone wrote in a May 14, 2007 memo:

"[Gamal's] power base is his father, and so while he could conceivably be installed prior to Mubarak's death, the task would become far more difficult ...once the pharaoh [Husni] has departed the scene."

Opposing Gamal, say American diplomats, are Defense Minister Mohammed Hussein Tantawi and intelligence chief Omar Suleiman. I can attest from personal experience that Suleiman loathes Gamal. To give you a sense of how deep this runs, one of Suleiman's agents always refers to Gamal as "the boy." The State Department also worries that mid-level officers might some day try to stage a coup.

The most worrisome line in the cables-and remember this for future reference-is the warning that Gamal will be "politically weaker" than his father and thus eager to sound anti-American to build popular support. I was a bit surprised at this point since Gamal is very Westernized and attuned to business. But perhaps this assessment makes sense.

With both Egypt and Jordan run by "princes" who are very lightweight (King Abdallah of Jordan is no King Hussein and one seasoned Western observer recently described him as more British than Arab), the leadership forces on the Arab anti-Iran, anti-Islamist side will be pretty weak.

[By the way, if you are keeping track, only 270 shopping days until Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's birthday. I understand that his friends and colleagues are taking up a collection to get him a nice nearby country or two as a present.]  

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This was published December 20, 2010 and is archived at
http://www.gloria-center.org/gloria/2010/12/ son-of-mubarak-succession-without

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 25, 2010.

This was written by Claudia Rossett and posted December 23, 2010. as "The Rosett Report" on Pajamas Media and is archived at
http://pajamasmedia.com/claudiarosett/ midnight-money-for-durban-iii/


At the United Nations, plans for Durban III roll on. In a vote just after midnight, the United Nations General Assembly said A-OK to spending money on this conference — yet another staging of the anti-American, anti-Semitic UN roadshow that opened in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, and was revived in Geneva, in April, 2009, as Durban II, or the Durban Review Conference (starring Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — here's Roger Simon's post [1] from Geneva at the time). The UN has scheduled round three, Durban III, to be held in New York, dovetailing with next year's opening of the UN General Assembly. The UN's chosen date is Sept. 21 — just 10 days after the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 jihadi attacks that brought down the Twin Towers, killed almost 3,000 people, and turned a once thriving part of lower Manhattan into a war zone of ash and rubble.

Not only will Americans have Durban III foisted upon them next September, in the heart of New York. As chief funders of the UN, they are now officially expected to foot the biggest share of the bill. How did that happen? Following a byzantine process in which one of the UN committees involved brazenly broke the UN's own rules and neglected to include an estimate of costs while approving plans for this Durban III conference, the General Assembly's budget committee then came up with estimated costs. As this headed for the General Assembly plenary, Anne Bayefsky, in an article last week, provided a deft outline [2]of the UN intricacies involved, and accurately predicted how this would play out.

That brings us to this Thursday evening, with the clock ticking past midnight as the UN General Assembly raced to wrap up business before the Christmas holiday and end of the year. Having adjourned for most of the afternoon and evening (apparently to allow for the production of some enormous mass of documentation related to the proceedings), the General Assembly convened for one final run at a heap of business — with the final round of deliberations opening just before midnight. After a series of no-vote consensus approvals, gaveled through at speed, the delegates got to the question of funding for Durban III. More important than the amount (an estimated $322,500, of which $206,400 would effectively represent new money dolloped out from a UN "contingency fund") was the chance to block this project by simply refusing the money.

Not a prayer. Nor did the Obama administration go down fighting. America didn't even call for a vote. Israel was left to make that request. The delegate of Yemen, speaking for the Group of 77 plus China, urged everyone to vote for this fine opportunity to mark, in Manhattan, the 10th anniversary of the 2001 Durban conference (an event at which the anti-semitic and anti-American hate speech became so vitriolic that then-Secretary of State Colin Powell ordered the U.S. delegation to walk out). Before the vote, the U.S. said nothing.

The votes were cast:

102 in favor of money for Durban III.
17 against (including the U.S.).
33 abstentions.

After the vote, the U.S. delegate (not Ambassador Susan Rice — there was no sign of her at this post-midnight Durban approval session) offered a desultory "Explanation of Vote," saying the U.S. continues to have "serious concerns" about this conference. But having articulated those concerns last month in the General Assembly's Third Committee (not a gang that attracts a lot of press), he would not "re-articulate them." The Belgian delegate, speaking on behalf of the European Union, also expressed "deep concern," but said the EU will "remain engaged." And so — uour UN at work — on to Durban III.

URLs in this post:

[1] Roger Simon's post: http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2009/05/12/ talking-through-my-hat-how-ahmadinejad-made-me-a-believer/

[2] deft outline: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/12/17/ washington-budget-train-wreck/

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, December 25, 2010.

Reports are that Prime Minister Netanyahu will honor his promise to appeal directly, officially and publicly to President Obama for the release of Jonathan Pollard. According to a close associate, "The letter will be ready by Sunday or Monday..." (just missing the hoped-for goal of right before Christmas).

For a day and a half last week, after Netanyahu decided to proceed with the appeal, Pollard's wife Esther was not able to get a message to her husband, because he had undergone emergency surgery. His health has so deteriorated during his time in prison that there is concern for his life. This means there truly is no time to be wasted.


Herb Keinon of the JPost has analyzed the possible political implications of Obama responding positively to the letter:

"When evaluating the current flurry of activity surrounding efforts to free Jonathan Pollard, two assumptions should be kept in mind.

"First: Things don't just happen.

"And second: Anything publicly being done by the Israeli government on the matter is known in advance by Washington. Israel is not looking to ambush the US administration on Pollard-related issues.

"With those two assumptions in mind, the timing of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's announcement that now, 25 years after Pollard was arrested, Israel will publicly ask the US president to release him takes on added interest.

"Two key questions that must be asked are 'Why now?' and "what took so long?' Why wasn't this done years ago? The official response to that question from the Prime Minister's Office is that a cost-benefit analysis was done among the powers that be with the conclusion that whereas in the past the feeling was that more could be done for Pollard in closed-door meetings, now the sense is that he would benefit from the light the media will shine on a public Israeli governmental appeal..."


And here's the clincher, at least according to Keinon:

"...After Obama's first two rather rocky years with Israel, releasing Pollard would be a huge push on the reset button in his relations with American Jews. With this move, he could say, 'See, I really do care about Israel, and am doing something no other US president was willing to do.'

"For Israelis, including senior government officials, releasing Pollard would go a long way to rebuilding trust with the president. Netanyahu...would now be able to say that the release shows Obama is indeed 'back on our side' and could be trusted."
htt p://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=200839


Give me a break! Are Jews — both American Jews and Israeli officials, as alluded to here — this gullible? One politically self-serving act by Obama, one attempt to appear to be our friend, and we are expected to embrace him with a feeling of trust, knowing that he is "back on our side"?

The bottom line is that there was a miscarriage of justice with regard to how Pollard was handled by the US government, not least of which was the broken pledge not to seek life imprisonment for him if he cooperated. If Obama moves to secure Pollard's release now — while, please G-d, he is still alive and can be brought back to health — he will only be doing what is right. I don't imagine that there would be a political backlash on this — for the climate in the US has shifted, with former government officials actually coming forward publicly to say that what was done to Pollard was not fair.


While this scenario may well explain Obama's readiness to receive the public request on Pollard and perhaps act on it — and I suspect Keinon has the political undertones right — we have to hope that Jews will be more savvy than to be taken in by what would really be a simple act for Obama.

As to any notion of his being "back on our side," implicit in this is a conceptualization of Obama as someone sometimes "on our side" and sometimes not. (Although I'm not actually sure when he ever was, never mind.) If he is "back on our side" now, when it suits him, he will walk away from our side again, when it doesn't. This does not inspire trust.

And his doing what is right on this occasion does not mean we "owe" him.


I return here to a recurring theme of mine — one that cannot be emphasized too much: the way in which US weakness has strengthened Iran here in the Middle East.

Caroline Glick, in her Friday column, "Slouching towards Iran," addresses this issue:

"Two weeks ago, Iran scored a massive victory. Jordan, the West's most stable and loyal ally in the Arab world began slouching towards the Iranian Gomorrah.

"On December 12, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashaei met with Jordanian King Abdullah II in Amman and extended a formal invitation from Ahmadinejad for him to pay a state visit to Iran. Abdullah accepted.

"...Abdullah reportedly said that his country recognizes Iran's nuclear rights and supports its access to peaceful nuclear technology.

"Abdullah was one of the first world leaders to sound the alarm on Iran. In 2004 Abdullah warned of a 'Shiite crescent' extending from Iran to Iraq, through Syria to Lebanon. His words were well reported at the time. But his warning went unheeded.

In the intervening six years, reality has surpassed Abdullah's worst fears... "In the face of Iran's expanding web of influence and the mullahs' steady progress towards nuclear capability, Washington behaves as though there is no cause for concern. And the likes of Jordan are beside themselves.

"In a WikiLeaks leaked cable from April 2009 written by US Ambassador to Jordan R. Stephen Beecroft, Jordan's frustration and concern over the Obama administration's incompetence in handling the Iranian threat was clear.

"Beecroft wrote, 'Jordan's leaders are careful not to be seen as dictating toward the US, but their comments betray a powerful undercurrent of doubt that the United States knows how to deal effectively with Iran.'

"...the Jordanians recognized that the Obama administration was committed to appeasing Iran and so tried to convince the Americans to ensure that their appeasement drive didn't come at the Arabs' expense.

"Beecroft reported a clear warning from Abdullah. Abdullah cautioned that if the Arabs believe that the US was appeasing Iran at their expense, 'that engagement will set off a stampede of Arab states looking to get ahead of the curve and reach their own separate peace with Teheran.

"'King Abdullah counseled Special Envoy George Mitchell in February [2009] that direct US engagement with Iran at this time would just deepen intra-Arab schisms and that more "countries without a backbone" would defect to the Iranian camp.'

"That was then. And since then, the Obama administration did nothing after Ahmadinejad and his henchmen stole the presidential election. It did nothing as they repressed the tens of millions of Iranians who demonstrated against the election fraud. The Obama administration did nothing as Iran conducted repeated war games along the Straits of Hormuz, progressed in its nuclear program, deepened its military alliances with Turkey and Venezuela and escalated its proxy war against the US and its allies in Afghanistan.

"The Americans said nothing as Iran prevented the pro-US faction that won the Iraqi election from forming a government. They did nothing as Iran forced the reinstallation of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki despite his electoral defeat.

"As Washington stood idly by in the face of Iran's aggression, Jordan and the other US-allied Arab states watched as Obama harassed Israel, announced his plan to withdraw all US forces from Iraq next year, appointed a new ambassador to Syria and approved more military aid to the Iranian-controlled Lebanese army. And Abdullah and the other Arabs watch now as the US is poised to begin yet a new round of appeasement talks with Iran next month.

"And so, just as Abdullah warned would happen, today he is leading Jordan into the ranks of 'countries without a backbone,' and making a separate peace with Ahmadinejad."


How painful all of this is, and from the perspective here in Jerusalem, how terrifying. It makes a mockery of any notion that Israel can trust Obama as a friend.

Make no mistake about it: the greater the movement by Arab nations in this region into the Iranian sphere, the more difficult for us. We are on our own.

And be clear about this, as well: If Jordan, at our eastern border, is under the sway of Iran, it makes it all the more imperative that we retain forces at the Jordan River. It diminishes the already very meager possibility of making any security arrangements with the PA with regard to a Palestinian Arab state at that border.

Obama just doesn't get it: He claims to want to foster peace, but acts in ways that undermine true peace.

I still want to yell: Wake up America!


I alluded the other day to my memory of Arafat, right before Christmas, telling journalists, "I must go to Bethlehem and pray." As if he were a Christian who prayed on Christmas. He was co-opting the Christian experience for the public. And the media, not to their credit, ate it up.

Once, not so long ago, Beit Lehem (Bethlehem) was a Christian city. No more. The Muslims have driven the Christians out. And so now they "do" Christmas in Beit Lehem.

Again with credits to Caroline Glick, who produces the Latma satirical videos:

Her latest, "Jihad Bells," wickedly satirizes the Muslim take-over of Beit Lehem and their treatment of Christians.


We won: The "Israeli War Crimes — Your Tax dollars at work" campaign that was slated to place ads with this message on Seattle buses starting this week has been stopped.

On Friday, King County Executive Dow Constantine ordered the county's transit system not to accept this ad — which was to be placed by something called "The Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign — or any other new noncommercial advertising.

This was a result of the outcry that the plans for this campaign elicited — which teaches us an important lesson. "Given the dramatic escalation of debate in the past few days over these proposed ads, and the submission of inflammatory response ads, there is now an unacceptable risk of harm to or disruption of service to our customers should these ads run," Constantine said.

A spokesman for the Awareness Campaign charged that the county had submitted to "intimidation." After all, the ad was only designed to stimulate discussion and promote awareness.


On Friday, the UN General Assembly in New York approved a resolution — 104 to 22, with 33 abstentions — to hold a summit on September 21, during the assembly's annual ministerial meeting, that would commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Durban conference on racism.

Tonight, Israel's Foreign Ministry released a statement stating that:

"The Durban Conference of 2001, with its anti-Semitic undertones and displays of hatred for Israel and the Jewish World, left us with scars that will not heal quickly,

"As long as the meeting is defined as part of the infamous 'Durban process,' Israel will not participate."


Canada announced its intention of boycotting this summit weeks ago, but Israel waited until the vote and formal announcement connecting the summit with Durban I.

US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, released a statement indicating that the US voted against the resolution "because the Durban Declaration process has included ugly displays of intolerance and anti-Semitism, and we do not want to see that commemorated."

This is all fine, as far as it goes. But if the US does not want to see a commemoration of Durban, will it also decline to participate in the summit? There's no word on this.

What a statement it would make if all of the democracies of the world declined to participate that day. I dream, I know.


Tomorrow night, December 26, Hadar-Israel (Council for Civil Action) will be holding a seminar on the question,"What Are Israel's Security Needs for a Viable Peace?" with Former UN Ambassador Dore Gold, Maj. Gen. (res) Uzi Dayan, and Maj. Gen. (res) Yaakov Amidror. Dan Diker, Secretary-General Designate for the World Jewish Congress will moderate.

It is being held at the Begin Center in Jerusalem, starting at 7:30. Those out of the area may want to know that the seminar will be able to be accessed via live video simulcast, at www.hadar-israel.org.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 25, 2010.

It took 25 years for a significant number of U.S. Jewish and governmental officials to overcome timidity and plead for commuting Jonathan Pollard's excessive sentence. The New York Times reports this story unfairly.

The Times describes PM Netanyahu's stated intent to publicly request that clemency as contrasting with "Israel's discreet efforts in the past." What past regime efforts? Some Israeli Prime Ministers claimed to have made such efforts, but their claims later were disproved. They claimed to have subsidized medical treatment for Pollard's wife, to have appealed to the U.S. President, etc.. Why believe PM Netanyahu, a master of political pilpul — he selects words to give a popular impression, but when called upon for results, later shows that those words really mean the opposite.

When Israeli Prime Ministers were asked to deliver petitions, even from the Knesset, for clemency, they ignored the petitions. What do you suppose the U.S. Presidents conclude from such behavior — that the Prime Minister did not much care? For one or two years, hopes for silent diplomacy to work might be valid. After that, hope is unreasonable and boasts of having conducted such diplomacy are suspect. "Silent diplomacy" can be cover for non-diplomacy.

Why did Israeli regimes do so little for Pollard? Do they fear that had Pollard been released, he might have called to account the several Israeli officials who betrayed him? He was ready to promise silence if released.)

Yes, the Times correctly states, "Many American law enforcement and intelligence officials have opposed granting him immunity." Put that way, the opposition carries the heft of secret intelligence and high officialdom. Their intelligence, however, was poor and their ethics not as high as their official positions. They had blamed Pollard for the deaths of U.S. agents revealed to the Soviets. Turned out, other spies were responsible.

The Times should have acknowledged the admission, by Pollard's paramount persecutor, former Defense Sec. Weinberger, that the outcry against Pollard had been exaggerated. Pertinent, too, would have been the fact that a top U.S. Presidential adviser suggested not freeing Pollard in order to retain him as a human bargaining chip with Israel. That information would have made the report balanced. Balance still is a goal of journalism, isn't it? One wonders how callous is U.S. policy, that it holds a political prisoner, hostage to negotiation.

Proof of Pollard's innocence in the deaths of U.S. agents didn't do Pollard any good. U.S. officials must have other motives.

Did they fear that Pollard could have embarrassed those who, he found out, had concealed criminal Iran-Contra activities and violations of U.S. promises to share with Israel intelligence about Arab military moves?

The newspaper ascribes CIA opposition to releasing Pollard to its opinion of "him as a spy who deserves his life sentence, arguing that the release of Mr. Pollard would send a bad message about how the US viewed people who traded in American secrets." Nonsense. The U.S. has caught many spies who traded in American secrets. Their usual sentence for the same criminal act that Pollard committed is 2-4 years. Why 25 and counting, for Pollard? Why two years or less for a number of Arab and Chinese spies? By CIA logic, that the reporter reiterates without analysis, the U.S. gives Arab and Chinese spies much lesser sentences, so as to encourage them to spy on us.

Note is taken of Pollard's deteriorated health. Did his health deteriorate naturally? Consider his early years of confinement naked on a cold stone floor, incarcerated in a ward for the insane, and denied appropriate medical treatment. That record shames the U.S..

During the Wye negotiations, Netanyahu did arrange for Pollard's release. Journalist Isabel Kershner writes that Netanyahu made the case a bargaining point with the Arabs. Actually, he made the case with Pres. Clinton. Not stated is the fact that Clinton agreed. Israel kept its side of the bargain, making major concessions to the Arabs that enabled the Arabs to murder Jews in Hebron.

Clinton reneged. Why did Netanyahu go through with the dangerous concessions?

Israel would be within its right to demand that the U.S. keep that promise, and without further Israeli concessions, to show that there is some validity to U.S. promises. After all, the U.S. broke other promises to Israel, too. President Obama broke the U.S. promise to approve of Israel retaining major settlement blocs without having to offer anything in return. Earlier Presidents broke their promise to protect Israel's right to send ships through the Suez Canal and their guarantee against Egypt moving Soviet missiles forward so as to shield Egypt's invading army from Israeli jets. Will the U.S. falsely promise Israel anything, so as to give Arabs an advantage?

Former assistant Secretary of Defense Korb, who now supports clemency, suggests that Israel acknowledge "that it was wrong to have recruited a spy against its closest ally and should say that it is willing to cooperate fully with the Americans to bring the chapter to a close." Israel already did cooperate with the U.S. on the case. But if it is wrong for Israel to recruit a spy in the U.S., is it right for the U.S. to recruit spies in Israel? Why the double standard?

The use of the word, "against," insinuates intent to harm the U.S.. Pollard did not copy data about the U.S. (and did not have access to intelligence about the Soviets). He copied data about Israel's Arab enemies. The distinction here is important in deciding whether Pollard should be granted clemency after having served several times as long as most spies who committed the crime he did.

The data Pollard divulged to Israel was the data already promised to Israel. When Pollard realized that data was being denied Israel, contrary to stated U.S. policy, and his supervisors refused to do anything about it, and the data revealed serious Arab military threats to Israel, Pollard informed Israel. One result is that Israel was prepared for a poison gas attack by Saddam Hussein. Tens of thousands of Israeli lives were spared. The U.S. was prepared to see those tens of thousands sacrificed. To what end? Is that the behavior of an ally?

Likewise, Pollard found out that the U.S. deliberately fed Israel unclear information about Arab military capabilities, such that if the Arabs attacked Israel, again, Israeli forces probably would suffer high casualties.

Opponents of Pollard stand on American patriotism, a patriotism they do not muster when spying is by hostile Arab and Chinese spying. Nor do they manifest patriotism over the U.S. betrayal of its ally, Israel, that Pollard discovered, and the subversion within the U.S. government. They have not called for investigation of that subversion. This inconsistency calls into question their stated motive. On what do they base their indignation against Pollard?

So long as the Times relates background information, shouldn't it have mentioned the smear campaign against Pollard? That campaign includes false charges of greater crimes, without proof or even evidence. It includes false accusations that Pollard was a paid agent. It includes false contentions that he has not expressed remorse.

Pollard declines in prison while the media evades its responsibility to properly inform Americans about the case, while officials successfully subvert their government, while the U.S. gets away with betraying its ally, and while prison wardens go unpunished for cruel practices. Only he is being held to account and to a degree as if his job is to suffer in the place of all the sinners of mankind.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by S. Turkman, December 25, 2010.

A Jew, Fred Hargeshemier, is dead at age 94 in Lincoln, Nebraska, USA and is being mourned by Moslims of New Britain Island, Papua New Guinea. The island was conquered by Japan ending British Rule of it in WW II. US Pilot Fred was shot down by Japanese Army and his Plane had fallen in deep Jungle there on June 5, 1943.

He was found 31 days later by the natives of a nearby 'Ea Ea' village (now called 'Nantabu'), badly injured and was close to death. They had taken him to their village, hid him from their enemies, the Japanese, fed him and nursed to health. After USA had kicked Japanese out of there, he was handed over to US Navy in February, 1944. After leaving US Air Force, he visited the island back in 1960. Coming back to USA, for the next 3 years, he worked to collect donations for the people of New Britain more than cost of a House in USA from Jews and others.

He went back to the island to build first school of that village. In the following decade, he raised more money. He built another school and libraries in surrounding villages also. In 1970, he moved to New Britain and taught children in his schools free for 4 years with his wife for next 4 years.

On his last visit in 2006, he was helicoptered by Papua New Guinea Government to his crashed plane that still sat in the jungle and Nankanai men pushed his Wheel Chair all along because he could not walk anymore. 69 years old Mr. Ismael Saua said, "The people were very happy. They always remembered, what Mr. Fred Hargeshemier has done for our people"..

Moslim population of the world is 110 times the Jewish. Can any Moslim match this story?

Has any ordinary Moslim done this much for Jews like this Jew has done for Moslims?

" ...tSwaab credit from any 'SaDqa A Jaariyah' never ends" (a HaDees) and doesn't matter, even if you believe in Allah or not because Allah said this in Qoraan but does any Moslim believe in it?

No because Hate is our Culture, Begging is our Profession and Philosophical Corruption is our Religion.

Allaho Akbar ...!

Contact S. Turkman by email at turkman@sbcglobal.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Truth Provider, December 25, 2010.

Dear friends,

For the purpose of today's bulletin, I have to remind you, yet again, of clause 1 of the Palestinian National Charter:

"Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the greater Arab homeland and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation."

As you see, the "Palestinians" by their own admission are not a separate nation, but an integral part of the Arab nation!

Now think how many people and politicians around the world are doing their utmost to create a nation that does not exist and endow it with a state (Arab country No. 26) they do not deserve.

So, the "Palestinians" are Arabs. And why are they called Arabs? Because their origin is in Arabia (today Saudia and Yemen). After Muhammad's conquests in the 6th century, Arabs from Arabia reached the Middle East. They were never by any stretch of the imagination indigenous "Palestinians."

For most of past 2000 years, the land of Israel laid barren, as clearly described by Mark Twain who visited the Holy Land at the end of the 19th century. Jewish people remained in it from Roman times while Arabs invaded it through the millennia.

During the British Mandate (1918 — 1948), the British, in need of laborers, brought into "Palestine" many more Arabs from neighboring countries. They also carved out some 75% of the Mandate territory (East of the Jordan River) and gave it to the Bedouin Emir Abdullah. This new country was named Trans Jordan, today The Kingdom of Jordan.

Likewise, other Arab countries in the Middle East, such as Syria and Lebanon, are artificial entities with artificial borders, created arbitrarily by colonial European powers, not by natural historical process and cultural.

Those are historical facts! So how come we have today millions around the world who are buying into the Arabs' anti-Israel lies and propaganda?

Millions who are involved in a humongous conspiracy to delegitimize ISRAEL, the ONLY historically legitimate country in the Middle East?

Here are some answers:

1) The bankruptcy of Socialism left the far left without a uniting cause.

2) 60 years after the Holocaust, anti-Semites feel safe enough to yet again raise their ugly heads.

3) The world's dependency on Arab petrol.

4) Unlimited Arab petro-Dollars spent on anti-Israel propaganda.

5) Young correspondents who do not know history.

6) Media in desperate need of Arab money to survive.

7) Arabs success in portraying themselves as victims.

8) A UN comprised of 56 Arab and Muslim countries versus one Israel.

9) 1.3 billion Muslims versus a mere 6 million Jewish Israelis.

So who is the real underdog in the Middle East?

The shocking fact is that even some Jews participate in the abominable anti-Israel cabal, as the following article from Toronto, Canada, proves:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/12/21/ barbara-kay-anti-semitism%E2%80%99s-useful-idiots/

Unfortunately, there have always been Jews who hate themselves or are trying to prove, for whichever sick reason, that they do not belong.

It is in the spirit of this season and as a wish for 2011, that I call upon all of you to support Israel and her struggle against her many enemies, from without and within. An excellent New Year's resolution would be for you to study the facts, learn the truth and ignore all anti-Israel lies and propaganda.

I wish you a magnificent 2011.

Your Truth Provider,

This and other articles are posted on www.truthprovider.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, December 24, 2010.

This is about Professor Barry Rubin's article on how Western Institutions' Naivete (Or Incompetence or Ideology) Helps Terrorists

Prof. Rubin: ... but there's another as yet unaddressed dimension to the arab war against Israel: The profit-motive behind the BHO administration's determined yen to arm Hamas by sending hundreds of millions US $ to Hamas-ruled Gaza. Gaza was the land belonging to Israel (under international law) that Sharon's stupidly, foolishly, and illegally donated to his nation's worst enemy

It's profitable to manufacture weaponry. We have the right to suppose that someone is profiting from BHO/US State Dept.'s largesse: Therefore we ask: Who and how many profit from the enterprise of arming the arabs? The manufacturers take their cut, no? And the banks and shipping companies? Who, and how many take their cut? And how 'bout the Saudis? ... the de facto governors of the US State Dept. They profit, too, by using the US State Dept. to empower sharia's anti-American policies. And what about those blinders affixed to Hillary's head? Blinders that prevent her from having to admit that she serves a president who is assiduously weakening US allies and enabling US enemies. Blinders comprised of the mega-millions the Saudis donated to her husband's "presidential library"? Where Bill can luxuriate in comfort while his wife's boughten missiles rain down on the innocent heads of Israeli civilians.

There are good and bad capitalists. The bad ones profit whenever their weapons are used to murder and maim US allies. Meanwhile, Saudi-funded CAIR whines about discrimination against Muslims, and Eric Holder weeps with them and gives Muslims privileges the US denies to other established religious organizations. Meanwhile, BHO brags about his outreach to his fellow Muslims and rewards Sharia's idiotic Jewish enablers. We call the latter "Kissinger-jews" because they are willing to ignore the extermination of their brethren in the belief their duplicity will preserve themselves. And these Jews call this scheme a "peace process."

Viva to the Patriot's of Israel from the Secular Christians for Zion. (SC4Z) Not Left. Not Right. Just 4 Justice 4 Israel.

These below are excerpt from Rubin Report:


If I had to pick one sentence to show what's profoundly wrong with Middle East coverage in the Western mass media, this is the one I'd choose. It's in a New York Times article entitled, "Israel: Tensions Rise Along Gaza Border" by Isabel Kershner. I'll put the sentence in bold:

"A rocket fired from Gaza fell close to a kindergarten in an Israeli village on Tuesday morning. Earlier, the Israeli Air Force struck several targets in Gaza in retaliation for a recent increase in rocket and mortar shell fire. Small groups appear to be behind the fire, but Israel says it holds Hamas, the Islamist organization that governs Gaza, responsible." (excerpt.)

"Personally, I'm putting my money on Hamas, not the Obama Administration, proving to be correct. (excerpt)

(Excerpt) "Zahar said Hamas is not planning to launch new attacks on Israel. Why should they? It is enough to let Islamic Jihad and other small groups allied to Hamas to fire mortars and rockets at Israel while trying to send small squads across the border to do terrorist attacks. If Israel tries to retaliate too much, Hamas will run crying to the Western media and governments to protect it.

Thanks to Western aid and to the lowered sanctions — despite the fact that it is officially listed as a terrorist group in the United States and Europe — Hamas can stay in power and build a strong support base by delivering the goods."

Zahur boasts:

"They told me...`You cannot stay isolated and you are not going to survive more than two months. Now we finished five years and we survived, and we stayed, and we faced two wars," Zahar said. "So we can stay, and we can withstand, and we can win."

Of course, Hamas would not have survived if Israel was enabled to overthrow it during the December 2008-January 2009 war or perhaps if sanctions had remained tight. Hamas succeeded not because of its own ability — its military performance in the war was abysmal — but because the West saved it.

And why is Zahur saying the following: "Time is not important if you are not wasting this time," he said, adding Israel was losing international support as the Palestinians gained legitimacy.

In other words, Western demonization and delegitimization of Israel is directly encouraging terrorist groups to be less moderate and to fight."

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 24, 2010.

This was written by Elad Benari and it appeared today in Arutz-Sheva


The IDF said on Thursday that it has ordered an Arab resident of east Jerusalem to stay out of the city for four months for inciting protests against Jewish residents.

The man is 34-year-old Adnan Jith, a resident of the Shiloach (Silwan) neighborhood near the Kotel. Jith, who is a leader in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement, said he will appeal the order. The IDF said it had received "security and intelligence information linking Jith with activity which is liable to cause a breach of public order within the city of Jerusalem."

Arab residents of Shiloach have gone on many rampages in the last few months. In June, at least two hundred Arabs hurled fire bombs, fireworks and rocks at security guards stationed at Beit HaDvash in the neighborhood, and at dozens of policemen and Border Police who came to restore order.

An Arab mob in Shiloach also attacked a car driven by a Jewish man accompanied by his three children. The man managed to drive away but the vehicle was damaged.

In another incident in late August, which was described as "a near-pogrom," dozens of Arabs went on a rampage for over 90 minutes, blocking roads and setting Jews' cars on fire. The rioters also pelted a Border Police truck with fire bombs and rocks.

David Be'eri, who drove into an ambush of Arab youths throwing stones at passing Israeli cars in the neighborhood, swerved to the side and hit an Arab youth who ran in front of his car while pelting him with stones. These are just several of many incidents which have taken place in the neighborhood over the last several months.

The banishment order against Jith is based on a rarely used emergency statute from 1945 during the British Mandate. It was often used against Jewish groups who were battling the British. Attorney Daniel Seidemann, an expert on Jerusalem, said in a conversation with The Associated Press: "Since the early 1970s, to the best of my knowledge, this has not been used. So this is a serious regression. Beyond that, this sends a very serious detrimental message to the Palestinians of east Jerusalem: Behave well or you're out of here."

Jith himself told The Associated Press on Thursday that he has been in and out of Israeli jails over the past two decades for demonstrating against what was termed "the occupation of Palestinian territory." He said that Israel is trying to punish him for those protests.

He added that he has no intention of complying with the order, and said: "There is only one way they can carry out their decision: to deport me by force."

Jith claims that Israel is "trying to make look it like I am the one threatening the security, as if saying no to oppression and to house demolitions is an assault. Whatever they do to stop me, I will keep talking."

Meanwhile, PA President Abbas appealed to the United States to halt the eviction. PA spokesman Nabil Abu Rdeneh told AP: "It's illegal and unacceptable, and it will negatively affect the American efforts to revive the peace process."

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 24, 2010.

Back in the bad old days of early Oslo in the 90s, Rabin invented a slogan to serve as the Oslo mantra. It was based on the old Ben Gurion mantra from the 1940s, about how the Jewish Yishuv in Zion would fight Hitler as if there were no White Paper (the British document that prevented Jewish refugees migrating to the Land of Israel) and would fight the White Paper as if there were no Hitler.

Rabin altered this to be: We will fight for peace as if there is no terrorism, and we will fight terrorism as if there is no peace process.

The same slogan was used by Ehud Barak during his various phases, and is now being bandied about by Amram Mitzna as his own slogan, in his current attempt to pull a Nixon and re-establish his hegemony over the rump Labor Party.

Except for one thing. As early as Rabin's era as Prime Minister, I argued that the REAL mantra of the Labor Party under Oslo is this:

"We will fight for peace as if there is no terrorism, and we will fight terrorism as if there is no terrorism."

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, December 24, 2010.

This was written by Herb Keinon and it appeared December 24, 2010 in The Jerusalem Post


Analysis: For Israelis, including senior government officials, releasing Pollard would go a long way in rebuilding trust with Obama.

When evaluating the current flurry of activity surrounding efforts to free Jonathan Pollard, two assumptions should be kept in mind.

First: Things don't just happen.

And second: Anything publicly being done by the Israeli government on the matter is known in advance by Washington. Israel is not looking to ambush the US administration on Pollard-related issues.

With those two assumptions in mind, the timing of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's announcement that now, 25 years after Pollard was arrested, Israel will publicly ask the US president to release him takes on added interest.

Two key questions that must be asked are "Why now?" and "What took so long?" Why wasn't this public appeal done years ago? The official response to that question from the Prime Minister's Office is that a cost-benefit analysis was done among the powers that be with the conclusion that whereas in the past the feeling was that more could be done for Pollard in closed-door meetings, now the sense is that he would benefit from the light the media will shine on a public Israeli governmental appeal. The PMO also said that Netanyahu received a request from Pollard himself, via his wife Esther, to make an official and public request for his release.

But, obviously, there is much more at work. Which leads to the second assumption, that the US administration did not first learn through the media about Netanyahu's intention to officially call for Pollard's freedom. The administration was obviously told in advance and might — in fact — have been involved in coordinating the timing of the announcement.

Right now Pollard, in the words of Ra'anan Gissin, Ariel Sharon's long-time spokesman, could be a vital "bridge over troubled waters" between Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama that could lead to breaking the current logjam in the diplomatic process.

Gissin was at the Wye River Plantation in 1998, serving as the spokesman for Sharon — who, at the time, was Netanyahu's foreign minister — and remembers that there was such confidence that Pollard would be freed at that time that there was actually discussion about where he would be sitting on the plane ride back to Israel.

Indeed, former US president Bill Clinton said in a conversation with a prominent US Jewish leader in September that when Netanyahu went to the Wye River Plantation talks with Yasser Arafat, he thought that he would return to Israel with Pollard.

In the end, a deal to release Pollard as part of the agreements with Arafat was scuttled when then-CIA director George Tenet threatened to resign if the deal went through. One of the US officials who was involved in the issue at the time was Dennis Ross, who was in Israel last week.

Ross dealt at some length in his memoir "The Missing Peace" about how the Pollard issue played out during the Wye talks, and wrote that Clinton considered releasing Pollard to try to ensure that an Israeli-PA deal would be sealed.

"Is it a big political issue in Israel? Will it help Bibi?" Ross paraphrased Clinton as saying. "'Yes,' I replied," Ross wrote, "because he is considered a soldier for Israel and 'there is an ethos in Israel that you can never leave a soldier behind in the field.' But if you want my advice, I continued, I would not release him now. 'It would be a huge payoff for Bibi; you don't have many like this in your pocket. I would save it for permanent status. You will need it later, don't use it now.'"

"The President had a different view," Ross wrote. "You know, he said, 'I usually agree with you, but this stalemate [in the diplomatic process] has lasted so long that it has created a kind of constipation. Release it and a lot becomes possible. I don't think we can afford to wait, and if Pollard is the key to getting it done now, we should do it.'"

Ross, in a footnote, wrote that he was in favor of Pollard's release, "believing that he had received a harsher sentence that others who had committed comparable crimes." Ross wrote that he preferred "not tying the release to an agreement, but if that was what we were going to do, I favored saving it for a permanent status."

And now here we are, some 12 years later, and certain things have simply not changed: Netanyahu and Ross are still central actors in the diplomatic drama, the diplomatic process remains "constipated," and Pollard is still languishing in prison, serving a life sentence for spying.

Certain stars in the diplomatic universe may be correctly aligned at this moment, making Pollard's release now — as part of a bigger package — more probable, though far from certain, than it was 12 years ago.

First is Obama's weakened position in the eyes of the not insignificant swaths of American Jewish community. Two years after taking office, and two years before seeking office again, the president still needs to convince not inconsiderable segments of the American Jewish community, including many who voted for him in 2008, that he is genuine in his expressed support for Israel's security.

According to figures put out by J Street, 66% of Jews voted Democratic in the recent midterm elections. While J Street said this "bucked the national trend," it was still 12 percent less than the 78% Jewish vote Obama took in his presidential race — proof the President does indeed need to shore things up with many American Jews.

After Obama's first two rather rocky years with Israel, releasing Pollard would be a huge push on the reset button in his relations with American Jews. With this move, he could say, "See, I really do care about Israel, and am doing something no other US president was willing to do."

For Israelis, including senior government officials, releasing Pollard would go a long way in rebuilding trust with the president. Netanyahu, who back in 1998 knew — according to Ross — that gaining Pollard's release would make selling the Wye agreements much easier back home, would now be able to say that the release shows Obama is indeed "back on our side" and could be trusted.

And with that trust, Obama could then ask concessions from the prime minister — perhaps being more accommodating in presenting his version of a final map — that Netanyahu has hitherto been unwilling to give.

Editor's Note:

Leave no stone unturned.

You can make the difference.

Call the White House (202) 456-1111 (If busy call the switchboard at (202) 456-1414) fax (202) 456-2461.

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, December 24, 2010.

This was written by David Wurmser and Jonathan M. Baron and was published by the Energy Policy Information Center


Even as heads of state and foreign ministers contemplate every development in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, historians may instead note the coming weeks as the moment when the Jewish State emerged as a noteworthy exporter of fossil fuels. The economic and strategic impact of Israeli energy production could prove far more important than any diplomatic event in recent memory.

In the eastern Mediterranean, fewer than 100 miles offshore Israel, a heretofore unexploited energy basin holds the potential to establish the Jewish State as a global model for energy security, resource management, and economic growth.

Wedged between Cyprus and the shoreline from Syria to Sinai, the Levant Basin encompasses approximately 32,000 square miles. The first noteworthy hydrocarbon discovery in the area was made in March 2000 offshore Israel west of the city of Ashkelon. This find, which ultimately was determined to contain about 1 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas, encouraged additional exploration. In January 2009, a major natural gas discovery was confirmed at the Tamar field within 60 miles of the northern coast of Israel. Beneath approximately 5,500 feet of ocean and another 10,500 feet of sand and rock, Tamar holds a resource now estimated at 8.4 Tcf, which represents the world's largest natural gas discovery in 2009. Even at significantly greater consumption rates, the field should supply all of Israel's domestic natural gas demand for at least 20 years.

Tamar, however, may be only the beginning. At this moment, drilling is underway to explore the Leviathan field, estimated to have a 50 percent probability of holding a gross mean resource of 16 Tcf, or nearly double Tamar, with the results expected by the end of the month. The total, lifetime financial value of Leviathan could exceed the entire current annual budget of the State of Israel. Moreover, Leviathan is only one of many prospects currently being pursued across the Levant Basin, and the majority of those opportunities, as with all of the aforementioned discoveries, are within the equivalent of Israel's exclusive economic zone. An assessment of the Levant Basin published by the U.S. Geological Survey earlier this year estimated a total mean volume of 122 Tcf of undiscovered, technically recoverable gas resources.

The implications of robust Israeli natural gas development are profound and possibly transformative. First, electricity costs should decrease meaningfully relative to scenarios under which Israel depends on foreign energy sources, including Egypt. Second, inexpensive and reliable natural gas means a lower cost of producing desalinated water, a major concern for Israel. Third, natural gas holds the potential to facilitate and expedite the conversion of Israel's car fleet to electric vehicles and thereby displace consumption of much more expensive and less secure oil. Fourth, using natural gas for power generation, as opposed to fuel oil or coal, emits significantly lower levels of carbon dioxide, which could carry a high cost if an international agreement puts a price on such emissions. And fifth, if exploration at Leviathan is successful, resulting development would make Israel a natural gas exporter as China and India are experiencing explosive growth and clamoring for energy resources.

These outcomes would act as an historically significant stimulus to the Israeli economy, already considered one of the most dynamic and resilient in the world. In addition, through direct royalties and taxes on production, the government stands to collect tens-of-billions of dollars in unanticipated revenue. Inflows to the government should rise considerably beyond such levels as broad-based economic growth driven by lower energy costs materializes. All of these plausible benefits could make the discovery of natural gas the most important economic event for Israel since 1948.

But the fiscal and broader economic value of significant natural gas production would not be the most lasting or important impact. With the emergence of a true domestic energy sector, Israel could finally mitigate the long-standing risks posed by near-total dependence on foreign energy suppliers. And none too soon. Currently, a substantial portion of Israel's gas supply comes from Egypt, which faces an impending succession. Moreover, powerful constituencies within Egypt increasingly are calling for an end to normal relations with Israel, of which gas exports are a highly visible example.

Of course, an occurrence of this magnitude creates challenges. Israeli policy makers will need to manage with great care the infrastructure planning process required to support development. Exploration and production companies depend on a stable tax and regulatory environment, which is threatened by rising populism. Energy exports strengthen a currency and can reduce the competitiveness of domestic companies in international markets. Iran's pursuit of nuclear-weapons capability constitutes a strategic threat that must be addressed for Israel to achieve its full potential.

If Israel maximizes the opportunities presented by offshore energy production, the resulting combination of accelerated economic growth and improved energy security promises to provide Israel with a foundation for unprecedented achievements.

David Wurmser, Ph.D. served as a senior advisor on the Middle East to Vice President Richard B. Cheney. He is the founder and executive member of Delphi Global Analysis Group, a geopolitical risk management firm. Jonathan M. Baron, who formerly held senior staff positions with members of the Republican leadership in Congress, is the founder and president of Baron Public Affairs, LLC, a consultancy specializing in mitigating risks and leveraging opportunities created by government policy. The companies have advised clients on Israel's natural gas sector.

To Go To Top

Posted by Sanne DeWitt, December 24, 2010.

This was written by Ami Isseroff. Contact him at ami-iss@013.net It is archived at
http://www.zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2010/12/21/ the-hamas-is-never-going-to-recognize-israel/


Everyone except the sort of people who believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus understands that the Hamas is never going to recognize Israel, since they were founded in order to destroy Israel, and the Hamas charter declares that their goal is to wipe out the Jews. Nonetheless, there are a few people, probably a few adults too, who do believe in Santa Claus. More people believe in the good intentions of the Hamas, including some Jews. There is also a growing mythology of a moderate or pragmatic wing of the Hamas, though there is very little evidence that one exists. Periodically, obliging media circulate the news that the Hamas is about to recognize Israel, if only Israel will make the "necessary" concessions. This little lie has become part of the "narrative" of the Israeli conflict, and it is becoming entrenched by repetition. The Hamas never say any such thing of course, and the rumors are promptly denied. The latest flurry of reports was prompted by an alleged remark of Ismail Haniya, cited in an AFP report:

Hamas "will respect the results of a referendum even if the results conflict with Hamas's positions," Haniya said at a rare press conference with foreign journalists. "We accept a Palestinian state with full sovereignty on the land occupied in 1967 with Jerusalem as its capital and a solution to the issue of refugees," he added.

Recognition of Israel was not mentioned. The solution of the issue of refugees that Haniya had in mind was the flooding of Israel with Palestinians. This was enough to set off the usual enthusiastic cheers of the believers. Here, in case you had any doubts, is the straight dope, no "Zionist Propaganda" but the explanations and protests of a Hamas official and avid Hamas supporter. Hamas will never recognize Israel. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (or Haniya) explicitly ruled out even a meaningless declaration of recognition such as that offered by the Palestine Liberation Organization, which denies the right of the Jewish people to self-determination. According to a Reuters report:

(Reuters) — A large crowd of Palestinians cheered a Hamas leader's pledge on Tuesday never to recognize Israel and celebrated the Islamist movement's 23rd anniversary at a Gaza rally punctuated by sonic booms from Israeli jets.

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, whose group runs the Gaza Strip, said the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) headed by Western-backed President Mahmoud Abbas had made a "historic mistake" by recognizing Israel.

"We said it five years ago and we say it now ... we will never, we will never, we will never recognize Israel," Haniyeh told the gathering which some organizers said was attended by around 250,000 people.

Haniyeh had raised speculation last month about a change in Hamas's charter, which calls for Israel's destruction, by suggesting the group could accept a referendum on any peace treaty giving the Palestinians a state on land Israel captured in a 1967 war.

But he said such a truce would entail "no recognition of Israel and no concessions over any part of the land of Palestine."

Haniyeh is often touted as a "moderate" as opposed to the hard-line Khaled Meshaal, who really doesn't like Jews.

As Israelseen points out, Khalid Amayreh, a known Hamas advocate, recently penned an article titled Hamas won't recognize Israel, period. He explained:

There have been some rumors of late alleging that Hamas is willing to recognize Israel in exchange for the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Some anti-Hamas websites indulged in more than a small amount of gloating and disinformation, effectively celebrating Hamas's alleged ideological turnabout.

Moreover, some Fatah spokesperson seized on the rumors, claiming that Hamas and Fatah were now on equal footing.

Even Hezbutahrir (the Islamic Liberation Party) which is notorious for trying to catch faults with Hamas, has castigated the Islamic movement for following the path of Fatah and abandoning the path of Islam.!!!

The truth of the matter is that for Hamas recognition of Israel, the Zionist entity which claims Palestine as an exclusive national Jewish homeland, remains an ultimate and inviolable red line.

Which means that the Islamic Liberation Movement will never ever recognize the illegitimate entity called Israel?

Hamas does recognize the physical existence of Israel, but it doesn't attach any moral legitimacy to that existence. This principled non-recognition of the Zionist regime is not a tactical or bargaining position which might change depending on the direction of political winds. It is rather an immutable bedrock upon which Hamas's very existence is based. It is a matter of religion for Hamas and all other Muslims who take their religion seriously...

Hamas also insists on the repatriation of Palestinian refugees to their original places of residence in what is now Israel. This is not a new position. This has always been the movement's long-standing position ever since its creation in 1987.

Prime Minister Ismael Haniya was probably tendentiously misunderstood when he was quoted recently as saying that the movement would accept the outcome of any referendum pertaining to the peace process with Israel. What Haniya actually meant was that Hamas wouldn't employ any undemocratic means to force its vision and agenda upon the Palestinian people. But he never meant and he never would mean or even imply that the movement would abandon its ideological tenets in this regard, namely its ideological and religious rejection of Israel.

In fact, recognition of Israel's legitimacy as far Hamas is concerned is tantamount to a kind of blasphemy or even apostasy. It would mean an acknowledgement that the Israeli historical narrative was correct whereas the Palestinian historical narrative was incorrect.

It would mean that historical Palestine never ever belonged to the Palestinian people, who had been "encroaching squatters living on land that didn't belong to them."

It would mean a delegitimization of the entire Palestinian history as well as a vindication of Zionism. It would mean a definitive recognition by the Palestinian people that the murder of the Palestinians, their ethnic cleansing from Palestine and expulsion to the four corners of the globe at the hands of Zionism were perfectly legitimate.

Interestingly, even those Palestinians who have formally recognized Israel would argue openly that they did so under duress and that they didn't believe for a second that the creation of Israel in Palestine in 1948 had any iota of legitimacy. Amayreh nonetheless urges that Europe should speak to the Hamas:

There is no doubt that Hamas, the main Palestinian Islamic movement, is becoming more rational, more pragmatic and more moderate, at least in comparison to its formative years. [emphasis added] Nothing in the recently written article of Amayreh, or the declaration of Haniya, suggests that Hamas is becoming more "pragmatic." The position offered by Khalid Amayreh is, if anything, more belligerent than the one he offered in 2006.

Hamas will be willing and ready to give Israel a de facto recognition, an open-ended peace, if Israel agrees to recognize a sovereign Palestinian state on 100% of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes...

The position of the Hamas is crystal clear and has been enunciated by both its official spokespersons and advocates. If Israel will accept terms of surrender, the Hamas will generously offer, at most, a truce. Hamas was still plot the destruction of Israel even then, and will never grant a formal peace treaty. Nonetheless, the lie of Hamas acceptance of Israel is firmly entrenched, and we can be sure that it will reappear at every opportunity.

To Go To Top

Posted by Leslie J. Sacks, December 24, 2010.

Some months ago, Anwar al-Aw'laki — the pestering and festering American-born imam hiding out in Yemen — has issued a fatwa (an obligatory and legal Islamic ruling) calling for the death of Molly Norris, the woman who dared pen an invitation to draw Mohammed on Facebook. Apparently, Mohammad's saintly purity and demi-god status is at risk — and must be countered with murder — by this utterly minor development. Apparently, the true believers are so insecure, so delicate that their lives and the meaning of their existence are threatened by amateur drawings of their prophet. Ms. Norris, like many infidels before her, must now fear for her life.

The million-dollar question, the elephant in the room, looms. How do we counteract this lunacy and its threat to our freedom of expression (and peace of mind), a basic tenet of our unique civilization? Just last week, even the peace-loving socialist Swedes were subject to terrorist bombs because of a re-printed cartoon of Mohammed. Clearly, negotiation and persuasion is a waste of time in the face of such childish fanaticism.

Instead, Congress must pass a new law, outlawing (as it does hate speech and murder as an accomplice) this type of international and unmitigated incitement to murder. In each case of a don't-do-or-say-that-or I'll-kill-you fatwa from an influential fanatic against a US citizen, the government should pass a judgment in absentia, declaring this dangerous nonsense criminal and illegal. The law could be particularly applicable if the fanatic was a US citizen, like our dear Mr. al-Aw'laki. If ignored, the judgment should give the US military the right to treat those perpetrators as criminals, to be captured and if not to be eliminated, just as we do Al Qaeda members and those that make our country's demise their personal fetish.

Perhaps this policy will finally turn the tables on those issuing murderous fatwas with impunity.

When these blood thirsty radicals become the object of our efficient and capable military — when the proverbial sword that they so barbarously unsheathed cuts both ways — they will surely be more circumspect in initiating murder.

Talk to your local congressman.

Leslie J. Sacks blogs at www.strengthandtolerance.com See also "Dueling Fatwas" at http://www.danielpipes.org/8942/dueling-fatwas

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, December 24, 2010.

One of the ways the Palestinian Authority attempts to create a Palestinian history is to deny the Judean/Jewish nationality of Jesus, and misrepresent him as a "Palestinian."

Palestinian Media Watch has documented this ongoing Palestinian Authority historical revision. Recently on PA TV, the author Samih Ghanadreh from Nazareth was interviewed about his book Christianity and Its Connection to Islam.

The following is the transcript of the discussion describing Jesus as a Palestinian:

RELIGIOUS PROGRAM ON PA TV: This is our religion

Author: "The Shahid (Martyr) President Yasser Arafat used to say: 'Jesus was the first Palestinian Shahid (Martyr).' I heard him say that sentence many times."

PA TV Host: "He [Jesus] was a Palestinian; no one denies that."

Author: "He [Jesus] was the first Palestinian Shahid (Martyr). He (Arafat) attributed this Martyrdom to Palestine, as well." [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 3, 2010] Click To View Interview.

Fatah proud of "Palestinian" Virgin Mary

Earlier this year the Fatah Communications and Education Authority issued as statement on the official Fatah website claiming the Virgin Mary was "of the nation of Palestine":

"If we are proud of the holiness of our land, then we are proud and pride ourselves that the first and most important holy woman among the nations and peoples is from the holy land: The Virgin Mary — the woman of love and peace — is of the nation of Palestine..." [palvoice.com/index.php?id=23043]

Jesus and Mary were Palestinians par excellence

The Palestinian Authority religious leader, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein:

"Jesus was born in this land; he took his first steps in this land and spread his teachings [of Islam] in this land. He and his mother [Mary], we may say, were Palestinians par excellence." [PA TV (Fatah), May 12, 2009] Palestinian Authority Mufti claims Jesus was a Palestinian and a Muslim. [Some 600-700 years before Islam was invented and the Arabs invaded the region.] Click to view.

See more examples of the PA's misrepresentation of Jesus as a "Palestinian" who preached Islam, on the PMW website. here. VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES here.


To Go To Top

Posted by Maurice Ostroff, December 24, 2010.

The following letter from a Zimbabwean refugee in Johannesburg is a stark reminder of the world's indifference to human tragedy wrought by Mugabe, while the anti-Israel crusaders divert the world's attention. It was written by Joseph Khumalo, fomerly of Josiah Tongogara Street, Harare, Zimbabwe. Now in Johannesburg.




We admire and envy the good works and immense resources and influence around the world that enable you to charter ships and organize costly flotillas and we ask in all humility, are we Zimbabweans less human and less deserving than the Gazans? At least they have UNRWWA with its $400 million annual budget and substantial additional funds from the EU, the U.N. the U.S., Saudi Arabia and other Arab League countries.

We don't for one moment suggest that you ignore the Gazans but we appeal to you to remember our suffering too, with 80% percent of our population barely existing below the poverty line, where Mugabe has destroyed basic health services, where the police use batons and worse to suppress political opponents, where malaria, Aids and tuberculosis continue to spiral upward, where hyperinflation is rampant and the privileged few who have jobs earn $8 to $16 per month, barely enough to buy bread when available, for the family.

The average life-span has fallen to about 30 years per person and more than one-third of Zimbabwean children are orphans.

ABC news reported in June this year that the largest number of new refugees in the world are from Zimbabwe, almost all in South Africa. ZimOnline has reported that while the people starve, Mugabe and his loyalists in ZANU-PF own nearly 5 million hectares of agricultural land, seized from white commercial farmers since 2000, making a mockery of the land reform plan.

In a John Simpson BBC documentary "Tracking down a massacre", the terrible wounds which Mugabe's Fifth Brigade inflicted on Matabeleland in the early 1980s were recently exposed. It began when Mugabe decided to deal with about 500 dissident followers of his rival, Joshua Nkomo. Mugabe ordered the Brigade to root them out

The Fifth Brigade, like Mr Mugabe's government was mostly Shona-speaking, whereas Matabeleland is populated mostly by Ndebele descendants of Zulus who came to the area in the 1830s. Joseph Buchena Nkatazo who co-ordinated an investigation some years ago by the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace told Simpson that in the areas where they had been able to investigate, they found evidence of more than 20,000 deaths. He was sure there must have been many more elsewhere. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7388214.stm

Flotilla organizers, Physicians for Human Rights, Rabbis for Human Rights, and other humanitarian organizations, please spare some of your compassion, energy and resources for this human disaster in Zimbabwe that has been callously ignored by people who should be concerned. Can we look forward to an aid flotilla via South Africa with food for distribution to the needy and medical supplies for the ailing?

Contact Maurice Ostroff by email at maurice@trendline.co.il
and visit his website: http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld, December 24, 2010.

Conspicuously, neither Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz nor the rulers of any Arab or Muslim state are holding special national telethons to help raise funds for some 400,000 new Pakistani refugees. Many fled their homes after the Taliban took over the Swat valley, and others were forced to leave amid the fierce fighting between the Taliban and the Pakistani military. The Saudis say they are friends of the West and of all Muslim nations, but their real alliance is with Iran, Hamas and the Taliban — as you can tell just by following the money.

Indeed, to get hundreds of millions, and even billions, of dollars in emergency funds from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf States, the Pakistani refugees should have declared themselves Palestinian.

Since January 2009, or in just over four months, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States have given between $1.646 billion and $1.950 billion to the Palestinians, according to figures published on the Web site of Saudi Arabia's embassy in the U.S.

Most of the money, as well as medical aid, food and building materials, went to Hamas-controlled Gaza. These donations were in addition to $1 billion donated on Jan. 19 by King Abdullah "to help rebuild the Gaza Strip."

On May 6, a day after U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates sought Saudi help to fight off the Taliban in Pakistan, the Saudis announced a $25 million donation, not to Pakistan, but to rebuild the Palestinian Nahr Al-Bared refugee camp in Lebanon.

Meanwhile on May 7, at the Arab League's meeting of foreign ministers in Cairo, Egypt, aid to Pakistan was not on the agenda. Instead, as reported by the Saudi Gazette, the League issued a warning about the imminent danger posed to Jerusalem by the Jews.

On May 10, while a new influx of 100,000 Pakistanis escaped the fighting between the military and the Taliban, Saudi Interior Minister Prince Naif, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal, chairman of the Kingdom Holding Company Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Secretary-General Abdul Rahman Al-Attiyah all found the time to meet with Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama. They promised to send a high-level delegation "to consider the volume of assistance that could be rendered to rehabilitate the [internal] refugees" in war-torn Sri Lanka.

So what about Saudi aid to the suffering Pakistanis? On April 23, the Saudi King gave Pakistan 150 tons of dates, as "humanitarian aid."

Is this an appropriate response from the "custodian" of the two holiest mosques, the second-largest Muslim country in the world and one that is 70% Sunni?

The Saudis are pouring money into Gaza, where Iranian-supported, sharia-enforcing Hamas caused death and destruction. At the same time, they are avoiding supporting Pakistan against the Iranian-supported, sharia-enforcing, murderous Taliban.

It seems that the Saudis care more about enforcement of the most radical form of sharia as imposed by Hamas and the Taliban, than they do about helping hundreds of thousands of suffering Muslim brothers in Pakistan.

Support to Hamas and the indirect endorsement of the Taliban are a telling sign of important changes in the Muslim world. The Sunni-Wahhabi Saudis and the Shiite radicals ruling Iran seem to have put aside their differences for now. The uniting factor is the opportunity to speed up the creation of the global Islamic nation — the ummah in Arabic.

The Taliban, like Hamas, achieved political and territorial gains by brute force. Hamas threw the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority out of the Gaza Strip, and the Taliban took over Pakistan's Swat valley, through relentless terrorist attacks. Both terrorist groups received tactical and strategic support from Iran and funds from the Saudis.

On April 28, former head of Saudi intelligence Prince Turki al-Faisal, who admitted funding the Taliban before 9/11, and who served as ambassador to Washington, was quoted in the Washington Times calling for "the speedy withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan," saying that they are "not welcome" there.

Pakistan's decision to cede power over the Swat Valley to the Taliban, and the Obama administration's decision to talk with Hamas and Iran, only help to bolster these groups' demands and increase their influence in the Arab and Muslim world. The more concessions the West makes to radical Islam, the stronger it gets and the closer it comes to the Islamic dream — and the rest of the world's nightmare — of the coming ummah.

Editor's Note: Emanuel Winston sent in Ehrenfeld's essay later, with this foreword:

As you read the following penetrating analysis of which nations are now working diligently to break the spine of America and her ally, Israel, by collaborating with the Saudis and their Wahhabi funding of global Terror stands out exposed. The focus on Iran which, with the cooperation of American (read: Obama) and European leaders, will allow Iran to achieve Nuclear capability and, therefore, the dominance and hegemony of the Middle East.

In the near future, there'll come a time when the Free West will (hopefully) be forced to open their eyes and start the Global search for those who colluded with the Saudis and Iranians to subvert America and the Western countries so the worst nations will now come to dominate the Globe under the description of the New World Order underpinned by Sharia law.

We all know that black crude drives the cash flow ambitions of the multi-national oil companies and countries whose intentions are tied to greedy politicians who are ready to accept the Hitlerian world for their own benefits. I believe it was the Nigerians who suffered most under the oil predators who coined the phrase that black crude was the "Devil's excrement".

Perhaps a World Court will be convened as in Nuremberg for crimes against humanity. So who would testify with authority about participating in the subversion of America and Europe by their leaders' collaboration with the Saudis and Iranians?

For a start, perhaps former President George Herbert Walker Bush and his Secretary of State James Baker could enlighten us as to their role if put under subpoena before a Grand Jury. Certainly, current President Barack Hussein Obama could tell the Court a lot with respect to his involvement as a (former?) Muslim along with his appointed Czars and Czarinas, his associates who are members Socialism, Communism, anarchists and other anti-American movements that dream about and connive to achieve the collapse of America and her successful capitalism.

After all, why should hard-working people, high-achieving Americans be brought down to the equivalent of failed Third World nations, at least according to Obama?

So, remember America has enemies within.

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is Director of the American Center for Democracy (http://www.public-integrity.org/). Her anti-libel tourism campaign has achieved success with the enactment of the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act (SPEECH Act) of 2010, signed into law on August 10, 2010. She is author of Funding Evil.

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, December 24, 2010.

This was written by Atara Beck and is archived at
http://www.jewishtribune.ca/TribuneV2/index.php/ 201012203853/Master-s-thesis-shines-light-on-OISE- aculty-s-anti-Israel-agenda.html


TORONTO — The widespread publicity about the controversial master's thesis accepted by University of Toronto's (U of T) Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) has brought to light an anti-Israel agenda on the part of some of its faculty, which has been the case for at least several years.

Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) activist Jennifer (Jenny) Peto's paper, titled The Victimhood of the Powerful: White Jews, Zionism and the Racism of Hegemonic Holocaust Education, labels the "North American Jewish community as extremely oppressive" and one of "white Jewish privilege," and attacks March of the Living, a program that takes students together with Holocaust survivors to Poland and Israel, and the March of Hope project, under the umbrella of the Canadian Centre for Diversity — a non-Jewish group — where students of diverse backgrounds travel with Holocaust survivors to concentration camp sites.

"A victimized Jewish identity can produce certain effects that are extremely beneficial to the organized Jewish community and the Israeli nation-state," she wrote.

Many supporters not only of Israel, but also of Canadian and Western values, have been outraged by the contents of Peto's thesis and — more significantly — by the fact that the allegedly unscholarly paper was accepted by a venerable institution such as U of T. As pointed out by University of British Columbia Professor Emeritus Werner Cohn in a letter to U of T President David Naylor, "I find this thesis to be one of hatred," but, more significantly, "I do find great fault...with the institution that bestows an academic imprimatur on what amounts to a very subjective emotional creed. The thesis's aversion to empirical data is absolute.... Peto makes wild and hateful charges against her fellow Jews without a shred of evidence."

B'nai Brith Canada also sent a letter to Dr. Naylor recently to express its concerns "on the theses of two students, Jennifer Peto and Griffin Jaye Epstein, which appear to put forward outrageously offensive and indeed antisemitic propositions."

According to the letter, signed by B'nai Brith CEO Frank Dimant, "in terms of Peto's thesis, respected academics have already reviewed the text and have found that it lacks the minimum academic standards expected of any high-calibre institution.... Claims that appear in the thesis are unsubstantiated. Moreover, human rights advocates have also criticized the central argument."

Dimant, who did not receive a response before this newspaper's deadline, pointed out that Professor Sheryl Nestel was Peto's advisor on the thesis and that "one has to question whether the professor's own political agenda influenced her role.... We also have to wonder whether allegations currently circulating about OISE are true, namely, that anti-Israel themes have so pervaded Sociology and Equity Studies in the Education program...making such anti-Jewish statements not just acceptable, but worthy of academic recognition.

"We have long been concerned by the parade of anti-Zionist speakers using OISE facilities and good offices for some time," Dimant added. "Your records will show that we contacted OISE prior to the first year of the Israeli Apartheid Week, warning that allowing free rein to such a politicized agenda would ultimately compromise the institution's academic integrity. More recently, we saw attempts to broaden that exercise into the high school arena with 'strategy' meetings being hosted behind closed doors at OISE."

In 2008, the Jewish Tribune planned to attend a publicized High Schools Against Israeli Apartheid (HAIA) meeting in the OISE building, but it turned out to be a closed session with minors, albeit not in compliance with U of T booking procedures. The following year, the Jewish Tribune found evidence suggesting that a flyer promoting an anti-Israel event was sent to a student mailing list by Kristine Pearson, graduate studies liaison officer in Sociology and Equity Studies in Education (see Jewish Tribune, Feb. 19, 2009).

More recently, politicians from both the Liberal and Progressive Conservative parties strongly condemned U of T's acceptance of the thesis.

MPP Mike Colle rose at the Ontario Legislature to "condemn the unwarranted attack" made on the Canadian Centre for Diversity program and the March of the living in "the so-called thesis....

"This unmitigated attack by this student at the University of Toronto against caring people who are trying to come to grips with the murder of over six million of their relatives, who were slaughtered by the Nazis, has no place in any university, not does it have any place in Ontario."

Liberal MPP Eric Hoskins, Ontario Citizen and Immigration minister, was "greatly disturbed and, in fact, disgusted" by Peto's paper.

Progressive Conservative MPP Steve Clark called it "shockingly antisemitic."

Dr. Karen Mock, federal Liberal candidate in Thornhill and prominent human rights activist, declared that Peto "did not use empirical data, but simply opinion to support her ideology.... Had the thesis been conducted in a scholarly manner, it would have shown that most Holocaust education today is designed to help students and teachers recognize and understand what white supremacy and all forms of totalitarianism look like and sound like, so they can counter it against all peoples."

"It's not scholarship; it's ideology," Dr. Irving Abella, a former Canadian Jewish Congress president and history professor at York University, told the Toronto Star. I'm appalled that it would be acceptable to a major university."

Khaled Mouammar, national president of the Canadian Arab Federation, found it "deplorable" that Hoskins denigrated the thesis "because you don't agree with her political views." Like other traditional Israel critics who defended Peto but gave no evidence to support her claims, he accused those who condemned Peto, including elderly Holocaust survivors, of using "bullying" tactics.

According to Cohn, Nestel, who supervised Peto's thesis, was also on record as promoting Israeli Apartheid Week.

Cpntact Israel Academia Monitor by email at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Pastor Hagee, December 23, 2010.

Victory for Jews and Gentiles, and, above all, for Israel. Please note the holiday wishes are there because this is from a Christian Zionist organization. No harm or disrespect is intended.

Action Alert New!

Dear Friends,

At 2:00 EST today, we issued an action alert asking all of our members to e-mail officials in King County, Washington, with an urgent request to block the following inciteful ad from appearing on Seattle buses:  

Your response was overwhelming. In the week leading up to our action alert, King county officials had received 2,000 e-mails to asking them to reject this ad. Within five hours — by 7:00 pm EST — our action alert had generated three times as many e-mails — almost 6,000 — to these same government officials.

We are thrilled to report that your voices have been heard and that your efforts have paid off. At 7:00 p.m. EST today, King County Executive Dow Constatine announced a new policy governing advertising on buses that, among other things, will block the proposed anti-Israel ad from appearing on city buses. Now that the anti-Israel ad will not run, we no longer see the need to respond with our own ad telling the truth about Israel.

This is a great victory. We are thankful to our friends in the pro-Israel community who called our attention to this issue and began the campaign against these dangerous ads. And we are thankful to all of you who responded with enough speed and determination to accomplish the mission so quickly. Your efforts were especially meaningful on a day when so many of us are so very busy with travel and shopping before the approaching Christmas holiday.

We wish you all a blessed Christmas,

Pastor Hagee is National Chairman and David Brog is Executive Director of Christians United for Israel (CUFI).

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Kaplan, December 23, 2010.

Ynet News recently came out with the story of "conscientious objector" Maya Yechieli Wind, 19, who refused to serve in the IDF and is now a student at Columbia University where she smears the IDF and Israel regularly on campus with mock "checkpoint" displays. Maya dresses up as an Israeli "sergeant" and does street theater as she "brutalizes" Palestinians for no reason at all as they try to pass through her "checkpoint." Israeli students also attending the University in the Big Apple who have actually served at the checkpoints have objected that Maya in no way shows what really goes on at the checkpoints or why they are necessary to stop terrorism.

Maya, of course, at the tender age of 17, became an expert on the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, the immorality of the IDF and of Palestinian "victim hood" when she was recruited by ISM-affiliated groups in Israel at her high school such as the pro-communist New Profile, a group that really wants the IDF castrated (you see, if there's no male-dominated army to protect the Israeli people, then the Arabs will make peace with them and all will be happy like the groups of lesbians are who parade around at New Profile events with each other).

But back to Maya.

Fellow students and readers of the Ynet article about her might think she is just a conscientious young woman playing out her beliefs as a pacifist. But a little research reveals she's a self-serving puppet playing out propaganda and probably financed by the Arabs and NGO's who have found her a nice sinecure working for them doing these checkpoints at Columbia.

The new strategy of the ISM to de-legitimize Israel in America is to have Jews at all anti-Israel demonstrations to suggest even "real Jews" like the paid-off Neturei Karta clowns are against a Jewish state. Throughout Jewish history there have always been traitors to the Jewish people who gladly persecuted or maligned their fellow Jews for money or prestige, Maya Yechieli Wind is no different. On graduating high school, she went to salaried work for Rabbis for Human Rights and later the EU funded Israel Committee Against House Demolitions whose leader, Jeff Halper, was part of the Gaza Flotillas to bring aid to Hamas.

Now she's at Columbia organizing anti-Israel spectacles as street theater.

But according to Maya, "At first, like many other Israeli citizens, I too could not bring myself to confront or criticize the Israeli military's immoral actions. I realize that this difficulty originated from my sense of identification with soldiers my own age, to whom I could relate. Today it is precisely this realization that leads me to refuse to serve. I cannot recognize the humanity of Israelis but not that of Palestinians. It is because of my deep sense of commitment and responsibility to the community in which I grew up that I am refusing to contribute to this cycle of bloodshed."

Cycle of bloodshed?

Maya hasn't got an original thought in her empty head. The checkpoints are there to prevent bloodshed as they prevent Arab terrorists from entering Israeli communities and murdering Israelis, both Jew and Arab alike. Just where is the "cycle of bloodshed" if the IDF screens potential terrorists from killing Israelis? For this to be a cycle, you'd need Israelis sneaking into the PA to murder Arabs. The "cycle of bloodshed" line was put together by the PA propagandists to excuse Arab terrorism and de-legitimize the IDF's protecting the people of Israel. Maya began her campaign against the IDF while only a high school student. So had no military experience with the checkpoints.

This "conscientious objector," Maya, did not choose to be a medic in the IDF or serve in a non-combat position, so where is her" identification" with soldiers her own age she might help if they are injured? She served a total of 40 days in jail which is another mistake of the Israeli government: if she was unwilling to serve in any capacity other than to go abroad and be a propagandist against Israel, why wasn't she sentenced to her full three year military term? IDF draftees receive no salaries while serving, while this little nitwit gets to attend Columbia as a professional Israel basher and liar.

The most important piece of information about Maya's real goals and ideas is where the above quote was found: On a website paid for by the ISM-affiliated groups Jewish Voice for Peace and Code Pink. Both groups support Hamas and even smuggle material aid to the terrorist group despite its Charter calling for the complete destruction of the Jewish state and the annihilation of world Jewry. These are wonderful conscientious people who Maya works for and keeps company with.

But wait, there's more:

According to Maya Wind: "We can no longer term our military a 'Defense Force.' A defense force does not conquer lands of another people. A defense force does not assist in the building of settlements on those lands. A defense force does not permit settlers to throw stones at Palestinian civilians, nor does it deny them access to their lands and source of livelihood. None of these are acts of a defense force."

She then continues:

'The occupation has no defensive advantages. On the contrary, the pointless occupation of millions of people only leads to radicalization of opinions, hatred and the escalation of violence. Violence is a cycle that feeds into itself. This cycle will not stop until someone stands up and refuses uncompromisingly to take part in it."

The Arabs and their communist allies in the ISM, when they use the term "occupation," refer to "all Palestinian lands" and only then will mention the West Bank and Gaza too. This includes Fatah. People with a little more sophistication than Maya know what Abbas and Haniyah both say about the unconditional Arab right of return in Arabic. This little nitwit of course repeats what the ISM taught her to say, that the big bad Israelis are not defending the people of Israel but are "occupying another's land". Never mind Hezbollah in the North, Hamas in the South and the Iranians or Syrians, because it's all Israel's fault for trying to set up checkpoints to stop the fedayeen from going in to kill Jews. And the new calumny that religious Jewish settlers throw rocks at innocent Arabs is the latest in ISM doublespeak. The Arabs have been throwing rocks at Jews for years even as part of Koranic incitement, and anyone who reads a newspaper knows about rock throwing at Jews in Bi'ilin and elsewhere in the West Bank.

Anybody today who flies on an airplane goes through a checkpoint thanks to Palestinian political maneuvering during the last fifty years. Yet the Arabs want us all to believe they are humiliated and brutalized at checkpoints because they are inspected to be sure no bombs or weapons are brought in. Maya knows this. She just doesn't care. She's attending Columbia and what a cushy job she has while doing it while her fellow high school graduates are working without pay to protect the people of Israel. Gee, what a bunch of suckers they are.

Maya concludes, "My views are also relevant to the current operation in Gaza. One form of violence cannot stop another. This current violence is the result of decades of ongoing occupation of the territories and sieges on Gaza since the Disengagement. I mourn the unnecessary deaths of both Palestinians and Israelis. Yet again we have chosen war."

Since the Disengagement? Gee, Maya, you admit to a "Disengagement" where Israel deported its Jewish population from Gaza and for eight years had missiles fired on Sderot and Ashkelon, on day care centers and schools. As for a "siege on Gaza", the Arabs in Gaza are among the fattest people in the world. The "siege" consists of preventing Iranian missiles from getting in by sea while new luxury hotels abound and Gaza is thriving. The fact that Maya would mention Gaza at all is because the ISM is following the marching orders given out by Hamas, and Maya Yechieli Wind is more than willing to be in lock step. As for mourning the deaths of Israelis, she only assures there will be more dead in the future by keeping the conflict roiling for the Arabs.

In researching further quotes from Maya, she is listed as an ally in various articles of the War Resister's League in the United States. Members of the League were recently raided by the FBI in Chicago and Los Angeles for having an ISM safe house where terrorists stayed from Hamas, Hezbollah, the PFLP and even Columbia's FARC. Nice company Maya keeps with. Maya can be viewed on an anti-Israel website video here where she pokes "Palestinians" with her machine-gun and physically abuses her "charges" as she poses as an IDF "sergeant", conduct that would earn any real IDF soldier time in the brig. According to her presentation to Columbia students, every Arab who enters a security checkpoint is bound and gagged for no reason and prodded with a rifle. Maya is the quisling Arab who will misrepresent this canard. Meanwhile, in the background of a video showing this on the Web is played Palestinian martial jihadi music, another example of Maya Yechieli Wind's concern for peace on both sides. The scene is clearly not representative of the facts, and shows just how offensive and libelous this woman is to the people of Israel.

At the film's conclusion it states 91% of An-Najah University students claim to have been late to class due to checkpoints. An-Najah was the University that did an art exhibit in tribute to Sbarro pizza parlor bombing with limbs of Israelis strewn around and blood all over the displays. Maya's mother should be proud of her daughter, shilling for murderers and terrorists while lying that she is for "peace." At least Maya says she is, but I rather doubt it.

Lee Kaplan is a long-time investigative journalist, specializing on infiltration by Marxist and Islamic groups anti-democratic groups under the guise of peace and working for the underdog. Visit his website: www.dafka.org and contact him at leekaplan@att.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Mandel, December 23, 2010.

This is archived at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/23/opinion/ lweb23wright.html?_r=2&ref=opinion


To the Editor:

In "A U.N. Plan for Israel" (column, Dec. 14), Robert Wright says, "The United Nations created a Jewish state six decades ago, and it can create a Palestinian state now." But it cannot and would be well advised not to try.

First, the United Nations didn't "create" Israel — sovereignty was asserted by its provisional government at the termination of British authority in the territory — nor indeed was the 1947 General Assembly partition resolution even legally binding. It would have been, had both Jews and Arabs accepted it, but Arabs did not. Had Arab arms prevailed over the Jewish forces, there would have been no Israel, regardless of United Nations resolutions.

Second, despite the importance of that resolution in changing the conditions surrounding Israel's emergence, the United Nations came onto a scene that Britain, the governing power, was vacating. In short, it filled a vacuum. There is no such vacuum today.

Third, this idea suffers from the flawed tendency to believe that creating a Palestinian state will produce peace. Yet no perusal of Palestinian sermons, statements or publications suggests that Palestinians accept the idea of a peaceful state alongside Israel. If a Palestinian state won't bring peace, why create it?

A United States policy that devises carrots and sticks to induce Palestinians to relinquish their war on Israel's continued existence provides the best basis for future, fruitful negotiations.

Daniel Mandel
Haddonfield, N.J.,

The writer is the author of "H. V. Evatt & the Establishment of Israel."

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, December 23, 2010.

This was written by Gil Ronen and it appeared today on Arutz-Sheva


(Israelnationalnews.com) Thousands rallied at Kikar Tzion (Zion Square) in Jerusalem Thursday evening in support of the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, and continued construction there.

Rabbi Shalom Dov Wolpe of Our Land of Israel warned Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his speech that if he decides to destroy Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, "There will be civil war here."

"They say words can kill, but missiles certainly kill," he added. "Bibi Netanyahu, you should know, the entire holy crowd here, we all declare — if you tear down the isolated communities, this is treason. You were given the mandate to lead in order to build the Land of Israel, not freeze it."

MK Michael Ben-Ari (National Union) addressed the protesters and told them about his plan to house infiltrators in posh Tel Aviv neighborhoods. "I made thousands of telephone calls to the residents of Ramat Aviv and called upon the dear residents of Ramat Aviv to shoulder their share of the burden," he said sarcastically.

Ben-Ari recalled telling the residents of the north Tel Aviv neighborhood: "You are humane and democratic and not racist, let's see you accepting the African invasion."

"What do you think I got in response? Curses and shouting. Leftists voice criticism of the demonstrators in Petach Tikva and Bat Yam but we should say the truth: the Land of Israel should have a Jewish character, not a character of enemies."

Ben-Ari noted that Israel's founding prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, was a proponent of "Hebrew work" (avoda Ivrit) — the idea that Jews should do all of the labor in Israel and refrain from hiring others to do the more tedious, difficult or dangerous jobs.

Were Ben Gurion alive today, Ben-Ari said — he would be reviled as a racist.

Contact Barbara Ginsberg by email at BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com and visit her website at

To Go To Top

Posted by CAMERA, December 23, 2010.

This is archived at
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2010/12/no_crosses_ in_bethlehem_no_chr.html


Christian and mainstream media outlets have routinely used the Christmas season as an opportunity to draw attention to the suffering of Christians living in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In years past, Palestinian Christians have been portrayed as the modern-day equivalent of the Holy Family that was forced to give birth to baby Jesus in a manger because of the oppressive policies of the Roman empire. Predictably, Israel was cast in the role of the Roman oppressors.

The trope became so obvious that CAMERA coined the term "Bethlehem Fomula" to describe the process by which the Christian liturgical calendar was used to generate contempt towards Israel. As tourism has improved in recent years, the template of Palestinian Christians as the Holy Family and Israel as the Roman empire has been increasingly difficult to apply.

This year is no exception, especially since Christian merchants in Bethlehem have stopped selling crosses for fear of offending their Muslim neighbors.

This is a sad story, but there's one that's even sadder that doesn't seem to be getting much traction in the community that has routinely targeted Israel for condemnation. Still reeling from the Oct. 31 attack that killed several dozen Christians in Baghdad, church leaders in Iraq have decided not to celebrate Christmas this year.

An article in USA Today provides some detail:

On Tuesday, al-Qaeda insurgents threatened more attacks on Iraq's beleaguered Christians, many of whom have fled their homes or the country since the church attack. A council representing Christian denominations across Iraq advised its followers to cancel public celebrations of Christmas out of concern for their lives and as a show of mourning for the victims.

"Nobody can ignore the threats of al-Qaeda against Iraqi Christians," said Chaldean Archbishop Louis Sako in Kirkuk. "We cannot find a single source of joy that makes us celebrate. The situation of the Christians is bleak."

This would seem like a good opportunity for Christian organizations such as the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches to express solidarity with their co-religionists in Iraq, but so far, two days before Christmas, they have yet to release a statement. By way of comparison, the World Council of Churches has issued a statement on the Kairos Document which was released more than a year ago. Talk about beating a dead horse.

Will either of these organizations comment on this sad state of affairs in time for Christmas? Or will they take a pass? And if they do lament the sufferings of Christians in Iraq in time for Christmas, will they mention exactly who perpetrated the attack on Oct. 31 or will the attackers be left unnamed?

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. The website address is www.camera.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Fern Sidman, December 23, 2010.

Zionist visionary and leader, Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, was remembered this past Sunday evening, December 19th, as hundreds of Israeli high school students from across the country gathered in the main auditorium of the Knesset building in Jerusalem for the award presentation to the 15 winners of the 2010 Ze'ev Jabotinsky National Essay Contest.

Sponsored by the American For A Safe Israel (AFSI), and an Israeli group called Misdar Jabotinsky, the ceremonious event marked the 70th yahrzeit of the prescient Revisionist Zionist leader and founder of the Betar (Brit Trumpeldor) youth movement. A towering figure amongst pre-state Zionist leaders, Jabotinsky is known as a powerful and prolific statesman, writer, journalist and electrifying orator.

In stark contrast to his Socialist-Zionist contemporaries who encouraged Jews to fight for their civil rights within the countries of their origin, Jabotinsky was skeptical of this avenue of emancipation, proclaiming that salvation for Jews — both on a personal level and as a national entity — lay only in the re-settlement of the entire land of Israel. Jewish self-defense was at the epicenter of Jabotinsky's socio-political philosophy, both as a physical imperative and as a wellspring of pride and self-confidence, capable of "ennobling" the Jewish spirit.

The essay contest covered five categories of Jabotinsky's life, written works and political activities which included such headings as "The individual and the nation in Jabotinsky's thought," "Social reform according to Jabotinsky," and "Jabotinsky, builder of Hebrew military power." Offering first, second and third cash prizes, the essay contest was projected by AFSI as the first step in an extended campaign to stimulate interest in Zionist history both in Israel and beyond its borders. In the United States, AFSI plans to launch, "Zionism 101", a filmed series of internet programs covering the 120-year history of the contemporary Zionist movement.

According to William Mehlman, the Jerusalem chairperson of AFSI and contributor to their "Outpost" newsletter, Jabotinsky's link to Zionism's heroic past was underscored in essay after essay on the saga of "Aliyah Bet," his British blockade-busting enterprise that brought more than 100,000 European Jews to Palestine between 1936 and 1940; his World War I formation of the "Zion Mule Corps," the first organized Jewish fighting force in 1,800 years, and his subsequent establishment of both the Haganah (which grew into the IDF) and the Irgun Z'vai Leumi (IZL), the underground resistance force that was instrumental in driving the British out of Palestine.

AFSI chairman Herbert Zweibon said the essay contest "marked the culmination of a 10-month effort to rekindle an intimate relationship with Zionism among Israeli youth, undermined by decades of high school teaching that made Zionist history and their attendant heroes hostage to universalist myths and 'narratives,' that smacked of blatant ant-Zionism."

Former Member of Knesset Michael Kleiner, together with Emanuel Weiser of the Jabotinsky Order, spoke of Jabotinsky as a "revolutionary" in the most positive sense of the word.. "He revolted against the British occupation, against a Jewish establishment that seemed satisfied with a stateless Jewish status quo and while others remained silent, he marched across Europe in the 1930s imploring Jews to leave before it was too late."

A polemical aspect surrounds the essay contest as well, due to a decision made by the Israeli Education Ministry in November of 2008 "to exclude the founder of the Revisionist movement in Zionism from the list of 100 personages studied at Israeli schools. Three years separated the passing of the Jabotinsky Law (2005) and erasure of his philosophy from local textbooks" as reported in Ha'Aretz newspaper. The decison was then reversed by the Education Ministry as of early December of 2010 and according to Ha'Aretz the ministry is "actively supporting a privately-sponsored essay contest on Ze'ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky and urging students to participate in it."

The prizes to contest winners were presented by Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar and Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin. Describing Jabotinsky as Zionism's most existentialist figure, Knesset Speaker Rivlin said he was "not just a thinker, but a doer." In his remarks to the students, Education Minister Sa'ar, said that as a high school student in 1980 he took second prize in an essay contest commemorating the 40th anniversary of Jabotinsky's passing and lauded his teachings as timeless.

Contact Fern Sidman by email at ariellaH@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by GWY, December 23, 2010.

UKs' Bedfordshire Polices' rules regarding terrorists and dangerous criminals

If they're non-Muslim

  • Consider the most opportune time of day to be able to arrest suspects with minimum resistance
  • Apply all necessary force to enter the premises and arrest suspects accordingly.

If they're Muslim:

  • Community leaders must be consulted before raids into Muslim houses.
  • Officers must not search occupied bedrooms and bathrooms before dawn.
  • Use of police dogs will be considered serious desecration of the premises.
  • Cameras and camcorders should not be used in case of capturing women in inappropriate dress.
  • If people are praying at home officers should stand aside and not disrupt the prayer. They should be allowed the opportunity to finish.
  • Officers should take their shoes off before raiding a Muslim house.
  • The reasons for pre-dawn raids on Muslim houses needs to be clear and transparent.
  • Officers must not touch holy books or religious artefacts without permission.
  • Muslim prisoners should be allowed to take additional clothing to the station.

With this continuing appeasement, no wonder it's now predicted that Britain will become an Islamic state by 2070. (Time to think about your children.)

Contact GWY at GWY123@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Phyllis Chesler, December 23, 2010.

Is It Not Torture When the Prisoner is a Jew?


Why is this man still in jail? Why was this man forced to spend seven years in solitary? Why is still confined, languishing, festering in jail for a total of twenty five years?

Solitary confinement is the most barbaric of punishments. Few people can withstand this form of torture without becoming very ill, both physically and mentally.

Am I talking about the Soviet Gulag? Or about some hell-hole in Afghanistan or Iran?

Last year, The New Yorker ran a piece about solitary confinement. The article concludes that this punishment amounts to torture, that it can even induce "acute psychosis with hallucinations." The article describes the cases of two political prisoners or prisoners-of-war: AP's Middle East correspondent, Terry Anderson, who was put into solitary by Hezbollah in Lebanon for six years. Anderson "felt himself disintegrating"; his mind went blank; he had hallucinations; he started to become "neurotically possessive about his little space"; he felt his brain was "grinding down." He also describes Senator John McCain who said that "solitary confinement crushes your spirit and weakens your resistance more than any other form of mistreatment. And he said that even though he had his arms broken and was subjected to other forms of torture."

Clearly, the New Yorker's man, Atul Gawande, opposes this practice.

He does mention the cases of two unnamed inmates: one was convicted of felony-murder and spent five years in isolation. After a few months he began talking to himself, pacing back and forth, having panic attacks, and hallucinating. After a year he was hearing voices on the television who were talking to him. In another case, Gawande describes another American man in solitary whose initial crime was armed robbery and aggravated battery but who then "misbehaved" at a medium security prison for which he was was put in solitary or in isolation for almost fourteen years. This man stopped showering and began throwing his feces around his cell. He became psychotic.

Even he was released after he served his sentence of fifteen years.

Gawande does not mention the man I have in mind, a man whose living head is on a pike in the public square for all to see — a message, a warning to us all — a man who killed no one.

I am talking about Jonathan Pollard.

What crime did he commit? Did he spy against American for the Soviets or for the Chinese communists? Did he do so for money, sex, or for ideological reasons? American Navy Seaman, Michael Walker, operated a Soviet spy ring; he was arrested in 1980, pled guilty, was sentenced to 25 years and released after 15 years.

CIA Agent David Barnett sold the Soviets the names of thirty American undercover agents. He was arrested in the mid-1980s, sentenced to only eighteen years, and paroled after only ten years. In 2001, John Walker Lindh, who joined the Taliban and received training as a terrorist in Pakistan, was captured and sentenced to 21 years. In the Abdul Kedar Helmy, an Egyptian-born American, transmitted classified materials to Egypt used in a joint weapons program with Iraq to vastly increase the range of ballistic missiles, including Scud missiles, which were later fired on U.S. troops during the Persian Gulf War." In 2010, Chinese-American engineer Dongfan "Greg" Chung operated as a spy for China against America for thirty years. He received a 15 year sentence.

What is "different" about Pollard? Unlike Walker, Barnett, Lindh, Helmy, and Chung, Pollard is the only Jew. The others are Christians or Muslims or atheists.

What else is different? Pollard is the only one who shared secrets with an American ally with whom America was not and is not now at war. Pollard shared information with Israel.

What else is "different" about Pollard? There is one more thing. Like the Rosenbergs, Pollard was the proving grounds, the scapegoat, for another man, also a Jew, but a Jew who did not like being mistreated as a Jew, as a Jew who wanted to prove how tough the was or how hard he was ready to be on another Jew and on the Jewish state.

The Rosenbergs, (who were guilty), had their Jewish judge who chose to have them electrocuted. Pollard, poor Pollard, had Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger whose paternal grandparents were Jews and whose father was a Jewish lawyer. When Caspar was a boy, he was taunted for supposedly being Jewish. His mother was a Christian and he was raised as a Christian. When he visited Yad Vashem, the Memorial to the Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust, he said loudly: "I am not a Jew." He said this in response to the guard who told him that "he, too, would have been murdered in the Holocaust."

Weinberger submitted a forty page affidavit in which he insisted that Pollard should be harshly sentenced. (In later years, he said that "the Pollard matter was comparatively minor." Weinberger is now dead and no doubt roasting in Hell.

One wonders: What did he have over CIA head George Tenet (who threatened to resign when President Clinton suggested pardoning Pollard)?

What did Weinberger have over President Bush's Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom went along with Weinberger's revenge?

Where are all the anti-torture activists on Pollard? How can it be that our most prominent American political prisoner has never made it onto their honor roll of causes with which to browbeat America?

Yesterday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu formally asked President Obama to pardon Jonathan Pollard, at long last. I and all true believers in democracy stand with him in this matter.

Update: Based on a recent article by Leo Rennert which critique's yesterdays' coverage of the Pollard case in The New York Times, "it is now clear that Pollard, in failing health, has been the victim of a CIA cover-up of a massive intelligence failure, with the agency blaming Pollard for the damage caused by a real 'mole' inside the CIA who passed to Moscow the names of more than a dozen U.S. informants in the Soviet Union — namely Aldrich Ames, the head of CIA's Soviet-Eastern Europe division, who fingered Pollard to keep the CIA from discovering his own treachery.. The CIA did not discover Ames' role until well after Pollard was behind bars and it still isn't willing to acknowledge its mistake in blaming Pollard for Ames's crimes."

Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D. is emerita professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. Well known author of fifteen books, including Women and Madness (Doubleday, 1972), The Death of Feminism: What's Next in the Struggle for Women's Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005) and most recently, The New Anti-Semitism, she is the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology and the National Women's Health Network. Prof. Chesler is often on international media and is a frequent contributor to INN as well as FOX News, Middle East Quarterly and others.

To Go To Top

Posted by GWY, December 23, 2010.

This comes from churi1001@gmail.com and was posted by Paul Williams
http://pauls2k.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/ the-difference-between-jews-and-muslims/.


The Jews are NOT promoting brain washing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is NOT one single Jew who has destroyed a church. There is NOT a single Jew who protests by killing people. The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels. Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems. Muslims must ask 'what can they do for humankind' before they demand that humankind respects them.

Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, even if you believe there is more culpability on Israel 's part, the following two sentences really say it all:

'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel." (Benjamin Netanyahu)

General Eisenhower warned us. It is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, 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. He did this because he said in words to this effect: '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'

Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the 6 million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated' while the German people looked the other way.

Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

This e-mail is intended to reach 400 million people. Be a link in the memorial chain and help distribute this around the world.

How many years will it be before the attack on the World Trade Center 'NEVER HAPPENED' because it offends some Muslim in the United States?

Contact CWY by email at GWY123@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Marcia Leal, December 23, 2010.

This was posted by Mike McDaniel. It appeared in http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/iran-shipped-missiles- to-venezuela/?print=1


Recent revelations about hostile incursions into South America have raised alarm in those who care about American interests and security, particularly in America's hemisphere. They have also raised questions about whether the Monroe doctrine — America will tolerate no hostile incursions in her own hemisphere — is dead. These revelations have been, for the most part, ignored by those who care little for American sovereignty and security, such as the MSM and apparently the Obama administration.

Among the two most alarming revelations are the already completed sale and delivery, to Venezuela by Russia, of nearly 2000 advanced, shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles capable of hitting aircraft as high as 19,000 feet. Equally and perhaps more alarming is an October agreement between Iran and Venezuela — the agreement establishes a joint ground-to-ground missile base on Venezuelan soil and calls for the sharing of missile technology and the training of technicians and officers. In addition, Venezuela may use the missiles as it chooses for "national needs" and in case of "emergency." Several types of missiles will be deployed, giving Venezuela the ability to strike targets throughout South and Central America and throughout America.

The dangers arising from the Marxist, cult-of-personality rule of Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez are many. These weapons are only the largest and most destructive purchased or finagled by Chavez. He has also purchased an enormous number of Russian assault rifles — the real thing, fully automatic military rifles, not the non-existent "assault weapons" of gun control imaginations and press releases — and related weapons and ammunition.

Keep in mind that these are only the sales and transfers about which American authorities and the public are aware.

With these weapons, Chavez can dominate the region. The consequences for American and hemispheric security should be obvious to those who care about such things, but again, seem to entirely escape the Obama administration. But there are more direct, immediate threats.

Several pundits have suggested that Venezuela's shoulder-fired ground-to-air missiles might be carried into America if they were broken down into smaller pieces. Nonsense. Such weapons are self-contained and come complete with their own hardy, weatherproof hard cases which are easily small enough to be smuggled across the southern border without further disassembly. Anyone familiar with the vast size and wildly varied terrain of our Southern border, compared to the small number of Border Patrol Officers assigned to guard it, understands that smuggling anything across the border, including entire vehicles and thousands of people is in many places merely a matter of walking across. Many are unaware that environmental regulations prevent the Border Patrol from doing what they are charged to do — patrol — in large areas. Also little known is the federal land grab the Democrats hope to sneak into law in the current lame duck session of Congress that would greatly increase the number and acreage of federal lands and related environmental restrictions, making even more of the border region off limits to the Border Patrol — but certainly not to terrorists, drug smugglers, and illegal aliens.

So out of control is the border that in some areas of Arizona, the Federal Government has posted signs advising Americans that drug cartels and human smugglers have taken control, warning that they should stay out for their own safety. To date, the Obama administration's primary response, apart from surrendering control of American territory, has been to sue Arizona for daring to try to protect its citizens by passing a law that mirrors federal law. A few hundred troops have been sent here and a few hundred there, but these troops are not armed for battle and empowered to capture those who would harm us.

It must be assumed as fact that Chavez is not only able but more than willing to equip terrorists and drug cartels, organizations with whom he has long-standing relationships, with weapons including shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles. His agreements with and public embrace of Iran, the single most active state sponsor of terrorism already responsible for the loss of an untold number of American lives, leaves no room for doubt. It would be surprising if such weapons, accompanied by terrorists, were not already on American soil.

American commercial airliners are uniquely vulnerable to such weapons. Most vulnerable on takeoff and landing, slow moving aircraft are easy targets, targets that will crash in the heavily populated suburbs surrounding most modern airports, racking up even higher death tolls. A few individual attacks could all but completely paralyze American commerce and wreck an economy already brought to its knees by two years of Obamanomics. Coordinated, simultaneous multi-city attacks could easily exceed the 9/11 death toll and would not require the attackers to become martyrs.

Designed to be used by conscript troops in the field with little training, such missiles can be prepared, shouldered, and fired within seconds. A terrorist might simply step out of a vehicle along the periphery of an airport, shoulder and sight the missile, fire, and step back into the vehicle. By the time the missile strikes its target, he would already be driving away from the area, alive and ready to strike again.

We have been fortunate that the FBI has recently intercepted a number of homegrown terrorist bomb plots. However, missile attacks need not involve anyone currently living in America. A sufficient number of terrorists could simply slip across our southern border and drive to their assigned points of attack. Such attacks would be virtually impossible to intercept. In addition, the Russian missiles now in Venezuelan hands are so common as to render it very unlikely that an attack could be traced back to Chavez. The same would be true of any small arms smuggled across the border to be used in attacks at shopping malls, theaters, schools, or other places where large numbers of potential targets congregate.

Medium-range ground-to-ground missiles based in Venezuela are another matter entirely. Armed only with conventional explosive warheads, there would be little motivation for Venezuela or Iran to use them, as even under Barack Obama, massive retaliation would be at least possible. The equation is swung more in favor of use with biological or chemical warheads. But with nuclear warheads, use becomes even more likely. What is almost certain is that nuclear warheads would allow substantial blackmail capability, giving Iran and Venezuela a free hand not only in South and Central America, but in the Middle East as well. And all that is apparently keeping Iran from producing such warheads is a computer virus.

We have missile defenses, but in this situation they cannot save us.

One of the advantages for America, so to speak, of a Soviet missile attack was the 30-minute time from launch to impact, providing substantial time to detect and several opportunities to destroy an incoming missile. The shorter the time frame of missile flight, the fewer the opportunities. Ideally, missiles should be killed during the boost phase while still over enemy territory by such means as airborne laser platforms, platforms for which the Obama administration has cut funding. After the boost phase, missiles become harder still to locate and shoot down — but we do have limited capability to do this. As they are falling back to Earth, we have substantial capabilities, such as the land-based Patriot system and various shipboard systems. But unfortunately, their range is limited. They are area defense weapons. If they're not in the right place at the right time, no defense. Most such systems are currently protecting our troops and allies.

And of course, Mr. Obama has all but ended advancement in design, testing, and deployment of missile defense systems.

The obvious response is to locate and obliterate as many of Venezuela's anti-aircraft defenses, including shoulder-fired missiles, as possible and as often as necessary. Any attempt to build military installations in concert with Iran should likewise be met with utter obliteration. The chance of this occurring under President Obama is essentially zero — that is why we are facing a growing crisis, one barely mentioned by the MSM and apparently ignored by the Obama administration.

Weakness invites war; strength deters it. Never has America been stronger, with greater and more overpowering war fighting technology, and never has she had weaker, more ineffective leadership. Were this not so, what nation would dare America to repeat, even exceed, President Kennedy's response to the Cuban Missile Crisis? Sadly, there is no longer any such thing as a Democrat interested in defending America. If Barack Obama allows such blatant threats in America's backyard, what if anything could possibly provoke him to act in her defense? Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Amadinejad believe the answer is nothing.

Contact Marcia Leal at marcia.leal.eejh@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 23, 2010.

1. Well after serving as a swamp of leftist treason and anti-Israel academic radicalism for decades, the anti-democratic officials at the head of Ben Gurion University just decided to prevent a small group of leftwing extremists from distributing a libelous pamphlet on campus. The pamphlet was a malicious personal attack against Avigdor Lieberman. Campus heads were convinced the pamphlet was slanderous and would result in the university being sued. See this story:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/left-wing-students-fight-university- ban-of-libelous-flyer-featuring-lieberman-1.332319

The pamphlet also warned against the "march towards fascism" in Israel. This is ironic, since many of the leading anti-Israel Neo-Fascists who battle against freedom of speech in Israel are faculty members at Ben Gurion University, and one of the worst is now Dean of Social Sciences and Humanities there.

The leftwing fascist students who prepared the pamphlet complained that the ban violates "academic freedom" at BGU. But academic freedom at BGU does not exist at all. Zionists and non-leftists may not teach in the Politics department. The campus chiefs have led the jihad to silence the Zionist students from Im Tirtzu. You also recall no doubt that BGU's President, the cabbagehead Rivka Carmi, fired a professor for expressing a politically unfashionable opinion about homosexual couples raising children. She then defended the firing in the name of the necessity of silencing opinions that can offend people. Except she has long defended the rights of faculty members to cheer Hamas rocket attacks against Jews and who also call for Israel to be annihilated, opinions that also offend people.

And since when are the heads of BGU so upset about harassment libel suits? After all, they have long SUPPORTED the neo-fascist attempt by anti-Israel pseudo-academic Neve Gordon to silence ME by means of a harassment SLAPP suit. Gordon wanted the court to punish me for criticizing Gordon's published political opinions. The Israeli Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in that matter any day now.

Gordon's harassment SLAPP suit against me, by the way, was originally filed in Nazareth Court because Gordon hoped (and succeeded) to get the case assigned to an anti-Israel Arab radical judge. The Nazareth Court has been in the press in recent days. Because so many of its judges are Arabs, every Palestinian with any "grievance" against Israel files suits THERE, and in many cases the sympathetic judges award monetary awards to the Palestinians, including those injured when involved in violence against Israel. Nazareth Court, according to these media reports, has morphed into Israel's center for the judicial intifada.

2. Don't hold your breath waiting for the Left to Apologize:

By Alan Dershowitz
Published in: Huffington Post December 21, 2010

Since the end of the Gaza War in January 2009, Israel has stood accused of targeting civilians, rather than terrorist combatants. The Israeli Defense Force has claimed that during Operation Cast Lead it targeted only combatants in its efforts to protect its civilians from rocket attacks. It has also claimed that most of the dead were combatants and issued lists of names of many of the combatants killed and identified them as members of the specific Hamas military units. Despite unprecedented efforts to avoid civilian casualties — including hundreds of thousands of leaflets, telephone calls and non-lethal, noise-making warning bombs — some civilians were killed, because Hamas deliberately hid behind civilians, using them as shields, when they fired rockets at Israeli civilians.

Following the end of the Gaza War, which has essentially stopped Hamas rocket attacks against Israeli civilians, there was a great debate about the number of Gaza civilians actually killed, and the ratio of civilian to combatant deaths during this difficult military operation. The Israel Defense Force put the total number of known combatants killed at 709 and the number of known civilian deaths at 295, with 162 (mostly men of fighting age) "unknown." Such a ratio, if true, would be far better than that achieved by any other nation in a comparable conflict. Not surprisingly, Israel's enemies initially disputed this ratio and claimed that the number of combatants killed was far lower and the number of civilians far higher. The United Nations, the Goldstone Report, various "human rights" organizations and many in the media automatically rejected Israel's documented figures, preferring the distorted numbers offered by Hamas' and other Palestinian sources.

But a statement recently made by a Hamas leader confirms that Israel was correct in claiming that approximately 700 combatants were killed. First, a word about the context of the Hamas statement. In the aftermath of the war, Hamas has come under considerable criticism from rival terrorist groups for not doing enough to defend Gaza and for allowing so many civilian casualties. So, in a recent interview with a London paper, Al-Hayat, Fathi Hamad, Hamas' Interior Minister, responded to these criticisms as follows:

"It has been said that the people were harmed by the war, but is Hamas not part of the people? It is a fact that on the first day of the war Israel struck police headquarters and killed 250 members of Hamas and the various factions, in addition to the 200-300 operatives from the [Izz al-Din] al-Qassam Brigades. In addition, 150 security personnel were killed, and the rest were from people." (The original text of the interview in Arabic, as reprinted in the Hamas newspaper Felesteen, can be found on the website of the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center. It was also reported by Agence France Presse)

This statement not only supports the Israeli numbers, but it also acknowledges what Israel has long said about the 250 policemen who were killed on the first day of combat: they were "members of Hamas and the various factions" and were indeed "combatants" by any realistic definition of that term.

Fathi Hamad's figures are in striking contrast to those originally issued by Palestinian groups which claimed that only 48 combatants were killed and that the total amounted to a mere 17 percent of all fatalities.

Because it uncritically accepted the original Hamas claims of very few combatant deaths, the Goldstone Report was able to reach its flawed conclusion that the purpose of the operation must have been to kill civilians, not combatants. This is what the Goldstone Report said: The Mission notes that the statistics from non-governmental sources are generally consistent. Statistics alleging that fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant...raise very serious concerns about the way Israel conducted the military operations in Gaza. The counterclaims published by the Government of Israel fall short of international law standards.

Now that the truth has been admitted by the Hamas leadership — that as many as 700 combatants were, in fact, killed — the Goldstone Commission is obliged to reconsider its false conclusion and correct its deeply flawed report.

Richard Goldstone himself has repeatedly said that he hoped that new evidence will prove his conclusions wrong. Well, this new evidence — a classic admission against interest — does just that! The original false figures have also been submitted by the Palestinian Authority to the International Criminal Court. It too has an obligation to correct the record. It would be an outrageous miscarriage of justice for the International Criminal Court to open an investigation of a nation that, in actuality, had the best ratio of combatant to civilian deaths in any comparable war.

The admission by Fathi Hamad that Israel's figures were correct and those originally offered by Palestinian groups were false exposes the rush to judgment against Israel that has stained the so-called "human rights" community so often in the past. It is essential that this new evidence be widely circulated, which it has not been to date, and that those who condemned Israel on the basis of false allegations correct the record. Don't hold your breath! In today's distorted world of "human rights," truth takes a back seat to ideology, and false claims — especially those that "support" radical ideologies — persist even after they have been exposed.

Professor Alan Dershowitz's latest book is a novel, The Trials of Zion.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/ finally-a-hamas-leader-ad_b_798429.html?ref=tw

3. From Middle East Quarterly:
Clash of Identities:
Explorations in Israeli and Palestinian Societies
by Baruch Kimmerling.
New York: Columbia University Press, 2008. 429 pp. $55 ($27.50, paper)

Reviewed by Steven Plaut
University of Haifa
Middle East Quarterly
Fall 2010 http://www.meforum.org/2799/clash-of-identities

If you are looking for a numbingly unreadable book of anti-Israel diatribes written by a deceased sociologist with Marxist tendencies, you can do no better (or worse?) than Clash of Identities. Kimmerling, who died in 2007, devoted his long career as a sociologist to doing little sociology while preening as a New Historian. Clash of Identities is the reprint of twelve previously published articles venting against Israel and Zionism.

Just about everything that was wrong with Kimmerling's work as an academic is on display in this new book, which is long on diatribe but short on evidence. Data and numbers are almost completely missing. Other than a few tables from a questionable public opinion survey, nothing is measured quantitatively in this supposed investigation of identity.

Kimmerling seems to have had little interest in measurement and analysis and seemed more interested in preaching and advocating. He saw himself as a historian of the Palestinian people, seeing shades of Palestinian identity decades, even centuries, before the U.N. partition vote of 1947. Ironically, when he actually stumbled across evidence of importance, he tended to ignore what it actually showed. Thus, in describing the birth of Palestinian national identity, he mentions petitions sent to British authorities in the 1920s by thousands of Palestinian intellectuals and professionals, demanding to be made Syrian citizens.

This book may be eye-opening for people who have never read a book before about the Middle East. They will learn that both Jewish and Arab identities have something to do with religion, that both nationalist movements have flirted with socialism, and that many Israeli resources go into its military. However, Kimmerling chooses to ignore or hide the fact that the bulk of Palestinians in 1948 were recent migrants or temporary workers who came to the area from other Arab countries attracted by the increase in economic opportunities brought about by Jewish enterprise and British rule of law. The reader will also fail to learn that, until 1967, there was little Palestinian nationalism beyond Arab nationalism or beyond the Arab desire to see the Jews driven into the sea.

The most interesting part of the book is its long preface. There we learn that when Kimmerling first approached the dean of Israeli sociology, Shmuel Eisenstadt, to be his dissertation advisor, Eisenstadt turned him down cold because Kimmerling was planning on writing a pro-Arab diatribe as his thesis. Other senior professors at Hebrew University also showed him the door. Eventually he managed to twist the arm of a junior faculty member, Moshe Lissak, to serve as his supervisor. Lissak, who became one of Hebrew University's most distinguished professors also became one of Kimmerling's harshest critics.

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by Robin TIcker, December 23, 2010.


To Whom It May Concern, amv"sh

In all due respect to Stand with Us and the wonderful work you do(see below), the Palestinians, (who really never were a people so for lack of a better term let us call them Muslim Obstacles of Peace and Occupiers of Judea and Samaria), are the ones who don't belong in Judea and Samaria and are illegitimate occupiers. We can also call those who glorify suicide bombers in their schools aka FATAH or PLO, the Muslim Jihad Lovers or MUJL (which actually sounds like MUGGLE (from Harry Potter).

What to do with all these Arabs in Judea and Samaria?

Let them choose from 22 Arab States who refuse to take them in or else choose to accept Jewish Sovereignty in the one and only Jewish State. They can leave as they wish. With Israel absorbing hundreds of thousands of Jews over the years, the Arab Countries whose collective size is 400 times the size of Israel, can absorb these Muslims who reject Israel and the G-d of Israel.

Israel as you point out is an ancient Jewish Homeland.

Israel was Promised by G-d only to the Nation of Israel. Foreigners are welcome as long as they accept Jewish Sovereignty and the 7 Noahide Laws.

This basic fundamental fact based on the Torah is one that you shy away from. But it is Truth and it should be included in your educational material regarding the Israel Palestinian conflict. It is the root source of this theological conflict.

Who are the real legit occupiers? Aren't they the Jews in Judea and Samaria? AFter all, isn't this ancient Jewish Land based on the Bible, History, Archeology and International Law?

Or does it belong to this newly created unknown fabricated nationality that does not have its roots in anything except its desire to wipe out any Jewish presence which is their only connection of the Palestinians of the past.

Will the real legit occupiers please Stand With Us?


As you may know, an anti-Israel group is planning on running billboard ads on Seattle buses beginning Monday, December 27.

WHAT StandWithUs Northwest HAS DONE

StandWithUs Northwest Alerts and Lobbying

Last Friday evening, we confirmed that an anti-Israel group was planning to run anti-Israel "Israeli War Crimes" ads on at least 12 buses running through downtown Seattle. Saturday evening, we sent out the first of our three email StandWithUs alert messages and you responded. People from all over the world wrote to the suggested recipients and are working to make a difference.

Many of you have copied us with the emails you've sent in to the King County Councilmembers and Metro. We've received copies of over 1,800 emails so far. And we know that that is only a small portion of the emails that have been sent — not everyone copied us on their emails. Plus, the phones at Metro have been ringing off the hook with complaints about Metro accepting the anti-Israel "Israeli War Crimes" ad.

Since Monday, StandWithUs Northwest's professional and Seattle lay leadership have been on the phones, calling King County Councilmembers, lobbying them to come out in opposition to the anti-Israel ad. We've been calling all our other political contacts asking that they (1) call the councilmembers and Metro and use their political powers of persuasion to get Metro to reconsider the ad in light of the language of its own policy, and (2) be prepared to come out publicly in opposition to the message of the ad and in support of U.S. aid to Israel.

The Results So Far

As a result of your emails and calls, and calls from other community members and leaders, along with StandWithUs Northwest lobbying, we know that at least three King County Councilmembers have publicly come out in opposition to Metro running the ad. The first to speak out was Councilmember Peter von Reichbauer. Yesterday both Councilmembers Reagan Dunn and Jeanne Hague also came out very strongly with statements opposing the ad.

Please let them know we appreciate that they have taken this public position. Let them know that we appreciate their political courage and that we know the political risk they take by clearly speaking out in the Seattle metropolitan area in opposition to the anti-Israel ad and in support of Israel.

To thank these council members, click on the following names to email Councilmember von Reichbauer (206-296-1007), Councilmember Reagan Dunn (206-296-1009) and Councilmember Jeanne Hague (206-296-1006).

Closing Down Ballot Stuffing on KING 5 TV Poll

Many of you are aware that KING 5 TV, which first broke the story, had an on-line poll on whether or not Metro should carry the ads. It very quickly became the most visited page on their website, with tens of thousands of people voting. Blogs across the country directed people to vote in the poll. By Monday evening, slightly more than 50 percent of the votes were against Metro running the ad. Then, between late Monday evening and early Tuesday morning, more than 15,000 nearly unanswered "yes" votes came piling in, supporting Metro running the ads.

StandWithUs Northwest realized that someone had set up a computerized voting application that created unique but false email addresses so that thousands of fake votes could be automatically sent in to the poll. The supporters of the anti-Israel ad were ballot stuffing.

StandWithUs Northwest's co-chairs, Carolyn Hathaway and Sharon Finegold, called KING 5 and explained the problem and showed them that it was statistically nearly impossible for so many no votes to come in so quickly in a legitimate way.

KING 5 responded immediately by investigating the problem and, within an hour, pulled the poll off the web.

Meeting with the King County Executive Office and Metro Management

This afternoon we met with representatives of the King County Executive's office together the senior management of Metro.

We were joined for this meeting by three other community organizations: the AJC, Federation of Greater Seattle and ADL.

Together, we urged Metro to hold off on running the ad until they review it in light of the threat to public safety and the danger to the Jewish community in Seattle — especially in light of the attacks against our community organizations in recent years, including recent vandalism and threats at Jewish schools.

We asked that they apply their own advertising policy, which specifically states that they will not run ads that include "material directed at a ... group that is so insulting, degrading or offensive as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will incite or produce imminent lawless action in the form of retaliation, vandalism or other breach of public safety, peace and order."

We explained that the "Israeli War Crimes" language is incendiary, that the ad could result in a mentally unbalanced person attacking Jews or Jewish organizations — or even Metro's buses. We expressed that this is very a serious concern in the Jewish community — a community that needs to spend an inordinate amount of money on security for our schools, synagogues and organizations.

Both the King County Executive's office and the Metro management heard our position. No decision was reached at the meeting, but we expect to hear from them shortly.

WHAT StandWithUs Northwest IS DOING NOW

Again, StandWithUs fervently hopes that Metro will not run the anti-Israel ad. But if they do, we are prepared to run our own ad. It's a tough ad, but we feel that we have to respond to what will be four weeks of repeated "Israeli War Crimes" ads running through our downtown corridor. In today's world of sound bite news, it is that phrase that people will remember long after the ad campaign is over.

We also know that many other organizations from outside of the state are planning to run ads. One of the reasons we hope that Metro will decide not to run the anti-Israel ad is because it will bring the Middle East conflict to the buses of Seattle. It will result in organizations using Seattle as their advertising battlefield. It will be divisive and hurt our larger community. And because issues like the Mideast conflict are far more complex than sound bites.


Over the past three years,StandWithUs Northwest has sent speakers out throughout the community — to schools, campuses, churches, and civic organizations — to speak to thousands of high school and college students, church members and Northwest community members in support of Israel. We realize how little most people know about Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

But it has been an eye-opener and evidence of the need for even much greater outreach and education to realize that the Metro management had no idea how the anti-Israel "Israeli War Crimes" ad would affect our community. They had no idea that it would elicit the incredible response from you and members of the Jewish community across not only Seattle, Washington or the U.S., but from Jews around the world.

They asked us, "What's so bad about this ad? We just don't get it."

Clearly, we have a lot of work to do. We need more speakers, more meetings with church leaders, more programs in the community, more educational opportunities and more chances to confront, face-to-face, in public debates and forums, those who distort the truth and demonize Israel. We need proactive education and we must be prepared to respond to misinformation.


AJC and Wendy Rosen for heading the Seattle Anti-BDS Task Force.

AJC, Federation, ADL and various other organizations and individuals for their work on the Anti-BDS Task Force. The Federation of Greater Seattle for the alert it sent out this week.

The metropolitan Seattle community's rabbis, synagogues and organizations for sending out to their members and supporters our alert this week.

You and the thousands of other community members who have written, called, and created the political pressure that has led to the County and Metro's reconsideration of the anti-Israel ad.

Contact Robin Ticker at faigerayzel@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Victor Sharpe, December 22, 2010.


Here is another evil Muslim Arab poster campaign; this one maligns Christianity and Christmas. Imitation is the 'sincerest form of flattery,' at least among Muslims, Arabs and their duped western amen chorus. As with the despicable anti-Israel bus posters in Seattle, there seems to be a concerted Muslim campaign to demonize Christians, Jews, all other non-Muslims, the Jewish state and Christmas itself. This is only going to get worse unless the evil is nipped in the bud by governments — and very soon.

This below was posted December 22, 2010 by Robert Spencer on Jihad Watch. Spencer, director of Jihad Watch is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law. His latest book is called "Stealth Jihad".



Christmas: does it make you think of STD's, rape, teenage pregnancy, abortion? Me either. Islamic Tolerance Alert from Absurd Britannia: "'Christmas is evil': Muslim group launches poster campaign against festive period," from the Daily Mail, December 22 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

Fanatics from a banned Islamic hate group have launched a nationwide poster campaign denouncing Christmas as evil.

Organisers plan to put up thousands of placards around the UK claiming the season of goodwill is responsible for rape, teenage pregnancies, abortion, promiscuity, crime and paedophilia.

They hope the campaign will help 'destroy Christmas' in this country and lead to Britons converting to Islam instead....

The placards, which have already appeared in parts of London, feature an apparently festive scene with an image of the Star of Bethlehem over a Christmas tree.

But under a banner announcing 'the evils of Christmas' it features a message mocking the song the 12 Days of Christmas.

It reads: 'On the first day of Christmas my true love gave to me an STD (sexually transmitted disease).

'On the second day debt, on the third rape, the fourth teenage pregnancies and then there was abortion.'

According to the posters, Christmas is also to responsible for paganism, domestic violence, homelessness, vandalism, alcohol and drugs.

Another offence of Christmas, it proclaims, is 'claiming God has a son'.

The bottom of the poster declares: 'In Islam we are protected from all of these evils. We have marriage, family, honour, dignity, security, rights for man, woman and child.'...

Yes, dignity for women and non-Muslims, as long as they know their place.

Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer, contributing editor, and author of Volumes One and Two of "Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state."

This is archived at
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/uk-muslim-group- launches-christmas-is-evil-poster-campaign.html

To Go To Top

Posted by Jim Kouri, December 22, 2010.

Two years after the Pentagon revealed that many Guantanamo detainees rejoin terrorist missions after leaving the military prison, President Obama's National Intelligence Director confirms that one in four resume terrorist activities against the United States after being released.

Law enforcement officers are familiar with the concept that American prisons are training schools for criminals to learn "new skills" while incarcerated. For example, a mugger serving time in a state prison when released has probably acquired the knowledge and skill to become a burglar or a high-tech perpetrator of computer crime.

The same appears to hold true for enemy combatants detained at the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay. A large number of terrorists released from Gitmo appear to find their way back to the battlefields in the Global War on Terrorism only this time possessing more knowledge and maturity.

As the president fulfills his promise of returning America to the "moral high ground" by closing the detention facility at the U.S. Naval Base in Cuba, the number will only rise. Dozens of suspected terrorists have been freed from Guantanamo since Obama issued an executive order last year calling for a comprehensive "review" of all detainees and a total of 598 have been released so far, according to officials at Judicial Watch, a public-interest, watchdog group that investigates government and political corruption.

One hundred fifty are confirmed or suspected of "reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after transfer," according to a report issued by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to Congress.

At least 83 "remain at large" and if additional detainees are released, some will "reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities", says the DNI assessment.

Created by Congress in 2004 to force collaboration between the nation's spy agencies, the DNI claims to be the country's first line of defense, serving as the head of the intelligence community by integrating foreign, military and domestic intelligence that protects the U.S. from terrorist threats.

The newly released DNI assessment is hardly earth-shattering news. Nearly two years ago the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency disclosed a sharp rise in the number of Guantanamo detainees who rejoin terrorist missions after leaving U.S. custody.

Using data such as fingerprints, pictures and other reports the defense agency, which gathers foreign military intelligence, determined that the number of Middle Eastern terrorists who returned to "the fight" after being released nearly doubled in a short time.

Earlier this year, officials at Judicial Watch reported that at least a dozen Guantanamo inmates rejoined Al Qaeda in Yemen shortly after being released. A terrorist hotbed and popular Al Qaeda training ground, Yemen has been deemed a high security threat by the State Department and it's where the Christmas Day airline bomber proudly trained.

Jim Kouri, Vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. Jim writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement Journal, and others. Jim can be reached at jkouri@thenma.org.

This article is archived at
http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/ gitmo-university-guantanamo-detainees-rejoin-terror-groups

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Richard Swier, December 22, 2010.

I received the above invitation to attend a dinner in Tampa, Florida on December 30, 2010 hosted by Islamic Relief USA and featuring Hanan Turk. The objective of the event is to raise funds for the beleaguered "Palestinian people". The event is titled A Night For The Love Of Palestine.

Sounds wonderful doesn't it?

However, let's dig down a little deeper. What is Islamic Relief and its American subsidiary Islamic Relief USA?

According to Joe Kaufman, Chairman of Americans Against Hate:

"Islamic Relief (IR) was founded in Birmingham, England in 1984. Since then, it has opened up offices around the world; hence its UK headquarters designation, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW). Today, it has subsidiaries located in over 30 countries, including the United States [Islamic Relief USA]."

Joe Kaufman points out that, "according to the group's website, IR "seeks to promote sustainable economic and social development by working with local communities through relief and development programmes." As noble as that sounds, the group has had a checkered past. In 1999, it was reported that IR had collected and sent over $6 million to Chechen rebels with ties to Al-Qaeda. The same year, IR received $50,000 from Human Concern International (HCI), a "charity" that the U.S. Department of Treasury described as a "Bin Laden front." Shortly after the September 11th attacks, IR, itself, would be investigated by the Treasury Department, as a "possible source of funding for Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations."

In May of 2006, Israel labeled IR a Hamas front, after Israeli security services arrested the organization's Program Manager for Gaza, Ayaz Ali, for providing assistance to the terror group. According to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs (IMFA): "[Ali] admitted to being a member of the UK-based Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), which is suspected of supporting Hamas... [H]e worked to transfer funds and assistance to various Hamas institutions and organizations, including the Al Wafa and Al Tzalah associations, which have been outlawed in Israel. He also admitted that he worked in Jordan and cooperated with local Hamas operatives."

According to Americans Against Hate:

Islamic Relief USA (IR-USA) is located in Buena Park, California, though it has regional offices based in Totowa, New Jersey, Washington, D.C. and Plano, Texas. The corporate address of IR-USA is in Burbank, California. It was incorporated in October of 1993, and the Registered Agent for the incorporation is listed as Kazbek Soobzokov, the former attorney for terror operative Wagdy Ghoneim. Ghoneim, who has just last year called for violence against Jews, was deported from the United States and refused entry into Canada after it was discovered that he was a member of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

So what we have in fact is a "Night for the Love of Hamas" fund raiser in Tampa, Florida.

Remember, Tampa was the home of Sami al Arian, the self-confessed funder of the terrorist organization Hamas and co-founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in the United States; later renamed the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Tampa is a hot bed for Sharia compliant organizations such as the University of South Florida Muslim Students Association and CAIR Tampa

In effect, the Ummah in Tampa is hosting Islamic Relief USA — a terrorist linked fund raiser.

Contact Richard Swier at drswier@gmail.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 22, 2010.

This was written by David Lev and it appeared in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews). It is archived at


The people of Bat Yam, adjacent to Tel Aviv, are not racists, nor are they Arab haters, says Asher Vodka, one of the organizers of a protest this week that raised eyes around the country; they are just sick and tired of being pushed around in their home towns. "And this is not a Bat Yam issue," Vodka told Israel National News. "This is a problem all around the country."

The "problem," says Vodka, is one that nearly every Israeli is aware of, whether or not they wish to admit it to themselves and others: Call it the "over-confidence of Israel's Arab population that does what it wants, when it wants, regardless of how it affects anyone, especially Jews," says Vodka.

Vodka is not talking about the freedom Arabs have to enter Israeli cities and towns at will, to shop and do business — which, he says, they take full advantage of — but what they do with that freedom. It was for that reason, he says, that he and some friends organized a protest on Monday, which was attended by hundreds.

"There are times when we Jewish residents — especially the girls and women — dare not show our faces in certain parts of this city, because we know we are going to be attacked or accosted by Arabs," says Vodka. On weekends, and especially on Muslim holidays, Vodka says that Arabs, from Yafo (Jaffa) and from villages in the Triangle area and Negev, visit Bat Yam, which has invested a great deal in its tourism infrastructure in recent years — and basically "take over the town. Often they will riot, getting drunk — something they would not even consider doing in their own villages — and fight, either among themselves or with Jews. Not too long ago, there was a major riot in a local shopping center, courtesy of drunken Arabs."

Especially vulnerable are Jewish girls and women. "The Arabs accost them, trying to either seduce them, or in some cases forcing themselves on the girls. Some try to resist," says Vodka, "and for their trouble they find themselves getting beaten up; we just had a case like that last week." In other instances, Arabs will offer money and other "goodies" to girls as young as 14 and 15, trying to get them to follow them back to their villages — where they end up as virtual prisoners." Israeli activists in organizations like Yad L'achim estimate that there are as many as 15,000 Jewish girls living in Arab villages, Vodka says. "They come from places like Bat Yam."

Obviously, more education and action in the Jewish community is necessary in order to raise consciousness among Jews as to the dangers of getting involved in relationships with Arabs, Vodka says, "but they don't belong here with us. The imam of Jabel Mukaber openly instructed Muslims to do whatever was necessary to capture and defile Jewish girls — as part of their war against Jews. We can't just sit by and let them drive a wedge in our communities."

The war is being conducted not just on the streets and among Jewish girls — but in the real estate market as well. Israeli media portrayed Monday's protest as being aimed specifically at preventing Arabs from buying and renting homes in the community, and Vodka admits that this is a problem, especially in certain neighborhoods. "They come in with large amounts of money — money supplied to them by terrorist interests — and overpay, sometimes by 200 percent or 300 percent for houses, in order to push Jews out," he says. But far worse is the virtual reign of terror imposed on Jewish residents by "visiting" Arabs, who have made life in Bat Yam hellish.

And it's not just Bat Yam. "This is a national problem, and everyone knows it. Politicians criticize and condemn, but they all know that something must be done." That includes the mayor of Bat Yam, Shlomi Lahayani. "He, like everyone else, knows that the king has no clothes, but is deathly afraid of the media."

Vodka and his friends, however, are not. "We had hundreds of people at a protest on Monday here in Bat Yam, but we want to expand this to other cities." Vodka, along with some friends, organized the protest now, "because we felt the time was right, and we plan on making this into a national movement. We want to prevent Bat Yam from turning into a Yafo or Akko [near Haifa], where in some neighborhoods Jews walk the streets at their own risk. And we want to turn back the tide, and reclaim our homeland, wherever we can."

Contact Laura by email at LEL817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, December 22, 2010.

Michael B. Mukasey, Former US Attorney General, wrote this letter to President Obama.


December 21, 2010

The Hon. Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500-0001

Dear Mr. President:

I write to ask that you consider commuting the sentence of Jonathan Pollard, and releasing him after he has served more than 25 year of a life term imposed following his plea of guilty to one count of disclosing classified information.

You have received, and no doubt will receive, letters from others, seeking the same result. My purpose here is not simply to add one more letter to the stack, or simply to invoke my own public service in aid of this request. Rather, it is to focus attention on a few of the may letters you have already received from people knowledgeable of the underlying facts and to add the perspective of a former district judge and a former Attorney General.

Particular weight should be attached to the views of former CIA director James Woolsey and former chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee Dennis DeConcini, who are familiar with the information Pollard disclosed and the circumstances of its disclosure, and who have expressed firmly their belief that his sentence should be commuted. Moreover, the highly unusual submission to the sentencing court of affidavits from Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, seeking a heavier sentence than requested by the prosecutors despite Pollard's guilty plea and cooperation, as discussed in the submission by former Assistant Secretary of Defense Lawrence Korb, is deeply disturbing.

Pollard disclosed the information in question to an ally, and has not been alleged by anyone to have had any motive to harm the United States. In these circumstances, a life sentence can only be considered utterly disproportionate to the crime. I say that reluctantly because the district judge in the case no doubt did his level best with what was put before him. But I had occasion myself to consider life sentences, and indeed to impose them. In more than 18 years on the bench, I imposed such sentences on four defendants. Two of them committed and ordered multiple murders. Often under circumstances of great cruelty. The other two were convicted in a terrorism prosecution, one having committed murder with his own hand and plotted further killing, the other having provided the theological justification that he knew would be, and in fact was, taken as the order by others to commit multiple murders. Pollard's offense does not nearly approach any of those.

In addition, during the time I served as Attorney General, I had the obligation to review every request by the government to impose a capital sentence, and to review as well numerous pleas to impose a capital sentence, and to review as well numerous plea bargains in which a lesser penalty, whether a term of years or life, was agreed to. Again, Pollard's offense is in no way comparable to any of those cases.

Even considering that assigning particular periods of confinement to human behavior has inherently arbitrary aspects, Pollard has suffered confinement well beyond the severity of what he did. The Constitution places in your hands the power to commute his sentence; I believe that doing so would be a wise and proper exercise of that power.

Yours sincerely,
Michael B. Mukasey New York, NY 10022

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-7, December 22, 2010.

This was written by Chana Ya'ar and appeared today in Arutz-7,


MK Yaakov "Ketzaleh" Katz (National Union) is warning northern Tel Aviv residents to unite with the rest of the city in fighting an influx of illegal immigrants, or face a flood.

Katz argued Wednesday that wealthy residents of northern Tel Aviv cannot abandon the city's impoverished southern neighborhoods in the fight against the influx of illegal immigrants without the flood eventually reaching the north as well.

"Soon thousands will be protesting in central Tel Aviv and in a year or two thousands will be protesting in the north, as many of them carry AIDS and tuberculosis," he said. Katz was referring to Tuesday's rally against illegal immigrants living in southern Tel Aviv.

"The silence of the residents in northern Tel Aviv is like the orchestra playing on the deck of the Titanic while its stern is sinking," Katz commented.

High Percentage of Migrants are HIV Carriers

According to a new report released this week by the Health Ministry, 17 percent of HIV carriers in Israel are illegal immigrants.

In addition, 13 percent of those with tuberculosis, are migrants, according to the report.

The ministry said it is reportedly examining ways to develop a network in which to offer medical services to the illegal immigrants.

To Go To Top

Posted by Robin Ticker, December 22, 2010.


Att: Linda Thielka
Tel: 206-684-1151.

Re: The decision of the King County Metro to advertise large banners with "Israeli War Crimes, Your Tax Dollars at Work" on its buses.

This is a Demonization campaign of Israel by running this ad on the eve of the second anniversary of Operation Cast Lead when Israel responded to thousands of missiles fired from Gaza.


Clearly we are dealing with Palestinian War Crimes and NOT Israel War Crimes.

Many Congresspeople agree! Counter these banners with banners that expose the truth!.

Please visit: Rethinking Palestinian Aid

Now that the issues is raised, it is an excellent opportunity to seriously examine the hundreds of millions of dollars of American Tax money going to support terrorism. Please Visit...

We are the merchants of death.


Our President and Arafat's fragrant keffiyeh


* The PA does not recognize Israel's right to exist.
* They glorify Jihad and suicide bombs in their education.
* They join with Hamas and hide behind ambulances and school buildings and UN buildings to launch rockets against Israeli civilians, clearly War Crimes.
* Israel responds as any Sovereign Nation should in self defense.

Clearly it is Palestinian War Crimes we are talking about! Israel puts its money into building homes, settling the Land,, farming, technology and medicine. They have won more Nobel prices in all fields than all the Arab Nations combined. They are the first to send aid for any international disaster since they really care about the world. This is the facts and truth.

The Palestinians claim Jewish Land even though they have no justified claim based on the Bible, history, archeology and International Law. All their money is used for warfare against Israel and to support terror and to teach their children the same.


Robin Ticker

Contact Robin Ticker at faigerayzel@gmail.com

This will be posted on Shemittahrediscovered.blogspot.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, December 22, 2010.

Will it work? It depends on President Obama.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has made a decision to issue a formal, public and official request for the release of Jonathan Pollard, as I understand it, immediately before Christmas. This decision was made at the behest of Pollard himself, who sent a message via his wife Esther, and after Netanyahu had consulted with advisors and US administration officials.

"I intend to continue acting with determination for Pollard's release, both because of the State of Israel's moral obligation to him and so that he might live with his family and restore himself to health after his prolonged incarceration," he said.


Two days ago, Lawrence Korb, who was assistant to Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger and was on the inside during the time Pollard was arrested, came to the Knesset. He urged a more activist stance on behalf of Pollard, whom he believes was treated unfairly:

"Jonathan Pollard made a deal with the prosecutors: they agreed if he cooperates, which he did, he would not get life in prison," Korb said. "He did cooperate, but he got life in prison and the question really is why?"

Korb says that at the time of Pollard's sentencing, Weinberger gave a "victim impact statement" suggesting that information Pollard had passed ended up in the hands of the Soviet Union — this, during the Cold War, when American agents had been compromised. Later, it turned out that information Pollard had passed had nothing to do with the death of American agents.

"We found out later that the secretary's statement was really exaggerated, and he himself, before he died in 2004, said in retrospect the Pollard affair was a comparatively minor matter, but at the time we did not know it," Korb said.


See Caroline Glick on this issue here:

"Pollard's unfair, unjustified and discriminatory sentence and treatment are a dismal symbol of Jewish vulnerability. His personal suffering is inhumane, real and unrelenting. He needs us to stand up for him. "And so we must. And so we will. The time has come, against all odds to shout that Pollard must be freed. Now".


Pollard — who has been in prison for 25 years and has spent much of this time in solitary confinement — is in ill health. He will be released only if there is a presidential pardon. Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said very recently that "I am not aware... that that's something that the president is looking at doing."


Things have gotten a lot hotter in Gaza and it's now being asked whether we're going to see Operation Cast Lead II.

As I am reading from multiple sources, the increase in attacks emanating from Gaza is the result of unrest among the troops, both members of Hamas and other terrorist organizations, who are eager for action. Hamas, which controls the situation, is permitting limited attacks along the Israeli border with Gaza, but not deep into Israel. And it is Hamas military commander Ahmed Jabari who is in charge on this.

Yesterday saw the most intensive Israeli aerial involvement in Gaza since Cast Lead. Eight targets — including arms warehouses, smuggling tunnels and tunnels being dug towards Israel — were hit in response to a mortar attack. In addition, a Hamas training camp was hit in response to a Kassam rocket that landed near a kindergarten outside of Ashkelon — parents were dropping off their children when it landed, and a 16-year old girl was injured.


I confess: Every time I read that we have hit smuggling tunnels in response to a particular attack, I am left at a loss to understand why we don't hit those tunnels, since we know where they are, even if there hasn't been an attack.


While Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi calls the situation "fragile and explosive," the IDF is predicting that the violence will subside. Hamas, you see, is not ready to take us on again yet, as they are still rebuilding their tunnels and acquiring additional sophisticated weaponry.

These weapons now include long-range rockets such as the Iranian Fajr-5. Ashkenazi has revealed that a Russian-made advanced anti-tank missile, the Kornet, penetrated the hull of an Israeli Merkava tank two weeks ago. As a result of this, Battalion 9 of the 401st Armored Brigade is now deployed along the Gaza border because it deploys an anti-tank missile defense system.


Meanwhile, and predictably, PA president Abbas has said that "Israeli aggression" in Gaza threatens the "peace process."

While chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat expressed "deep concern and fear" regarding what's happening along the border between Israel and Gaza. "Deep concern and fear"? How heartfelt is the PLO concern for what happens to Hamas.

Charged Erekat: Israel has an interest in perpetuating divisions within the Palestinian people.

It's all a bit of PR nonsense. Never mind that it's not clear how our defending ourselves again terrorists at our border with Gaza affects the relationship between Hamas and Fatah. What I believe is at base here is a recent leak that said that the PA had asked Israel to attack in Gaza before the beginning of Cast Lead — hope being that Israel would take out Hamas and turn over Gaza to the PA. Now the PA has issued vociferous denials.


I am sooo tired of analyses of the "peace process." In spite of the several post-mortem statements that have been delivered to date, the issue simply will not go away.

We have, for example, Aaron David Miller, who served as an advisor on negotiations to previous administrations and predicts that Obama is headed towards "bridging proposals." Obama, he says, "believes that through the force of his personality he can act as a transforming agent." If this is true, in the face of everything that has occurred to date, Obama is even more narcisstic and removed from reality than is broadly thought.

Warns Miller, "before he commits" Obama must ask himself if "the two leaders [are] willing, able, and ready to make the big decisions on the...big...issues."

The fact that Miller can pose this with apparent seriousness is unreal. At the end of the day, he knows: "In failing [to get an answer to this question], he will surely fail...And far from being the architect of a negotiated two-state solution, Obama will end up being the American president whose administration presided over its demise."



"The Good News Corner"

A ministerial committee has approved 91 million shekels to renovate 16 archeological and heritage sites, as part of the National Heritage Plan. One of these is the Herodian National Park in the Gush Etzion region (Judea) and one is at Rechavam's Arches, in the Golan Heights, where there are the ruins of a Sixth Century CE synagogue. Prepare for the Arab protests.


In case I do not write again in the next two days, I express wishes now for a Merry Christmas to my Christian readers.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, December 22, 2010.

This is archived at


Contrary to the repeated statements by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to foreign leaders that the PA recognizes Israel, the PA internally in Arabic continues to deny Israel's existence and to present a world without Israel. The PA transmits the message to its people that it does not recognize Israel's existence, describing all Israeli land, cities and regions as "Palestinian." Palestinian TV is one tool among many used by the PA to disseminate this message. See video.

In three recent programs on PA TV, which is owned by the PA and operated under the auspices of Mahmoud Abbas's office, Palestinians were presented with a world without Israel, which is the most explicit non-recognition:

  1. The Israeli city of Tiberias was said to be "in northern Palestine, close to the Palestinian-Jordanian-Syrian border." — "Palestine" could not share a border with Syria unless Israel did not exist. Tiberias is in northern Israel and not "northern Palestine."

  2. The coast of "Palestine" was said in an educational program to be 224 km. long, reaching Rosh Hanikra in northern Israel. — The coast of "Palestine" could not be 224 km. long unless there were no Israel, since the coast of the Gaza Strip is only 40 km. long.

  3. "Palestine is big — 27,000 sq. km.," said PA TV host. — The area of "Palestine" could not be 27,000 sq. km. unless Israel were to disappear, since the West Bank and Gaza together are only about 6,000 sq. km.


The following are the transcripts and context of the statements defining Israel as "Palestine": See video.

1. Host: "In Palestine there are very beautiful historical sites and cultural and natural sites... The city of Tiberias is one such area, where history, nature and water come together."

Reporter: "The city of Tiberias is in northern Palestine, close to the Palestinian-Jordanian-Syrian border." Click to view [PA TV (Fatah), Nov. 23, 2010]

2. Question on PA TV quiz showThe Stars for university students: "The length of Palestine's coast, along the Mediterranean Sea from Rosh Hanikra to Rafah is:

1. 152 km.
2. 224 km.
3. 375 km."

Representative from Bethlehem University answers: "224 km."
[His answer is confirmed correct.]

Note: Rosh Hanikra is Israel's most northern coastal point, and the coast of "Palestine" would be 224 km. long only if Israel did not exist. [PA TV (Fatah), Nov. 26, 2010]

3. Amal Daraghmeh, chairman of the committee planning the "Palestine Conference for Public Relations, Communications and Media" said on PA TV that he hopes to include as many Palestinians as possible in the conference. The PA TV host responded: "Palestine is big — 27,000 sq. km." [PA TV (Fatah), Nov. 29, 2010]

Itamar Marcus, Director of Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il), was Israeli representative to the Tri-Lateral Anti Incitement Committee established under the Wye accords, and has written reports on Palestinian Authority, Syrian and Jordanian schoolbooks.

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, December 22, 2010.

A U.S. cable leaked on Monday said Israel and President Mahmoud Abbas' forces worked closely together against Hamas as it took over Gaza in 2007. The June 13, 2007, cable quoted Yuval Diskin, the head of the Israel Security Agency, as saying the PA security apparatus shares with Israel "almost all the intelligence that it collects." The cable was sent from the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv as Hamas forces were routing Abbas' security forces to take over Gaza.

Diskin called Abbas' forces "desperate, disorganized, and demoralized." "They ask us to attack Hamas. This is a new development. We have never seen this before. They are desperate." (Reuters)

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by AFDI, December 22, 2010.

Now Metro Considers Changing Policy Over Anti-Israeli Bus Ads by Pamela Geller from the Atlas Shrugs website


I put the finishing touches on the two ads AFDI will be running in Seattle to counter the nazi-style propaganda designed to incite violence and hatred towards the Jewish people.

Here are the two ads that have been submitted to Titan — Seattle transit.



As for the Jewish blood libel being sponsored by the notorious antisemite Ed Mast, Seattle Mass Transit is having second thoughts.

"It's not clear if the ad campaign will run as scheduled. It was supposed to roll out on Dec. 27. Metro is scrambling to re-assess its advertising policies before next week."

If they ran that poison, they will run the truth.

Metro considers changing policy over anti-Israeli bus ads NWCN.com

SEATTLE — Calls and emails continue to flood into King County as Metro deals with a political firestorm over its bus billboard policy.

An anti-Israeli ad campaign is scheduled to appear on buses starting Dec. 27. A group called the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign is behind the ads. It's the two-year anniversary of Israeli military action in Gaza, aimed at stopping rocket attacks on Israeli citizens.

Metro is considering changing its ad policies for non-commercial groups, but says it could be costly and tricky. But if they ban the anti-Israel ads, they might have to ban ads for causes that have public appeal, such as the Boys and Girls Club, Puget Sound Blood Center and United Way.

The American Civil Liberties Unions is urging Metro to run the ads, saying they may offend people but they should be protected under the First Amendment.

News of the ads has led to tighter security at the Jewish Federation in downtown Seattle. Four years ago, a mentally ill man claiming to be angry at Israel broke into the building, shot and killed a woman and shot five others. The fear is an ad campaign could fuel more violence.

"We're always on a heightened sense of awareness in the Jewish community and this heightens it," said Richard Fruchter with the Jewish Federation.

"Mentally ill man?" He was a Muslim slaughtering Jews. It was jihad. Here's what was presented in the jihadi's prosecution:

Prosecutors opened their case against a man accused of opening fire on a Jewish Federation office by playing a tape of the gunman who called 911 as he held a pregnant woman hostage at gunpoint. "I have this gun pointed at her head," said the man, who identified himself as Naveed Haq. Haq told the person handling the call that "I just want to get us out of Iraq," and that he was upset by U.S. policies that left Muslims "repressed." Haq, 32, has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity in the shooting rampage that killed one woman and injured five other women at the downtown office of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle on July 28, 2006. In her opening statement Monday, King County Deputy Prosecutor Erin Ehlert told jurors that Haq carefully planned the attack, making four trips to gun shops and using the Internet to map the route from the Tri-Cities to Seattle. Haq is charged with murder, attempted murder and other crimes. Haq railed against the Iraq war and Israel during the call, telling a woman on the other end of the line that "Muslims are very upset about you sending bombs to Israel. And that we're very upset that you stay in Iraq, and that you follow foreign policies where we are repressed."

SEATTLE — King County Councilman Peter von Reichbauer is calling for a review of proposed advertising on Metro buses that blasts Israel and the U.S., claiming U.S. tax dollars support war crimes.

Von Reichbauer says the ads could incite violence.

"I know hate when I see it," he said. "A number of people in King County see hate in this advertisement."

E-mails have been pouring into von Reichbauer's office since KING 5 broke the story of the planned ad campaign. He's asked Metro to reconsider.

Although Metro attorneys say the ads are covered by the First Amendment, they are now reviewing their policy on non-commercial advertising.

"We don't need to see a public transportation system be a medium for a message of hate," said von Reichbauer.

It's not clear if the ad campaign will run as scheduled. It was supposed to roll out on Dec. 27. Metro is scrambling to re-assess its advertising policies before next week.

Even the murderous Muslim Hamas leader admitted that Israel killed mostly terrorists in Gaza.

Emotions Heat Up Over Bus Ads in Seattle

anti-Israel ad in Seattle

Advertisements to be displayed on King County Metro Transit buses are generating controversy a week before being displayed.

The Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign has purchased ads to be displayed on 12 buses beginning December 27 that feature the slogan, "Israeli War Crimes: Your Tax Dollars at Work."

The Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), a program of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), has declared that it will run counter-ads that read, "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Islamic jihad." The group's executive director, Pamela Geller, complained that SIOA is not getting the same price break as the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign and issued a statement,

According to Seattle's KING 5 News, Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign paid $1,794 to run the ads. However, King County Metro Transit would not offer the same price to AFDI/SIOA Executive Director Pamela Geller. "I asked for the same deal as the Jew-haters received, but was told that the price in the article was 'misquoted.' So of course they are charging me more." SIOA was quoted a price of $2,760 for its ad.

The ads have generated so much controversy that the King County Metro Transit is thinking about changing its advertising policies for non-commercial groups.

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, December 22, 2010.

This comes from the Before it's News website. It was written by Alan Strong of Studio City, CA. It was also posted on the Huffington Riposte, which offers a conservative ripost to the extreme left of the Huffington Report.


Snopes receives funding from an undisclosed source. [B]The source is undisclosed because Snopes refuses to disclose that source. The Democratic Alliance, a funding channel for uber-Leftist (Marxist) Billionaires (George Soros etc.), direct funds to an "Internet Propaganda Arm" pushing these views.[/B] The Democratic Alliance has been reported to instruct Fundees to not disclose their funding source.

For the past few years www.snopes.com has positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell-all final word' on any comment, claim and email. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com. It is run by a husband and wife team — that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby. David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research.

The reason for the questions — or skepticisms — is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the Internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com. In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place. I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me) thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers — and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg that no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm.

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the Internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a shock? So, I say this now to everyone who goes to snopes.com to get what they think to be the bottom line fact 'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus,you can always search a subject and do the research yourself.

I have found this to be true also! Many videos of Obama I tried to verify on Snopes and they said they were False. Then they gave their liberal slant! I have suspected some problems with snopes for some time now, but I have only caught them in half-truths. If there is any subjectivity they do an immediate full left rudder.

I have recently discovered that Snopes.com is owned by a flaming liberal and this man is in the tank for Obama. There are many things they have listed on their site as a hoax and yet you can go to You tube yourself and find the video of Obama actually saying these things. So you see, you cannot and should not trust Snopes.com, ever for anything that remotely resembles truth! I don't even trust them to tell me if email chains are hoaxes anymore.

A few conservative speakers on MySpace told me aboutSnopes.com. A few months ago and I took it upon myself to do a little research to find out if it was true. Well, I found out for myself that it is true. Anyway just FYI please don't use Snopes.com anymore for fact checking and make your friends aware of their political leanings as well. Many people still thinkSnopes.com is neutral and they can be trusted as factual. We need to make sure everyone is aware that that is a hoax in itself.

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 22, 2010.

This was written by Dr. Avi Perry and it appeared in Arutz-7


The December 20 issue of Time Magazine features an article, "Palestinian Youth, Growing the next generation of Israel's adversaries," by Karl Vick, in which he contends that the separation wall, erected by Israel to separate Israel and the Palestinian Authority, is the reason for the separation of the mind, for the absence of familiarity. It is the rationale and the basis, he claims, "there is little chance for the two peoples, one day living as neighbors in peace."


"It's the wall," he says, rather than the constant brainwashing of the Palestinian youth by their leaders and their schoolteachers.

"It's the wall," not the rise of political Islam with its anti-Semitic venom.

"It's the wall, which isolates the Palestinians, taking them farther away from the Mediterranean coast, and from orientation to the West," not their seventh century desert Jihad culture and teaching, portraying America and Israel as the latest reincarnation of the devil. Oh, no. Blame it on the wall.

Let's examine the true nature of the separation wall.

It could be seen by the Arabs as the demarcation between the state they are striving for and the despised Jews and their "Zionist entity," an observation which caused rightist opposition to its construction in Israel.

It makes it difficult for those who wish to cross illegally from one side to the other. And in Israel's case, it prevents terrorists and suicide bombers from crossing into Israeli towns and neighborhoods, killing innocent women and children in the killers' quest for a fake promise of paradise.

It does not prevent Palestinians from crossing legally into Israel, as thousands of them do on a daily basis, in quest of medical care in Israeli hospitals.

It does not prevent Arab children from learning the truth about Israel and Israelis in PA schools.

It does not prevent PA residents from appreciating and relating to Western culture due to their inability to reach the Mediterranean — Islam pulls it off for them.

The real problem is that when Palestinians see the wall, they see an end to their dream of an expanded Palestine stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, where Jews are no longer the masters of that narrow stretch of land they call Israel and perhaps without any Jews at all.

The Palestinians do not like the wall because it formalizes the fact that Israel is not part of Palestine; it is a different country ruled by different people. The wall does not enclose the Palestinians in a prisonlike state unless they make their own towns and villages feel like prison.

In the fifties and sixties, when I grew up in Israel, the country was young, isolated and tiny. I did not hate America, I loved and admired it, even though I had never been outside the boundaries of my petite world. I knew what Europe was like, even though I had never visited Paris, London or Zurich. I read books, saw pictures, watched movies. I did not feel isolated like those PA Arabs who could benefit from the Internet as well, only if they truly wanted to learn about Israel and its people.

Time Magazine had it wrong again. Karl Vick offered a distorted picture of the root-cause dominating the Palestinian "misunderstanding" of what Israel is.

It's not the separation wall, Karl. It is the persistent brainwashing; it's the Palestinian's culture of hate and hubris. It's the Palestinian's unwillingness to accept Israel for what it is — a Jewish state.

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, December 22, 2010.

Country's condemnation of Israeli intelligence agents in 2004 seen as attempt to increase exports to Arab states. This below was written by Richard Adams and it appeared yesterday in the Guardian.co.uk


Lamb is one of New Zealand's biggest exports. (Getty)

US diplomats disparaged New Zealand's reaction to a suspected Israeli spy ring as a "flap" and accused New Zealand's government of grandstanding in order to sell more lamb to Arab countries, according to leaked cables.

The arrest and conviction in 2004 of two Israeli citizens, who were caught using the identity of a cerebral palsy sufferer to apply for a New Zealand passport, caused a serious rift between New Zealand and Israel, with allegations that the two men and others involved were Mossad agents.

"The New Zealand government views the act carried out by the Israeli intelligence agents as not only utterly unacceptable but also a breach of New Zealand sovereignty and international law," New Zealand's then-prime minister, Helen Clark, said after the arrests.

But US officials in Wellington told their colleagues in Washington that New Zealand had "little to lose" from the breakdown in diplomatic relations with Israel and was instead merely trying to bolster its exports to Arab states.

A confidential cable written in July 2004, after New Zealand imposed high-level diplomatic sanctions against Israel, comments: "The GoNZ [government of New Zealand] has little to lose by such stringent action, with limited contact and trade with Israel, and possibly something to gain in the Arab world, as the GoNZ is establishing an embassy in Egypt and actively pursuing trade with Arab states."

A cable two days later was even more pointed, saying: "Its overly strong reaction to Israel over this issue suggests the GNZ sees this flap as an opportunity to bolster its credibility with the Arab community, and by doing so, perhaps, help NZ lamb and other products gain greater access to a larger and more lucrative market."

The two Israelis were sentenced to six months in prison and ordered to pay a fine of $NZ50,000 (£24,000) to the Cerebral Palsy Society of New Zealand because the victim of the attempted identity theft was a tetraplegic, wheelchair-bound cerebral palsy sufferer in residential care.

Both men pleaded guilty but denied working for Mossad. The pair were released after serving just two months behind bars and deported in October 2004. Israel made a formal apology for what an Israeli government statement refered to as "the incident with the Mossad," and normal diplomatic relations were restored by late 2005.

To US diplomats, though, "New Zealand's public reaction is its strongest diplomatic retaliation in 20 years — since French spies bombed the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbor in 1985. Clark's limitations on diplomatic contact go further than the GoNZ reaction in 1985, however, and it was reported that she toughened the language of her response from that put forward by MFAT [New Zealand's ministry of foreign affairs and trade]."

Ironically, a 2003 US embassy cable from Wellington alleged that New Zealand agreed to deploy troops to Iraq in order to safeguard lucrative contracts for New Zealand diary exporters, a claim described by Clark — currently the head of the UN Development Programme — as "rubbish".

The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard Swier, December 22, 2010.

This was written by Nidra Poller, an American writer and translator who has lived in Paris since 1972. She has contributed to English-language publications such as The Wall Street Journal, National Review, FrontPage Magazine, and The New York Sun.


Let's hear that again: violent words lead to violent acts. And the Islamization of our society is marked, precisely, by an intolerable level of violence. And this violence is fomented by the hatred of Others inscribed in Islam. The violent words preached in far too many mosques explain why Europeans are becoming "intolerant" of the craze for mosque construction. Oskar Freysinger, initiator of the Swiss minaret ban referendum, was greeted, according to the AFP release, like a hero.

Aounit was followed, on France Culture, by a police official who explained that the pork and wine street party planned for the Goutte d'Or neighborhood on June 18thwas banned because it was likely to disturb the peace. On the contrary, he said, the anti-Islamization Congress is held indoors. It is discreet. There was no big poster campaign. The document announcing the event is rather moderate. So authorities decided to respect the right of assembly and free expression.

Isn't that the point? The other big Islamic issue this week is Muslim street prayers. Maxime Lépante of Riposte Laïque, major organizer of today's Congress, has been posting videos of the prayers all year. They finally came to the attention of the general public when Marine LePen, daughter of the retiring president of the Front National, compared them to an "occupation" of our territory. (I'm covering this story for Family Security Matters here http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.8167/pub_detail.asp). A pork and wine street party in a [Muslim?] neighborhood of Paris would be offensive, but hundreds of prostrate Muslims praying in the streets of a [French?] neighborhood of Paris is not? Pork and wine are provocative but "allahu akhbar" isn't?

For a variety of practical reasons I was not able to attend the anti-Islamization meeting... which is why I am here to inform you now, as the participants file out into a snowstorm. I will have inside information in the coming days. My attempts to follow the debates online were stumped but I see from readers' comments on newspaper websites that many people were successful. I'm told that there were five thousand visits to the site.

And we can be proud that our friend Tom Trento (Florida Security Council) was quoted in the AFP release: "All the speakers focused on the 'dangers' of Islam. An American militant, Tom Trento, declared — according to the French translation of his speech projected on screen, that 'political Islam' is a greater danger than Hitler was."

Speaking of "political Islam," the UOIF is listed among the organizations that took part in today's protest against the "Assises." The UOIF is known to be a Muslim Brotherhood front.

We don't intend to wait for proof that these guys are worse than Hitler!

Contact Richard Swier at drswier@gmail.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, December 22, 2010.

As we go towards winter, the unpicked grapes age


Writing this blog forces me to stop and think seriously about what motivates my passion for photography. Often, my mood of the day affects how I interpret what I see in the world around me. Late fall is nature's cranky mood, what with the weather turning cold and everything in a state of slow, inevitable decay. So what better subject to reflect that feeling than a cluster of rotting grapes, once healthy and robust yet now, for some unknown reason, left clinging to the vine, neglected.

At this stage, the grapes are halfway to becoming raisins. They have lost their moisture and translucence, so finding a point of view with soft, afternoon backlighting is no longer an option. I made a 360-degree circuit around the vine to find the next-best choice for light, and chose this side-lit angle which gives a bit of sculpting to the droopy fruit. I used a macro lens to bring the subject close up and emphasize the textures.

Despite nature's apparent weariness as it slides into winter, I find spending time outdoors is always rewarding and invigorating, no matter what pictures I bring home.

TECHNICAL DATA: Nikon D-700, 28-105mm macro zoom at 105mm, f8 at 1/60 sec., ISO 320.

Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website:
http://www.goldenlightimages.com. Reproductions of his work as cards, calenders and posters may be purchased at

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, December 22, 2010.

Mr. O'Reilly,

Last night you made the statement that we have no hard evidence that there is such a thing as "Stealth Jihad" in the United States, wherein Islam is trying to indoctrinate us all to believe their culture is morally equivalent to our own in its treatment of men, women. minorities, other religions, etc. That statement is absolutely false. You are dangerously misinforming your audience and the attractive blond lady on the program vs. Alan Colmes was right. You evidently are not aware of terrorist investigator Steve Emerson's work and his video, "Jihad in America" from 1994, wherein he presents mountains of "hard evidence" that "Stealth Jihad" has been going on for years in this country. since at least 1971. The FBI and CIA are finally finding active islamic chapters promoting these ideas all over the US. Mr. Emerson has a second video coming out in a couple of months called, "The Grand Deception — Jihad II", which addresses Stealth Jihad in great depth citing thousands of "hard facts." Please watch it and continue to wake up America and refute completely the misinformation of that awful guy, Colmes who is either stupid, a dedicated liar, a paid propagandist or all three. He is certainly one of your "pinheads."

Jerome S. Kaufman
Greenacres, FL

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Phyllis Chesler, December 22, 2010.

Afshan Azad, 22, the high-profile Harry Potter actress remains in hiding after refusing to appear in a London court. Ms. Azad had been seeing a non-Muslim man, a Hindu. Her family, specifically her father, Abul Azad, 53, and her brother Ashraf, 28, called her a "prostitute" and tried to force her into an arranged marriage with a Muslim man. Her brother also beat and her father threatened to kill her in May of this year. She escaped her family home and has been in hiding ever since. According to the Telegraph, she refused to testify against her family, saying that doing so would endanger her further. Apparently the British police tried but failed to persuade Ms. Azad to testify.

Ms. Azad's refusal to appear makes sense to me. She is already in great danger for having associated with a non-Muslim man. Add to that the public and shameful exposure of her family in this matter. Having her male relatives jailed would mean a torturous death sentence.

I have published two studies about honor killing. The first appeared in 2009 in Middle East Quarterly; the second appeared there as well in 2010. In the most recent publication, I studied 230 victims who were honor-murdered on five continents over a twenty year period in 172 separate incidents. (More than one person was murdered in some of the incidents). As these studies have shown, immigrants to the West, including and especially immigrants from South Asia (Ms. Azad is of Bangladeshi descent), continue to perpetrate honor killings in the West.

The level of violence towards girls and women in South Asia can be barbarous and quite unbelievable.

Horrific vigilante mob violence is routinely perpetrated against innocent individuals in Pakistan. Recently, the Pakistani "Taliban" have been known to throw acid into the faces of schoolgirls, disfiguring them for life, if they were seen as improperly veiled or trying to attend grade school.

In 1998, Zahida Perveen's husband, in a fit of rage, bound her hand and foot and then, using a razor and a knife, proceeded to cut out her eyes and slice off her ears and nose. Zahida's crime? Her husband suspected that she was having an affair with a brother-in-law. At the time, Zahida was three months pregnant.

In 2004, a tribal council in Pakistan in the Punjab ordered that a young girl be publicly gang-raped then paraded naked through her village — a punishment for an alleged crime committed by her brother. This case became known worldwide when the girl not only did not kill herself but indeed pressed charges.

Girls in South Asia and elsewhere are routinely killed for far less than choosing their own husbands. They are murdered if a false rumor has been spread or if they are seen even talking to a male non-relative. There are few police officers, few judges, few social workers, few lawyers who would be able or willing to protect Ms. Azad in South East Asia from her family's permanent desire to kill her and so to "cleanse their own shame." Honor killings take place both among rural, indigent and illiterate South Asian families — and among highly educated, literate, professional, and wealthy South Asian families too.

In 2009, I received an extraordinary report which documented honor killings in Pakistan. (Although Ms. Azad's family is from Bangladesh, the country was actually part of Pakistan until 1971, and its culture is very similar to Pakistan's.) My Pakistani informant, of the SW Community Development Department, in Sind, Pakistan, sent me an unpublished paper in which he describes and explains Ms. Azad's family's culture very carefully:

Phyllis Chesler is Emerita Professor of Psychology and the author of 14 books including "The New Anti-Semitism" and "Woman's Inhumanity to Woman." She has written extensively about Islamic gender apartheid and may be reached through her website at www.phyllis-chesler.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, December 21, 2010.

No, no no~

The permanent borders for Israel were set during the Twenties per the San Remo Resolution. To deny this is to abrogate settled international law with unsettling results rippling throughout Europe. Israel owns all land between the ocean and the sea — that's why that bloody Egyptian terrorist Yasser Arafat schemed so hard to steal it. That's why Yasser befriended the weakest and most malleable of all Jews: Shimon Peres. While Yasser was industriously attacking Jewish women and children, Peres, a "Kissinger-jew" if there ever was one, clung to this little bloody runt and declared Yasser his "dearest friend in peace." Now Peres hopes people will dismiss his proclamation as "sarcasm". But there was no sarcasm — Peres and Yasser had cut a deal which they hoped to fulfill via their Cayman Island entities. Peres was outed by World Net Daily, and he made his deal disappear pronto.

You people made a fatal mistake when you let Peres get away with this and now you're paying a dear price for his avarice.

See: "A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel — The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law. Prof. Howard Grief. Available at www.amazon.com. We read it, why haven't you?

Why are Jews so ignorant of their own rights and advantages? How is it that Jews can be made to forget? Why are some Jews so readily bullied into stupidity? Bribed? Promises of weaponry in exchange for cheating Israeli citizens? Promises of lavish gifts and refuge similar to what the US gave to Gorbachev? (Of course they're not called pay-offs or bribes. But they attain the same or similar results.) We remind you people what Saudi "prince" Bandar, bragged: "If the reputation builds that the Saudis take care of their friends when they leave office, you'd be surprised how much better friends you have who are just coming into office."
— Prince Bandar ibn Sultan, Ambasador of Saudi Arabia to the United States.

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Shamrak, December 21, 2010.

Human Rights Groups a PA Terror Weapon by Gil Ronen

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said that, "Human rights organizations have become a tool of the Palestinian Authority for diplomatic warfare against Israel" and "paddles of terror, which tries, through these groups, to undermine Israel's right as a democratic country, to defend itself."

Ayalon added, "Governments which fund these organizations are responsible for strengthening terror and reinforcing the Palestinians' false hope of establishing a state without negotiations."

Noting observance of Human Rights Day, Ayalon called on human rights groups and the international community not to forget whose rights are trampled by Hamas (and Islamic expansionism to the West, conducted by organisations like Al Quida), and to advance the release of abducted soldier Gilad Shalit.

Ayalon stated that in view of the Palestinian Authority's consistent refusal to come to the negotiation table, he expects that during 2011 the PA will continue attempts to assault Israel's legitimacy. To this end, it will use tactics like lawfare and "other obstructive unilateral steps," and the global human rights agenda "will once again be hijacked and abused for a narrow political agenda."

NOTE: Lawfare has been described as a strategy of using or misusing law as a substitute for traditional means to achieve military or political objectives.

Subject of Slavery and anti-Jewish Propaganda

In Africa, Arab merchants were selling seventy thousand slaves a year at the Zanzibar slave market. "The Arabs," says Hoffer, "looted ivory, grain and cattle, made slaves of the able-bodied natives, burned villages and wantonly killed those who did not escape into the bush." Arab slave routes could be traced "by the vultures and hyenas feeding on putrefying corpses." (Some undercover anti-Semites are 'fuming' that a few Jews were involved in slave trade. However, they are not angry at Arabs for hundreds of years of African slave trade, which is still being conducted at present time!)

Arabic Style of Expressing Christian Love

In honor of Christmas, the mayor of Bethlehem lights a tree and calls to boycott Israel.

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

Why does the Israeli press go the extra mile to camouflage the fact that the murderous Carmel fires were lead by Arabs? This is beyond fake political correctness — it is a blunt display of unadulterated self-hate! One cannot defeat foes without clearly identifying them!

Understanding Mentality of Islam and Treaties with Infidels!

"This is a bloody war to the final victory until the enemy surrenders to Islam." (Please visit and read this interview if you are truly interested in understanding Arab-Israel conflict and what drives global Islamic terror!)

They will Never Recognize Israel

"Hamas will never recognize Israel, despite pressures and efforts aimed at achieving this," Hamas Prime Minister Ismael Haniyeh said during a mass rally in Gaza to mark 23 years since the birth of the Islamic movement in 1987. Hamas is the Gaza branch of the pan-Arab Muslim Brotherhood. (There is no point in negotiating with Arabs. They will never honour any agreement with infidels and will just replace one 'moderate' terrorist organisation with another!)

The Fake Game of Recognition of Fake State.

"We want a state of Palestine, not a unilateral declaration of statehood," said the PA's 'Prime Minister' Salam Fayyad. He explained that he did not see how a unilateral declaration would help the PA's cause. Such a declaration "is not and will not be a part of our thinking". At the same time, 'Palestinians' are furious over the US Congress resolution against unilateral statehood and the EU, restates its need for a negotiated accord. (Blackmail and terror is their game! There many international idiots who are willingly help Arabs spill Jewish blood and destroy Jewish aspirations)

Jerking Israel by NO Policy Yo-Yo

Washington will no longer seek an Israeli settlement freeze to renew stalled Middle East talks, and was "ending the contacts to try and achieve another moratorium," said a senior US diplomat. The diplomat, briefing reporters in Jerusalem on condition of anonymity, said "we reached the conclusion that this is not the time to renew direct negotiation by renewing the (settlements) moratorium." Israel banned Jews in Judea, Samaria and much of Jerusalem from building any new structures, or additions to existing homes, for 10 months in an attempt to bring the Palestinian Authority to the negotiating table. It did not work! (The United States do not have a clear ME policy and are making it up on a whim. Self-serving interests dominate, of which oil is the biggest factor of influence and it has not always been in favour of the Jewish state. Israel can say "No" to the US, as any sovereign country. The time has come for Israel to start pursuing her own interests!)
— 'Peace Talks' Linked to Terror

IDF commanders have previously warned that Hamas and other terrorist groups will double their efforts to attacks Israelis if the diplomatic process moves forward. "We assume that if Israel resumes negotiations with the Palestinians, there will be more attempted shooting attacks". While the Fatah-led PA agreed for a brief period of time to negotiate with Israel, many groups rejected negotiations, among them Hamas, Islamic Jihad, breakaway Fatah groups, and the PFLP.

Rejection Against which Nobody Protests

The Central Committee of Fatah has rejected a plan by United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to open indirect talks mediated by the US between Israel and the PA on core issues. (What would be the world reaction if Israel has rejected the US 'suggestion'? Peace was never their intention!)

Quote of the Week:

"The Arab language has many nuances. To understand an Arab phrase one has to understand the context and follow the intonation. Not everything you hear should be accepted as real. Most of our Israeli politicians are completely ignorant of understanding the outlook of our enemies, especially (so-called) Palestinians. If the country's policy is based on ignorance then it is worth nothing." — Moshe Sharon is an Arabic studies researcher, a professor of the Oriental studies department of the Jewish University in Jerusalem.

Another Global Attack on Democracy

Two bomb blasts that killed a person in central Stockholm were a "terrorist crime". An Islamist website, al-Qaeda-linked, called Shoumoukh al-Islam published a photograph of the man it said was the attacker. "It is our brother, mujahid Taymour Abdel Wahab (Iraqi-born Swede from UK), who carried out the martyrdom operation in Stockholm." But Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt later cautioned against drawing hasty conclusions. (By opening doors to Muslim immigration, Western democracies made themselves vulnerable to Islamic terror. Western democracies made themselves vulnerable to Islamic terror. The Government of Sweden supports the creation of a Palestinian state and is very critical of Israel. It has not bought immunity from Islamic terror, just delay!)

Hidden Ugliness of Democratic States

The British government has decided to cover the cost of extra security for state-funded Jewish schools. The cost of security comes to approximately 1.6 million euros ($2.1 million) annually. The Community Security Trust reported that anti-Semitism hit a new high in 2009 with 924 anti-Semitic incidents recorded. (In the 21th century Jewish communities in the democratic states — UK, EU, Australia, US — are under constant threat from Islamic terror, and anti-Semitic vandalism and violence, which has been deliberately ignored by local authorities!)

Hypocrisy in Action:

Amnesty condemns Israeli ban on home sales to non-Jews...

— Amnesty International condemned a "religious ruling", which is not Israel's law! Why has the organization been mute about the practice of imprisonment and even killing of Arabs, in accordance with PA laws, if they sold land or homes to Jews in Judea and Samaria? Amnesty International lost its impartiality a long time ago. It has transformed itself into another international stooge, serving the highest bidder — oil rich Arab states!

Polarities of Christianity! by Steven Shamrak

I have been writing my editorial letter for over 9 years. It is not against Christianity or Islam, regardless of how much harm they have inflicted upon the Jewish people. It is about the right of my nation to live in peace on all Jewish ancestral land, although, some issues must not be buried, forgotten or remain unanswered.

Recently I have received messages from two Christians in my mail list after I had published the "Apology for Unintentional Mistake" article. I would like to share them with you. If you are a Christian, it is up to you to choose which one you would like to affiliate with:

Communication from Roy and my answers:

"How many Jews died in the Holocaust? Was that not enough for you to recognize the truth?" — Is this a hidden Holocaust denial? Is it justification of the Holocaust using the Inquisition idea — to burn Jews if they do not convert to Christianity? Just be honest about your intentions toward Jews and do not hide behind a smokescreen of dishonest questions!

"The Church was not responsible for the Holocaust" — Silence of the Church was the major KILLER! The Holocaust was committed by Christians, Germans and local thugs. Most 'nice' people remained silent. This is the clear indication of responsibility. In Denmark, Bulgaria, even in Italy, to some degree, when the Nazi anti-Jewish bigotry was challenged, Jews were saved!

"The Chief Rabbi in Rome during World War II converted to Catholicism. Was that not a profound statement concerning the truth of the Catholic Church's position regarding the massacre of Jews by the Nazis?" — You must think what you write! This only "profoundly" proves the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church, its aim to irradiate Jews physically or through conversion. It seems that the Holocaust was a useful tool, as was the Inquisition before it! For almost two thousand years the Church has been cynically keeping Jews alive in Rome, so they would witness the glory of the "second coming". This is not an act of LOVE — it is an ugly cruelty!

"I am not guilty of slavery, persecution, genocide, forced conversion, child abuse or silence about the killing of Christians by Muslims, so I cannot repent" — No, you might have not carried them out yet! But you are guilty of ignoring and even secretly supporting the revolting deeds that have been committed in the name of the Church and making excuses for them!

2. Communication from Ken

"You are absolutely correct. Many people who use the term Christian have no idea what Christianity really is. It is exactly as you say, about forgiveness, love, and one of the most important commandments besides the Law of Moses, is Thou Shalt Not Judge, yet many atrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity. Christ even speaks of Wolves in Sheep's clothing.

True Christians know we (Church) are a branch (of Judaism), and we must bless the Jewish people and nation, that is one of Christ's main messages to us. But, sadly, the denominations of Christianity most often represent their own ideas and use it as a fear factor of control and personal gain. Please know there are many ministers in America who preach that it is our duty to help the Jewish nation..." (Please, read more on the subject: Message to Christian Friends of Jews)

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement and currently lives in Melbourne, Australia. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sarah Stern, December 21, 2010.

This week, I was honored to participate in a conference organized by Ashraf Ramelah of the Voice of the Copts movement, celebrating International Human Rights Day, entitled, "Human Rights in the Middle East. What the West Needs to Know."

The snow that almost paralyzed most of Washington this Thursday did not prevent these courageous individuals, mostly Christian, but some Muslim, from coming out and revealing their deplorable treatment as religious minorities who have lived in the Muslim world. I am honored to call these wonderful people "friends."

They spoke about the Koranic roots which command the obligation to subjugate, fight and kill the "Kafir", (unbeliever).

Not all Muslims take this literally, but enough do to have made life an absolute living hell for religious minorities living under Muslim rule.

Each one of these brave people, representing a wide breadth of geography, including Ashraf Ramelah of Egypt, to Ali Alyami of Saudi Arabia to Nazir Bhatti of Pakistan, among others, spoke about the humiliating Dhimmi laws, the lack of due process and the rule of law, the arbitrary taxes, arrests, tortures, sometimes resulting in death, that they personally, or someone that they know and love had been subjected to.

They all spoke about the egregious treatment of women in their native lands. For example, in Saudi Arabia, a woman cannot drive or vote. A woman's testimony is worth that of half of a man's. If she is raped, she is stoned to death by male relatives for dishonoring the family. She cannot even be admitted into a hospital without be accompanied by a male guardian, even if it means she will die in childbirth.

This coming Saturday, Christmas will be celebrated throughout the Christian world.

Christmas in Bethlehem is not at all what it sounds like in the Christmas carols.

Since the Palestinian Authority has taken over the city, Christian families have been leaving the town of Bethlehem and the nearby towns of Bet Sahour and Bet Jalla by the droves. Before the P.A's take-over of Bethlehem, the Christians in the city made up approximately seventy per cent of the population.

Today the Christians, in the city of the Jesus' birth, make up less than fifteen percent of the population. They complain about constant employment discrimination, constant intimidation, land theft and forged documents and the sexual abuse and intimidation of their women.

Many Christian businessmen have been forced to shut down their businesses because they could no longer afford to pay the special "taxes" or "protection money" from Muslim gangs.

As Khaled Abu Toameh wrote last year in the Jerusalem Post,"As a Muslim journalist, I am always disgusted and ashamed when I hear from Christians living in the West Bank and Jerusalem about the challenges, threats and assaults that many of them have long been facing.The reason why I feel like this is because those behind the assaults and threats are almost always Muslims. For decades, the delicate and complicated issue of relations between Muslims and Christians in the Holy Land was treated by Palestinians as a taboo. Most Palestinians chose to live in denial, ignoring the fact that relations between the Muslim majority and the tiny Christian minority [about 10%] have been witnessing a setback, particularly over the past 15 years."

I would like to close this week's column with a pleasant story of Israel's tremendous gift, not only during Christmas, but throughout the year to the people of Haiti.

Dr. Yehuda Skornick who is the Chief of Surgery of Ikalov Hospital in Tel Aviv and the President of Magen David Adom International, Israel's Red Cross, was in Haiti, last month. He spoke to me this week, of the continuous presence of Israelis in Haiti, since the earthquake.

He spoke of a Special Rehabilitation Center that Israel has opened up in the Haitian City of Port-au — Prince. This was done through combined monetary contributions from that the Israeli organizations of Magen David Adom, Tel HaShomar Shiva Hospital and the Joint Distribution Committee.

Said Dr. Skornick, "When we saw the situation after the earthquake, there were a great deal of people under compression who were forced to have their limbs amputated, or else they would become necrotic. We knew that thousands of young people with amputated arms and legs remained behind in Haiti, and we had to do something about it."

Since the earthquake dozens of doctors from Magan David Adom and Tel HaShomar have remained behind. Within the last four months, the Israeli team have managed to successfully do eighty prostheses surgeries. Then, the rehabilitation begins with a team that has flown in from Tel HaShomar Hospital. At the same time, they are training local physicians and nurses to do the rehabilitation training.

November 17th, was the official opening of the Rehabilitation Center as part of the University Hospital. Said Dr. Skornick, "When you go to the hospital, you see the incredible misery that the people are enduring until this day. There are no roads, no traffic lights, no sanitation. You see huge camps of plastic bag homes where the people live. There, they are exposed to temperatures in the upper 90's. As soon as a building is marked for demolition, the people are immediately evacuated into the street, and live in these camps."

Said Dr. Skornick, "It was incredibly depressing to see the apathy at death. Entering the emergency room, there was a corpse of a young woman who died of cholera. She was only partially covered. People seem to pass by without paying any attention.

Dr. Skornick goes on to describe an emergency room with ten's of patients, some in severe pain, lying passively in beds, waiting for some sign of help, not complaining. As if accepting their destiny.

Then, from within this dark environment, the rehabilitation center emerges as a light in the darkness. People, from government officials to medical workers to patients, gathered from all over the country to express their profound gratitude to Israel.

Three of the victims who were treated there, told their stories. One was a twenty-five year old dancer who had lost his legs. He was treated by Israeli doctors in Haiti and taken to Israel to complete the rehabilitation. He is able to dance again.

Another two victims who lost their legs, twenty and twenty-five, sang a song in Hebrew, although they did not understand the words. "But they were singing with such pure emotion, said Dr. Skornick, it was as though they were praying, and not singing."

Dr. Skornick said that Magen David Adom has created an emergency medical system in Indonesia, which has the largest Muslim population in the world. He points with pride to the emergency medical services Mogen Dovid Adom has provided to the countries of Uganda, Sri Lanka, Azerbaijan and India.

"It is simple", says Dr. Skornick, "It says in the Bible. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. We, as Israelis and Jews try to do that."

Sarah N. Stern is President of The Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), which is dedicated to educating policymakers and the general public regarding the threat of Radical Islam and about Israel's critical role in defending Western civilization from that threat. For more about EMET's mission go to http://www.emetonline.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Ellen Horowitz, December 21, 2010.

Jewish Israel has learned, through firsthand sources, that the Jerusalem Post featured erroneous headlines, on December 6th, alleging that Interior Minister Eli Yishai refused fire truck donations from the Christian group IFCJ.

By promoting the flawed story as a news-breaking "exclusive" — based largely on alleged claims by Yechiel Eckstein — the Jerusalem Post consequently fanned the flames of scandal, expedited calls for Yishai's resignation and gave a boost to Israel's dependency on evangelical philanthropy.

Politically expedient reporting may be legitimate, but disseminating false reports and propaganda is not. Jewish Israel investigates...

In the aftermath of the Carmel fire, there has been an expected outpouring of support from Christian evangelical and messianic groups. In an upcoming series of reports, Jewish Israel will expose the sincere, the deceptive, and the opportunistic among those who are partnering with major Jewish charitable institutions.

But first, we begin by covering an outrageous post-fire media stunt performed by the Jerusalem Post that demands exposure and investigation, and which will hopefully be rectified by that publication.

Take My Fire Trucks, Please!

Shas is the party that, outside of its own constituency, everyone — loves to hate. Say "Shas" and Israel's mass media instantaneously salivates, for many valid and some rather dicey reasons. Justifiably or not, the fingers of the press, the politicians and much of the public are pointing at Interior Minister Eli Yishai of Shas, for lack of preparedness on the fire front.

Is it a "lynch", as Yishai claims? Is the Interior Minister negligent? Or is the press simply barking up the wrong tree in the name of political expediency?

Far be it for Jewish Israel to jump into this political fire. We'll leave that to the official investigators. However, by sensationalizing claims by Yechiel Eckstein of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (IFCJ), the Jerusalem Post consequently fanned the flames of scandal, expedited calls for Yishai's resignation, and gave a boost to Israel's dependency on evangelical philanthropy.

In what was heralded as an "exclusive", the December 6th front page headlines of the JPost alleged that Yishai refused fire truck donations from Christian group.

Jewish Israel asked sources closest to the original story (not from the Interior Ministry) if Interior Minister Eli Yishai really refused actual fire truck donations from the IFCJ. The answer we received was, "definitely not".

According to our firsthand sources, Eckstein was offended by Yishai's opting out of an IFCJ ceremony and photo-op (possibly for religious reasons). One of those sources told us that, "Eckstein said he would have provided more trucks [like those given in the past] but no offer was made because of Yishai's attitude."

We kid you not. Now depending on one's opinion, failure to nurture a relationship with the IFCJ and pay homage to Eckstein in a photo-op could be deemed as behavior unbecoming the head of the Interior Ministry. It could even be worth an opinion piece, but it is surely not enough to pin the blame for a national disaster on Eli Yishai via a headline-breaking exclusive in Israel's premier English daily the morning after the inferno.

Jewish Israel reminds our readership that, outside of IFCJ donations and the hoopla surrounding evangelical Christian events and support, there are plenty of established Jewish charities tirelessly and successfully working on Israel's behalf. Just last week, an Orthodox Jew from Brooklyn reportedly contributed 13 million dollars directly to Israel's Treasury to help repair damages caused by the Mt. Carmel fire. Only, unlike IFCJ, this U.S. Jewish donation was anonymous, so there likely won't be a ceremony or a photo-op (and headlines are minimal).

If the circumstances weren't so tragic, it would be comical. In the days immediately following the fatal fire, the Jerusalem Post published no less than three articles, penned by four of their top columnists, and a number of letters to the editor, which referred to the Christian fire truck pseudo-scoop again and again. All that appeared to be missing from the "poison pen" columns directed at Eli Yishai was a little P.S. declaring, "with love to Yechiel, from the JPost staff". The Jerusalem Post and Yechiel Eckstein are friends and allies. Jewish Israel notes that at one point, IFCJ was a publishing partner with the JPost in their production of the Jerusalem Post Christian Edition. Two years ago, this writer inquired about that relationship in correspondence with Gershom Gale, editor of the Jerusalem Post Christian Edition. We received the following reply:

"Rabbi Eckstein and his IFCJ are no longer partners with The Jerusalem Post in the production of The Christian Edition, though the publication remains a natural friend and ally of his organization."

The current publishing partner of the Jerusalem Post Christian Edition is the International Christian Embassy (ICEJ).

The writer of one sensible oped piece, which did manage to get published in the JPost, made the following observation:

"...if the organization[IFCJ] cared so deeply, it could have donated the trucks to the Fire and Rescue Service and, to be sure, its officers would have been happy to be in the photos...When the Orthodox have accepted pro-Israel Christian donations, they have been ridiculed for it. Did Yishai err here? It's not clear."

The Little Fire Engine That Couldn't

Very few Israeli or international media outlets found the JPost "hot off-the-press exclusive" newsworthy enough to run with it. But that didn't stop those initial erroneous headlines from spreading like wildfire throughout the blogosphere, with everyone from Christian bloggers to online PR consultants picking it up.

The Jerusalem Connection ran the story, but James Hutchens, founder and president of that publication described as "the foremost Christian Zionist online magazine in America", enjoys a special connection with Yechiel Eckstein.

While State Comptroller Micha Lindenstraus finds fault with Interior Minister Eli Yishai and a number of other political leaders and government offices in his initial Carmel fire report, neither the JPost exclusive report nor Eckstein's alleged claims are mentioned therein.

Without a significant and widely-published retraction, the JPost's misleading headlines, "Yishai refused fire truck donations from Christian group", will continue to be spread and be accepted as truth by uninformed sources.

On December 15th, more than a week after the erroneous banner headlines graced the front page of the Jerusalem Post, respected JPost columnist and Jewish community leader, Isi Leibler, also disseminated the JPost's inaccurate information in his regularly featured opinion column. Excerpt:

"If this were not enough, almost concurrently, the nation learned that Shas Interior Minister Eli Yishai had rejected an offer of fire-fighting equipment because it was being donated by Evangelical Christians." Jewish Israel responded with a letter to the editor — which was edited by the JPost.

[Note: Jewish Israel has been critical in the past of Leibler's blind embrace of evangelical support for Israel"]

This is certainly not the first time the JPost has gone to bat for Christian groups at the expense of Orthodox Jewish reputations. The JPost gave extensive and one-sided coverage to both the Bass and Beckford trials. The trials, which pitted messianic missionaries against Orthodox Jews in the Negev, enjoyed JPost news and oped columns, as well as a magazine feature story. Yet with all of the publicity given the cases, the Jerusalem Post failed to issue follow-up reports on the outcome of the trials when both Christian parties lost in Israeli courts.

Makes you wonder if you're reading the JPost or Pravda with your morning coffee.

Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, an author and a columnist for Israelnationalnews.com. Email her at ellenwrite@bezeqint.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Seth J. Frantzman, December 21, 2010.

The rise and decline of architecture in Israel.


Conrad Schick arrived in Jaffa in 1846. Born in the village of Bitz in the old German kingdom of Wurttemberg, his sharp mind brought him to the attention of Christian Fredrich Spittler, a clergyman who had a plan to revive the Holy Land, to bring the gospel to the East, and he needed missionaries. So he settled on the Schick to create a German Protestant foothold under the auspices of St. Chrischona Pilgrims Mission.

It doesn't seem it was ever Schick's destiny to convert the East. However his arrival in Jerusalem was to revolutionize the city in another way, through his architectural creations. It is not clear what professional training Schick had in architecture, but he had a keen eye for detail. He taught himself locksmithing, mechanics and watchmaking, and became a qualified amateur archeologist, scholar on the Holy Land and model maker.

Initially he worked out of a bruderhaus, a fraternity, that he rented with other missionaries. Lonely and quiet he tinkered on his clocks while the other brothers worked at soap making and other crafts.

He apparently wrestled with fears that he was becoming too worldly. It seems the death of his patron, Spittler, in 1867 may have freed him from his obligations. Or perhaps his finances ran low. In that year he took on a commission to excavate an area around a tomb that was to become the famed Garden Tomb in east Jerusalem, which some Protestants believe to be the true holy sepulchre.

Schick planned several Jerusalem neighborhoods, among them Mea She'arim, which was constructed in 1874, and the Bukharan Quarter. He designed the Bukharan Quarter to look like a European neighborhood, with wider streets than was then common in Jerusalem. His plans for Mea She'arim called for open spaces and courtyards and the use of the most modern technologies, such as street lights. Not all of his ideas were incorporated, but he left an indelible mark on both neighborhoods.

SCHICK DESIGNED beautiful buildings as well. In 1882 he built a house for himself on Rehov Hanevi'im, an unforgettable gem, which he called Tabor House. He designed Jesushilfe in 1867, a leper hospital in Talbiyeh that was run by a German organization. In the same year he began supervision of the construction of Talitha Kumi, a Christian girl's school that once stood next to Hamashbir on King George Avenue. The building was considered of such architectural value that when it had to be torn down to make way for modern works, its façade was preserved.

His work on St. Paul's Anglican Chapel on Rehov Hanevi'im is considered a gem of Victorian "gingerbread" style. He also designed part of the German Deaconess Hospital, which is now the eastern wing of Bikur Cholim. Schick dedicated his life to Jerusalem and died there in 1901.

His architectural gingerbread was followed by Antonio Barluzzi's often neo-renaissance style pilgrimage churches. It seems that, like Schick's overall influence in 19th century Jerusalem, no great Catholic building was built in the land of Israel without Barluzzi's hands having been dipped into the mold. Born in 1884 in Rome, his life did not seem destined for architecture. He obtained a degree in engineering and spent time in the army overseeing archeological excavations. For a while he worked as a builder, rising to director of construction before enlisting once again during World War I. He became a chaplain and somehow got himself torpedoed off the coast of Gaza and ended up in Jerusalem in 1918.

For the next 42 years until his death, he designed and restored some 24 major churches and Christian institutions, from the Church of the Visitation in Ein Kerem to the Church of Beatitudes that overlooks the Sea of Galilee.

Later he wrote: "Whenever possible — as now — it is the duty of all Christians to save these relics and to give them the honor that is due. And in this I do not believe that too much can be done, since no materials or work could be precious enough to be worthy custodians of such holy treasures."

IF SCHICK devoted his energies to designing original structures and neighborhoods in Jerusalem, and Barluzzi devoted his religious faith to the Church's attempt to reclaim the holy sites, then Ram Karmi's achievement has been to translate the socialist pragmatism of Zionist planners into reality. Karmi was born in Jerusalem in 1931, served in the army and studied at the Technion and in London. The son of an important architect, the discipline ran in his veins and it was his expertise.

Like Schick and Barluzzi, his hands reached wide and he grasped many of the great projects of his day, from playing a role in the design of the Knesset, to building that great beast known as the new Central Bus Station in Tel Aviv. He was the chief architect of the Construction and Housing Ministry until 1979, built the Supreme Court and has been hired to restore the famed Habimah Theater in Tel Aviv.

In contrast to Barluzzi's neo-renaissance style that sprang directly from his faith and Schick's tinkering, Karmi has been devoted to the Brutalist style. There is nothing more brutal than to behold a Karmi building. Endless reams of concrete flow across the landscape coming together in imposing fortress like structures. The Central Bus Station in Tel Aviv, one of the most horrid large buildings in the world, is a monument to the fact that the person who designed it probably never envisioned using it himself.

And this is the tragedy of the country's Brutalist architecture. It escaped the roots from whence it springs, the people, and devotes itself to the stringent socialist belief in the way people "should" live. This is the essence of the planned neighborhoods. Consider the difference between the buildings that Schick hoped to bequeath to his Jewish clients, the courtyards and open spaces, and the ugly decaying tenements the Brutalists have designed for millions of new immigrants. As Paul Barker and Philippa Louis argued in The Freedoms of Suburbia: "It is about the way people wish to live. Why should their wishes be trampled on, in the name of the plan?"

Zionism has put down roots in the Holy Land in the shadow of three great architects, one who loved Jerusalem, one who loved the Church in Rome and one who loved the concrete plan. We would do well to return to a Schick building and ponder what the next 100 years should bring us in terms of freedom, as best symbolized by what we build.

Seth Frantzman is a PhD researcher at Hebrew University and a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies. Visit his website:
http://journalterraincognita2.blogspot.com. This was published today in the Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/ Article.aspx?id=200477

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 21, 2010.

This was written by Alan M. Dershowitz.


Among the world's most respected figures is South Africa's Bishop Desmond. His recognizable face — with its ever present grin — has become a symbol of reconciliation and goodness. But it masks a long history of ugly hatred toward the Jewish people, the Jewish religion and the Jewish state. Bishop Desmond Tutu is no mere anti-Zionist (though Martin Luther King long ago recognized that anti-Zionism often serves as a cover for deeper anti-Jewish bigotry). He has minimized the suffering of those killed in the Holocaust. He has attacked the "Jewish" — not Israeli — "lobby" as too "powerful" and "scar[y]." He has invoked classic anti-Semitic stereotypes and tropes about Jewish "arrogance", "power" and money. He has characterized Jews a "peculiar people," and has accused "the Jews" of causing many of the world's problems. He once even accused the Jewish state of acting in an "unChristian" way.

Were he not a Nobel laureate, his long history of bigotry against the Jewish people would have landed him in the dustbin of history, along with a dishonor roll of otherwise successful people, whose reputations have been tainted by their anti-Semitism such as Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Patrick Buchanan and Mel Gibson. But his Nobel Prize should not shield him from accountability for his long history of anti-Jewish bigotry, any more than it should for Yassir Arafat, Jimmy Carter and Jose Saramago.

Let the record speak for itself, so that history may judge Tutu on the basis of his own words — words that he has often repeated and that others repeat, because Tutu is a role model for so many people around the world. Here are some of Tutu's hateful words, most of them carefully documented in a recent petition by prominent South Africans to terminate him as a "patron" of the two South African Holocaust Centers, because he uses his status with these fine institutions as legitimization for his anti-Jewish rhetoric.

He has minimized the suffering of those murdered in the Holocaust by asserting that "the gas chambers" made for "a neater death" than did Apartheid. In other words, the Palestinians, who in his view are the victims of "Israeli Apartheid," have suffered more than the victims of the Nazi Holocaust. He has complained of "the Jewish Monopoly of the Holocaust," and has demanded that its victims must "forgive the Nazis for the Holocaust," while refusing to forgive the "Jewish people" for "persecute[ing] others."

Tutu has asserted that Zionism has "very many parallels with racism," thus echoing the notorious and discredited "Zionism equals racism" resolution passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations and subsequently rescinded. He has accused the Jews of Israel of doing "things that even Apartheid South Africa had not done." He has said that "the Jews thought they had a monopoly of God: Jesus was angry that they could shut out other human beings." He has said that Jews have been "fighting against" and being "opposed to" his God. He has "compared the features of the ancient Holy Temple in Jerusalem to the features of the apartheid system in South Africa." He has complained that "the Jewish people with their traditions, religion and long history of persecution sometimes appear to have caused a refugee problem among others." He has implied that Israel might someday consider as an option "to perpetrate genocide and exterminate all Palestinians."

He has complained that Americans "are scared...to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful — very powerful." He has accused Jews — not Israelis — of exhibiting "an arrogance — the arrogance of power because Jews are a powerful lobby in this land and all kinds of people woo their support."

"You know as well as I do that, somehow, the Israeli government is placed on a pedestal [in the U.S.] and to criticize it is to be immediately dubbed anti-Semitic, as if Palestinians were not Semitic."

He has compared Israel to Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union and Apartheid South Africa, saying that they too were once "very powerful" but they "bit the dust," as will "unjust" Israel.

He has denied that Israel is a "civilized democracy" and has singled out Israel — one of the world's most open democracies — as a nation guilty of "censorship of their media." He has urged the Capetown Opera to refuse to perform Porgy and Bess in Tel Aviv and has called for a total cultural boycott of Jewish Israel, while encouraging performers to visit the most repressive regimes in the world.

He has claimed that his God sides with Palestinians, whom he compares to the Israelites under bondage in Egypt, and has sought to explain, if not justify, how Israeli actions lead directly to suicide bombings and other forms of terrorism.

He has been far more vocal about Israel's imperfections than about the genocides in Rwanda, Darfur and Cambodia. He repeatedly condemns Israel's occupation of the West Bank without mentioning the many other occupations in the world today. While attacking Israel for its "collective punishment" of Palestinians — which he claims is worse than what Apartheid South Africa did — he himself has called for the collective punishment of Jewish academics and businesses in Israel by demanding boycotts of all Jewish (but not Muslim or Christian) Israelis. (This call for an anti-Jewish boycott finds its roots in the Nazi Kauft Nicht beim Juden campaign of the 1930's.) When confronted with his double standard against Jews, he has justified it on phony theological grounds: "Whether Jews like it or not, they are a peculiar people. They can't ever hope to be judged by the same standards which are used for other people." There is a name for non-Jews who hold Jews to a double standard: It is called anti-Semitism.

Tutu has acknowledged having been frequently accused of being anti-Semitic," to which he has offered two responses: "Tough luck;" and "my dentist's name is Dr. Cohen."

I am confident that President Obama was not aware of Tutu's sordid history of anti-Jewish rhetoric and actions when he awarded him the Medal of Freedom in the White House in 2009. The sad reality is that Bishop Tutu's beneficent look is the new face of the oldest of bigotries.

The decent people of South Africa have become aware of Tutu's bigotry, because they have seen and heard it up close. It is time for the rest of the world to recognize that the Bishop is no saint. When it comes to Jews, he is an unrepentant sinner.

Though he is now retired, he still has the opportunity to repent and to end the sordid history of applying an unacceptable double standard to the Jewish state, the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, December 21, 2010.

This was written by Erick Stakelbeck, the CBN News Terrorism Analyst. It was published in CBN News and is archived at
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2010/December/ Fmr-CIA-Spy-Iran-to-Aim-Nukes-at-Israel-West-/


Iran's leaders have declared that the Islamic messiah — or Mahdi — will soon return to stamp out unbelievers.

They claim that Israel will be wiped off the map and that America's days are numbered. And according to one former regime insider — they truly believe it.

"This day for them, is the ultimate day in Islam. It's the day of justice in their view," Reza Kahlili said.

Iran's Revolutionary Guards

Kahlili once served in Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps — the most powerful and influential arm of the Iranian regime.

He gave an inside perspective on the regime's apocalyptic worldview in an exclusive interview with CBN News.

"One-third of the world population has to die due to nuclear wars," he explained. "Another one-third due to hunger and chaos and havoc. And then imam Mahdi — the Shiites' 12th imam — will reappear, kill the rest of the infidels and raise the flag of Islam in all corners of the world."

The Revolutionary Guards began shortly after the 1979 Iranian revolution to protect Iran's new Islamic state.

Today, it is a fearsome military force with ground, air and naval capabilities. They answer only to Iran's supreme leader and their activities range from domestic spying to international terrorism. They even run a multi-billion dollar business empire and have a hand in Iran's economy.

CBN News asked Kahlili if the principles of jihad, martyrdom, sharia and killing Christians and Jews were drilled into the Guards on a regular basis.

"The sermons were every day. And the ideology of martyrdom, of ending up in heaven next to prophet Mohammed and imam Ali, was the main focus of the clerics," he replied. "You have to die for the glorification of Allah."

When the Iranian Revolution began, Kahlili saw an opportunity for democracy after years of internal repression under the shah. The Ayatollah Khomeini had promised freedom and openness.

"The deceit was so strong that Iranians in millions bought it, and so did I," Kahlili said. After joining the Revolutionary Guards, Kahlili soon discovered just how wrong he was.

"I saw a group of teenage girls tortured — taken to the courtyard and executed. I talked to my best friend, who told me that they raped his little sister in front of him just to bring pain to him and get him to name others," he said.

Spying for the CIA

During a visit to the U.S., he contacted the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Soon, he was back in Iran — spying for America. The details of his covert work against the Iranian regime can be found in his new book titled A Time to Betray. In it, he reveals how Iran uses mosques in the U.S. and Europe to plot and finance terrorism. "They are used as a recruitment center, for backdoor meetings, transfer of arms and cash, and putting together terrorist activities. And I was involved in some of their meetings," Kahlili explained. He played the double game for years, feeding inside information to the CIA.

Nuclear Weapons Program

At the same time, he became frustrated with America's efforts to engage the Iranian regime in dialogue.

"The reason for the failure of every American administration is that they do not understand the ideology. It's taken right out of the Koran. It says in the Koran to kill the non-believers until there are no more non-believers on earth," he said.

That ideology drove the Revolutionary Guards to create the terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon — and engineer the 1983 U.S. Marine barracks bombing in Beirut.

Their new mission is helping Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Kahlili says they're close to attaining their goal.

"Everything is in place. And the only part missing is for them to become a nuclear powered state. Then they are going to attack Israel. They are going to attack oil fields in the Persian Gulf and European capitals. Millions are going to die. There's going to be a total breakdown in the global economy," Kahlili described.

CBN News asked if the Iranian regime would use nuclear weapons against Israel and European capitals — not to mention the U.S.

"That is my belief and I have no doubt about it, that they'll bring that about," Kahlili responded. "They're going to arm Hezbollah. They're going to arm Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Syria."

He says the only solution is for America to overthrow the regime.

"If the U.S. attacks, the regime cannot withstand it," Kahlili said.

It's just one of many revelations he hopes will reach America's leadership — before it's too late.

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, December 21, 2010.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post


The new campaign calling for the release of Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard from prison in the US is in many ways a curious development. Pollard was arrested in 1985 and convicted on one count of transferring classified information to Israel during his service in US Naval Intelligence. He pleaded guilty to the charge in the framework of a plea bargain in which the US attorney pledged not to request a life sentence.

Despite this, Pollard was sentenced to life. So far, he has served 25 years, much of it in solitary confinement and in maximum security prisons. His health is poor. He has repeatedly expressed remorse for his crime.

Pollard's sentence and the treatment he has received are grossly disproportionate to the sentences and treatment meted out to agents of other friendly foreign governments caught stealing classified information in the US. Their average sentence is seven years in prison. They tend to serve their sentences in minimum or medium security prisons and are routinely released after four years.

The only offenders who have received similar sentences are Soviet spies Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames. While Pollard transferred documents to Israel over a period of 18 months, both Ames and Hanssen served the Soviets — the US's primary enemy — for decades. Their espionage led to the death of multiple US agents operating behind the Iron Curtain.

Pollard was given a life sentence because then secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger wrote a classified victim impact assessment to the sentencing judge in which he insinuated that he had transferred information to the Soviet Union as well as to Israel. Weinberger reportedly attributed the deaths of US agents to Pollard's activities.

Weinberger's accusations were proven false with the subsequent arrests of Hanssen and Ames. As it turned out, the damage Weinberger ascribed to Pollard was actually caused by their espionage.

OVER THE past five years, and with increased urgency over the past several months, several former senior US officials who had in depth knowledge of Pollard's activities have called for his immediate release. Former CIA director R. James Woolsey has stated that, contrary to Weinberger's allegations, none of the documents Pollard stole were transferred to the Soviets or any other country. A few months ago, former senator Dennis DeConcini, a past chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, sent a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to immediately release Pollard from prison. And in October, Lawrence Korb, who served as assistant secretary of defense under Weinberger, became one of the most outspoken champions for Pollard's release. Korb currently works for the Center for American Progress, which is closely allied with the Obama White House.

The renewed interest in Pollard's plight has garnered a great deal of attention in the local media as well. After Korb's initial call for Pollard's release in an op-ed published in The Los Angeles Times in October, Ma'ariv published a cover story in its weekend news supplement about Pollard's suffering. Reporter Ben Caspit demanded that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu formally request that Obama commute Pollard's sentence and release him from prison.

Ma'ariv's article caused a spike in media coverage of Pollard in November. And this month, Pollard was back in the news when the government intervened to help his former wife Ann and her father make aliya after the consulate in New York discovered they were both ill and living in poverty.

Public pressure on Netanyahu seems to be working. Before Monday, Netanyahu refused to make any public statements regarding Pollard. At his recent meeting with Obama, he refused to deliver a letter signed by 109 of the Knesset's 120 members formally requesting Pollard's release. On the other hand, heavy public pressure caused Netanyahu to initially agree to speak at Monday's rally for Pollard's release at the Knesset. Netanyahu canceled his appearance at the last moment however, and insisted on sufficing with a private meeting with Korb and Pollard's wife Esther. Obviously more pressure can and should be applied.

On the face of things, it seems that this is a particularly inauspicious time to renew the campaign to release Pollard. This is true first of all because of the nature of the current president who is the only one with the power to release him.

By now there is little question that Obama is the most hostile US leader Israel has faced. It is hard to imagine the circumstances in which he would agree to do something for Israel that his vastly more sympathetic predecessors George W. Bush and Bill Clinton refused to do.

In light of Obama's attitude, at first blush it makes more sense to try to advance Pollard's case through quiet diplomacy. This is the argument that cabinet secretary Zvi Hauser made in testimony before the Knesset earlier this month. Hauser appeared before the State Control Committee to respond to State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss' recommendation that Netanyahu set up a ministerial committee to oversee a public, formal campaign calling for Pollard's release.

But on second thought, the current campaign is eminently sensible. To understand why, we must consider the relative benefits of quiet, behind the scenes diplomacy and loud, public diplomacy.

Quiet diplomacy works well when all sides share a perception of joint interests and when its exposure is likely to change that perception. For instance, Israel and its Arab neighbors perceive a shared interest in blocking Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But given the nature of Arab politics, that perception, which enables the likes of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Bahrain to work with Israel on preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, disappears the moment cooperation is made public.

Likewise, Lebanon's Sunnis and Christians share an interest with Israel in defeating Hizbullah. But their ability to work with Israel on defeating Hizbullah is destroyed the moment such work becomes public.

Quiet diplomacy does not work when there is no perception of shared interests. For instance, regimes that repress human rights to maintain their grip on power have little interest in cooperating with free societies, when the latter demand that they free political dissidents from prison. Quiet diplomacy in the field of human rights between the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War never succeeded, because the Soviets realized that opening up their tyranny to domestic criticism would destroy the system.

And today, as Cairo's fake parliamentary elections and Teheran's continued repression of democracy protesters shows, the Obama administration's quiet diplomacy with the Muslim world regarding human rights and democracy has utterly failed.

It is in cases like this where public, noisy diplomacy comes in handy. Public campaigns are helpful when one government wishes to persuade another to do something it doesn't want to do. Last week we received a reminder of the effectiveness of such behavior with the publication of protocols of meetings held by president Richard Nixon in the Oval Office.

One such meeting involved a conversation between Nixon and secretary of state Henry Kissinger following a meeting with prime minister Golda Meir. She had asked Nixon to support the Jackson-Vanek amendment that linked US economic assistance to the USSR to the latter's willingness to permit Jews to emigrate. Kissinger opposed the request, telling Nixon, "The emigration of Jews from the Soviet Union is not an objective of American foreign policy. And if they put Jews into gas chambers in the Soviet Union, it is not an American concern. Maybe a humanitarian concern."

On the face of it, Kissinger was right. Using humanitarian considerations to weaken Soviet tyranny probably didn't help US arms control negotiators score points with Leonid Brezhnev. But on a deeper lever, he was completely wrong. The Jackson-Vanek amendment not only forced the Soviets to permit limited emigration of Jews. It started a process of opening the Soviet system, which ended up destroying the regime just a decade later.

SINCE TAKING office, Obama has only used public diplomacy in the Middle East to convince one government to take action it believed was antithetical to its interests. Last year he waged a forceful, unrelenting public diplomacy campaign to convince Netanyahu to abrogate Jewish property rights in Judea and Samaria. And it worked.

Although it harmed the sacrosanct pillar of Zionism that Jewish rights are nonnegotiable, although it weakened Netanyahu's standing with his party and voters and although it empowered the Palestinians to expand their political war against Israel on the international stage, Netanyahu gave in. The public pressure Obama exerted on him compelled him to act against his interests.

The US is not an evil empire. And it is hard to see how a clear demand for Pollard's release on humanitarian grounds will have any fundamental impact on its nature.

And that is fine. But the fact is that Obama has no interest in freeing a suffering Israeli agent who was railroaded by Weinberger and remains in prison due to the efforts of Israelhaters who wrongly insist he did untold damage to US national security. Indeed, many of Pollard's detractors are members of Obama's political camp.

Israel can't expect a lot of help on this from American Jews, although they stand to be major secondary beneficiaries if Pollard is released. The impact of his case on the US Jewish community has been debilitating. Although the US and Israel are strategic allies which share many of the same interests and fight the same enemies, Israel's detractors in the US foreign policy community use the Pollard case as an excuse for questioning the loyalty and patriotism of American Jews who serve in the US government and support Israel. His continued incarceration casts a long shadow over American Jewry.

The odds are poor that a public campaign to win Pollard's release will succeed. But if Israel is going to do anything at all, its actions should be concentrated in the public realm. As we have seen, quiet diplomacy, the strategy the Netanyahu government tried until now, will never get him out of jail.

And Israel must act. Pollard's unfair, unjustified and discriminatory sentence and treatment are a dismal symbol of Jewish vulnerability. His personal suffering is inhumane, real and unrelenting. He needs us to stand up for him.

And so we must. And so we will. The time has come, against all odds to shout that Pollard must be freed. Now.

NB: Tuesday afternoon 21 December, Netanyahu announced he will formally request that Obama release Pollard.

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 21, 2010.

This is a Jerusalem Post Editorial
(http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/ Article.aspx?id=200356).


Netanyahu: "We must expose the hypocrisy of human rights organizations that turn a blind eye to the most repressive regimes in the world."

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sunday night attacked the ostensible anti-Israel bias of some human rights watchdog groups. "We must expose the hypocrisy of human rights organizations that turn a blind eye to the most repressive regimes in the world... and instead target the only liberal democracy in the Middle East," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu's comments appeared to be a reaction to a 166-page report entitled "Separate and Unequal," issued by Human Rights Watch earlier Sunday. In addition to descriptions of alleged Israeli violations of human rights, the report, the longest and most comprehensive issued on any Middle East country this year, called on the US to punish Israel by deducting aid in accordance with its spending on settlements.

There is a tendency among politicians, including the prime minister, to make sweeping charges against HRW and other human rights NGOs, generalizing that they are riddled with malicious intent without providing specific examples. It is worth focusing on one of the many tendentious claims in HRW's report to illustrate the unfortunately frequent validity of official Israel's sense of grievance.

THE REPORT takes Israel to task for a purportedly discriminatory water allocation policy. HRW stated that, "Average Israeli per capita consumption of water, including water consumption, by settlers is 4.3 times that of Palestinians in the occupied territories (including Gaza)."

This is true, as far as it goes: Per capita water consumption among Palestinians is 70 liters a day, compared to Israel's average per person of 300 liters a day. What HRW failed to mention, however, is that access to piped water has dramatically improved in recent decades and is significantly better than in Syria or Jordan, which would have been in control of the West Bank had it not attacked Israeli in 1967.

In fact, as Alon Tal of the Blaustein Institute for Desert Research at Ben-Gurion University noted in a recent article in the Israel Journal for Foreign Affairs, Israel has significantly exceeded its requirement as set down in the 1995 Oslo II Peace Accords, increasing supply by 60 million cubic meters (mcm) a year, instead of 28.6 mcm as required.

The 10 percent of the Palestinian population on the West Bank who do not have reasonable access to running water might usefully be contrasted with, say, Romania, where one-third of the population has no running water, or closer to home, the Jordanian city of Irbid, where 400,000 residents lack access.

The relatively widespread accessibility did not happen by itself. A World Bank report from April 2009 noted that Israel was responsible for a 50% rise in the number of West Bank Palestinians who have access to networked water supply. The World Bank also estimated that 45% of West Bank Palestinians' (and settlers') water is provided by Mekorot, the Israeli national water carrier, from sources located inside Israel. This has unfolded over the past two decades, moreover, during which the Palestinian population tripled to 2,461,000. As Tal concluded, "There are few developing economies that have achieved such dramatic improvements in such a short time."

None of this is mentioned in HRW's report. And while a litany of accusations are leveled at Israel — ranging from "over-extraction of water" to "refusal to approve Palestinian water projects" — no blame whatsoever is placed on Palestinians. Yet, as Tal notes, 30% of Palestinian water leaks out of poorly maintained pipes, three times what Israel loses to leakage.

The Palestinian Authority — with $1 billion in annual civil aid, the world's largest per capita recipient of international development assistance — invests precious little, if anything, in improving water delivery. And due to PA corruption, rural residents are often forced to pay exorbitant rates for bottled or tanker water. Deficient law enforcement by the PA also results in the digging of wells that threaten to contaminate major aquifers.

SUCH SKEWED treatment of Israel's water policy is a microcosm of HRW's wider failings, which were recently detailed to shocking effect in a lecture (republished on these pages on November 25) by its outraged founder Robert Bernstein. Not only does HRW's obsessive and antagonistic focus misrepresent Israel, it is also counterproductive to the Palestinian cause.

By Israeli standards, the amount of water available to Palestinians, while higher than many developing countries, is inadequate. But what HRW deliberately fails to acknowledge is that this is a consequence of a complex reality that includes Palestinian negligence.

As long as the specifics, and the wider realities, are intentionally ignored by human rights groups maintaining cynical anti-Israeli campaigns, the root problems afflicting Israelis and Palestinians will continue to be distorted, misunderstood, and consequently, all the harder to resolve.

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Kaustav Chakrabarti, December 21, 2010.

While the disclosure of thousands of classified documents by Jualian Assange, an Australian national, of Wikileaks, considered to be highly sensitive by the American Government, has given sleepless nights to US diplomats thereby leading to a flurry of damage control exercises by the latter, the event, if judged in terms of realpolitik, is likely to prove a blessing for Israel. Among the several skeletons to tumble out of the cupboard, mention may be made of the concerns expressed by the Saudi Government for Iran's nuclear programme that has of late stirred a hornet's nest in international politics. Among the most interesting proposition of the Saudis and their allies to the United States and other Western powers was to 'bomb' the Iranian nuclear facilities thereby 'cutting off the snake's head.' In fact none of the monarchical states in the region (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Qatar) are keen to see a nuclear-armed Iran being able to dictate terms in the future, and (who knows!) affect regime changes on that note.

This disclosure is far from the reality of a supposedly united Islamic monolithic bloc under President Ahmadinijad hell bent on isolating and destroying the 'Zionist entity' at leisure. It's obvious that none of the Muslim/Arab regimes have any stomach for the Iranian President's adventurist designs in forestalling Israel which might as well boomerang with the formers' subjects/citizens clamouring for change on the Iranian model. This revelation of secret Perso-phobia in Arab/Islamic circles (the latter almost all being Sunnis vis-á-vis Shi'ite Iran) should be utilized by Israel to the hilt both diplomatically and militarily. On one hand, it should try to rope in moderate Arab regimes (e.g. Jordan and Egypt) who view stability to the anarchy of anti-Zionist jihad; on the other hand, should the United Nations someday wake up to the call of thwarting Iran's nuclear programme (with its persistent threat of a nuclear holocaust against Israel), Israel should join the military coalition (on the Iraqi model) to utilize the opportunity to wipe out Iran's strategic assets, with or without the United States.

Contact Kaustav Chakrabarti by email kaustav12000@yahoo.co.in

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 21, 2010.

The Israeli Left has a new poster boy — it is the failed and dirty politician Amram Mitzna. Suddenly the Left cannot control its adoration of Mitzna. The Israeli media, the occupied territories of the Left, are also unable to control their glee.

Mitzna is capitalizing on teh fact that he has been largely out of the spolight for a few years. He had been the head of the Labor Party and got creamed in the elections of 2003 by the Likud under Sharon. It was at the time teh worst showing ever for the Labor bolsheviks. After sitting on a back bench for a while in the Knesset, Mitzna resigned as party chair in a huff.

Now that most of the Left is disillusioned with Ehud Barak as current Labor Commissar, Mitzna decided it is time for him to attempt a Nixonian comeback. He is posturing to teh Far Left, to try to knock out Barak from that side, and ran to pay homage this week to Abu Mazen in Ramallah, leaving little doubt as to whose interests he would serve if he were ever to be Prime Minister.

The following piece of mine appeared in AUgust 2002. It is still relevant and accurate:

Israel's Most Dangerous Politician [the slick Clinton-in-a-beard far-leftist mayor of Haifa]

Below is what I wrote August 19, 2002. It's entitled "Israel's Most Dangerous Politician."


The world's media is suddenly all ecstatic at the fact that Generalissimo Amram Mitzna has decided to toss his kafiya into the race for Labor Party chief. Because Mitzna is to the left of the current party chief, 'Fuad' Ben-Eliezer, and indeed is to the left of Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin, the Jewish anti-survivalist Left is celebrating, and the world's anti-Jewish media has discovered a new great messiah of hope and peace. If Mitzna takes the Labor chiefdom and then gets elected prime minister, or so the media think, he will lead Israel down the Oslo path to its dénouement of complete surrender and national suicide.

Mitzna is just the latest in an endless series of retired generals from the Israeli military (generals retire in their 40s usually) who then enter politics, almost always through the Labor Party. Most of these emerge as ultra-doves and similar lefties. The worst of these took over leadership in the Labor Party and led the country into its current lake of blood. Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak were arguably the two worst prime ministers the country ever had. They were both ex-generals who led the country to the brink of self-destruction. Many other leftist ex-generals occupied numerous other power positions in Labor.

Which brings us back to Mitzna. Amram Mitzna is the slick Clinton-in-a-beard far-leftist mayor of Haifa. He is soft-spoken and eloquent and may be the dirtiest politician in the country, king of the dirty deals with Israeli oligarchs.

Mitzna had been the general in charge of the central command during the 'First Intifada' of the late 1980s, when most of the violence was in his turf. He dealt with it by introducing the New Strategy of defeating Palestinian savagery by understanding it and showing his good will and empathy for the rioters. When he left the army, he parachuted into Haifa, where he had never been a resident, a city that has yet to have its first non-Labor Party mayor (no longer true SP), and ran for mayor. As mayor of Haifa, Mitzna spent a great deal of time courting the Far Left and letting everyone know he would be willing to take the country to new depths of leftist Oslo self-debasement and self-destruction. He is in favor of holding appeasement talks with the PLO even while the PLO mass-murders Jews. He supports concessions to the PLO even beyond those Yossi Beilin would offer. His strategy is to challenge the other Labor leaders from the Left and garner Arab support for his candidacy. In other words, he is more Ehud Barak than Ehud Barak himself. As mayor, he repeatedly courted and spoke before the Arab communist party Hadash.

Despite his cultivated speech and smooth manner, Mitzna is a corrupt Tammany Hall politician who runs Haifa like a petit Indonesian gangster or Third World crony gang leader. His strategy has been to build up a power base at the expense of Haifa residents by striking corrupt dirty deals with large contractors and builders having Party connections. In a typical Mitzna deal, a contractor is granted special zoning variances that allow him to build a 40 story tower on a plot of land zoned for 3 stories and to pocket $40 million in undeserved profit, or to construct a shopping mall on land that belongs to the public or is supposed to be a park. In gratitude, the contractor than quids Mitzna's quo, including funding his political career. One contractor made so much money on the mall Mitzna allowed him to build illegally that he could put in a bid for acquiring the Israeli national telecom company. Mitzna has sought to turn Haifa into a Hong Kong of 50 story monsters all to benefit his crony friends. 'Hizzonah' Mitzna used Haifa as a base to build up a war chest and a power base, waiting his chance to challenge the Labor Party machine and take over the party leadership. His chance came when Ehud Barak crashed and self-imploded.

It is not clear whether Mitzna actually believes in anything other than getting himself elected. It is not clear whether Israel would survive a period of Mitzna reign over the country.

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments — both seriously and satirically — on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, December 20, 2010.

This was written by Rick Richman and it appeared in Commentary Magazine


The Palestinians are upset at the unanimously adopted Congressional Resolution, authored by the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and its ranking Republican member, which opposes any attempt to establish a Palestinian state outside a negotiated agreement. The resolution calls on the administration to lead a diplomatic effort against a unilaterally declared state, affirm that the U.S. would not recognize it, and veto any UN resolution seeking to establish one. The resolution — and the Palestinian reaction to it — caps a series of clarifying developments over the past year and a half:

First, the Palestinians refused to negotiate unless Netanyahu endorsed a two-state solution and froze settlement construction; Netanyahu did both, and the Palestinians refused to negotiate. They had to be dragged into "proximity talks" and then dragged into "direct negotiations" and then left.

Second, the Palestinian Authority canceled local elections in the West Bank, unwilling to risk them even in the part of the putative state it nominally controls. The PA is now headed by a "president" currently in the 72nd month of his 48-month term, with a "prime minister" appointed by the holdover "president" rather than by the Palestinian parliament (which, unfortunately, is controlled by the terrorist group the Palestinians elected five years ago). These days, the PA turns for approval not to its public or its parliament but rather to the Arab League, while the other half of the putative state is run by the terrorist group. As a democratic state, "Palestine" is already a failed one.

Third, the peace-partner Palestinians rejected the two criteria that Netanyahu set forth for a peace agreement: recognition of a Jewish state and demilitarization of the Palestinian one. The first requirement reflects a series of essential points: the Palestinians cannot have a state and a "right of return" to the other one; there cannot be a two-stage plan to obtain a second state and then work to change the character of the first one; and a peace agreement must contain an "end-of-claims" provision precluding further disputes. The second requirement reflects the obvious fact that, having withdrawn completely from Lebanon and Gaza only to have them become staging areas for new wars, Israel would be crazy to expose its eastern border to the same thing with a militarized Palestinian state. But the Palestinians rejected both of the requirements.

Fourth, the peace-partner Palestinians objected to an Israeli referendum on any peace agreement, considering democratic approval an obstacle to peace. A referendum serves as a necessary check on the legitimacy of the process; it is why the PA itself continually assures its own public (and the terrorist group in Gaza) that any peace agreement would be subject to a Palestinian referendum. But the peace-partner Palestinians do not want one for the Israeli public if it would serve as a check on further one-sided concessions.

Israel is currently faced with a PA that is unwilling to meet the basic requirements of a permanent peace, lacks the political authority to enter into a peace agreement (much less the ability to implement one), opposes any process in which the Israeli public can assure itself of the result, and wants a state simply imposed on Israel by the U.S. or the UN. If the Congressional Resolution helps disabuse it of these notions, it will be a significant contribution to the current non-peace non-process.

The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Rock Peters, December 20, 2010.

Rock Peters has an excellent graphic exhibit of the differences between Sharia law and U.S.A. Constitution-based law. It is available on his website: http://www.GodSaveUSA.com

Rock Peters is a free lance writer. Email hime rockpeters@aol.com and visit his web site at www.GodSaveUSA.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Raymond Ibrahim, December 20, 2010.

Back in 2004, in one of his most recognized messages to America, Osama bin Laden, responding to then President George Bush Jr.'s claims that Al Qaeda hates freedom, rhetorically asked, "If so [if Al Qaeda hates freedom], let him [Bush] explain to us why we have not attacked Sweden, for example."

Days ago, on December 11, an Al Qaeda affiliated suicide bomber attacked Sweden — the first terrorist attack in Sweden in three decades, and its first ever suicide attack. The attempt largely failed (only the bomber died, two Swedes were injured). Even so, it "could have been truly catastrophic," said one official.

So much for Sweden epitomizing Al Qaeda's "respect" for freedom. Why the change in policy? In fact, according to an audio-recording issued by the terrorists minutes before the attack, the vitriol is such that "all Mujahadeen [jihadists] in Europe and Sweden" are to prepare for action: "Now is the time to strike, don't wait any longer."

Would-be future jihadists were further advised to attack with "whatever you have, even if it is a knife" — a bag of nails was found near the body of the suicide bomber — indicating that the jihadists may have been taking lessons from Al Qaeda's popular online magazine, Inspire, which, among other things, offers creative tips on how to transform household items into lethal weapons.

As for motives, according to the audio-recording, there are three: Sweden will be a target of the jihad "as long as you do not [1] end your war against Islam and [2] humiliation of the Prophet and [3] your stupid support for the pig Vilks."

The first point — "war against Islam" — appears to be a reference to Sweden's 500 troop presence in Afghanistan. Yet Sweden is only one of nearly fifty countries — including Muslim ones — to have a presence in Afghanistan; Turkey alone has contributed nearly four times as many troops. And most of these nations have not (yet) been targeted. Moreover, Sweden has been a troop contributing nation since July 24, 2003 — well over a year before Osama portrayed it as a neutral country, undeserving of attack. (Perhaps he meant Switzerland, which is known for its neutrality, and is often conflated with Sweden by Middle Easterners?)

The second and third reasons cited — "humiliation of the Prophet" and "support for Vilks" — are one and the same and, in fact, the immediate reason behind the attack. Context: back in 2007, Swedish artist Lars Vilks drew unflattering caricatures of the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Since then, Al Qaeda has set a bounty on him (the reward increases if he is "slaughtered like a lamb"); he has already been physically assaulted and his house nearly burned down.

Swedish freedom of speech and expression, then, is what prompted the attack. In fact, eliminating Western freedoms — or at least conforming them to the dictates of sharia law, which, among other things, forbid mockery of Muhammad — is a longstanding Islamist goal. Nor is it limited to violence; rather, the West's very legal system is being exploited, through Islamist "lawfare" designed to censor free speech concerning Islam (prompting countermeasures such as the Middle East Forum's Legal Project).

More generally speaking, when assessing why jihadists attack this or that country, there are other factors to consider, such as capability and timing ("Now is the time to strike, don't wait any longer," said the recording). The fact is, from an Islamist point of view, Sweden has long been deserving of attack, simply for contributing the 500 troops to Afghanistan — just as the nearly fifty contributing nations are all fair game.

More to the point, even the most neutral country that has no dealings with Islam is a potential target; if and when it gets attacked is based on if and when the Islamic world resurrects the caliphate — again, capability and timing being the ultimate determinants. Once a militarily capable caliphate is established, offensive jihad to subject the world to Islamic dominion becomes no less obligatory than stifling mockery of Muhammad. In short, it is not about what this or that country does; Islamist animosity for infidels is intrinsic, kept at bay only by circumstance.

And so, to respond to Osama bin Laden's 2004 question "why we [Al Qaeda] have not attacked Sweden," the answer is — because the time was not quite right then.

This was published todaay by Hudson New York and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 20, 2010.

This comes from Hivolt220ap.


Amazing that the female leader of Australia has bigger gonads than our wonderful president (with a small p)

Australia says NO — Second Time she has done this!

AMAZING You must read it!!!!  

She's done it again..

She sure isn't backing down on her hard line stance and one has to appreciate her belief in the rights of her native countrymen..

A breath of fresh air to see someone lead. I wish some leaders would step up in Canada & USA.  

Australian Prime Minister does it again!!

This woman should be appointed Queen of the World.. Truer words have never been spoken.

It took a lot of courage for this woman to speak what she had to say for the world to hear. The retribution could be phenomenal, but at least she was willing to take a stand on her and Australia 's beliefs.

The whole world needs a leader like this!

Prime Minister Julia Gillard — Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks..

Separately, Gillard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying she supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote:


I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society. Learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'

'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves in Canada & USA, WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

If you agree please SEND THIS ON and ON, to as many people as you know

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, December 20, 2010.

This was written by Gil Hoffman for the Jerusalem Post


Netanyahu meets with Esther Pollard, says he will decide whether to accept wife's plea to formally call on Obama to release Jonathan.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu promised Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard's wife Esther in an emotional meeting at the Knesset on Monday that he would decide by Tuesday evening whether to accept her husband's request that he issue a formal, public call to US President Barack Obama to commute his life sentence to time served.

Netanyahu told a delegation of activists for Pollard led by Esther and former US deputy secretary of defense Lawrence Korb that he had quietly raised the Israeli agent's fate six times in his meetings with Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in an effort to secure his release. Netanyahu questioned whether a public call might do more harm than good.

"There is a risk that I might do everything that you suggest and that it simply won't work," Netanyahu told the group candidly.

A tearful Esther Pollard responded by detailing her husband's poor health and telling Netanyahu: "This might be my last chance to beg you to change your tactics. Whatever you have done until now did not bear fruit. Jonathan is prepared to take whatever risk there may be. There is a greater risk in doing nothing."

Netanyahu's associates denied that he was afraid of harming himself politically by issuing a call for Pollard's release that would be rejected. They said he genuinely wanted to bring Pollard home to Israel, and he was unsure whether the approach that the agent requested in a letter Esther delivered to him was the ideal strategy when appealing to Obama.

Sources close to Netanyahu said he did not believe it was the role of a prime minister to issue public calls or write letters when he can speak personally to the president of the United States. They said that for the same reason, he chose to cancel his participation at a pro-Pollard rally at the Knesset on Monday and instead meet Esther Pollard and Korb privately in his office.

In the meeting with Netanyahu and earlier at the rally, Korb spelled out what he believed was the best way for the prime minister to persuade Obama to commute the life sentence Pollard has been serving for more than 25 years. He read aloud a draft of what Netanyahu should say in a public request for Pollard's release.

"I admit it was wrong for Israel to recruit Pollard to spy on his country and for Israel to then deny that he was its agent," Netanyahu should say according to Korb. "Since the Pollard incident, Israel has complied with its commitment to no longer field agents in the US. We feel the need to speak publicly at this time, because according to US laws, Pollard's punishment does not fit the crime he committed. He has expressed remorse and had good behavior in prison. We publicly request that Pollard's sentence be commuted to time served."

Esther Pollard stressed at the rally that the holiday season in the US was traditionally a time in which the president makes decisions on pardons and commuting sentences. Korb added that "Americans are a forgiving people" and that Obama was "a very thoughtful man."

Officials working for Pollard's release revealed that when his lawyers asked former US president George W. Bush to pardon Pollard, they were told in a meeting with the White House legal team that a formal Israeli request could be helpful, but the request never came and Bush left office without pardoning Pollard.

Korb advised Netanyahu not to try to secure Pollard's release in return for a diplomatic move, as he tried to do at the Wye Plantation summit in 1998 and when he recently offered to extend a construction moratorium in the West Bank in return for Pollard's release.

The pro-Pollard rally, which was organized by MKs Uri Ariel (National Union) and Ronit Tirosh (Kadima) featured addresses by Nobel Prize winner Israel Aumann and former Supreme Court Justice Zvi Tal. Esther Pollard told the audience about her husband's ailing health and that the last time he called her, he was too sick to talk to her.

"This was the first time in 26 years that Jonathan didn't have the strength to talk to me on the phone," she cried. "That's how sick he is. Mr. Netanyahu, now is the time to call for Jonathan's release — for every reason, because if you don't do it now, I am not sure whether there will be another opportunity."


PM announces he will formally call for Pollard's release. The prime minister said, "I intend to continue acting with determination for Pollard's release, both because of the State of Israel's moral obligation to him and so that he might live with his family and restore himself to health after his prolonged incarceration."

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 20, 2010.

Press Release
For Immediate Release
NGO Monitor
December 20, 2010
Contact: Jason Edelstein, +972-52-861-2129

HRW Again Distorts Middle East Conflict

Latest Report Promotes BDS and Hijacks Civil Rights Rhetoric Jerusalem — In another indication of the organization's biases and lack of moral compass, Human Rights Watch (HRW) today released a report that promotes boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel and strips away the context of Arab terror in which Israel operates, notes NGO Monitor, a Jerusalem-based think tank that tracks NGOs in the region. In particular, NGO Monitor condemns the report — titled Separate and Unequal — for its historical inferences and misleading and false allegations.

"This is the latest HRW report comprised of inflammatory rhetoric, misuse of international law, and baseless accusations," says Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor. "Presenting information in this manner only serves to reinforce the myth of Palestinian victimization — a tactic that does not foster an environment conducive to peace and mutual understanding. Furthermore, by invoking the Separate and Unequal language of the American civil rights movement, HRW falsely turned a political conflict into one of racial hostility. This is an insult to the history of African Americans and black South Africans who truly suffered as a result of racial discrimination."

NGO Monitor also notes other critical flaws in the report:


As in the case of most HRW reports on Israel and the conflict, this publication has the façade of research, without the substance. Instead, the majority of the allegations are based on reports from and a mix of political advocacy NGOs that HRW did not independently verify — specifically: Al Haq, EAPPI, BADIL, B'Tselem, Bimkom, OCHA, Peace Now, Yesh Din, and Coalition of Women for Peace.

In one example, HRW misquotes B'tselem (page 4): "Israeli security forces killed 1823 Palestinian civilians" in the West Bank between 2000 and August 31, 2010. According to B'Tselem, however, 479 of these casualties were known to be "Palestinians who took part in the hostilities," and an additional 411 casualties may also have been armed. HRW's independent research, including interviewing 66 Palestinians and eight Israelis, is anecdotal and lacks credibility.


HRW's Middle East and North Africa (MENA) division has consistently and obsessively focused on Israel, while giving far less attention to human rights violators in the region. The 166 page publication is the longest one issued by MENA in the past two years. HRW has issued more reports and documents on Israel in 2010 than on any other country in the region. For comparison, HRW's five-year report on systematic Saudi Arabian abuses is only 52 pages ("Looser Rein, Uncertain Gain," September 27, 2010); HRW's report on the Syrian police state covering the past decade is 35 pages ("A Wasted Decade," July 16, 2010). In 2010, HRW's three reports on Israel total 344 pages — far more than any other country in the region.


The report seeks to justify increased HRW support for the BDS campaign, which specifically calls for the destruction of Israel, as stated in the 2001 NGO Durban declaration. (HRW was a major supporter of the NGO Forum and has supported BDS in the past.) In addition, HRW repeats previous demands for punishing Israel by withholding U.S. security assistance.


Significant portions of HRW's indictment are based on a tendentious version of human rights norms and international law, such as reliance on the widely discredited advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, July 2004.

"This report unfortunately is the result of the anti-Israel agenda of the MENA division," Steinberg adds. "Much of the staff come from ideological advocacy backgrounds. MENA director Sarah Leah Whitson in 2009 actually went to Saudi Arabia to raise funds, selling the message that HRW's role is central in countering 'pro-Israel pressure groups.' Simply, the once proud organization has lost its moral foundations."

Steinberg's assessment echoes that of HRW founder Robert Bernstein, who last year concluded that HRW "has been issuing reports on the Israeli-Arab conflict that are helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state." After a visit to Sderot in November 2010, Bernstein remarked that "Human Rights Watch's attacks on Israel as the country tried to defend itself were badly distorting the issues — because Human Rights Watch had little expertise about modern asymmetrical war."

The release of the report also is indicative of the close relationship between superpower NGOs, such as HRW, and international institutions such as the UN.

"At the same time as the Arab League is campaigning to undermine the peace process by exploiting UN frameworks, HRW publishes this study," says Anne Herzberg, NGO Monitor legal advisor. "It is another troubling aspect of a very troubling and misleading report."

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, December 20, 2010.

Word came out on a major scale yesterday that YouTube had dropped the Palestinian Media Watch (http://palwatch.org) account. The reason given was that PMW had severely violated YouTube guidelines — with regard to hate speech. This came as a blow, for there seemed to be an essential confusion between promoting vile speech and exposing it. But that was yesterday, and today the news is different.

Apparently this was not a perverse or biased decision, it was an automatic process that was generated by complaints (complaints from Arabs who resented what was being shown, or from others offended by some of the content of what the videos show, I cannot say). Once a person of decision-making capacity was reached, and the situation was thoroughly explained, the decision by YouTube was reversed.

Many is the time that I have relied upon such PMW-generated YouTube videos to demonstrate exactly what is really happening in the PA (e.g., an officially designated musical troupe that dances on stage while singing, "This is the day of consolation of Jihad. Pull the trigger. We shall redeem Jerusalem, Nablus and the country." Which you can see here.)

I am glad that this story has a happy ending.


It would be good — and far far more important — to secure a happy ending on this score, as well:

I've read numerous exceedingly thoughtful pieces regarding the inadvisability — the danger! — of approving the new START treaty, which would put the US at a disadvantage, as well as regarding the audacity of President Obama in trying to push this through a lame-duck Senate right before Christmas and without adequate debate.

What I have chosen to share here is from Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy. It provides facts and an avenue for action. Please! Do respond to this:

There is no time for delay! Be activist enough to make those phone calls. It can make all the difference.


And then we have this, from StandWithUs Northwest:

"A group calling itself Stop30Billion has purchased...billboard and bus banner ads that demonize Israel. The bus ads will run on buses that serve downtown Seattle for at least the next four weeks starting on December 27. This is part of a growing campaign that has placed similar ads on buses and billboards in Houston, Albuquerque and San Francisco."

Pictures for these ads say, "Israel War Crimes — Your Tax Dollars at Work."

"These ads...fcor the first time try to spread broadly into our community a message of hate against Israel.

"In our culture of sound-bite news, what people will remember from this bus and billboard ad campaign will be the lead line, "Israeli War Crimes."

"This is a well-funded effort to have our community reject Israel, an effort to have our friends and neighbors, co-workers and children's schoolmates see Israel as a pariah state, a country acting outside of acceptable norms."

Please click here for the StandWithUS website that provides advice on whom you should contact to stop this from happening.


I'm no fan of Tzachi Hanegbi. No way. But a JPost piece by this former Kadima minister — who supports a "peace process" — makes interesting reading:

"...During the Saban Forum, I spoke with local friends who are experts in gauging the mood shifts in the Democratic administration, the Republican Congress and American public opinion.

"Their assessments were identical: President Obama has despaired of his failed diplomatic adventure in our region. His main priority now will be getting re-elected for a second term. The lesson the Democratic Party has learned from its recent beating in the congressional elections is to focus all its efforts on the domestic arena — on the faltering economy, the deepening recession and the dismaying unemployment numbers.

"Therefore, even if the US government does not go as far as to adopt the repeated calls of the New York Times' Thomas Friedman to leave the quarreling children of the Holy Land alone, those presidential energies and attention directed at our region will be focused solely on managing the conflict rather than solving it.

"This is the view from Washington. Not only is the weather in the American capital freezing (minus seven degrees), but so too is the diplomatic process between us and our Middle East neighbors."
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/ Article.aspx?id=200153


A situation that has been infuriating and distressing seems on its way to some amelioration, even if the public will not privy to all that is going on:

The subject is control of Har Habayit — the Temple Mount. After we redeemed it in 1967, a foolishly motivated Moshe Dayan, in an effort to keep things smooth (and, I suspect, with enormous naivete regarding what would ensue), told the Muslim Wakf — the Islamic trust — that it could have everyday management of the Mount, where Muslims came to pray at the Al Aksa Mosque, while Israel would retain over-all control.

But the Wakf was not into sharing. They have parlayed what was given them into a situation on the ground in which they have far more control than should ever be the case. The Mount is ours. But they have done excavations that have destroyed archeological treasures, while Israeli officials, in a craven attempt to keep things quiet, have restricted Jewish presence — and Jewish ability to pray! — on the Mount.

Remember that the Second Intifada was started ostensibly because Ariel Sharon went up on the Mount and this was said to cause "offense." Never mind that this war had been planned by Arafat, who was simply waiting for a hook to hang it on. The mere fact that the Arabs were able to represent the presence on the Mount of a member of the Israel government as "offensive" tells us what the mindset was.


At any rate, Arutz Sheva tells us that State Comptroller Michal Lindenstrauss has prepared a report on Israeli sovereignty on the Mount. Only portions of this material, considered to be highly sensitive, will be released to the public — with a subcommittee of the Knesset Control Committee deciding what can be made public.

Arutz Sheva cites MK Otniel Sheller, who heads the subcommittee:

"The report mainly deals with how we, Israel, actualize our sovereignty on the Temple Mount. It notes the problems, what can be done, and what has been done. And the conclusion is as follows: Many improvements have been made over the past few months, and everything is now done there in full coordination with the police, the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Attorney-General's office, the relevant ministerial committee, and the Jerusalem municipality. The situation has totally changed."

This is good news, but my gut feeling is that it needs to be even better.


Esther Pollard, wife of Jonathan Pollard, is here in Israel and has asked PM Netanyahu to intervene — Jonathan, whose health is failing, has personally requested a public call for his release. Claiming unease about his role and what will result, Netanyahu is said to be thinking about it.


One more mark of what we're dealing with:

"For the past week," according to Haaretz, "representatives of the Popular Palestinian Committees (PPC) have been urging West Bank [i.e., Judea and Samaria] residents [who are Arab] to bury their dead in Israeli-controlled parts of the West Bank, identified as Area C."

This plan, being called "Intifada of the Graves," was revealed on Army Radio yesterday.

"Proponents...believe it will be more difficult for Israelis to take control over parts of the West Bank in a final agreement if there are Arab cemeteries throughout the disputed territories."


This is only a slightly different version of an Arab scam that's been operative for a while, and has now been reported by Arutz Sheva: Not long ago it was discovered that new graves were turning up in the Mamilla Cemetery, an ancient Muslim cemetery located on the outskirts of Jerusalem's Independence Park, but that no one was buried in them: the plan was to usurp land and authorities removed the gravestones.

Now the same thing is happening outside the Eastern wall of the Temple Mount, in what is designated as a national park.

Maya Shukri of the El Har HaMoriyah Institute, documented the faked graves with her camera; she says that at present, the graves are empty but an infrastructure is in place for future burials.

A year ago, the Court ruled that there could not be graves placed in this area, which has historical significance, but so far nothing has been done to stop it.


In closing today, allow me to return for one moment to PMW. I'm sure my Christian readers will be interested in learning that Jesus (and Mary) were not Jews, but Palestinians. How do I know? These videos tell us so. Never mind that there was no Islam when Jesus lived.

Reminds me just a bit of how a Muslim Arafat used to tell journalists, before Christmas eve, "excuse me, I must go to Bethlehem to pray." And they would eat it up.
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi= 506&fld_id=506&doc_id=830

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Harold Reisman, December 20, 2010.

"Those who do not know history will die of myth."
— Ralph Peters

"The secular West is inept in neglecting the seriousness of theological motivation."
— Efraim Inbar

Qur'an 9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

Qur'an 2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.

"Islamic war/peace ethics is scriptural and premodern. It does not take into account the reality of our times, which is that international morality is based on relations among sovereign states, not on the religions of the people living therein. Though the Islamic states acknowledge the authority of international law regulating relations among states, Islamic doctrine governing war and peace continues to be based on a division of the world into dar al-Islam and dar al-harb. The divine law of Islam, which defines a partial community in international society, still ranks above the laws upon which modern international society rests."
— Bassam Tibi, "War and Peace in Islam" (1996), an internationally respected scholar of Islam.  

Saudi Arabia was created as a state in 1913.
Lebanon's borders were drawn in 1920.
Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932.
Syria's borders were drawn in 1941.
Jordan's borders were set in 1946.

These states were carved from the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Yet Arabs call Israel a "modern creation", an "upstart state" and a "country with no history".

Concerning the period from the close of World war I to the present day, all diplomatic efforts and pronouncements that have suggested methods of ending the Palestine problem have been accepted by Zionist bodies or Israel and have been rejected (often with violence) by the Palestinians and Arab states.

A comment concerning the final stages of World war I in the Middle East:

"At this time, 1.5 million Armenians were being systematically exterminated by the Turks, and the Jews of Palestine feared that they would face the same tragedy. It was only the capture of Palestine by the British that forestalled such a fate."
— "Faith and Fate" by Berel Wein, page 61

The Balfour Declaration (1917) set forth guidelines for a Jewish state in the Mid-East. The concept was opposed furiously by the Arabs. In July, 1922 the League of Nations entrusted Great Britain with the Palestine Mandate, recognizing "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine". Three months later, trans-Jordan (77% of the Mandate territory) was given to the Hashemite kingdom in direct violation of the Mandate.

In 1937, the Peel Commission was formed by Great Britain. The conclusion of the study was that partition of Palestine (West of the Jordan) was the only feasible solution. The proposed Jewish state would compromise less than 15% of the original Mandate and consist mainly of desert. The Zionist movement accepted. The Arabs were outraged and rejected the proposal. Rioting continued.

In 1939, the British (in response to the rioting) issued the White Paper, further limiting Jewish immigration into Palestine. During World War II, Sheikh Amin el-Husseini (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem) aided the Nazi war effort. He had held this position since hid appointment soon after the Mandate began. In the 1920's and 30's, he fomented riots and massacres against the Jews, the British and his Arab opponents. He worked for a Nazi victory in Europe and a promise was made to him that the Jews would be treated in like fashion once the Mid-East was conquered.

All through the mid-East (and Muslim enclaves in southeastern Europe), the war cry was: Bissama Allah, oua alard Hitler. Translated this means: "In heaven Allah, and on Earth, Hitler". Mein Kampf (translated into Arabic as "My Jihad") remains a massive best-seller in Muslim countries.

Testimony of the dean of Arab historians, Philip Hitti, at the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in 1946:

"There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not." Some conclusions of the meeting were (a) Jews and Arab sections of the land should be separated and (b) Jewish immigration should be limited. Conclusions were rejected by all Arab parties. Zionist groups reluctantly agreed.

"I do not want to impugn anybody, but only to help the refugees. The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the action of the Arab States in opposing partition and the Jewish State. The Arab States agreed upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem."
— Emil Goury, secretary of the Arab High committee during the 1948-49 war (Beirut Daily Telegraph, Sept. 6, 1948)

Some 100 million refugees have been re-settled (voluntarily or by force) since the end of World War II. Arabs dislocated in 1947-48 have never been absorbed or integrated into their own peoples' land (common culture, religion and language). Jewish refugees from Arab lands (excess of 800,000) have been completely absorbed into Israel.

Jordan (a so-called "moderate" Arab state) controlled key positions of Jerusalem from 1948 to 1967. There was never a call for "internationalization" or "multi-party" control. No mosques were built in their area of control. Innumerable synagogues (including the Hurva) were destroyed or vandalized. Jews were not permitted to visit the Western Wall. The Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives was vandalized and gravestones were used as paving stones or latrine floors by the Jordanians. No world body investigated or protested before or even after 1967.

General Assembly Resolution 181 (Nov. 29, 1947) calls for the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. The Zionist movement accepted the partition; the Arabs rejected it and promised war. Security Council Resolution 242 (Nov. 22, 1967) calls for withdrawal "from territories occupied" in the war. There is no call for a Palestinian state but only states to "live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Jordan ruled the "West Bank" from 1948 to 1967. They made no effort to create a Palestinian state, nor did they offer to resettle refugees. Egypt ruled the Gaza Strip from 1948 to 1967. They made no effort to create a Palestinian state, nor did they offer to resettle refugees.

Selections from the Palestinian Authority Charter:

Article 2 Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible unit.

Article 9 Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.

Article 15 The liberation of Palestine...aims at the liquidation of the Zionist presence.

Article 19 The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time.

Article 20 The Balfour declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void.

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was founded in 1964, three years before the 1967 war. Just what was to be liberated? In October of 1973, Arab states defined the PLO as the "sole representative of the Palestinian people".

After the 1967 war, Abba Eban made a speech at the UN offering to return captured territories in exchange for three Arab concessions: diplomatic recognition, negotiations to set recognized borders and peace with Israel. The Arab states met at Khartoum and replied (August, 1967): No recognition, no negotiations, no peace.

After the 1967 war, the Israeli government (at the instigation of Moshe Dayan) ceded administrative control of the Temple Mount to the Waqf. Since that time:

a) Jews are not permitted to pray on the Temple mount
b) stone and debris throwing incidents continue to occur
c) heavy equipment is used to destroy areas with no archeological supervision
d) a giant underground mosque has been created with tons of debris discarded without attention to destruction and loss of artifacts or ancients coins and utensils
e) any tie of Jews to the Temple mount has been considered "lies" and "unfounded history"
f) the existence of any Jewish Temple has been denied. If there was a temple, it was built by "Josoof", a Muslim.

Yassir Arafat (at the UN in 1974): "We don't want peace, we want victory. Peace for us means Israel's destruction, and nothing else." Yassir Arafat (April, 1990) in response to increasing numbers of immigrants to Israel: "I give you explicit instructions to open fire. Do everything to stop the flow of immigration."

In August, 1993 Israel and the PLO agreed on a "Declaration of Principles". These were signed in September and are called "the Oslo Accords". Many in Israel plus most of Diaspora Jewry were euphoric; this time Arafat could be trusted. Soon afterward he spoke (in Arabic) in S. Africa and claimed he was following Muhammed and referred to the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah (a 10 year truce dissolved by Muhammed two years later when he gained sufficient military strength). The Oslo Accords called for the PLO to change its Charter and to stop all propaganda and incitement against Israel in the media and in its schools. Neither condition has been fulfilled.

Sheikh Yusuf Salamah (international conference in May, 1999) praised seventh and eighth century dhimmi status, "...as the proper paradigm for relations between Muslims and Christians today". The Pact of Umar (which describes and defines dhimmi status) is part of Islamic foundational law and has been accepted by all schools of Islamic jurisprudence.

In September of 1995 (also called "Oslo II") Ehud Barak made further concessions and unprecedented offers to establish a Palestinian state. Many peace proponents and negotiators were startled by the offers. The widow of Yitzchak Rabin, a very liberal Leah Rabin, was quoted as saying, "Yitzchak is turning in his grave". The offer was rejected in any case and no counter proposals were offered.

In a May, 2005 speech, Abbas described establishment of Israel as an unprecedented historic injustice and vowed never to accept it. In late 2007, at Annapolis, he rejected PM Olmert's proposal of a Palestinian state in 97% of the West Bank (with balancing of the remainder by ceding Israeli land) and the entire Gaza Strip. Abbas dismissed any recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and demanded full implementation of the "right of return".

"We are fighting in the name of religion, in the name of Islam, which makes this Jihad an individual duty, in which the entire nation takes part, and whoever is killed in this [Jihad] is a martyr. This is why I ruled that martyrdom operations are permitted, because he commits martyrdom for the sake of Allah, and sacrifices his soul for the sake of Allah. We do not dissociate Islam from the war. On the contrary. disassociating Islam from the war is the reason for our defeat. We are fighting in the name of Islam."
— Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Head of the European Fatwa Council and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar TV sermon. (Feb. 25, 2006). Also called the "World Caliph" and considered a moderate by many in academia in the United States.

At Fatah's sixth general congress (Bethlehem in 2009), delegates reaffirmed their longstanding commitment to "armed struggle" as a "strategy, not a tactic...this struggle will not stop until the Zionist entity is eliminated and Palestine is liberated."

Contact Harold Reisman by email at hbr029@sbcglobal.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 20, 2010.

This was written by Jerusalem Post Staff and Ron Friedman. It's archived at


The video sharing website originally removed the PMW video channel for "severe violations of our Community Guidelines."

In response to criticism and outrage by supporters, the video-sharing website YouTube reactivated a video channel operated by Israeli NGO Palestinian Media Watch on Monday.

The website removed PMW's video channel from its servers on Sunday for "severe violations" of YouTube's community guidelines.

The channel, which featured videos of Palestinian incitement against Jews and Israelis, posted by the group in order to expose Arab media undercurrents, was accused of repeatedly airing hate speech.

PMW director Itamar Marcus said he had received an automatically generated letter from YouTube informing him that the channel had been removed following complaints by YouTube users.

"YouTube has removed some of our videos in the past, but closing down the site is a tremendous disservice," said Marcus.

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Boris Celser, December 20, 2010.

This appeared on the FresnoZionism.org website
http://fresnozionism.org/2010/12/ israel-doesnt-have-to-be-a-big-tent/


The favorite argument of the Left is the demographic argument: that unless Israel gives up the territories, it must choose between its democracy or its Jewish character. Either Israel lets all those Arabs vote or it doesn't. Therefore, Israel must 'make peace' and give up Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem.

But analysis shows — and I'm not going to repeat it here, I and others have explained it thousands of times — that giving up land won't bring peace, that the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and indeed the great majority of the Palestinian Arab population see Israeli concessions as indications of weakness and stepping stones to the ultimate replacement of Israel by an Arab state. The kind of settlement Barack Obama and the Europeans want to see would simply set the stage for yet another war.

The two-state solution, in other words, is a mirage. There could be two states (for a while), but it wouldn't be a solution. So what to do?

There are hidden premises in the argument of the two-staters. They are 1) that the Jewish character of Israel and democracy that includes the Palestinian Arabs are equally important, and 2) that 'democracy' means that every person must be a citizen regardless of his ideology.

I deny the first premise, and in fact I insist that the imperative of maintaining at least one Jewish homeland in a hostile world (and it is getting more hostile every day) is an overriding one. And I deny the second one: why can't citizenship require a commitment to the basic principles of the state?

Israel has put itself between a rock and a hard place because it feels that it has to respect the wishes and even the 'rights' of the Palestinian Arabs, who as a matter of fact want to destroy the Jewish state.

On the face of it, this is absurd. It's as if the US had decided to fight WWII while respecting the wishes and rights of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany.

Palestinian Arabs and their supporters make no bones about wanting Israel gone, even the so-called 'moderates'. They don't talk about the need for democracy in the 'Palestine' that they want to create from the river to the sea. They've been murdering Jews there for a hundred years, and are doing it (or trying) as I write. Why is it so important to compromise with them — especially since they won't accept a 'compromise' that is less than a surrender?

"But you are suggesting that Jews and Arabs won't have equal rights — that's racist apartheid!" says the Left.

No. It has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with ideology. The proposal of a loyalty oath for everyone, Jews, Arabs and members of the Ha'aretz editorial board, is not a bad idea. Support the Jewish state and you can vote, pay taxes, etc. Oppose it — either violently or by incitement — and please close the door on your way out, to an Arab country, to Europe, to the US.

"But how can you expect Arabs to support a Jewish state?" Well, if they like living in a modern state with modern conveniences like good health care and other benefits, perhaps this is more important to them than nationalist or Islamist ideology. Or perhaps not — but if not they can leave.

Israel, as many Americans don't seem to have noticed, is in the Middle East. This is a place where democracy blind to ideology doesn't exist. Look at Lebanon if you think it has a future. Most Middle-Eastern countries are dictatorships or monarchies which are not democratic in any respect. What I'm proposing could be called 'limited democracy', where the limitation is based on one's decision to accept an ideology, not religion or race.

Sure, the devil is in the details, but the devil in the details of keeping control of the territories and Jerusalem is a smaller devil than the one that will be released by withdrawal from them.

Israel is a tiny country. Maybe it doesn't have to be a big tent.

Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, December 19, 2010.

Background The Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) channel tapes TV shows from arab TV and translates them into English, thus letting the Western hear what the Arabs say among themselves, rather than to a Western audience. They have shown us the hate techniques used to indoctrinate arab toddlers with hate towards Jews and to twist young minds so they yearn to become suidice murderers. The PMW exposed this hate. The Arabs accused PMW of Hate! of Islamophobia! The PMW videos was taken off the air! Which makes it easier for the Arabs to continue to talk hate.

This was written by Andre Oboler and it is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/ Article.aspx?id=200160


The closing of Palestinian Media Watch channel is one example of how the website's policies are inconsistent and only selectively enforced.

Justice Louis Brandeis of the US Supreme Court once said "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

This is often used to justify "more speech" as the only solution to "hate speech."

In November, as parliamentarians and experts from over 40 countries gathered in Canada for the second meeting of the Interparliamentary Coalition for Combatting Anti-Semitism, there was a growing concern at rising anti-Semitism, and an increased acceptance that more than sunlight was needed in response.

At the gathering, I presented as part of an experts panel on hate speech online. One point I raised was the problem of YouTube videos that do not by themselves constitute hate, but which attract hateful comments.

An example I gave was a YouTube clip of Sacha Baron Cohen's song "Throw the Jew Down the Well."

The most popular comment on the video the morning I presented, as voted by YouTube viewers, read: "Lets [sic] genocide them by burning them! But this time, lets [sic] actually do it."

Should Sacha Baron Cohen or YouTube take this clip down if this is what it inspires? Should the comments be closed to viewers? The answer is unclear, but allowing this to continue is not a good thing and seeing how popular it is leaves me feeling very uncomfortable.

THERE IS also a clear problem with hate groups, such as "theytnazism" on YouTube.

I reported this to YouTube in February, and on November 22 — 10 months later — it was still active. The group includes a "list of people we hate and we want to kill." It was a short list of "1. Blacks, 2. Jews, 3. Indians."

I then included it in a set of slides for a conference on anti-Semitism run by the World Zionist Organisation in France earlier this month and suddenly the group was gone. I doubt that was a coincidence, especially as the rest of my collection of similar groups (reported at the same time) are still active. One of these, with giant swastikas in the background, declares it is God's will to murder all non-Aryans.

The problem is not that YouTube never steps in. The problem is they are liable to step in only when there is public exposure of content they wrongly ignored, or when political pressure is applied.

YouTube also seems to have started giving in to pressure to remove videos and channels that expose and educate against hate.

A few months ago, for example, efforts were made to shut down the YouTube presence of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). The institute provides the English-speaking world with insight into the Mideast media. Some of the exposure is not welcome by those who say one thing in English to a Western audience and another thing at home.

The MEMRI debacle seems to have been resolved, but YouTube is now going after Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) which fulfills a similar role, focused exclusively on the Palestinian media.

PMW monitors, translates and shares examples of incitement. It was PMW that exposed the use of a Mickey Mouse character inciting hate and violence on the Hamas TV children's show "The Pioneers of Tomorrow."

That story created shock waves around the world, leading to discussions in the Western mainstream media and at the UN of the link between incitement in the media and terrorism.

PMW's violation appears to be that it was posting "hate material."

There is no doubt that it was. However, like MEMRI, that material was not shared for the purpose of incitement, but to expose and counter the spread of hate. Some commentators have speculated that it is not the hate against Jews, Israelis and Americans — as shown in MEMRI and PMW videos — that is the problem, but rather the fact that the videos might cause a backlash against those promoting such hate.

Any argument that uses free speech to prevent the exposure of hate speech is inherently deeply flawed.

YouTube needs to get its act together.

What it has created is a haven for hate, devoid of sunlight. Its policy seems inconsistent, ineffective and only selectively enforced. It is working against community expectations and the public interest. Ignoring illegal content, while removing the very sunlight needed to expose those spreading hate, creates a volatile environment.

Social media is built on concepts of security and trust. When these start to go, opportunities for competitors are created. It may be too early to call this the beginning of the end for YouTube, but unless it gets its policies right, and properly enforces them, we may well see this megalith begin to slide downhill.


"PMW wants to personally thank our subscribers and supporters. In response to your many actions — your emails to You Tube, your blogs, tweets, op-eds, and calls to Google — as of this morning the YouTube "Palwatch" account is once again functional.
Much thanks to everyone."
Itamar Marcus

The writer is an expert in social media and online hate. He is director of the Community Internet Engagement Project and Co-Chair of the Online Anti-Semitism working group for the Global Forum to Combat Anti-Semitism.

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, December 19, 2010.

If Israel is an authentic democracy, public opinion should influence the policies of its governments on issues of national concern. Well, it doesn't!

But what is "public opinion"?

There are four types of public opinion. The first is "media-generated." It is usually transient and doesn't require much thought or discussion. People read a newspaper or watch a talk-show and come away with opinions.

Since Israel's media is dominated by the Left, we should expect public opinion to be left-wing oriented, but it isn't! Election results show that public opinion is right of center, and has been for decades. But if this is so, common sense or logic would indicate that Israel is not an authentic democracy despite its multiparty periodic elections.

A second type of public opinion is "party-generated." This type is manifested during election campaigns, when diverse political parties discuss various issues and offer the electorate alternative public policies. Although these policies are usually stated in general terms, those of the winning party may be said to approximate public opinion. In Israel, however, parties readily violate their campaign platforms because their candidates are not individually accountable to the voter in constituency elections. We saw this in October 2004 when 23 Likud MKs, contrary to their campaign pledges, voted for withdrawal from Gaza. More evidence that Israel is not an authentic democracy.

A third type of public opinion is "government-generated." It emerges from the kind of public inquiry and discussion occurring in legislative committees and assemblies, executive agencies, and judicial bodies. This type of public opinion may be said to reflect the deliberate sense of the community. It is subject to change, but not as rapidly or as readily as media-generated or party-generated opinion. The trouble is that Israel's government not only ignored the warnings of its highest defense and intelligence officials against withdrawal from Gaza, but it simply fails to articulate a rational and coherent national policy. Thus, on the all-important territorial issue, public opinion in Israel has long been in a state of confusion.

A fourth type of public opinion is "tradition-generated." It consists of a nation's basic beliefs and values, which are more or less unquestioned. Obviously, a nation cannot long endure or retain its identity if its government-generated opinions are in conflict with its tradition-generated opinions. But this means that a government may be at war with its nation's heritage. This is the case in Israel today, as I shall now show by three examples.

Example 1. In professional polls conducted shortly before the June 1992 elections — the elections that brought the Labor government of Yitzhak Rabin to power — 55% of Israel's Jewish population (excluding the 150,000 Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza) believed that these areas ought to "remain under Israeli rule, even if this meant hindering the peace process." Only 33% favored Labor's policy of "land for peace." Consistent therewith, Rabin promised he would not negotiate with the PLO. Once in office, however, the Rabin government engaged in clandestine negotiations with the PLO, which led to the disastrous Oslo Agreement.

Example 2. In the May 1996 election, Benjamin Netanyahu led the public to believe that he would not follow the Oslo Agreement, but that is precisely what he did after the election.

Example 3. In the January 2003 election, the Likud Party won a stunning victory over Labor. At least 70 percent of the public voted against Labor's policy of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. Yet, the victorious Likud Party adopted and implemented Labor's policy in August 2005. This means that the Sharon government nullified the 2003 election and made a mockery of democracy

One of the great myths of our time.

So we see that public opinion in Israel has no discernible effect on the government's territorial policy — its most vital national issue. Hence, it's futile to belabor the obvious fact that the media in this country is dominated by the left. This is well known even to a large majority of Israel's high school students! Surely it's time for serious political analysts to stop saying or suggesting that Israel is a democracy and to start editorializing or campaigning for a real democracy.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is an Internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer. He is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy, a Jerusalem-based think tank for improving Israel's system of governance. Contact him at list-owner@foundation1.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, December 19, 2010.


Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Jim Kouri, December 19, 2010.

A Muslim cleric kisses Afghan child in public. (Memri)

When U.S. officials such as President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates discuss the war in Afghanistan and make claims of success in that fledgling democracy, one issue that's avoided is the widespread sexual intercourse between Afghan men and young boys. In non-diplomatic terms, Afghanistan is a haven for child rape.

In a country that is considered overly repressive due to its adherence to the precepts contained in the Muslim religion's Koran, it's difficult for American servicemembers and diplomats to understand the fact that a large portion of the Afghan male population are pedophiles (adults who enjoy sexual contact with prepubescent children) or pederasts (adults who enjoy sexual relations with pubescent or post-pubescent children).

While Muslims in Iraq have on several occasions stoned homosexuals for their sexual activities, not all Muslims believe pedophilia is a violation of Shariah law. Those who believe in the sacredness and infallibility of the Koran adhere to the teaching that women are sub-human and quasi-slaves, and therefore Muslim men will look for relationships — even sexual relationships — with others of their own gender.

According to Reuters, there is a lot of homosexuality going on in Afghanistan, but those engaging in it don't think of themselves as gay, so that makes it okay since Islam officially disapproves of the gay and lesbian lifestyle.

"They regard themselves as non-gay because they don't "love" the sex object so Allah is happy. These are the men who avoid their wives as unclean. Apparently there is very little love of any kind in Afghanistan, which explains a lot," according to Reuters.

"Having a boy has become a custom for us," Ena Yatullah, a 42-year-old in Baghlan province, told a Reuters reporter. "Whoever wants to show off should have a boy." [...]

Sociologists and anthropologists say the problem results from a perverse interpretation of Islamic law. Women are simply unapproachable. Afghans cannot talk to an unrelated woman until after proposing marriage. Before then, they can't even look at a woman, except perhaps her feet. Otherwise she is covered, head to ankle, according to columnist Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, and a former Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent for the New York Times.

In Kandahar, a city with a population of about 500,000, and other towns, dance parties are a popular — often weekly — pastime. Young boys dress up as females, wearing makeup and bells on their feet, and dance for a dozen or more leering middle-aged men who throw money at them and then take them home. A recent State Department report called "dancing boys" a "widespread, culturally sanctioned form of male rape." If women dressed and behaved in such a way, they would surely be punished by Muslim men.

Even after marriage, many men keep their boy-lovers, according to former U.S. military personnel who served in Afghanistan. That helps explain why women are compelled to wear clothing that hides their faces and bodies and if they "sin" they are stoned to death in accordance with Islamic law. That same law also forbids homosexuality, but the pedophiles explain that it's not homosexuality since they aren't in love with their boys only fulfilling a bodily need.

Paradoxically, the Taliban frown on sexual relations between men and boys and enforce Shariah law to the letter. Are the followers of Islam, who adopt a more "liberal" approach to practicing their religion, perhaps responsible for the widespread rape of male children in Afghanistan?

So, why are American military forces fighting and dying to protect pedophiles and pederasts in a country considered by many to be the pedophilia capital of Asia?

Why is there hesitation on the part of Obama, Clinton, Gates and others to discuss the widespread sexual assault of male children in Afghanistan? Could it be that it is politically incorrect to discuss any immoral and unlawful behavior on the part of Muslims? It's quite evident that U.S. politicians may bash Christians without fear of adverse effects on their political careers. But these same leaders will behave as if they are walking on egg shells to avoid even the hint of criticizing Muslims.

In addition, there is always a hesitation to discuss man-on-boy sexual relationship for fear of mentioning the obvious: such a relationship is homosexual in nature.

Jim Kouri, Vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. Jim writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement Journal, and others. Jim can be reached at jkouri@thenma.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 19, 2010.

France is giving unconditionally100 HOT anti-tank missiles to the Lebanese Army for its Gazelle helicopters. Likewise, the U.S. removed a stay order on $100 million of military aid to the Lebanese Army, after Lebanon promised to monitor the border with Israel and not divert the aid to Hizbullah. Hizbullah has an estimated 40,000 land-to-land rockets, anti-tank guns, and other weapons. Hizbullah is the most powerful military in Lebanon.

Israel expressed concern over the French offer. So did ranking House Foreign Affairs Committee Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (GOP), for what she called "irresponsible" and destabilizing, as Hizbullah and its patrons in Iran and Syria gain influence in the government of Lebanon. She foresees the arms being used against Israel (IMRA, 12/18/10 http://www.imra.org.il/).

For the missiles, the news brief used the word, "giving," not "selling." U.S. arms "selling" may be "giving," as when the U.S. gives Egypt and Israel military subsidy with which those countries then "buy" arms from U.S. companies. Thus the U.S. transfers taxpayer funds to the arms industry and the arms to foreign countries, though some are unstable or hostile. Should the U.S. give priority to its economy and lobbyists or to national security?

Were U.S. foreign policy rational, it would be more cautious. After all, the U.S. armed Afghan rebels against the USSR, and the Islamists became emboldened to fight against the U.S.. The U.S. armed Saddam, and then repelled his aggression.

Besides, the U.S. is supposed to favor peace and not provide the means for aggression, even if the U.S. decides not to intervene. That probably is the case with U.S. military aid to the PLO, a terrorist entity. PLO forces in Gaza yielded U.S. arms to Hamas, when Hamas took over there. The U.S. still arms the PLO, pledged to take over Israel, by hook or by crook, by war or by diplomacy. An Arab take-over certainly means mass-dispossession and probably mass-murder. Is that what the State Dept. wants?

Is Lebanon the next bad example? Ask France and the U.S. what they expect the Lebanese Army to do with the new arms? Fight Iran, Syria, or Hizbullah? Not only would such a fight be futile. But Hizbullah so outmatches the Lebanese Army, that French and U.S. arms cannot even the odds. More important, the Lebanese Army cooperates with Hizbullah by keeping UNIFIL from preventing a Hizbullah military build-up that prepares villages as bases from which to bombard Israel.

As part of the governing coalition, Hizbullah can veto any Lebanese military effort against Hizbullah. Hizbullah had a military exercise that demonstrated its ability to take over Lebanon in a few hours. Factor that in!

What do you suppose are Lebanese Army intentions? Like UNIFIL, the Lebanese Army and government ignore Hizbullah's extensive violations of its ceasefire with Israel, and deplore Israel's flights over Lebanon, flights that monitor those violations. The government and UNIFIL declared their intent to stop Israeli over-flights, when they could.

Obviously, to those who look, arms given to the Lebanese Army are most likely to be used against Israel. Why aren't France, the U.S., and UNIFIL looking? They are not looking, because they appease the Arabs. UNIFIL pretends to keep the border quiet, but its record is one of ignoring or assisting terrorists against Israel. The practical purpose of the UN-imposed ceasefire was to set up a force blocking Israel from retaliating against Hizbullah aggression.

What is the big picture here? Western policy on the Arab-Israel conflict is based on ideological ignorance and make-believe. It has been for a long time. First the West thought that it could deal with the Nazis. WWII resulted. Then it thought it could deal with the Soviets. Other wars resulted or were threatened. Now it thinks it can deal with the Muslims. The results have been wars, terrorism, and migration-infiltration and a rising Islamic cry to take over.

Time for the U.S. to switch foreign policy from make-believe.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, December 19, 2010.

... that Israelis are no longer referring to arabs as "palestinians."

Thank goodness you people are beginning to understand how Jimmy Carter and Greta Duisenberg shaped the issues with their cunning use of words. Hebrew-speakers are unable to grasp the political nuances of the English language. But it seems Israelis are at last catching on. Arabs cannot be palestinians because they have no connection to the Jewish Homeland. The Jewish Homeland IS Palestine. That's the law. That has always been the law until along came the ignorant Jewish dopes in the "suck up to arabs" in the Peres claque. Remember, Peres professed his love for Yasser Arafat and oozed Jewish wonderfulness all over that Jew-hating Baptist, Jimmy Carter. That ploy only works with stupid children, and the arabs are anything but stupid children. They are hyenas out for the kill. Now that we know about German Jewish refugee Henry Kissinger's callous comments that gassing Jews in Russia is not an American concern (Kissinger soiled himself for to suck up to his boss, Nixon, and Nixon doubtless secretly despised Kissinger for being such a groveling brown nose) we find his kind in Shimon Peres who declared bloody Arafat his "dearest friend in peace." And Peres wasn't being sarcastic, he and Arafat were together crafting a scheme to extract profits from Gaza, which was precisely why Peres was gung-ho to give away land that Israel had no legal right to gift away.

Don't ever use the enemy's words. If the arabs call themselves martyrs, you must call them jackals. If they call you pigs and apes, don't argue with them about whether it's nasty to call Jews pigs and apes. Just call them thieving hyenas. As in, "The thieving hyenas organized under Abu Mazen, tried to steal a bomb into a synagogue."

Got it?

Go for it. Take your land. And arrest Olmert and holy-face Peres for violating international law. Olmert said he's tired of fighting. Well, give him a permanent rest in a locked facility. As for old holy-face? Seize his bank accounts and make him disgorge all the foreign-source funds that poured into his myriad "peace organizations."

Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z. Not Left. Not Right. Just 4 Justice 4 Israel.

Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by K_Hallal, December 19, 2010.
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post
(http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=199813). It is archived at

The media and the US administration are again colluding with the Israeli Left's political leadership to overthrow the Netanyahu government.


Over the past week, two writers published columns in foreign newspapers. One received wall to wall coverage in Israel. The other was completely ignored. The contrasting fortunes of the articles are a key to understanding the central challenges to Israel's democratic order.

Last Friday, Saeb Erekat, the Palestinian Authority's chief peace negotiator with Israel published an op-ed in Britain's Guardian newspaper in which he declared eternal war on the Jewish state. This he did by asserting that any peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians that does not permit the immigration of some 7 million foreign Arabs to Israel will be "completely untenable."

So as far as the supposedly moderate chief Palestinian negotiator is concerned, a peace deal in which Israel cedes Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem to the Palestinians as the Israeli Left desires will not be sufficient for the Palestinians. Unless Israel also agrees to commit national suicide by accepting 7 million foreign Arabs as citizens, the Palestinians will continue to wage their war. With or without a Palestinian state, as long as Israel exists, the Palestinians will continue to seek its destruction.

The second article was Tom Friedman's latest column in the New York Times. Throughout his interminable career, Friedman has identified with Israel's radical Left and so been the bane of all non-leftist governments. In his latest screed, he compared Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to someone in the throes of an LSD trip. Friedman harangued Netanyahu for failing to convince his cabinet to agree to the Obama administration's demand to abrogate Jewish property rights in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem for another 90 days. He argued that by doing so, Israel — with some help from the Palestinians — is destroying all chance of peace.

So on the one hand, the chief Palestinian negotiator declared eternal war. And on the other hand, Friedman condemned Netanyahu — for the gazillionth time.

And characteristically, the Israeli media ignored Erekat's article and gave Friedman's screed around-the-clock coverage.

DESPITE ITS hysteria, the media has not fooled the public. The Israeli people don't need to hear about Erekat's declaration of war to know that the supposedly moderate Fatah party is just as committed to Israel's destruction as Hamas. Israelis know that the majority of terrorist attacks carried out by the Palestinians since 2000 have been conducted by Fatah. They know that the US- and EU-financed and trained Palestinian security services commanded the Palestinian jihad that began in 2000. They know that Fatah is behind much of the political warfare being carried out today against Israel throughout the world.

The disparity between the pubic and the media comes across very clearly in a poll released last week by the Brookings Institute. A mere eight percent of Israelis believe that Israel and the Palestinians will achieve a lasting peace in the next five years. 91percent of Israeli Jews and 88 percent of Israeli Arabs think either that more time is needed or that there will never be peace.

Despite the sentiments of the public, there is a class of Israeli leaders that acts as though peace is just around the corner and that the public expects them to deliver it. Not unlike Friedman, for the most part these politicians argue that the Israeli government bears either sole responsibility or the lion's share of responsibility for the absence of peace. Consequently, they argue that all that is required to achieve peace is an Israeli leader willing to do what it takes to make it happen.

Over the weekend, opposition leader Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister and Labor Party leader Ehud Barak were in Washington for the annual Middle East peace process conclave at the Brookings Institute's Saban Forum. In their addresses to the forum and in media interviews, both politicians followed the Israeli media's lead by ignoring Erekat and parroting Friedman.

Barak brazenly rejected the policies of the government he serves by calling for the division of Jerusalem in the framework of a final peace accord with the Palesstinians.

As for Livni, she eschewed every semblance of propriety during her stay in the US capital. During a joint appearance on ABC's "This Week," with the unelected Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad, Livni viciously attacked the Netanyahu government. Livni criticized Netanyahu for not accepting the Obama administration's call to abrogate Jewish property rights. She attacked him for not forming a leftist government with Kadima and Labor. She made it clear that she doesn't believe that Netanyahu is interested in peace.

Echoing Barak's assertion at the Saban Forum that being a Zionist means supporting a Palestinian state, Livni argued that by surrendering to the Palestinians, and agreeing to every US demand, Israel is advancing its own existential interests.

On the so-called Palestinian refugee issue, while stipulating that Israel could not accept immigration of foreign Arabs to its truncated borders, she said nothing about Erekat's Guardian article. And she voiced no objection when Fayyad intimated that a Palestinian compromise on this issue is not in the offing.

From Livni's perspective, the only one acting in bad faith is Netanyahu.

Barak and Livni's behavior was not wrong simply because it is classless to attack your country's elected leadership while visiting in foreign lands. It was wrong because in behaving as they did, they showed extraordinary disrespect for the 92 percent of Israelis who do not share their professed belief that peace is just around the corner.

So what were they after in Washington? Why did they embrace the views of a mere 8 percent of the electorate while treating 92 percent of their countrymen with contempt? And why did they choose to launch their assault on the government from Washington?

Livni and Clinton


IN TRUTH Barak and Livni were simply following what has become the standard operating procedure for leftist politicians over the past twenty years. They were playing to two constituencies that they prize more than they prize the public.

They were playing to the US administration and the Israeli media.

Barak is an old hand at this game. During Netanyahu's first tenure as prime minister, Barak used then president Bill Clinton to bring down Netanyahu's government and get himself elected in his place. After Barak made clear that he would be far more accommodating towards Yassir Arafat than Netanyahu was, Clinton went out of his way to demonize and isolate Netanyahu. He pressured Netanyahu's coalition partners to abandon his government. And when Netanyahu's government finally fell, Clinton dispatched his senior political strategists James Carville, Stanley Greenberg and Robert Schrum to run Barak's campaign.

Since Netanyahu appointed him Defense Minister, Barak has been racking up frequent flier miles on the Tel-Aviv-Washington line. Barak travels to Washington at least once a month. Amazingly, he always happens to come home with recommendations consonant with the administration's whims.

Livni was similarly richly rewarded for her willingness to attack Netanyahu while sitting next to Fayyad on American television. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton treated Livni like the most esteemed politician in Israel. Clinton steadfastly ignored the fact that 91 percent of Israelis think Livni's views are utter nonsense. And after accusing Netanyahu of lacking the courage to embrace the cause of peace, Clinton ostentatiously hosted Livni for an hour-long private meeting.

Livni's party Kadima is a media creation. Whereas every other political party in Israel was formed by citizens who felt they needed to organize politically to empower their voices, Kadima was the brainchild of the media. The media colluded with Likud leaders who were disenchanted with their voters. The likes of Ha'aretz, Yediot Ahronot and Channel Two convinced these Likud politicians to join forces with breakaways from the Labor party, who also held their voters in contempt.

As Barak's rise to power in 1999 makes clear, the media's bid to demonize the Right and undermine Israel's alliance with the US in the hopes of restoring the Left to power is nothing new. But this week, a leading media siren was kind enough to expose the media's entire strategy for disenfranchising the public. Ha'aretz's veteran columnist Akiva Eldar performed this service in a pair of articles published Tuesday in the Guardian and Ha'aretz.

Eldar co-authored his Guardian article with his comrade Carlo Strenger. It was their response to Erekat's declaration of eternal war.

Eldar's main message to Erekat was that he should keep his plans to himself. Certainly he shouldn't be blabbing about them in a place the Israeli public was liable to see them. It could wreck the media's entire plan to discredit the government.

Eldar and Strenger scolded, "Erekat's article is disappointing. He is not just a private citizen, but the Palestinian Authority's chief negotiator, and he knows Israel and its internal dynamics very well. He knows that raising the right of return at this moment plays into the hands of Israel's right wing: they will be able to say: 'We always told you so: the two-state solution is just a Palestinian plot to incorporate the Jewish state into the Greater State of Palestine.'"

But then again, as Eldar showed in his article in Ha'aretz, Erekat doesn't really have anything to worry about. Eldar and his comrades will keep the Israeli public in the dark about Erekat's determination to destroy Israel.

Ignoring completely what Erekat wrote, Eldar's column in Ha'aretz started where Friedman's ended. He placed all the blame for the absence of a peace process on Netanyahu's shoulders. He accused Netanyahu of destroying Israel's alliance with the US by not embracing Obama's latest request to abrogate Jewish property rights in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. He then claimed that due to Netanyahu's behavior, the Obama administration has decided to follow in the Clinton administration's footsteps and overthrow his government.

As Eldar put it, "When Clinton recently invited Kadima leader Tzipi Livni to a private meeting, this signified an unofficial announcement that Netanyahu's account in Washington has been closed."

He continued, "Twelve years ago, when Hillary Clinton's husband realized that... [Netanyahu] had no intention of honoring his signature (on the Wye River Accord with Yasser Arafat), that was Netanyahu's last stop before being sent back to his villa in Caesarea."

So this is the game. The media and the US administration are again colluding with the Israeli Left's political leadership to overthrow the Netanyahu government. They are willfully ignoring both the will of Israel's voters and the declared commitment of their favorite "moderate" Palestinians to fight Israel until it is destroyed in order to blame the absence of peace on Netanyahu.

THIS GAME can stop. But two things must happen first.

The Obama administration and the US foreign policy establishment that supports it must pay a price for seeking to undermine the elected government of the US's most important strategic ally in the region. And Israeli voters — who gave Kadima more mandates in the Knesset than any other party in the last elections — must abandon Livni and her Astroturf party.

Until these things begin to happen we can expect our media to continue to collude with their American partners, and with Livni and Barak, to undermine the will of the public.

Contact the poster at k_hallal@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

NEW YEAR 2010-2011
Posted by Teresinka Pereira, December 18, 2010.

Riddled by hopes
I still have space in my heart
for new adventures.
I am waiting with hunger and thirst
for a way to reiterate
my existence.
Meanwhile I am sure that your news
of joy, recognitions and victories
will make me enjoy life,
resisting from my own troubles.
I will look for the landscape
which rises with sunshine,
bringing desires of hapiness
to share with you and others.

I will hope to have a good time
at New Year's Eve

Contact teresinka pereira by email at tpereira@buckeye-express.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Billy Mills, December 18, 2010.

The authorship of this article is murky and has been attributed to at least two different economics professors, who, according to Snopes, have denied authorship. At least one has used it in his classes.


Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7..
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Contact Billy Miles by email at rewrite@suddenlink.net

To Go To Top

Posted by IsraPundit, December 18, 2010.

This was written by Kathy Shaidle and it appeared yesterday in IsraPundit.


One reason I didn't go to university? Things-i-wish-id-known-or-remembered-when-i-was-a-leftist. Everybody promised me that Ronald Reagan was going to blow up the world. So why waste my time and money on a degree I'd never live to use, right?

That was my excuse, as a GenX "slacker", anyhow. I later learned that all through history, seers and soothsayers had been predicting the end of the world.

Those prophets were always the butt of jokes — until the mid-twentieth century. That's when doomsday-ers ingeniously repackaged their predictions as "science" instead of "religion."

Suddenly, they earned the "strange new respect" of the elites (plus billions in prophetic profits.) The rest of us plebes were forced to revere yesterday's kooks as today's respectable, infallible experts.

So we somehow survived the nuclear war" scare, the "nuclear winter" scare, the "overpopulation" scare.

And when those fads inevitably went the way of the Pet Rock, the "scientific" prophets concocted a new one: "global warming." Too bad for them, some of us had longer memories than the average j-school grad.

One of those "skeptics" with a sense of history is Donna Laframboise. I've told you before about her groundbreaking research into the "bible" of "global warming", the Nobel Prize winning IPCC report that's cost Western economies untold billions in naked wealth redistribution.

Today she presents a look back at "Forty Years of Drama Queen Scientists":

Four decades ago, in January 1972, the Ecologist magazine published a lengthy essay titled A Blueprint for Survival. Shortly afterward, the essay was re-packaged as a 140-page best-selling paperback.

What else were they saying back in 1972? The first line of the Blueprint's introduction declares that an industrial way of life is "not sustainable." We're told humans are consuming too much, polluting too much, and having too many babies. We're told economic growth is the enemy and that austerity is the answer. We're warned that unless things change radically "a succession of famines, epidemics, social crises and wars" are inevitable.

But of course, we need only look up from all our present day "statistics" and "computer model" and Al Gore's PowerPoints to notice that, as Laframboise says:

The past 40 years bear little resemblance to the horror story the drama queens were predicting back in 1972. Average people are now richer and healthier. They live longer lives and many enjoy access to more food, culture, and technology than did the princes of old. In much of the world the air and water is cleaner than it was in the 1970s, and the forests are larger.

Alas, I'd hoped we'd have buried ABBA and bell bottoms in the landfill of history, but otherwise, I assure all you young folks that life today is mostly better. (For instance, in the 1970s, something occurred that the high school economics textbooks we were using at the exact same time were assuring us was impossible: unemployment, interest rates and inflation were high at the same time. The situation was so bad they had to invent a new name for it: "stagflation." Thank you, Jimmy Carter!)

So when you read about the latest "end of the world" conference — this time in Cancun — remember: this "permanent class of global warming bureaucrats and diplomats and various hangers on" have been getting together to variously scold us and warn us about the any-minute-now, our-fault apocalypse... for the last 18 years.

IsraPundit.com is an activist pro-Israel website.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 18, 2010.

This was written by Daniel Greenfield and it appeared yesterday on his website, Sultan Knish.


When lefty stalwarts Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann decided to jump to the defense of an accused rapist, relying on such authorities as Bianca Jagger, they were either thinking that whether Julian Assange raped two women was irrelevant, because he was doing more important progressive duty. That was the same justification used to support Roman Polanski for his brutal rape of a 13 year old girl. It's more convenient to claim that the rape thing was a CIA plot, as Bianca Jagger did (while keeping "rape" in quotation marks) and Olbermann retweeted.

Predictably thin-skinned, Olbermann reacted to a feminist Twitter campaign with shrill insults, before eventually huffing and puffing and abandoning Twitter. Michael Moore penned an open letter to the Swedish government accusing it of ignoring rapes in general. It's a cynical pose that lets him play rape victim advocate, while defending a particular rapist. What Moore ignored is that most of those rapes in Sweden come from Muslim immigrants anyway.

Neither Olbermann or Michael Moore could wrap their heads around the idea that the US government likely pressured Sweden to bring Assange in — and that Assange is still an accused rapist. That both can be true at the same time.

The ideological paradigm has trouble coping with contradictory information like that. If the evil US government is hunting Assange then he must be a saint, and all accusations directed at him are the product of a vast conspiracy to silence him. But Olbermann and Moore should know better than anyone else that it's entirely possible to push interested allegations that are actually true. They've done it themselves when going after Republicans. More often though they've lied. And that may help Moore and Olbermann believe that everyone lies.

So first they lied about the charges that Julian Assange is accused of. They misrepresented the charges against Assange as not really being rape-rape. When in one case it's pretty clear cut rape from the start, and in the other it turned into rape. Whether Assange is guilty of those charges is for a court to determine, but Olbermann and Michael Moore are making a mockery of their own claims to be protectors of women by defending Assange by mocking his accusers and insisting that he can't be guilty because he's on our side. And therefore a victim of "The Man."

This same kind of defense was used for Roman Polanski. The charges against him were misrepresented. And the pro-Polanski documentary Wanted and Desired (it deserves to be called a documentary about as much as Moore's documentaries do) painted a portrait of Polanski as the well-meaning victim of ruthless prosecutors. Polanski couldn't be a rapist because he was one of us. Just like Assange is one of us.

One of the progressive good guys who see the world for what it is.

Let's take the case of Ira Einhorn, the Unicorn Killer, a leftist radical who murdered his ex-girlfriend, and stuck her body in a trunk. He managed to convince enough liberals that he was the victims of a CIA conspiracy, that they helped him escape and continued protecting him. He married a Swedish woman and parties around Europe. This went on for a long time, until the US finally managed to extradite him.

Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann will ignore the obvious parallels with the defenders of Iran Einhorn, who treated Holly Maddox as another inconvenient victim. And why shouldn't they? This kind of thing has been going on for a long time now.

David Horowitz of Front Page Magazine broke with the left over a case like this. The murder of Betty Van Patter. But most liberals have been willing to treat the Black Panther movement as heroes.

"I became a rapist. To refine my technique and modus operandi, I started out by practicing on black girls in the ghetto... and when I considered myself smooth enough, I crossed the tracks and sought out white prey.

Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values and that I was defiling his women...

Recently I came upon a book of quotations from one of LeRoi Jones' poems, takes from his book The Dead Lecturer.

"A cult of death need of the simple striking arm under the street lamp. The cutters from under the rented earth. Come up black dada nihilismus. Rape the white girls. Rape their fathers. Cut their mothers' throats."

I have lived those lines and I know that if I had not been apprehended I would have slit some white throats. There are, of course, many young blacks out there right now who are slitting white throats and raping the white girl.

That's from Eldridge Cleaver's Soul on Ice, the man that liberals turned into an icon, along with his Black Panther thugs.

By presenting his rapes as a response to racial oppression, Cleaver legitimized them in the eyes of white liberals. But the not so hidden truth is present all along. Cleaver did not just rape white girls. He raped black girls. Because he was first of all, a rapist.

By passing off his rapes as revolutionary acts, he got liberals to champion him and treat him as a hero. And his victims as irrelevant details. The same way Ira Einhorn did. Or Julian Assange.

Of course it doesn't end there. You could easily write a book on this sort of thing. It just wouldn't make for very pleasant reading. Some time ago I wrote about the liberal love affair with Caryl Chessman.

Caryl Chessman was a rapist who became the star of a worldwide campaign

"Telephone callers from Western Europe, Latin America, Africa and Australia have importuned Governor Brown to spare Chessman's life. Brown has received save-Chessman pleas from Belgium's Queen Mother and from the Social Democratic members of Italy's Chamber of Deputies.

Secretary of State Christian Herter told his press conference last week that the Chessman case had stirred up "quite a surprising amount of interest" in South America. In Brazil, circulators of a save-Chessman petition claim more than 2,500,000 signatures. In The Netherlands, record dealers are profiting from brisk demand for a new platter, in Dutch, called The Death Song of Chessman.

The London News Chronicle recently editorialized that "the great American nation is humiliated because of the agony of Chessman," and the London Daily Herald added that the day Chessman is executed "will be a day when it will be rather unpleasant to be an American." Buenos Aires' Critics called the Chessman case "the most terrible case that has faced the world in recent history." — Time Magazine, Mar 21, 1960

Neil Diamond wrote a song about Chessman. So did Phil Ochs.

Then there's that all time hero of gonzo journalism, Hunter S. Thompson, who made his reputation by mythologizing and defending the Hell's Angels biker gang on charges of rape. He did it for that incredibly progressive magazine. The Nation.

Thompson himself was on charged with rape. An unsurprising factoid, but one that the liberals who treat him as a hero avoid discussing.

Again it's possible to keep going with this forever. But let's bring it back to Sweden.

In his thoroughly cynical open letter, Michael Moore charges the Swedish government with loving rapists. When actually he's talking about himself. But he's not completely wrong. The Swedish government does love and cover up for rapists. So do most European governments. Why do they do it? Because the rapists are Muslim.

Most rapes in Sweden and Norway are carried out by Muslims against the natives. And it isn't talked about anywhere. It's certainly not mentioned by progressives. The French Arab and African of Eldridge Cleaver create rape songs turning their rapes into an act of cultural warfare.

And so we're back where we started. Assange and the Muslim rapists who boost Sweden's rape statistics have one thing in common. Liberal defenders who lie for them and cover up for them.

Now let's go to the weekly roundup,

Remember Muslims accusing Israel of stealing their organs. Or Turkey's Islamic regime making Valley of the Wolves, a propaganda piece in which Americans steal Muslim organs. Now where they could have possibly gotten that idea from?

Maybe it's from Muslim theft of organs.

The Muslim terrorist group, the KLA, which the Clinton Administration took off the terrorist list, armed and aided, and fought a war on behalf of — was stealing organs. From non-Muslims of course. (Murdering infidels for their organs is Hallal. Murdering Muslims for their organs is Haram.) From Christian Serbs.

Marty's investigation found that there were a number of detention facilities in Albania, where both Kosovan opponents of the KLA and Serbs were allegedly held once the hostilities in Kosovo were over in 1999, including a "state-of-the-art reception centre for the organized crime of organ trafficking."

The report says the captives had their blood drawn and tested to help determine whether their organs would be suitable for transplant, and were examined "by men referred to as 'doctors'" in the towns of Rripe and Fushe-Kruje. During his 2007 trip to Albania, then-U.S. President George W. Bush visited Fushe-Kruje.

Marty said his findings were based on testimonies of "KLA insider sources" such as drivers, bodyguards, and other "fixers" involved in logistical and practical tasks, as well as "organizers," or the ringleaders behind the lucrative organ trade. The report, however, does not name any of the sources, or the number of people who were allegedly killed in the process.

The accounts pointed to "a methodology by which all of the captives were killed, usually by a gunshot to the head, before being operated on to remove one or more of their organs," the report said.

The report alleges that the captives were first taken to a house in Albania run by an ethnic Albanian with ties to KLA's leadership. When the surgeons were ready, KLA gunmen would shoot the captives — their corpses quickly taken to an operating clinic, it said.

Of course this was only the work of a few extremists. Like the Prime Minister of Kosovo.

Hashim Thaci, Prime Minister of Kosovo (Dieter Nagl/AFP/Getty)
Kosovo's prime minister is the head of a "mafia-like" Albanian group responsible for smuggling weapons, drugs and human organs through eastern Europe, according to a Council of Europe inquiry report on organised crime.

Hashim Thaçi is identified as the boss of a network that began operating criminal rackets in the runup to the 1998-99 Kosovo war, and has held powerful sway over the country's government since.

The report of the two-year inquiry, which cites FBI and other intelligence sources, has been obtained by the Guardian. It names Thaçi as having over the last decade exerted "violent control" over the heroin trade. Figures from Thaçi's inner circle are also accused of taking captives across the border into Albania after the war, where a number of Serbs are said to have been murdered for their kidneys, which were sold on the black market.

Legal proceedings began in a Pristina district court today into a case of alleged organ trafficking discovered by police in 2008. That case — in which organs are said to have been taken from impoverished victims at a clinic known as Medicus — is said by the report to be linked to Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) organ harvesting in 2000. It comes at a crucial period for Kosovo, which on Sunday held its first elections since declaring independence from Serbia in 2008. Thaçi claimed victory in the election and has been seeking to form a coalition with opposition parties.

...and if he can't form a coalition with them, he can always have them killed and sell their organs on the black market.

Whom do we owe a Hashim Tachi government to? You know that wonderful man who just died? Richard Holbrooke. Capital fellow. They're naming a bridge after him. (No really, it goes straight down into the river.)

The new American Ambassador to the United Nations, Richard C. Holbrooke, met Kosovo's ethnic Albanian leaders today and urged them to help build the free, law-abiding and democratic society they say they want and that the NATO alliance went to war to provide.


Mr. Holbrooke's meeting with the political leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army, Hashim Thaci, 29, was both pointed and important, American officials said, with the future role of the ''army's'' members being negotiated now and a deadline for its ''demilitarization'' on Sept. 19.


The United Nations is also trying to move Mr. Thaci and his followers into active politics, but Mr. Thaci is said to be reluctant to give up his status in many Albanians' eyes as the leader of a liberation movement that helped drive the Serbs out of Kosovo. He is said to oppose the idea of leading a new party, fearing that it would turn him into ''just another politician,'' an official said, which is part of what the United Nations would like to achieve.

Mr. Holbrooke, who will meet Mr. Thaci again on Monday, was said today to have expressed understanding of the Albanian's hesitations. But he demurred publicly when Mr. Thaci, after their long meeting at his office, told waiting reporters that the two men agreed on every point of demilitarization and transformation of the Liberation Army, and that both agreed that ''Kosovars should be the ones to decide for themselves the future of Kosovo.''

Mr. Holbrooke said simply: ''I'll let Mr. Thaci speak for himself and his colleagues,'' adding: ''We see progress and problems. But at least we are in a free Kosovo, and with NATO to provide security, it allows the creation of a pluralistic democracy.''

He said Mr. Thaci ''assured me of his commitment to those principles,'' and said they had discussed another important point, unmentioned by Mr. Thaci, ''the issue of corruption, which is a cancer that can destroy a regime.''

A pluralistic Muslim run terrorist state which smuggles drugs into Europe and organs. Thank Allah for Mr. Holbrooke. A great pity that Al Gore never became President and Holbrooke lost the chance to be Secretary of State. We'd have a Palestinian state already.

Creating another Muslim enclave is not exactly a good idea. The existing Muslim world is about as pluralistic and tolerant as the KLA's bullets.

Here's a charming story from Atlas Shrugs that you won't see much elsewhere.

The remains of a Canadian diplomat buried in Turkey were reportedly forcibly removed from a local cemetery after a prominent Muslim family said they weren't comfortable praying next to a Christian grave.

Hans-Joachim Himmelsbach, 65, a retired trade commissioner from Vancouver who was living in Turkey, died about three weeks ago after suffering a blood clot to his brain while he was recovering from a throat operation, his stepfather, Heinz Koletzko, said in an interview.

Mr. Himmelsbach was buried in a Christian ceremony at a local cemetery in Bodrum, a tourist resort community on Turkey's south Aegean coast. Mr. Himmelsbach's family obtained permission from the municipality for a priest to perform the ceremony, Mr. Koletzko said, as is required in Turkey for religious groups not officially recognized by the state. But his wife, Ilknur Himmelsbach, a Turkish citizen, told the Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review that Mr. Himmelsbach's grave was recently moved against her wishes to a remote area of the cemetery at the request of a local Muslim businessman who felt Mr. Himmelsbach was buried too close to the family plot. "If they told me this incident was going to happen 30 years ago, I wouldn't have believed them," Ms. Himmelsbach told the newspaper. "My husband doesn't deserve this. He moved to Turkey to make me happy."

Sinan Dayioglu, described by the paper as a businessman belonging to "one of Bodrum's leading families," said he objected to the fact that Mr. Himmelsbach had been buried next to his mother and his cousin. "In the world, people having different beliefs are separated with walls or wires, even though they are in the same cemetery," Mr. Dayioglu told the paper. "This is for the respect of worship and belief."

His mistake. Right?

But don't expect the media to cover this, which is too busy ranting because the people of Safed have been asked not to rent apartments to Arab Muslims... in the interest of not being murdered. That of course is racist. But evicting a man from the cemetery because his religion gives you cooties is alright. There's no Apartheid to see here.

Meanwhile Atlas also has the date of the next Park 51 protest.

Solomonia blog has more on the ongoing Z Street vs Obama IRS case from Fresno Zionism.

Western Rifle Shooters has a proposal for an interesting open source project that will index and showcase stories to compete with the Drudge Report. Follow the link if you're interested in participating.

The Daley Gator gives us the new mascot of the Democratic Party. It's the same one depicted above.

And on that theme, Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit nails Congressman Cleaver on his lie about the 48 billion dollar earmark.

Col B Bunny comments on my own piece with his Liberalism as Naked Reaction.

Liberals, however, are different. Not once, not ever have I known a liberal to speak of Stalinism or Maoism as a danger to be avoided. Not once have I ever heard a liberal demonstrate the least concern for the huge political controls that were imposed on us during and after the New Deal or for the Supreme Court's betrayal that gave us the New Commerce Clause that laid waste to any remnant of meaningful federalism. Nor have I ever heard a liberal voice the least bit of anger or concern over the communist presence in the government. Van Jones in the White House? A trifle!

No. What liberals want is the victory of a particular political, scientific, economic, or social programs. They want some specific thing to happen and embrace whatever tool of government is required to force that result on others. The increase or decrease of personal liberty involved is irrelevant. (Abortion is a limited exception to this. It applies directly to or is understood personally by women but there is no understanding that spills over to others who are called upon to submit to controls that deprive them of their rights.)

The liberal is thus an ever ready and willing opponent of the constitutional order based on popular sovereignty whose requirements must yield in all cases to whatever plan is on the drawing board at the moment. The Van Joneses and crazed left want immediate and total revolution, change on steroids, but the liberal wants it on the installment plan.

For the right cause, what's a little coercion applied to the ignorant, the superstitious, and the fearful?

At NewsReal, Lisa Graas asks the tough questions about her state's new Senator, Rand Paul.

Elder of Ziyon notes the AP Sara Hussein's whitewash of a Hamas leader

At Commentary, Rick Richman sums up quickly and succinctly why the negotiations with the Palestinian Arab Muslim terrorist group Fatah are unworkable.

First, the Palestinians refused to negotiate unless Netanyahu endorsed a two-state solution and froze settlement construction; Netanyahu did both, and the Palestinians refused to negotiate. They had to be dragged into "proximity talks" and then dragged into "direct negotiations" and then left.

Second, the Palestinian Authority canceled local elections in the West Bank, unwilling to risk them even in the part of the putative state it nominally controls. The PA is now headed by a "president" currently in the 72nd month of his 48-month term, with a "prime minister" appointed by the holdover "president" rather than by the Palestinian parliament (which, unfortunately, is controlled by the terrorist group the Palestinians elected five years ago). These days, the PA turns for approval not to its public or its parliament but rather to the Arab League, while the other half of the putative state is run by the terrorist group. As a democratic state, "Palestine" is already a failed one.

There's two more to read.

Last year I also pointed out some basic dysfunctions within the failed non-state.

As of last year, the PA requested 7 billion dollars to "overhaul" its security forces to a mere 50,000 men at a rate of 23 "police" for each thousand Palestinian Arabs. That is 6 times the ratio of the NYPD. Since Oslo, the numbers have fluctuated from 40,000 to 80,000 under 14 separate police forces, which are individually loyal to different sub-factions within the PLO. And with all that "security", there is no actual law or order to be found. That is because "Palestinian Police" was how the various PLO affiliated terrorist militias were rebranded by the Clinton Administration. Most continued to operate as terrorists carrying out attacks against Israel. The rest function as the private police of various officials within the Palestinian Authority. And much as the State Department might like to pretend otherwise, all the PA police forces are not loyal to any laws, but only to those officials who pay them and give them orders.

There is no constitutional rule of law within the PA. There isn't even a legally elected head of the Palestinian Authority. There isn't even a single government ruling over Gaza and the West Bank. There is no economy. As much as 25 to 50 percent of the Palestinian adult male population is employed by the Palestinian Authority, which is its own biggest employer with as many as 200,000 people out of a population of barely 2 million in the West Bank. That's one PA employee to 10 Palestinian Arab men, women and children. It means that with 42 percent of the population under 14, virtually every Palestinian Arab family has a member who is officially employed by the Palestinian Authority. Some more than one.

And guess who pays for all this? The Palestinian Authority has never been self-supporting, it could not survive for 5 seconds without money from the United States and the European Union. The billions of dollars pumped into the PA's coffers go down the line to various officials and their families, as well as the terrorist militias who keep them in power. Often the money has a way of vanishing, as it did in 1997 when the PA reported that 40 percent of its budget just went "missing". The PA employment racket is not simply a bureaucratic blank check though. Jobs are given in exchange for support. The "employees" may not ever actually show up for work, but they are expected to use their tribal and family influence to back the PA leadership. And the remainder of that money goes to the tens of thousands of terrorists officially described as the police.

But we aren't done yet, because while the largest employer in the PA may be the authority itself, the second largest employer is the UNRWA, with a 95 percent Palestinian Arab staff. The UNRWA is dedicated only to aiding Palestinian Arabs and the vast majority of its budget comes from the US and Europe. Again. The UNRWA's employees not only overlap with those of the PLO and Hamas, but it is rife with waste spending more on Palestinian Arabs than the UNHCR does on other refugees in the world.

As for the rest of the PA economy... you just saw it. With over 50 percent unemployment in a part of the world where single income families are the norm and nearly 50 percent of the population is underage, the Palestinian economy is the American and European taxpayer. The few exceptions for the most part work in the same settlements that the world keeps demanding that Israel tear down, or across the Green Line in Israel, resulting in an unemployment spike every time there is a terrorist attack and Israel has to shut down its inner borders. There is no other economy, despite the billions invested by governments and individuals in everything from industrial parks to ready to use greenhouses, there has been no other economy, and there will be no other economy. Which should be obvious when the Palestinian Authority lists Olive-Wood Carvings and Mother-of-Pearl Souvenirs as two of its major industries. When you're listing not just souvenirs, but a very specific type of souvenir as a major industry, you really have no economic plan except to ask other people for money.

...but there's always the booming organ theft industry.

Finally a little video from 1932 whose opening is surprisingly relevant today in the age of Pelosi and Reid. Video.

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, December 18, 2010.

Anyone reading this Rav Kahane article and is not on my personal list to receive the weekly articles written by Rav Kahane and would like to be, please contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com

To view previously e-mailed Rav Kahane articles go to:


Many times I have spoken of the Talmudic parable of the king, his servant, and the fish. Never was it more apt.

Once there was a king who sent his servant to buy a fish. The servant returned with a fish that stank. In fury the king gave the servant a choice of three punishments: "Eat the fish, get whipped for the fish, or pay for the fish." In common with most people, the servant chose not to reach into his pocket and he decided to eat the stinking fish but after two bites the stench made him give up and he decided to get whipped for it. The pain of the lashes, however, made him stop that, too, and he cried out, "I will pay for the fish!"

And so the fool ate the fish, got whipped for the fish and, in the end, had to pay for it, anyhow. Those in Israel and without, who refuse to understand that nothing will deter America from demanding that Israel make the maximum concessions, play the same fool. Those who do not understand that there is nothing that Israel can possible do, that there are no compromises it can make, that there is nothing short of full retreat to the 1967 borders that will satisfy the United States-are the same fools as the servant who ate, got whipped and in the end had to pay anyhow,

Their refusal to make the difficult choice of telling the Americans "no", now, at this moment, will see them making the retreats they hope will avert American anger; it will see this effort fail even as the frontier moves from its present lines within the Arab heartland to new ones close to the Jewish cities; and most important, the Americans will make the same demands they always have envisioned since the days of the Roger Plan-total Israeli withdrawal. And since this is a thing that not even the most dovish of Israelis will agree to, the result will be an ultimate Israeli firm "no", an ultimate American anger of the kind all men of "new initiative" propose to avert today by compromise, and exactly the same conditions of confrontation that would come anyhow if the Israelis said their "no" today. There would be one great difference, however, a "no" today will bring the crisis while Israel stands poised near the Arab capitols. A "no" tomorrow, after all the hapless and confused compromises and "initiatives," will bring the same crisis near Tel Aviv, Beersheva and Netanya.

This is what happens when foolish and confused Israelis, by refusing to pay the price of saying "no" to the stinking fish of pressure, attempt to eat it, submit to getting beaten over it and then learn to their dismay that there is no escape from the difficult decision that they should have made in the first place.

Let the Israeli government, its men of "new initiative" and the Jewish leaders in America understand several basic axioms:

1) America is committed to the Roger Plan and the world's interpretation of Security Council Resolution 242, i.e. Israeli withdrawal from all (but insignificant) parts of the lands of 1967. This includes the Golan Heights, Gaza, the entire West bank and the entire Sinai as well as changing Jerusalem's present Jewish sovereignty status.

2) American interests lie, in the minds of most officials in Washington, with Arab oil, the huge potential Arab market and with supplanting Soviet influence with American. This means, at best, an "even-handed" policy rather than a pro-Israeli one.

3) America is moving steadily to recognition of the "Palestinians" as a people and of whomever they decide to have as their leaders. Those leaders are clearly the PLO and already the move to "moderate" the PLO, "public-relations-wise" is underway so that Washington can more easily pressure Israel into recognizing them.

4) The Ford-Kissinger administration is determined to prevent stagnation and will pressure Israel into concession after concession.

5) No administration will got o war for Israel and no administration will continue the present aid level no matter what Israel does or concedes. The frantic search for human allies will end as unsuccessfully as those Jews in the past who forgot what faith in the Jewish G-d was and who turned to Egypt or Assyria or other "allies" for help, only to learn to their dismay that the allies betrayed them.

Stinking fish are not made to be eaten or to get whipped or. One must have the courage to look at the truth and pay the bitter price of honesty. America is tired of the Israeli nuisance and wishes it would ea t the fish already. The time to loudly proclaim "no" is now.

Contact Barbara Ginsberg by email at BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com and visit her website at

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, December 18, 2010.
This was written by Jonathan Kalmus and it appeared December 16, 2010 in the Jewish Chronicle

The British government is refusing to release documents which could shed light on the fate of three Israeli soldiers missing since 1982 because it says sensitive information could harm diplomatic relations with Syria.

On June 11 1982, three Israeli soldiers went missing after a battle with Syrian and Palestinian forces near the Lebanese village of Sultan Yaqub in the last moments of the Lebanon war. Zachary Baumel, Yehuda Katz and Zvi Feldman, all in their 20s at the time, are still officially MIA — missing in action.

But Britain's ambassador to Syria, Ivor Lucas, filed a report to London on the day of the battle and may have witnessed the soldiers' capture by Syrian forces, who reportedly paraded them and their tank through Damascus.

Now a Manchester legal team, acting for Zachary Baumel's mother Miriam, is taking action under increased suspicion over silence from the UK government. Two years of failed requests by Mrs Baumel to see the Lucas report have resulted in the Foreign Office response: "We are conscious that the release of sensitive information would cause harm to our relationship with Syria."

In August the Manchester lawyers submitted a Freedom of Information Act appeal against the Foreign Office over its refusal to release Mr Lucas's report, which may be the only written record to shed light on the soldiers' fate. But two months after the appeal was launched, the FCO has stalled in setting a date to consider the matter.

Solicitor Daniel Berke believes the government can be forced to release the document on the grounds of public interest.

He said: "It is in the public interest to [show] that under its obligations under UK and international law, no passage of time will stop Britain aiding an ally, in this case Israel, to gain fair treatment for its soldiers and to counter terrorism. It is our view that the suggestion this 30-year-old document will cause some harm to Syrian-British relations is really quite a nonsense."

Ivor Lucas, now retired from the diplomatic service, refused a request by the JC to speak on the matter.

But Rev Bob Carroll, a British Christian minister and founder of MIA UK, dedicated to facilitating the release of Israel's service personnel, said he has met Mr Lucas and is sure he saw the fate of the soldiers.

An FCO spokesman would not comment on the appeal but said: "We stand ready to help the families involved as best we can. But the FCO continues to believe that the decision not to release the information best serves the public interest. We take our obligations under the Freedom of Information Act extremely seriously. "

Miriam Baumel said: "I just want the public to know this is a humanitarian matter. We keep getting information that these boys and my son were seen in Damascus and that there were witnesses, and anyone who saw something or who could help must help.

"I feel the possibilities are great that he is still alive, but certainly the families of those who were seen in Damascus are entitled to closure.

"I am calling on the British government to act in a humanitarian manner and let the families know by releasing this document, for us to go further in finding our children. If you have children, if one of your children would be lost, how would you feel?"

Contact Gabrielle Goldwater at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, December 18, 2010.

Atlas Shrugs reports on the verdict in the Ilan Halimi murder trial. Go there for pictures and links.

Ilan Halimi

Tonight, Friday evening (shabbat) the verdict was read, a repeat of July 2009, when the verdict was also read "in a show of disrespect for the family of Ilan Halimi, victim of the most atrocious anti-Semitic crime committed in France since World War II,' on a Friday night — the Sabbath.

The 2009 verdict was such a gross miscarriage of justice, Justice Minister Michèle Alliot-Marie instructed the prosecutor to appeal the verdict in the Gang of Barbarians case. A new trial was scheduled.

Ilan Halimi was targeted, tortured for weeks and murdered because he was Jewish. The murder of Ilan Halimi can only be described as an unspeakable horror, and yet typical of the rising Islamic Jew-hatred and violence against the Jews. A group calling itself the Muslim Barbarians targeted Jewish men for torture and murder. Their first attempts to kidnap a Jew were unsuccessful, despite the lure of a beautiful girl. Ilan Halimi was not so lucky. He did not escape the Islamic homemade concentration camp the Muslim Barbarians had set up.

The banality of evil lived in that apartment building. Apartment dwellers, all Muslims, heard Ilan's screams and cries of torture over a period of three weeks, and yet did not call the cops. The screams must have been loud because the torture was especially atrocious: the thugs cut bits of flesh off the young man. They cut his fingers and ears. They burned him with acid. They poured flammable liquid on him and set him on fire. Not only did those in the building not go to the police — they did nothing at all. Worse, many took part in the tortures.

After weeks of systematic and unspeakable cruelty:

On February 11, four days after the abductors stopped communicating with the family, Halimi was found, still alive, not far from a railway line at Sainte-Genevieve-des-Bois, about 15 kilometers south of Bagneux. He was naked, handcuffed, and bleeding profusely. He was incapable of speaking. His entire body — or "80% of it," according to police — had been butchered. He died of his wounds on the way to the hospital, just a few minutes after he was discovered. New York Sun here.

Tonight, Nidra Poller is in Paris covering the verdict for Atlas readers.

Verdict in the Gang of Barbarians appellate court trial, Paris December 17, 2010.


No punishment is enough punishment

The verdict in the appeals trial of 17 members of the Gang of Barbarians, guilty in diverse degrees of luring, kidnapping, and torturing Ilan Halimi, was announced this Friday evening. Ilan Halimi's mother, sisters, and brother-in-law, who are observant Jews, could not be in court to hear the verdict handed down two hours after the beginning of shabat.. The verdict in the lower court trial had been rendered at 10 PM on Friday July 13, 2009.

Jail terms were increased for seven of the seventeen defendants; the other ten were unchanged. The defense lawyers were exasperated. "All of this for nothing!" If it were nothing more than a few years added to the prison terms of seven defendants, one might be tempted to agree that it was not worth two and a half months of hearings at great expense of time, effort, and public funds. The plaintiffs' lawyers, on the contrary, were deeply satisfied. Why? This time, they say, the presiding judge organized the hearings in such a way that the full weight of the ordeal in all its horror was rendered. The mastermind Youssouf Fofana, who called himself the "Brain of the Barbarians," was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of Ilan Halimi, with aggravating circumstances of anti-Semitism. After the public prosecutor appealed the lower court verdict for the seventeen defendants, Fofana interjected an appeal on his own behalf. And then withdrew it. He was expected to appear in court, however, as a witness. But he created so many disturbances in the first days of hearings that the judge refrained from summoning him thereafter. In the absence of Fofana, whose unrepentant vice had dominated the first trial, the vices of the other defendants were, according to lawyers for the plaintiffs, brought to light.

If, as the defense lawyers would have us believe, the aim of the retrial was to radically increase the severity of the punishment, the whole operation could be seen as futile. The trial, once more, was held behind closed doors — without any media presence — on the grounds that two of the defendants were under eighteen when the crime was committed. Elsa Vigoureux, who writes a blog for Le Nouvel Observateur weekly, covered the lower court trial in great detail... from one side. Her blog was based almost exclusively on information slipped to her from defense lawyers. She told me, in a private conversation, that she also had the file of the investigation (which is supposed to be made available to a very limited number of people involved in the case).

This time, lawyers for the plaintiffs decided to inform certain journalists, primarily from a Jewish radio station, Radio J. And Ms. Vigoureux showed far less interest in the case. Could we say that the lower court trial was a smokescreen and the appeals trial a sincere attempt to render justice based on a thorough examination of the facts and the personalities involved, revealing the extent of their cruelty and the twisted nature of their minds? The picture that emerges this time is consistent with the horrors endured by Ilan Halimi, held prisoner for 24 days in a makeshift death camp. His jailors and tormentors could not hide, this time, behind a sociological screen... wayward youths manipulated by a monster. The monstrosity of each and every one came to light.

Behind closed doors. The next step is to make those truths public, with the help of those who defended the victims of the Gang of Barbarians.

Contact Laura by email at LEL817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Kaplan, December 18, 2010.

George Galloway claims he was denied entry to US and Canada to attend Muslim legal fundraisers for convicted pro-Hamas and pro-Al Qaeda terrorism supporters


Mainstream media completely overlooked last Sunday night's fundraiser in Southern California given by the Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA), an organization that bills itself as a U.S. 501-c-3 non-profit that, according to its website, "was established in November 2001 in response to the growing number of unjust legal actions against Muslim individuals and organizations in America following the 9/11 terrorist attacks." Their website further states, "The Muslim Legal Fund of America is not an advocacy organization. It is a charity that supports cases that require litigation through the American court system. Simply put, when advocacy falls short, we take it to court." Former British PM Galloway, who led the Viva Palestina convoys to Gaza as part of the International Solidarity Movement, was to be the featured guest at this event to solicit for funds. Right off the bat, it was announced that Galloway would be a no show and appear only on Skype, beamed up on two large screens at the front of the room.

An examination of the cases that were emphasized Sunday night suggested the MFLA spends the majority of its time litigating cases that defend Hamas and Al Qaeda terrorists or supporters who in most cases have already been convicted in the US legal system, even after copious evidence proved their guilt. MLFA also recently lost a S.L.A.P.P. lawsuit against investigative journalist Joe Kaufman accusing him of smearing Muslims because of articles by him that proved Hamas funding connections from myriad Muslim groups in the US, something that has been termed "lawfare" in the vernacular of the worldwide global jihad against western democracies. Khalil Meek, the head of the MLFA described legal cases the organization was involved in to try and get those convicted for giving material aid to terrorists released. After announcing each case, he shouted "Takbir!" to which the audience screamed "Allahu Akhbar!." Since this was not a prayer session, the shouting could only be interpreted as a war cry. Galloway rounded out the evening with his own diatribe against Israel and "Zionists" that drew loud applause from the audience that rumbled throughout the evening along with applause and further shouts of "Allahu Akhbar!"

Among the cases already adjudicated that MLFA sought funds that evening to try and reopen and/or reduce the sentences of those already convicted, was the Holy Land Foundation Five who were shown to have operated a fund raising front for Hamas in the US; Sami Al-Arian, who was convicted as the US head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the US and who murdered over 100 people abroad including some US citizens; and Dr. Afia Siddiqui, a US-educated Pakistani woman who was an operative of Al Qaeda and caught with weapons and explosives in Afghanistan where she tried to kill her American captors (Siddiqui is also a close family member of Khaled Sheik Mohammed who planned the World Trade Center attack in 2001).

In every case, Meek would have the audience believe, those found guilty were prosecuted merely for feeding starving children and because they were Muslim, as if the US justice system presented no evidence whatsoever. He urged the audience to give generously to pay for attorneys that normally cost $500 an hour or more but were working for only $150 an hour for "hundreds of thousands of hours" thanks to MLFA's work.

A guest to follow Meek's presentation was Pastor Art Cribbs. Cribbs, a black theologian and Christian pastor said he canceled at an event at his own church to attend that evening's fund raiser for convicts of aiding terrorism. Cribbs holds a PhD in Black Liberation Theology, similar to what the Reverend Jeremiah Wright teaches and is similarly expounded by the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan's group.

"Even though I am a follower of Jesus Christ," Cribbs stated, I wanted to be here to lend my support. We are all sons of Allah." The comment was almost eerie, reflecting what is called "dhimmitude", the subjugation of non-Jews to Islamic religious control and tolerance in the Middle East, only right here in America. In defending one of the Imams found guilty in the Holy Land Foundation trial, Imam Mohammed El-Mezain, Cribbs defined the Muslim clergyman as "a deeply loving, a deeply scholarly, a deeply generous person. I do not believe these charges that have been brought against him, this human being, this father, this religious person, this Imam. I do not believe!"

But the government presented a very different picture of El-Mezain, who the MLFA was raising money that evening to try and get released. According to a 2001 FBI memo, El-Mezain, as leader of the San Diego branch of the Holy Land Foundation, appeared at three Islamic events in the mid-1990s, openly stating that he had raised tens of thousands of dollars for "Hamas terrorists." The Treasury Department used the memo as grounds to freeze $5 million in assets and raid offices of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, one of the largest and most successful Islamic charities in the United States. Federal authorities closed its San Diego area office in December 2001. The memo, based on reports from FBI informants, said that during a speech at the Islamic Center of Passaic County in New Jersey in November 1994, El-Mezain "admitted that some of the money collected ... goes to Hamas or Hamas activities in Israel." It also said El-Mezain and another foundation leader, Shukri Abu Baker, reportedly told attendees at a conference in Culver City on Nov. 5, 1994, that "monies raised by the (foundation) were strictly for Hamas terrorists." And, the memo said, the keynote speaker at a Muslim Arab Youth Association conference in December 1994 urged the crowd to "Finish off the Israelis; kill them all! Exterminate them." After the speech, El-Mezain "exhorted the crowd to contribute money" and indicated that in 1994, he had "raised $1.8 million inside the United States for Hamas" the memo said. El-Mezain later denied the accusations. John Boyd, a Holy Land Foundation lawyer, has written to the Justice Department, saying the memo was full of translation errors and deliberate falsehoods.

The next major guest was Charles Swift, a former Navy JAG officer who is building a new career (and "hundreds of thousands of hours of billing") as the go to lawyer for Hamas and Al Qaeda operatives. In his best courtroom-style-melodramatic speaking tone, Swift told the audience how he was preserving the constitution and related his years in the US Navy (that past him over for promotion). Swift played to his Muslim audience by suggesting the US government had it in for Muslims and that the Constitution demanded their protection. He then bragged about how he had won the release of Al Qaeda terrorist Salim Hamdan. Hamdan, who was Bin Laden's personal chauffeur had been captured by Coalition Forces in Afghanistan, and Swift, the chubby little lawyer who has worked tirelessly for the reduced hourly fee of $150 an hour to free Guantanamo's prisoners-of-war from Al Qaeda, described how he ultimately won Hamdan's freedom getting him sent back to his native Yemen. Interesting enough, this same week news reports are that 25% of the detainees released from Guantanamo have returned to fighting for Al Qaeda and even killed American soldiers. Swift said, "They had to pass a special law to have anything on my client so they passed one making it illegal to drive for Al Qaeda." This was explained like a true lawyer to his audience, as he did not mention how Hamdan was caught with other Al Qaeda fighters in his vehicle and even an RPG grenade launcher. It should be noted that military veteran Swift's concern for the Constitution did not end with Muslims who are US citizens, but extends to those killing US soldiers abroad. He was applauded warmly by the audience.

About 400 people total plunked down $30 a piece to attend the fund raising dinner at the Sheraton Four Points Luxury Hotel in San Diego with the keynote speaker to be former British MP George Galloway who has been leading the ISM-linked Viva Palestina tours to Gaza to lend assistance to the Hamas government in Gaza and in defiance of Israeli control of Gaza's borders to prevent weapons smuggling to Hamas. The notion that people can be convicted wrongly is certainly valid, but one thing marked this event: the idea that the US government solely prosecuted these people because they were Muslims and because they sought only to feed starving children abroad. The fact that the use of charitable fronts by terrorist organizations to raise and launder funds for terrorism is a well-known tactic in the War on Terror is irrelevant to some people. In all common sense, what has the US government to gain by starving children overseas (when in fact the US government already pays to feed many of them) and by sending those fund raisers who seek to feed those children to prison for no reason at all? The message behind the MFLA jargon appears to be that it does not matter what these people did as long as attorneys can beat the rap. The US Supreme Court has wisely decided that the old shell game of providing money to terror groups like Hamas and looking the other way by claiming the funds that are fungible and are being used for starving children instead of guns should no longer fly. Hamas is still Hamas, and Al Qaeda is still Al Qaeda. At no time during the evening did the audience hear a condemnation of violence by these groups — except in one instance that proved the hypocrisy of the evening, a denial by Galloway that he supports terrorism or Hamas.

It was the highlight of the evening as George Galloway was presented by video on two large screens at the front of the hall, his image and voice beamed to us via Skype over the Internet. Galloway was unfamiliar with the Holy Land Foundation case, but declared the MLFA a wonderful organization and urged attendees to donate to his sponsors generously. He then spoke about his work with Viva Palestina, a tour he led designed to aid Hamas in Gaza.

Galloway in the midst of a rant against Israel and "Zionists" yelled out, "I am not a supporter of Hamas," stating he only concerns himself with "humanitarian aid" as he tried to deny he supports terrorism and those who support terrorists. Talk is cheap. Galloway was in fact recorded on video voicing his support for the terrorist wing and scoffing at the notion of aid to Hamas being for humanitarian grounds. He also complained that he has been accused of being