| HOME | Featured Stories | February 2007 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
HAPPY PURIM -- HAG SAMEACH
Posted by Bernice Lipkin, February 28, 2007. |
|
The first photo is by Fred Reifenberg. See other of his
imaginative and delightful photos at The second was submitted by Michael Travers of some Israeli Purim spielers. |
|
|
|
TOP RABBIS SEND PERSONAL PLEA TO PRESIDENT BUSH FOR POLLARD
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 28, 2007. | |
|
Nationwide White House Call-In for Jonathan Pollard
Every call is tallied by subject matter.
| |
|
Two of world Jewry's most renowned Torah Sages, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv of Jerusalem and Rabbi Aaron Leib Shteinman of Bnei Brak, have signed a historically unprecedented letter to U.S. President George Bush, calling for the release of Jonathan Pollard. It is reportedly the first time that these Torah Sages have ever addressed a foreign head of state about any matter. The letter was relayed to Jeremy Katz, Special Assistant to the President and Liaison to the Jewish community, and others in the White House. Copies of the letter, written in both Hebrew and English, were also sent to various Jewish communal leaders and activists. The joint letter to the U.S. President was the initiative of Rabbi Pesach Lerner, Executive Vice President of the National Council of Young Israel. Lerner, who has visited Pollard many times in his prison cell in North Carolina [ See below here. and below here.], met of late with leading Torah sages in Israel and asked for their involvement in securing his release. Another rabbi who has taken great active interest in the case, and whom Pollard considers his personal rabbi, is the Rishon LeTzion, former Chief Sephardic Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu of Jerusalem. Rabbi Lerner discussed with Rabbis Shteinman and Elyashiv the special elements of the Pollard case, over and beyond its being a supreme Torah value of "Redemption of Captives." Mentioned were Pollard's self-sacrifice on behalf of the security of the Jewish People, the disproportionate nature of the sentence, the failure of the Israeli Government to act on his behalf, Pollard's failing health, the positions taken by former CIA head James Woolsey and Dennis Ross [see below], and more. The rabbis then decided that their best course of action would be to send a concise personal letter to President Bush. The letter reads as follows:
In Oct. 1993, nearly 30 leading rabbis in the United States took out a full-page ad in the hareidi-religious Yated Ne'eman newspaper, calling upon "every Jew to make efforts to free [Jonathan Pollard] from his imprisonment; those who can should write letters to the government, and whoever can intercede on his behalf should do so." The White House has also been bombarded of late with calls for Pollard's release from another direction: A nation-wide call-in campaign, also initiated by Young Israel and endorsed by Agudath Israel. Jonathan Pollard's wife Esther, speaking with IDF Radio this morning, called on Prime Minister Olmert to follow the example of the Torah sages by making an immediate demand for Jonathan's release. "Mr. Olmert does not have to free murderers or terrorists," she said. "All he has to do is bring Jonathan home now and he will have blessing and the thanks of the Nation." "After 22 years in prison," Mrs. Pollard said, "22 years of torture and affliction and the worst possible treatment by the Government of Israel - and by the Americans - Jonathan deserves to be home in Israel well in advance of Pesach so that he can truly celebrate the Holiday of Freedom." Jonathan Pollard has been imprisoned since November 1985 regarding his conviction on one count of passing classified information to an American ally - Israel. The normal sentence for this offense is 2-4 years, and his unprecedented life sentence was in direct contrast to his plea bargain arrangement. He has long been in a maximum security prison, under difficult conditions. U.S. Appellate Court Justice Steven Williams has called the Pollard case a "fundamental miscarriage of justice," and even James Woolsey - former head of the CIA, a body that has traditionally been against clemency for Pollard - believes Pollard should be released. He recently told Arutz-7, "Now that [Pollard] has served [over] 20 years in prison, my view is that 20 years is enough. I also think that the close relationship between the US and Israel is also of some consideration, and at this point I think he's served long enough." Former US Ambassador Dennis Ross, who has been involved in shaping US policy in the Middle East under Presidents Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr., has said that Pollard's sentence was excessive, and that he told all three presidents that Pollard should be released. "Pollard has been in jail for so long," Ross said last December, "that whatever facts he might know would have little if any effect on national security today."
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor of Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).
|
|
HILLARY CLINTON FOUNDATION SUPPORTS PC INCORRECT KING HUSSEIN FOUNDATION
Posted by Janet Lehr, February 28, 2007. |
|
Bill O'Reilly touched upon a dark aspect of Hillary tonight, don't let it go. Don't let Anna Marie Smith cop 60 % of the airtime, this is important news. FOXNEWS O'REILLY 070227 Clinton charitable foundation-Hillary an officer. 5 million dollars fund -- Hillary violated Senate rules by not didn't file a report of her position as an officer of this non profit -- Spokesperson said it was a clerical error, From the Fox report, the $5 million foundation has gave spent 1.3 mill Recipients that O'Reilly noted were : Baptist Foundation; U/AK and King Hussein Foundation. This is an explosive revelation Here is a list of the past winners of the KHF Prize taken from the foundation website * Year 2005 winner: The Arab Human Development Reports, Dr. Rola Dashti, Mrs. Sulha Djuderija, and OneVoice Mary Robinson is a very controversial person. Her record at Durban was certainly dismal, and could well be and is often accused of as being anti-Semite. In what years was the contribution to the KHF made? Surely, the Clintons could have found a more worthy recipient. It brings to mind, Hillary's kissing Mrs Arafat. UNRWA is a highly flawed institution which has contrived and connived with the Arab powers for 60 years to reduce the palestineans in the UNRWA refugee camps to pathetic peon status -- and then blame their sorry state on Jews and Israel. NO, any contribution to the KHF needs to be explained on more grounds then not reporting it to the Senate finance committee. Before I run this in Israel Lives, I'd like some explanation from Hillary's camp. Susie - What charities or efforts does Hillary, do the Clinton's, support with a decidedly pro-Israel bias? Yes, I know that Hillary worked for the magic crystal solution for MDA being included in the International Red Cross. This below was written by Michael Rubin, who is a visiting fellow at the
Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations.
It is called "Mary Robinson, War Criminal?" and
was published May 20, 2002
on National Review Online
|
|
On September 12, 1997, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Mary Robinson as the United Nation's High Commissioner for Human Rights. On paper, Robinson is as eminently qualified as any other U.N. political appointee. For seven years, she served as president of Ireland. The website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights trumpets Robinson's "outstanding legal qualifications" and her long record in human rights. Chief among Robinson's accomplishments are her attendance and participation in many United Nations conferences and her travel. The official website crows, "Ms. Robinson was the first head of State to visit Rwanda in the aftermath of the genocide there... While in Rwanda, she met representatives of, and was briefed by, agencies on the ground, as well as by the United Nations Human Rights Monitors. She was also the first Head of State to visit the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia..." What the United Nations trumpets as qualifications look like little more than empty grandstanding to anyone caught outside the U.N.'s labyrinthine bureaucracy. Nevertheless, the International Criminal Tribunal might be an appropriate place for Robinson to return, albeit for a slightly longer visit. The trouble starts with Robinson's tenure as president of Ireland. During the last four years of Robinson's tenure, the European Union donated large sums of money to the Palestinian Authority. Ireland even held the presidency of the European Union for the second half of 1996. During this time, Arafat siphoned large amounts of European aid money away to pay for terror. Robinson can plead ignorance, but documents seized during the recent Israeli incursion into the West Bank revealed that the Palestinian Authority spent approximately $9 million of European Union aid money each month on the salaries of those organizing terror attacks against civilians. While European officials like Robinson looked the other way, the Palestinian Authority regularly converted millions of dollars of aid money into shekels at rates about 20 percent below normal, allowing the Palestinian chairman to divert millions of dollars worth of aid into his personal slush fund. Remember the young boys, students, and old women killed in the rash of Palestinian bus bombings back in 1996? It's hard to believe that European politicians are so incompetent than to notice that Palestinian violence grew in proportion to their aid money. European funds enabled Arafat to purchase $50 million worth of sophisticated Iranian weaponry for use against civilians. While the world knows the story of the Karine-A's interception last January, few remember that the ship represented only one of many Palestinian weapons schemes (Remember the Calypso? The Santorini? The smuggling tunnels from Egypt into Gaza?) European leaders may claim ignorance, but Robinson should be the first to admit that indirect responsibility is no mitigation for war crimes. The sad fact is that aid given by Robinson helped build the organizations that now kill children at pizzerias, teenagers at discos, and pensioners at Passover seders, not to mention numerous American citizens along the way. Robinson's tenure at the United Nations has been little better than her record as Ireland's president. She was the driving force behind the Orwellian "World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance." At the conference, Robinson presided over little more than an intellectual pogrom against Jews and Israel. She remained largely silent as the preliminary Asian Regional Conference in Tehran (to which Israel was excluded) inserted blatantly racist statements into the conference agenda. She failed to speak out when, on the grounds of the U.N. conference itself, the Arab Lawyers Union distributed pamphlets depicting hook-nosed Jews as Nazis spearing Palestinian children. In the same tent where nongovernmental organizations depicted Israel as a "racist, apartheid state," were distributed fliers entitled, "What if Hitler had won?" The answer: "There would be no Israel, and no Palestinian bloodshed." While Robinson takes no responsibility for enabling the greatest single display of anti-Semitism in 50 years, she failed to lift a finger when the South African government denied visas to European anti-slavery activists critical of human rights in Islamic nations like the Sudan, where over two million people have perished in a war since the regime in Khartoum declared a jihad against non-Muslims in 1983. Either black Sudanese are less worthy of concern to the human-rights commission, or it would be inexcusably politically incorrect to actually protest human-rights violations conducted in the name of Islam. Robinson's post-Durban record is little better. On April 15, Robinson's commission voted on a decision that condoned suicide bombings as a legitimate means to establish Palestinian statehood (six European Union members voted in favor including, not surprisingly, France and Belgium). The vote came after Robinson initiated a drive to become a fact finder to investigate the now-famous massacre in Jenin (also known as "the massacre that never happened"). Curiously, in the months preceding Israel's incursion into the U.N. refugee camp in Jenin, suicide bombers launched from the camp wearing explosives likely bought with European money killed more than 100 Israeli civilians. However, for Robinson, a massacre is the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians in a war zone (47 Palestinian militants and 23 Israel soldiers also died). The deaths of more than 100 Jewish civilians by suicide bombers is worthy of little more than deafening silence interrupted by an occasional pithy statement of moral equivalence. The world still waits for Robinson to use her bully pulpit to call for an investigation of the terrorist murder of Jews (but then again, such an inquiry might lead uncomfortably close to UNRWA and European Union officials ). Of course it's farcical to believe that Robinson will ever be brought before the International Criminal Tribunal, or that she even should be. With her double standards, amazing ability to look the other way, and her record at the Human Rights Commission, Robinson has done more than any other international official to demonstrate that international courts, commissions, and agencies are more about politics than ethics, human rights, or morality, and therefore should never the legitimacy of U.S. endorsement. The charge of indirect responsibility for crimes against humanity is a reasonable charge so long as it is levied against those whom the chattering classes in Europe wish to condemn. Otherwise, dozens of Dutch peacekeepers would be in prison now for handing countless Muslim men and boys to Serb gunmen in a so-called U.N. safe haven. U.N. peacekeepers might be defending their actions in The Hague for working feverishly to avoid taking any action in Rwanda as all hell broke loose. UNIFIL observers might need to explain under oath why they helped cover up Hezbullah's kidnapping of Israeli soldiers from across a border the secretary general himself certified. Speaking of the secretary general, he might wish to explain, at least as a witness, why he saw fit to meet with and legitimize Hezbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah just two months after Nasrallah declared, "Jews invented the legend of the Nazi atrocities." UNICEF director Carol Bellamy might want to explain why slaves (oops.. "abductees" in U.N. and E.U. parlance: We mustn't antagonize the Sudanese government) liberated by UNICEF in Sudan never returned home, but ended up dead at government check points a day after UNICEF representatives crowed triumphant and foreign journalists departed. Then again, with UNICEF workers in West Africa trading emergency food and medical assistance for child sex, why question a few dead Sudanese so long as the photo-op was successful? The European Union and the United Nations are sick with self-righteousness, moral equivalence, and appeasement, but Mary Robinson is just one symptom. Worthy international causes have been hijacked for narrow political agendas. Accountability has become a dirty word. And looking the other way, especially regarding terrorism, has become a form of art. But then again, why reform if bashing Israel and sponsoring forums to promote anti-Semitism can reinforce your credentials in the eyes of your peers? Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
JNF FAILURE
Posted by Janet Lehr, February 28, 2007. |
| [Editor's Note: For more information, see below.] |
|
Remember the blue and white JNF boxes you and I feed in good faith. Today, JNF abets the acquisition of JNF land by Arabs. How could this be? Will it be stopped? The JNF, Jewish National Fund was founded in 1901 at the Fifth Zionist Congress at Basle, which resolved: "The JNF shall be the eternal possession of the Jewish People. Its funds shall NOT be used except for the purchase of lands in Palestine and Syria." The public ownership of land is based on the Biblical injunction: "The Land shall not be sold forever, for the Land is Mine." (Leviticus 25:23). The JNF protocol specifically prohibits selling land ownership and selling any rights to non-Jews. Jews from all over the world put their money into the little Blue Boxes, donating millions of dollars to the Jewish National Fund (JNF). For those wishing to donate to truly Zionist organizations dedicated to purchasing land in Israel for Jews, and guarding and protecting that land, should write to Aryeh King at: kingshir@bezeqint.net.il. For those wishing to reach leadership at JNF to find an explanation for the apparently inexplicable please write the following and cc janetlehr@veredart.com: rlauder@jnf.org; adabrow@jnf.org; rlevine@jnf.org; lkleinman@jnf.org; aklein@jnf.org; jhess@jnf.org; hdamsky@jnf.org; blevin@jnf.org; iblachor@jnf.org; shochberg@jnf.org; mwechsler@jnf.org; slizerbram@jnf.org; dfrank@jnf.org; jlevine@jnf.org; dcantor@jnf.org; hweiss@jnf.org; nsiegel@jnf.org; eborkson@jnf.org; mpollock@jnf.org; jperlow@jnf.org; swilensky@jnf.org; bgould@jnf.org; mbrivik@jnf.org; javiram@jnf.org; jlevine@jnf.org; mruskin@jnf.org; jgoren@jnf.org; aklein@jnf.org; cfax@jnf.org; scohen@jnf.org; dmargules@jnf.org; jgrossman@jnf.org; lwolk@jnf.org; rwigoda@jnf.org; tbanks@jnf.org; mwiener@jnf.org; cwhitehill@jnf.org; hlis@jnf.org; nforman@jnf.org; abrooks@jnf.org; sbaratz@jnf.org; eheilicher@jnf.org; jresnick@jnf.org; jlevin@jnf.org; lpalan@jnf.org; jdavis@jnf.org; rlubin@jnf.org; bharrisburg@jnf.org; sfirestone@jnf.org; espritz@jnf.org; jrudoler@jnf.org; rpetcove@jnf.org; rbenedon@jnf.org; dshatz@jnf.org; rgering@jnf.org; mmiller@jnf.org; lbarris@jnf.org; sscheiner@jnf.org; ekay@jnf.org; hober@jnf.org; rsieger@jnf.org; mkelman@jnf.org; msimon@jnf.org; inegrin@jnf.org; jkay@jnf.org; rrobinson@jnf.org ; hcohen@jnf.org; mrosenzweig@jnf.org; abinder@jnf.org; ykane@jnf.org; mbernstein@jnf.org; elankin@jnf.org; aalterman@jnf.org; tbanks@jnf.org; sbaratz@jnf.org; jbelson@jnf.org; jberko@jnf.org; wberkowitz@jnf.org; dberman@jnf.org; mbirger@jnf.org; ebalachor@jnf.org; ablumenfeld@jnf.org; eborkson@jnf.org; sbreslauer@jnf.org; abrooks@jnf.org; dcantor@jnf.org; scardin@jnf.org; schesley@jnf.org; rcohen@jnf.org; gcohen@jnf.org; dcohen@jnf.org; adavids@jnf.org; jdavis@jnf.org; sdelug@jnf.org; jdweck@jnf.org; cfax@jnf.org; nforman@jnf.org; dfrank@jnf.org; sfratkin@jnf.org; jfriedman@jnf.org; tgelbart@jnf.org; sgendell@jnf.org; agoldman@jnf.org; rgolub@jnf.org; jgoren@jnf.org; ihack@jnf.org; rharrisburg@jnf.org; eheilicher@jnf.org; jhess@jnf.org; whess@jnf.org; rhurwitz@jnf.org; bisrael@jnf.org; chacobson@jnf.org; mjacobson@jnf.org; mkagan@jnf.org; bkahn@jnf.org; ckalmanson@jnf.org; trubin@jnf.org; aross@jnf.org; jresnick@jnf.org; dradler@jnf.org; jrabin@jnf.org; mpost@jnf.org; rpopkin@jnf.org; spersky@jnf.org; npaul@jnf.org; rpatt@jnf.org; lpalan@jnf.org; jpabian@jnf.org; roxman@jnf.org; rorkand@jnf.org; tolken@jnf.org; moliner@jnf.org; dnewman@jnf.org; tmower@jnf.org; mmower@jnf.org; mmiller@jnf.org; mmarkowitz@jnf.org; dmarkind@jnf.org; dmargules@jnf.org; rlubin@jnf.org; blipton@jnf.org; rlevine@jnf.org; jlevine@jnf.org; tzuckerman@jnf.org; mzuckerman@jnf.org; swolnek@jnf.org; lwolk@jnf.org; mwolf@jnf.org; swilensky@jnf.org; rwigoda@jnf.org; mwiener@jnf.org; cwhitehill@jnf.org; hweiss@jnf.org; mwechsler@jnf.org; jwachstein@jnf.org; jlevin@jnf.org; blevin@jnf.org; mlefton@jnf.org; mlazar@jnf.org; vkurtz@jnf.org; bkruglick@jnf.org; lkleinman@jnf.org; aklein@jnf.org; lkestenbaum@jnf.org; gkay@jnf.org; jkaufman@jnf.org; tkatz@jnf.org; rkaslove@jnf.org; jkaplan@jnf.org; dkaplan@jnf.org; jrudoler@jnf.org; lruss@jnf.org; msalberg@jnf.org; rsalfeld@jnf.org; jschector@jnf.org; sscheiner@jnf.org; sschonfeld@jnf.org; jschottenstein@jnf.org; mschwartz@jnf.org; eseelig@jnf.org; hshapiro@jnf.org; asilber@jnf.org; bspack@jnf.org; espritz@jnf.org; mstein@jnf.org; msterling@jnf.org; jsternstein@jnf.org; btannenbaum@jnf.org; source: http://www.jnf.org/site/PageServer?pagename=exec_off Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
MKS EXAMINE DESECRATED ANCIENT MT. OF OLIVES CEMETERY
Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, February 28, 2007. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Legislators serving on the Knesset's State Control Committee were given a tour Tuesday of the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mt. of Olives, overlooking Jerusalem's Old City. The purpose of the tour was to examine first-hand the many complaints registered with the authorities over extensive desecration of graves at the site, including graffiti and smashed headstones. MK Zevulun Orlev (National Religious Party-National Union), chairman of the Knesset State Control Committee, expressed bitterness over the destruction he saw at the ancient cemetery: "If such vandalism as the smashing of headstones and the desecration of graves had occurred in a Jewish cemetery in Europe, I am convinced that the entire Jewish world would be shocked and the law enforcement authorities would attempt to capture the guilty parties." MK Orlev noted that, in contrast to the case of a European Jewish cemetery desecration, such "shocking phenomena" are taking place "in the heart of the capital of Israel, adjacent to the Western Wall, [yet] the sovereign Jewish regime remains apathetic." Representatives of the Development Authority responsible for eastern Jerusalem, who accompanied the parliamentarians on their fact-finding tour of the Mt. of Olives, promised to implement government decisions to preserve and restore the desecrated Jewish cemetery. Among other measures, the development authority is to establish effective security arrangements for the area, repair the damaged headstones, and assure general cleanliness, waste collection and disposal. MK Orlev announced that the committee he heads will request State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss to examine the conduct of the relevant state authorities responsible for the Mt. of Olives site. In three months, Orlev said, the State Control Committee would hold a follow-up meeting on the issue. The cemetery on the Mt. of Olives includes approximately 150,000 graves, dating from the First Temple period through modern times. Among the many graves there are those of many famous Jewish historical figures such as Rabbi Moshe Ben-Nachman (Ramban), former Prime Minister Menachem Begin, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook, Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel Shlomo Goren, the codifier of modern Hebrew Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, author and Nobel Prize laureate S. Y. Agnon, British Chief Rabbi and Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, and media mogul Robert Maxwell. Many Jews through the ages have sought burial on the Mt. of Olives because the site is mentioned in the Bible as the first spot from which the dead will be revivified. COMMENTS: 1. The real desecration
is in fact the attitude of the current Chelmite "government". They just don't like religious Jews of any stripe. Their religion is leftist secularism, and the just want to be loved by the world, a world that hates Jews. And whatever they might think they are, the world will define them too as Jews, just like Hitler did, and if our fate is doom, they will share it. The world doesn't love them back, no matter how much they kiss up. Disgraceful!
Chazak Ve-ematz!
2. it just cant be and just to think that the Jews werent living in Israel until 1948,hummmmmmmmm now how did these Jews sneak these graves in there? ought to tell them something should'nt it? harold, usa (28/02/07) 6. The savages attack graves now. If the U.S. and Israeli governments allow them to keep getting stronger and stronger, then these vermin will skip the graveyards and go after the population centers. What will the West do? Coddle our Islamic enemies... let them keep pulling the wool over the eyes of millions in the U.S. and Europe with this 'religion of peace' garbage... that's what will happen. I am starting to know what the process of suicide looks like more and more. Leo, Fort Wayne, Ind (28/02/07) 8. Disbelief again My disbelief is not at the desecration, which is the normal behavour to be expected from our "neighbors" but the disbelief is yet again in the the East Jerusalem Authority whose promises are as worthless today as they have been in the past. Since I have family on the Mt of Olives - I know at first hand Or-Lev -FOLLOW UP NECESSARY!!!!! zvi fenton, Jerusalem (28/02/07) 9. RE; Harold in USA Ahmaine...you are so right. I mean if we Jews did not already have the land prior (1948) to the Arabs ...then Explain why all our Patriarchs from.the Torah.and Rabbis and so on are burried in Israel dating back thousands of years. The world needs to wake up to the truth...Shalom Zahara, USA (28/02/07) 13. Why like this al the time, arabs already destroyes our graves and europe does the same, what's new? But the solution is to throw all arabs and certain christian OUT OF ISRAEL, and i mean shomron and yehuda too...than nobody will do this anymore, throw also our bad leaders out of Israel and put people there like Bibi! Shalov rabotai, tehiyeh bari kolam! 14. WHATS NEW _ WE HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE SHAME ON THE GOVERMENT AGENCIES AND PRIME MINISTER. THIS WAS RAISED SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND FALSE PROMISES MADE TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION. IT IS AS IF THE AUTHORITIES CLOSE THEIR EYES TO THIS DESICRATION JUST LIKE WHAT THEY DID WHEN ARABS DESTROYED HAR HABAYIT. WE SHOULD SHOW THE ARABS THE DOOR TO JORDAN ONCE AND FOR ALL _ IT IS OUR COUNTRY NOT THEIRS TO DO AS THEY PLEASE ELIEZER, (01/03/07) Nissan Ratzlav-Katz is a writer for Arutz Sheva.
This article appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
PURIM REPLAY
Posted by Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis, February 28, 2007. |
|
If you stop to consider, it might occur to you that there is something surreal about Purim this year. It is almost as if we are witnessing "replay". Haman is once again in our midst, but this time he is called Ahmadinejad - same country, same place, same agenda. Today's Iran is Persia of yore, and even as the malevolent Haman schemed Holocaust - the "final solution", so too, his 21st century heir is orchestrating a plan to wipe Israel off the map. And even as the Jews in Shushan were divided, caught napping and assimilating into their secular culture, so today, our people are fragmented, sleeping, and succumbing to the enticements of society. To be sure, there is one huge difference between Shushan of old and the events of today - Esther and Mordechai are missing. There is no one to summon our people, to awaken them from their slumber and charge them with their Divine calling. There is no one to proclaim those two magic words, "Keemu V'Keeblu" - "Let us re-accept and re-commit to our Torah" - two magic words that resulted in a. nechapochu - "a miraculous turn-around", converting darkness into light, doom into blessing, culminating in the joyous festival of Purim. But worse still, today we find ourselves in an untenable situation. Not only do we have to deal with the Ahmadinejads of this generation - Hamas, Fatah, and all the other anti-Semites who are proliferating on every continent, but we have to deal with a scourge that is by far more menacing - those of our people who have become Jewish self-haters. And that is an evil that we cannot easily overcome, for the decay from within is by far more deadly than any onslaught from without. Our own people, members of the liberal left, have taken up the cause of those who would wipe us off the map (see Professor Alvin Rosenfeld's study on "Progressive Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism".) There is an entire corps of intellectual, liberal Jews who would demonize Israel and accuse her of being an apartheid state which uses fascist tactics for ethnic cleansing. As unbelievable as it may sound, this anti-Semitic vituperative is actually parroted by some of our own people of the left, who, in the name of freedom of speech, justify their anti-semitic stance by claiming that they are merely criticizing Israel. Incredibly, instead of crying out against jihad and the reign of terror that is being foisted upon Israel without surcease, these so-called Jews excoriate Israel for defending herself. Loudly, they demand a Palestinian state, never realizing that, in point of fact, there already is a Palestinian state in place that came about in August of 2005 when Israel evacuated twenty-one Jewish settlements and forcibly removed her own people from their land. The new State of Palestine has become a launching pad for Jihad; an odious cesspool of terrorists; a depot for lethal weapons; a haven for assassins from Iran and other parts of the globe, a place where slaughter, graft, and corruption are daily fare, - and now these so-called do-gooders would impose that very same fate on Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. To complicate matters, Abbas (the president of the Palestinian authority) has formed a unity government with Hamas. So now they can place added pressure on Israel to relinquish more and more of her land. But what the media and the world fail to report and accept, is that there is no difference between the goals of Fatah and Hamas. Fatah talks negotiation while simultaneously launching savage, murderous attacks, and Hamas just kills without negotiation. But the bottom line is that the charters of both parties call for the annihilation of Israel. When Abbas announced his unity government, he also said that "Arabs have to put their internal strife aside so that they might raise their guns only against Israel, for the sons of Israel are corrupting humanity on earth." But the media and the world chose to ignore all that. To them, attacks on Israel are non-issues. Now it's one thing for the media to be oblivious to anti-Semitic declarations, but it's something else again when this same platform is endorsed by Jews Was it only yesterday that, despite assimilation, Israel evoked a surge of pride in the most assimilated heart, creating a different climate in America. Remember when Mayor Giuliani, refused entree to Arafat, when Jesse Jackson was called upon to apologize for calling New York City "Hymietown" and Harvard, under pressure, felt constrained to return a very large grant to the Arabs? Why is there silence now? To understand the extent to which Israel-bashing has become politically correct, just consider that at a recent winter meeting of the Democratic National Committee, Husham al Hussainy, an avowed Israel hater, was chosen to deliver the invocation. During Israel's war with Hizbollah last summer, this man led rallies in support of Lebanese terrorists, carrying swastikas and anti-Semitic posters. Giving honor to such a man could never have happened a few short years ago and I'm not even discussing Carter's best seller which vilifies Israel, or General Clark's anti-Semitic` rhetoric, scoring "New York's 'money people'" And there are many more of their ilk out there. But what is significant is not so much what these anti-Semites are saying, but rather, that they feel confident in saying it. They fear no backlash because they know that none will be forthcoming - a tragic commentary on the state of affairs in the United States today. But all this pales into insignificance when compared to that which is transpiring in the State of Israel, where this same anti-Israel sentiment has taken hold of many of our people. Now, as if this was not enough, Israel has yet another scourge to contend with. In addition to the usual terrorist attacks, corruption is eroding the moral fiber of our people, from government, political, and military leaders to athletes, almost everyone is under investigation or being indicted - and that is by far more deadly than that to which we are witness in the United States, for if there is decay from within in Israel, the very security, the very survival of the state is at stake. If there is no idealism, if there is no vision, how can the nation defend herself? How can 5,308,300 Jews survive in a sea of tens of millions of hostile Arabs. So how did we come to this catastrophic turn of events? The answer is painfully simple - secular zionists were bent upon creating "a state that would be like all other states", and to that end, they were determined to fashion a "new" Jew - a Jew who was not burdened by his past; a Jew who would be physically strong and not be weighed down by a black hat. So, a generation was raised without Hashem, without Torah, and the vacuum filled with materialism, hedonism, greed, drugs, and all the other ills of Western civilization. Secularists of the newly formed state were so obsessed with cutting the umbilical cord to their Jewish past, that, not only did they refrain from mentioning Hashem's Name, but even reference to our Patriarchs to whom G-d promised the land, had to be omitted. For example, in Hatikvah, the national anthem, instead of saying, "lashuv l'eretz avoteinu" - "to return to the land of our fathers," "leyot am chofshi b'artzenu" - "to be a free people in our land" is sung. Our Yom Tovim - Pesach, Shavuos, and Succoth, have been converted to agricultural and national celebrations; Chanukah has become a symbol of military might; Purim a day of carnival and frolicking; Rosh HaShana, a time to take off and go to the beach, and G-d's Covenant - our encounter at Sinai, His promise that the land would be ours in perpetuity, has all but been forgotten. Is it little wonder then that many Israelis question their right to the land and find it difficult to refute the intellectual elite who view Israel as no different than colonial occupiers? More than Ahmadinejad's nuclear threats, it is this internal rot that is threatening our existence. Our long, painful history is testimony to a simple truth of which I spoke some thirty-four years ago in my first public appearance in Jerusalem: "B'shuv Am Yisrael l'Elokav, B'hitachaid Am Yisrael eem Torato, ayn koach b'olam she youchal lo" - "When the Jewish people return to G-d and become one with their Torah, there is no force on earth that can prevail against them." How easy it all sounds, and yet, how complicated, how remote this message is if the simple element of faith is lacking. But if those of us who understand; if those of us who can still hears the echoes from Sinai would attempt to be Esthers and Mordechais and awaken our slumbering people, inspire them to take hold of their Divine destiny and assume their Priestly roles, then we would make this remote formula the reality of our lives and once again become a Goy Kadosh - a holy nation; Mamlechet Kohanim - a Priestly Kingdom; Ohr L'Goyim - a Light Unto the Nations." If we will it, it can happen! Our destiny is calling.... It is up to us to make the words of the megillah - "La'YehudimHoyso Orho V'Simcha" - "And for the Jewish people there was joy and gladness" come alive. Contact the Rebbetzin at webmaster@hineni.org |
|
CIRCUMVENT THE MEDIA - REACH OUT TO THE BLOGOSPHERE!
Posted by Michael Freund, February 28, 2007. |
|
With the growing importance of blogs in shaping public opinion, Israel has an opportunity to start getting its message across beyond the filter of the mainstream press. As I suggest in the column below from yesterday's Jerusalem Post, it is time for the Jewish state to begin reaching out to the blogosphere and utilizing this important resource in the battle against Arab propaganda. This article is archived at
|
|
As archeologists continue to excavate the site of the Mughrabi Gate alongside the Temple Mount in Jerusalem's Old City, it remains anybody's guess what they might just find underneath the mounds of soil, rock and debris. But one item already unearthed by this dig should have us all deeply concerned, and that is the mainstream media's disgraceful habit of parroting Arab propaganda. It was just a few weeks ago that a shocking array of prominent media outlets, in their coverage of this non-event, went about spreading one irresponsible and malicious lie after another about the Mughrabi Gate dig, tarnishing Israel's image and inflaming public opinion against the Jewish state. A headline in The Australian screamed "Palestinians unite to fight Temple Mount dig," as if the bulldozers were actually tearing up the mount itself. Across the globe, France 24, the international French news channel, declared: "Palestinians protest over Jerusalem mosque works," falsely implying that Israel was ripping apart a Muslim house of prayer. Similarly, China's official Xinhua news agency reported: "Arab League urges international response to Israel's dig at al-Aqsa Mosque," as though the earthmovers were displacing the mosque itself. Perhaps the most egregious example was provided by Time magazine, whose editors could not resist taking a swipe at Israel by running the headline: "Raiders of the Temple Mount." It's hard to remember the last time so many falsehoods were spread so extensively in such a short period of time. If there is a lesson to be learned from this sorry state of affairs, it is that Israel needs to begin utilizing alternative means to circumvent the mainstream media and spread its own message far and wide. IN ORDER to better counter the Arab propaganda machine, the Jewish state should actively reach out to its many supporters in cyberspace, and especially in the blogosphere, for help in disseminating the truth. Blogs, or weblogs, are basically on-line journals where individuals or groups can posture, pontificate or simply share their thoughts by posting them on the Internet. There are literally millions of blogs out there, covering just about every subject you can imagine. Their reach is enormous, and their influence is growing rapidly. According to a July 2006 study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, 39 percent of US Internet users, or about 57 million American adults, read blogs. This is nearly double the amount of just three years ago. Over half of all bloggers are under the age of 30, underlining the importance of blogs to the next generation of decision-makers. Some of the most popular sites welcome hundreds of thousands or even millions of visitors. In recent years, blogs have come to play a key role not only in shaping the news, but in making it as well. In September 2004, just two months before the last US presidential election, a team of determined bloggers debunked the authenticity of documents presented by CBS News which claimed that George W. Bush had dodged the draft. Blogs have now become such a vital component of US presidential politics that campaign teams hire people to do "blog outreach." Some have paid and volunteer staffers who monitor blogs and keep track of the pulse and current of public opinion. Even shady Middle Eastern dictators have come to appreciate, and even fear, the power of blogs. Just last week, in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak's autocratic regime sentenced a blogger to four years in prison for "insulting the president." THE FACT IS that blogs are a vibrant source of energetic and independent thinking, often providing readers with a fresh way of looking at things that is unencumbered by bureaucratic blinders or organizational self-interest. As a blogger myself, I often find better and more timely analysis on the Web than in the mainstream media. Indeed, some of Israel's best friends and most articulate defenders can be found in the blogosphere, where sites such as Little Green Footballs, Powerline, Atlas Shrugs, Hugh Hewitt, Debbie Schlussel and Instapundit all provide a refreshing alternative to the moral relativism and politically correct anti-Israel blather of the media. AT THE height of the Mughrabi Gate crisis earlier this month it was the blogosphere which played a critical role in getting out the truth, just as it did during last summer's Lebanon war. Time and again, blogs have shown themselves to be a potent communications tool, and Israel needs to start tapping into their vast potential. This can be accomplished by launching a concentrated and effective outreach effort aimed specifically at influential bloggers, who should be courted with the same resources and commitment as the mainstream press. The government and Jewish groups should begin by organizing periodic fact-finding tours of Israel for key bloggers, giving them a chance to learn firsthand about the situation here in the region. An annual conference of pro-Israel bloggers, attended by key Israeli statesmen and personalities, could help to galvanize what is already a burgeoning network of support for the Jewish state. It is also crucial that Israeli spokesmen and leaders take the blogosphere into account when formulating their media strategies and messaging tactics, both by sending them relevant information and making sure to keep them in the loop. SURE, mainstream entities such as CNN, the BBC and The New York Times will continue to dominate the news business for years to come. But the battle for public opinion is far from being a lost cause. Israel just needs to start thinking a little more creatively about how to wage the battle. By working with our allies in the blogosphere, Israel can begin to turn the tide in its favor and chip away at the falsehoods being spread by the press. If we can't beat the media, let's circumvent it. Reaching out to bloggers seems like a good place to start. Michael Freund blogs on Middle Eastern and Israeli affairs. His 'Fundamentally Freund' can be found at IsraelNationalNews.com. Contact him at msfreund@earthlink.net. |
|
THE NEW DEMOGRAPHIC BALANCE IN EUROPE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, February , 2007. |
|
This was written by Raphael Israeli, who is a Fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a professor of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the author of numerous books including The Third Islamic Invasion of Europe (forthcoming); Green Crescent Over Nazareth; Islam in China: Religion, Ethnicity, Culture, and Politics; The Iraq War: Hidden Agendas and Babylonian Intrigue: The Regional Impact on Shiites, Kurds, Sunnis and Arabs; and Palestinians Between Nationalism and Islam. This a Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) publication. This
article is archived at
|
The Muslim world includes 57 Muslim-majority countries spanning Asia and Africa, comprising about 1.5 billion believers, making it the second-largest faith after Christianity. Since its inception, Islam spread, as did other faiths, by conquest, missionary work, or through expanding trade from the core areas of Islam in the Middle East to the Far East and the coasts of Africa. While Islam was extending its rule into others' territories, it necessarily came into armed conflict with the prevailing cultures, like the Berbers in North Africa, the Hindus of the Indian subcontinent, or the Christians of the Middle East and Europe. But since the Europeans halted the Muslim Ottomans at the gates of Vienna in the late seventeenth century, and the British defeated the Muslim Moghuls in India in the nineteenth century, a reversal in the fortunes of Islam has unfolded. Thenceforth, Islamic was in descent and the European and Western powers were on the ascent. As Islam withdrew, independent Judeo-Christian and Hindu nations emerged in the Balkans, in India, and in Palestine, and the remaining Islamic world was colonized by Europe, until its reemergence as independent nation-states after the world wars. The Attraction of European Society Colonization had its long-term effects nonetheless, inasmuch as modernization, both in thought and in effect, set in and began gnawing at the monopoly of Islam in those societies. As a result, the elites of those emerging new nations took to Western culture and learned the languages, the mores, the civilizations, the institutions, and the thought of their occupiers, and remained tied to them long after their emancipation from foreign rule. So, after attaining independence, many formerly colonized populations moved to the metropolis of their previous occupiers and established Muslim communities there. Some of the newcomers were more at home in the ambiance of their newly adopted cultures than in their original homes where they had become alienated. Others went in search of better economic opportunities. Still others came for study periods or to seek political asylum, but then were reluctant to relinquish the freedom, prosperity, and tranquility of the West and to return to the poverty, oppression, and turmoil of their own countries. Compared to the immense populations of their original homelands, these were tiny trickles of privileged individuals or families who were intent on adapting to their new environments, to adopt their new countries and cultures as their own, and to take the necessary steps to merge into the host-cultures of their choice. Their limited numbers, on the one hand, and their dispersion among the general population, on the other, was a built-in guarantee that in no time they would integrate into the mainstream and assimilate completely. The rapid economic growth of Europe in the aftermath of World War II - due to both reconstruction of the ravages of war and the economic and technological revolutions that those societies underwent, coupled with the very slow pace of reproduction of European populations, where both men and women were seeking careers rather than raising families - brought about an acute shortage of manpower. Former colonies, where manpower was available that required relatively limited cultural adaptation, became the plentiful sources for unskilled laborers who slowly at first, and then in droves, would lavishly replenish the dwindling pool of workers in Europe. In addition, vast countries like the U.S., Canada, and Australia, which had been founded as immigrant societies, would also absorb much of this massive immigration from Muslim countries to the West. Abusing European Generosity This growing movement of populations now came to encompass not only adventurers and seekers of new economic opportunities, but also increasing numbers of "political refugees," some of whom were genuine asylum seekers from their oppressive regimes at home. Many others, however, abused the generosity, concern for human rights, and openness of the West to escape "justice" in their own countries or to use their countries of asylum as launching pads for political struggle against their home regimes. Eventually, some of these immigrants would turn against their adoptive countries and launch terrorist campaigns against them. These new immigrants, who for the most part gained local citizenship after the requisite period of residency, which varies from one country to another, soon began to have an impact on their adoptive countries in different areas:
A Population Explosion in the Muslim World Generally speaking, the billion and a half Muslims of the world are distributed into three major blocs: about one-third in the Middle East and Africa, with the Arabs constituting over half, with another 150 million in Turkey and Iran (75 million each), and the rest in black Africa, principally Nigeria and the Horn of Africa. Another third encompass the Indian subcontinent with its three major components of Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh with about 150 million in each country, and smaller Muslim populations in Afghanistan and Central Asia. The rest are concentrated in East and Southeast Asia, with about half in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country, and the rest in Malaysia, and Muslim minorities in Thailand, Burma, the Philippines, and in Russia and China (about 25 million in each). The growth of Islam in the Western societies of Europe, America, and Australia is quite a new phenomenon, and as its numbers increase, either via immigration (legal or illegal) or by natural growth, the awakening of a Muslim identity discourages integration and gives rise to problems. There are already areas in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, and Britain where Muslim children constitute the majority of the school population, a situation that is pregnant with disaffection and can potentially lead to unrest and terror. Beyond its expansion into new areas, such as Western democracies, the Islamic world has sustained a consistent internal growth of 3 percent for many years, that is, a doubling of the total population every 25 years. This means that with this high birthrate, a result of tradition, prohibitions on birth control, and the general trend in the developing world where the rich get richer and the poor have more children, and decreasing mortality due to health improvements, there is a virtual population explosion in the Islamic world. Countries like Iran, Turkey, and Egypt, which boasted populations of 35-40 million in the 1980s, have each doubled since then. Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh, where the Muslim populations were already high in the 1980s, have also doubled since then. Smaller countries like Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, and Algeria have also doubled their populations, as have the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. So, in general, the three-quarter billion Muslim population of the 1980s has soared to one and a half billion, that is, 25 percent of the estimated world population of six billion. Moreover, since most of this population is young, the rapid demographic growth in those countries will continue apace as the children in this population come of age. While demographic statistics in those countries are not always reliable, there is little doubt about the trends. Moreover, while European statistics on incoming Muslim legal immigrants can be relied upon, the countless illegal migrants remain uncounted. A lack of statistics from the Muslim countries of emigration further complicates the calculations of demographers. Yet one thing is certain: an immense surplus of Muslim manpower has been migrating into Western democracies, either as "political refugees," as welcome manpower for manual jobs that Europeans are reluctant to do, or as illegal migrants who easily slip through porous European borders. Muslims in Europe When Europe changed the rules and began to tighten its border control following major terrorist attacks in Madrid and London in 2004-5, the 25 million-strong Muslim population of Europe was already difficult to supervise due to the liberal freedom of movement allowed Europeans across the entire expanse of the European Union. An additional source of demographic growth for the Muslim population in the West is domestic proselytization, which produces some of the most devout and radical Muslims, like the Black Muslims of America, and potential recruits for terrorism like Richard Reed in the UK. In France alone, it is estimated that in the decade between 1995 and 2005, some 50,000 Christian French converted to Islam. These figures amount in their aggregate to a Muslim population of about 6 percent in the European Union today, with France reaching 10 percent (6 out of 60 million), and 7 percent in the Netherlands and Belgium. In Germany, Britain, Italy, and Spain, Muslims can be counted in the millions, and Muslim visibility and public prominence seem out of proportion to their real numbers for a number of reasons:
Factors Limiting Growth of Muslim Identity in Europe On the other hand, several factors militate against an even faster rise of Muslim communitarian identity and demographic growth in Europe, as discussed in Amitai Etzioni's seminal work:[1]
Muslims Confront European Host Societies As long as Islam lived within its traditional boundaries, its tensions and frictions with the West remained outside the domain of the Western public; it was remote and lay beyond the horizon. But with the rise of fundamentalist Islam and the increase of Muslim immigration to the West, Muslims learned to face up to their host societies and even to confront them in debate. Their growing self-confidence and self-assertion taught them that they could debate the West without being imprisoned or executed, as they would be in their home countries. For the Europeans, the clash of civilizations, which had taken place for centuries on the borders of Christendom, moved into their own heartland and they were unprepared for it. Convinced that their open and democratic societies would prevail and lead the new immigrants to abandon their roots and identity, Europeans were shocked to discover that over the years the gaps had widened, the differences grew into clashes, and the complaints had grown into demands. The Westerners began to realize that they were obliterating their traditionally homogeneous societies in favor of multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and at times even multi-linguistic ones. Europeans began to see their goodwill and hospitality towards Muslims "rewarded" by violent demonstrations. This European reaction will not make it easy for Turkey to enter the European Union. Bringing Turkey in would mean not only freedom of movement of Turkish labor and nationals throughout Europe, but also spreading the message of Islam into all corners of the continent. With some 6-7 percent of the EU population Muslim today (25 million out of 380 million), frictions are already difficult; how much more so if 75 million Muslim Turks would join, raising the rate of Muslims to 20-25 percent (100 million out of 450 million). The rapid growth of the Muslim population, on the one hand, and the shrinkage of the European family unit, on the other, would mean that in the next generation Europe may become half Muslim. Britain, the most ardent proponent of Turkish integration into the EU, agreed to suspend the talks between the parties when it realized that Turkish oppression of the Kurds continues unabated, that women are still discriminated against in Turkish society, and that Turkish school textbooks, which are monitored by the EU, contain thousands of cases of racism and human rights abuses, notably negative portrayals of Greeks, Jews, Kurds, and Armenians.[2] The Behavior of Muslim Minorities Demography has a long-term effect on the chances of coexistence in countries where Muslims are a minority because of the built-in contradiction between the requirement of Muslims to live under Islamic rule, since only there can the Law of Allah can be brought to bear, and the grim necessity for many Muslims to escape from the persecution of their Muslim regimes in order to seek refuge in the West. Believers who live in non-Muslim lands must either regard their stay there as temporary, and in the meantime do their best to live their Muslim life undisturbed, or return to the Abode of Islam as soon as they can, or try to turn their country of residence into a Muslim one by seizing power in it. For this reason, Muslim minorities have pursued states of mind varying from quietist acceptance of permanent minority status to violent rebellion. The response of the Muslim minority depends in no small measure on the perceived threat posed to it by the majority host culture. Whenever coexistence with it seems feasible, as was the case with Muslim minorities in the West before the rise of fundamentalism among them, they could always say that as long that they could perform the obligations of their faith without inhibition, they could consider themselves as living within enclaves of the Abode of Islam, a state of affairs they could bear indefinitely. But as soon as perceived oppression made their lives as Muslims untenable, and they diagnosed their position as dwellers in the Abode of War, they were set on a collision course with their hosts, and conflict ensued. Additional variables have an impact, including the general Muslim environment, which when embracing the road of militancy can draw behind it Muslim minorities who are fascinated by its power, which compensates for their feelings of oppression, underprivileged status, and hopelessness in tackling the requirements of modern life. Furthermore, the larger the minority, to the point of constituting local majorities in certain areas, the more it feels self-confident to challenge the majority. In areas where large concentrations of Muslims are clustered together, they feel strong enough to advance demands and to resort to violence or to threaten the use of violence if their demands are not fulfilled. Finally, if the regime under which they live is as oppressive as their own countries of origin, they would be less inclined to rebel, knowing what their punishment would entail, but under the liberal democratic rule of the West, it is easier for them to act to undermine it and paradoxically seek its destruction because it gives them more leeway. There was a time when Muslim minorities were quite limited in numbers and scope of dispersion, usually as a result of interaction with the colonial powers who encouraged a certain amount of "natives" to tread their cultural ways in their own metropolitan centers, and some of them intermarried and stayed. However, the large waves of Muslim immigrants since the mid-twentieth century to the Americas, Australia and Europe, and more so the opening labor markets in the West to Muslim "guest-workers," coupled with important movements of conversion to Islam as a result of intense Muslim da'wa (mission), has dramatically increased the numbers of Muslim migrants to those countries. Moreover, the "guests" have come to regard themselves as permanent residents with all attending privileges of citizenship and social benefits. Not only do they not any longer regard their presence outside the realm of Islam as temporary, embarrassing and calling for justification, but with the birth in place of the second and third generations, who grow to learn the languages, cultures and ways of their new habitats, the process of their acculturation into their new homelands has accelerated. As Muslim Populations Grow, the Illusion of Integration Fades As long as their rate in the general populations of their new countries was negligible, and the socio-political environment was liberal (like in the U.S., Canada, Australia, Israel and Europe), then social pluralism and individual freedom of worship were advocated by the Muslim minorities. Under oppressive regimes like the Soviet or the Chinese, the Muslims were quick to adopt material acculturation into their host society, with all the trappings of language, dress, education and participation in the elites and social customs. The core of the faith was kept almost intact however, with the Muslim calendar, festivals, dietary laws, worship, and places of prayer preserved to the extent possible. This was easier in areas where Muslim minorities were more sizeable and commanded the critical mass necessary to entertain communal life, and much more difficult when the Muslim population was so sparse as to render any public display of Muslim identity impractical. When Muslim minorities become frustrated by the unworkability of a pluralistic society, either because they believe they are discriminated against or their expectations are not met, they become antagonistic to their host society. This is so much more so when they perceive the majority as having transgressed the limits of previous coexistence and encroached upon their freedom of worship or conduct. In such cases, they use Western vocabulary (freedom, tolerance, democracy, human rights, etc.) to impress upon their hosts that while they wish to play by the rules of their adoptive countries, it is the latter that violate them. In more extreme cases, like with some Muslim fundamentalist leaders (religious actors par excellence) in London, they claim that they came to Europe in order to change it, not to be reshaped by it, or they reject Western attitudes altogether. This sets the Muslim minority, and especially the fundamentalist elements in its midst, on a collision course with the host authorities. Militant elements among this disaffected minority may seek political or cultural autonomy (such as the London Muslim "Parliament"). In India, Muslims had conquered the land and subjugated Hinduism, but when Muslim power was eroded by the British, Islam sought and achieved separation from the Hindus for the most part, rather than submit to the democratic rule of modern India that would have allowed the Hindus to exercise political domination over the Muslims. When the majority of Indian Muslims established their own state (Pakistan), their 'ulama spoke of the reinstitution of the Shari'a as their state law. There was no alternative to this arrangement if one bears in mind the fact that Islam is incompatible with other political ideologies. As Orthodox Muslims see it, and much more so the fundamentalists among them, Islam is ideally an either-or affair. Either Islamic law and institutions are given full expression and dominate state life or, failing that, if the state is non-Islamic, Muslims should try to reverse the situation or leave. Despite the initial naïve days of Muslim immigration into Europe, when it was assumed that Muslim minorities would integrate painlessly into the much more prosperous nations where they made their new homes, difficulties began to emerge from the outset, which were dismissed as pangs of acculturation. But as the years passed, the Muslim communities grew, their Muslim radicalism came to the surface, and the illusion of integration began to fade, replaced by the illusory vision of multi-cultural societies, which made cultural concessions to the immigrants in order to accommodate them and make them partners in the system. But far from satisfying the Muslims of Europe, whose growing numbers gave them the necessary self-confidence to defy the system, that only further increased their sense of alienation from their host countries. The Europeans, in turn, sensing that their liberalism had turned against them, began to try to back-pedal, but it was too late and the collision became inevitable. Notes 1. Amitai Etzioni, From Empire to Community (New York: McMillan, 2004). 2. Anthony Browne and Suna Erdem, "Education Clash Holds Up EU Talks," The Times (UK), April 8, 2006. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
THE WARD CHURCHILL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 28, 2007. |
|
This article appeared in the Arutz Sheva
|
|
The Eichmann metaphor at Haifa University. Over the past few years, Ward Churchill, an instructor at the University of Colorado, has become the best-known symbol of academic lunacy in the United States. In an essay and then in a "book" authored by Churchill, both with the title On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: Consequences of American Conquest and Carnage, published by the "radical and anarchist" publisher AK Press, Churchill wrote that the victims of the 9/11 Al-Qaeda attacks on New York were "the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the Twin Towers." Instead of repudiating Churchill's lunacy, many on the fringes of the Western Left embraced and endorsed him, not only supporting his "right of free speech," but agreeing with the content of his statements. An associate professor of theater at the University of Haifa denounces Israeli soldiers as "little Eichmanns." Churchill has a long history of turning out anti-American hate screeds. He has long tried to pass himself off falsely as an American Indian, a victim of "white Amerika." He has a long track record of defending terrorism and playing apologist for Holocaust deniers. Churchill teaches "ethnic studies" at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Since the "little Eichmanns" incident, a movement led by the Governor of Colorado has sought to get Churchill dismissed from his university job, and those efforts are expected to be successful very shortly. A bit less well known than Ward Churchill, the University of Haifa has its own faculty member who makes a practice out of Eichmann metaphors, whose comments denouncing Israeli soldiers closely resemble those of Churchill endorsing the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center towers. In the Haifa weekly Kolbo, dated February 1, 2002, page 30, Professor Avraham Oz, a far-leftist anti-Israel associate professor of theater at the University of Haifa, denounces Israeli soldiers as "little Eichmanns." The news clipping above cites Oz as saying in his classroom, in the middle of a lecture that was part of a university course, that "in each of these people [evidently meaning Israeli soldiers] is hiding a little Eichmann." Oz then went on to compare the actions of Israel's military in the "occupied territories" to those of Nazi Germany. Students listening to him were outraged and complained. (That is probably how the newspaper heard about the incident.) Oz has a long history of denouncing Israel inside his classroom and utilizing his classroom for purposes of political indoctrination. He was earlier denounced for this by Limor Livnat when she served as Minister of Education, who also demanded that Haifa University officers take action regarding Oz. Oz's credentials to issue fatwas in judgment of Israeli soldiers are that he teaches courses in theater. When contacted for a reaction by the paper, Oz admitted the comments about Eichmann and added that he even was including questions on them in his course exam. Pity the student who does not provide him with the political answers he is seeking in those exam questions. Oz has tried to organize "Nakba Day" on his campus, together with Pappe. Oz has long been a defender and ally of Ilan Pappe, denouncing his own dean and drumming up support for Pappe in the infamous "Tantura Affair" fabrication. (Pappe and a student invented a non-existent "massacre" of Arabs by Jews, and had their legal defense fees financed in part by the PLO.) Like Pappe, Oz has also been active in promoting international boycotts of Israel and even of his own university. He falsely claims his own university "discriminates against Arabs" and he has tried to organize "Nakba Day" on his campus together with Pappe. On Nakba Day, Israel's catastrophic creation would be mourned. Among Oz's extra-curricular activities is his running an anti-Israel, anti-Semitic chat list named "ALEF" ("Academic Left"), whose members include some of the worst neo-Nazis and anti-Semites on the planet, some of them Jewish. ALEF operates under the auspices of the University of Haifa and is hosted on the University of Haifa computer. A good idea of the nature of ALEF can be derived from the fact that its members engage in debates over whether or not Hitler was "guilty" of anything, and also post praise there for David Irving. Oz only intervenes in the list debates when pro-Israel material is posted there inappropriately. Because of his devotion to denouncing his own country and hosting neo-Nazis and anti-Semites on his chat list, Oz is celebrated by them, ranging from Al-Ahram to communist web sites and neo-Nazi web magazines. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com or write him by email at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
HATE TERMINOLOGY IN ARABIC SANITIZED IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS BY PALESTINIAN NEWS SERVICE
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, February 28, 2007. |
|
The Ma'an News Service publishes numerous daily announcements in Arabic, which it subsequently translates and releases in English. In recent stories, PMW has noted that the Ma'an releases in Arabic include the hate ideology espoused by the terror organizations that deny Israel's right to exist, express reverence for suicide terrorists and justify terrorist murder as "resistance." But when translated into English, the same stories go through a sterilization process to hide from the English readers -- and possibly from the two Western countries, the Netherlands and Denmark, who give them funding -- the terrorist ideology Ma'an is helping to propagate. The following are two examples: 1 -- On Jan. 29, 2007, a suicide terrorist killed three Israelis in the city of Eilat. The Ma'an Arabic report included the language of the terror organizations, while the English was cleansed with changes and omissions, including changes to the language of direct quotes. The differences are striking: Denial of Israel's right to exist In English Ma'an accurately reports that the event happened "in the southern Israeli resort of Eilat." But in the original Arabic, Eilat is changed from an Israeli city to a Palestinian city occupied by Israel -- reflecting the terrorist assertion that all of Israel is "occupied Palestine." Ma'an English: "...in the southern Israeli resort of Eilat." Ma'an Arabic in first reference: "... in Eilat located in the south of occupied Palestine."
In the English the mother is referred to simply by her name and age: "Ruwaida Siksik, 42." In Arabic Ma'an adds: " Ruwaida Siksik, 42, whose family originated from the occupied city of Jaffa." The routine definition in a news story of Jaffa, a part of southern Tel Aviv, as "occupied" and Eilat as "occupied Palestine" is a way to linguistically express denial of Israel's right to exist, and is the terminology used by the terror organizations. Glorifying suicide terror as Shahada -- revered Martyrdom The act of the suicide bombing is likewise reported differently in the English and the Arabic. The English refers to a "bombing," while the Arabic gives it an idyllic Islamic categorization of an "Amaliyyah Ishtish'hadyyah" - a Shahada-seeking action. This is not merely a positive categorization, but is defining the suicide bombing as an honored Islamic action. The perpetrator is given the status of a Ishtish'hadi- Shahada-seeker, who becomes after his death a Shahid -- a revered holy Martyr. In Arabic: "She heard the news on Monday morning that he died as a Shahid ... In English: "Family of Eilat bomber" In Arabic: "mother of the Shahada-seeker" Another interesting difference is that in the Arabic, the brother of the bomber admits to knowing that his brother was leaving on a terror operation. This is omitted from the English version. 2- The second article demonstrating the terror support by Ma'an is its release yesterday about the murder of Erez Levanon, a 42-year-old Israeli musician and father of three children, who was attacked and stabbed to death by two Palestinians while praying in a field. The Ma'an English: "Palestinian sources told Ma'an that armed Palestinian men ambushed an Israeli..." The Ma'an Arabic: "Palestinian sources told Ma'an that Palestinian resistance men ambushed an Israeli ..." This is not just semantics. In choosing to categorize murder as "resistance," Ma'an is choosing the language used by terror organizations to justify murder. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -- Palestinian Media Watch -- (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
CHRISTIAN JIHAD? CHRIS HEDGES THINKS SO
Posted by David Meir-Levi, February 27, 2007. |
|
Dear Christian leaders, The recent upsurge of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish publications and speeches and boycotts and divestment movements and Holocaust denial is well documented, and continues apace even as Hamas re-iterates for the umpteenth time its commitment to destroy Israel and genocide its Jews. This upsurge is not unexpected, since, as I have reported numerous times, the propaganda war against Israel is part-and-parcel of the broader Arab war against Israel, and against Jews. When high intensity warfare (what we would call a regular war) failed for the fourth time in 1973, the Arab world turned to an increase in low intensity warfare (aka terrorism) and propaganda warfare in order to weaken Israel and undermine Israel's relationships with Europe and the USA and Canada. Now that the most recent chapter in the terror war saga (aka the Second Intifada) has failed, the assault continues with more and more stress on the propaganda war...hence the upsurge. The anti-Israel propaganda has, since the USA entry in to a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, beeen very closely tied in with anti-war propaganda, and anti-Bush propaganda. Recall the anti-war demonstrations that included placards and chants against Israel. Recall the equations of "occupied Palestine' and "occupied Iraq". And recall the baseless and at times utterly irrational anti-Bush placards in anti-Israel demonstrations which condemn Bush for supporting Israel. These facile and vacuous faux-equations are very useful for propagandists and diatribalists, because they create an effective broad spectrum condemnation of anyone or any institution or any action that can somehow be construed, rightly or wrongly, as support for Israel. But over the past year, we are witness to a new and deeply threatening turn in that propaganda movement's choice of victims. Now Chistian supporters of Israel are in the pro-terrorist diatribalist's cross-hairs... ...but not for their support of Israel. That would be too transparent. Instead, as Robert Spencer's article below demonstrates, Chris Hedges and a number of other rather third-rate authors have suddenly, coincidentally (?) at the same time, come up with books all dealing coincidentally (?) with the same faux-revelation: Right-wing Christian fundamentalists want to take over the USA and shut down its all-too-free and not-Biblical-enough government and replace it with a Biblically-based government. It is not likely to be just a coincidence that this accusation is a mirror image of what Islamofascist Jihad wants to do, substituting our Constitution with the Qur'an and making Shari'a the law of the land. It is likely to be no coincidence that this sudden upsurge of books dealing with this accuse-the-victim accusation accompanies the upsurge in anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda. It is very important to understand that one of the most effective methods of demagoguery and propaganda is to accuse the victim of the very crime that the propagandist is perpetrating against that victim. As Spencer argues, this is a great way to get the audience's attention away from the real crimes (in this case, the Islamofascist terrorist Jihad) and make it more difficult for the victim to defend himself against the crimes being perpetrated against him. So it is not likely to be coincidental that this new upsurge of anti-Christian books all suddenly appear almost at once, and all deal in only slightly different ways with the same irratioinal theme --the threat posed to our lives, our liberties, our culture, our religion...by the Christian right. The value of this type of "accuse the victim" propaganda is immense -- it gets the real criminal off the hook (at least for a while); but its danger is far greater than mere propaganda. Islamic victories against larger more powerful enemies were often brought about by a 'divide and conquer' technique; where Islamic representatives succeeded in getting vying factions in the infidel government or society to side with Islamofascists against their internecine rivals, thus cracking that government's unity and making defense against the jihad less effective. This ploy worked well against the Byzantime Empire, the Sassanians, the Copts, the Berbers, and the Spanish. And it is working today in the USA as well. Turning some facets of the Christian community against others is exactly the same ploy, and is being effected, at least in part, by the books discussed in Spencer's article. This ploy is successful for the anti-Ameican and anti-Israel Jihadists in two ways: a.) it discredits the Christian supporters of Israel, brands them as anti-American, and thus undermines them and Israel; and, by illogical extension, makes anything that opposes them and Israel into a pro-American endeavour...so indirect support for the Islamofascist terrorists waging war against us is now support for America! But why? Why would American or British journalists and writers, at least some of them Christians, want to lend support to the propaganda ploy of the Islamofascist Jihadists who want us all either dead or Muslim (per Osama's frequently televised speeches)? Can they hate Jews, hate Israel, hate Evangelical Christians, so much that they are willing help the Islamofascists?...willing to dig their own graves, and the graves of their families and co-religionists, and perhaps the grave of Western Civilization as well, by helping the Jihadists in their terror war against us? A hint of what might be a motive appears when we combine two not well known facts: 1.) the Saudi royal family pays journalists to write nice things about Saudi Arabia. See attachment #4. We do not know exactly which journalists are on the Saudi payroll, but those who irrationally and intentionally distort obvious facts in their reportage of things Arab or Islamic or Israel-related ( a process now named "fisking" in honor of Robert Fisk who epitomizes this faux-journalism) are good candidates for suspicion. Could the same Saudi interest in buying the professional loyalty of some western journalists, and rewriting the USA high school and college texbooks to put Islam in a better light, be at work in this new surge of full-length novels-made-documentary about the Christian Right's "jihad"? There is no proof, not even direct evidence. That is why I say: "a hint of a motive"...just a hint. But, as my grandmother of blessed memory used to say: when things don't make sense...look for the money. David Meir-Levi PS. Regarding Chris Hedges, one of the authors discussed in Spencer's article, it is of interest to note that he has been mis-reporting events in the Israel-Arab conflict for years. Some of his articles are almost textbook examples of 'fisking'. Chris Hedges wrote "eyeless in gaza I" and "eyeless in Gaza II" in Harper's Magazine, Oct., Nov., 2001, where he accused Israeli soldiers of using arab children for target practice. A careful review of his articles (see attachments #1-3) caught him in what seems to have been a transparent lie. He wrote that he was behind a sand dune, could not see what was going on...and heard the shouts (in Arabic) between Arab children and Israeli soldiers at a road block in the Gaza Strip. The children, sheltered in a concrete building, taunted the soldiers; and the soldiers called them names and called them cowards and dared them to come out. When they came out in to the open, according to Hedges, the soldiers shot the children...in cold blood, for target practise. Hedges acknowedged that he did not hear the shots, so the soldiers must have been using silencers, he assumed. He could not see, he could not hear...he assumed. He then went on to relate how he saw the mangled bodies of the victim children (an M-16 bullet makes a very very big hole when it hits -- that's part of its effectiveness) later, in a Gaza hospital, and silently cursed the cruel and barbaric israelis. Problem: M-16's can't take silencers. they fire a supersonic bullet. The very loud cracking sound associated with high powered assault and hunting rifles is the sound of the sonic boom made by the bullet's passing the sound barrier. That sound is made only after the bullet has left the rifle barrel. So a silencer would do nothing to silence the sound. Hedges was then a 32-year veteran of wartime news coverage. He, and anyone who ever trained on an M-16, is likely to know what I just described. If Hedges heard no shots, then there were no shots. And he should have known that. Did he simply make up the target practice accusation and supported it with the agonized description of the hospitalized children. Or did he fall victim, gullible and naive, to the propagandistic lies of a local Gaza doctor? We may never know. And we may never know how and why such terrible harm was done to those poor chldren. But, based on Hedges' own description, it was not the Israeli soldiers who did that harm. But that did not matter. The horrific story traveled several times around the world before any later more slow-moving and less dramatic critical analyses caught up with it. Is Hedges doing now in a full-length novel what he did back in October, 2001? This article is called "Beware the Christian Jihad?" and it was written by Robert Spencer. It appeared today in www.FrontPageMagazine.com. |
|
A new book that is climbing the Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Muhammad Atta? No, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and Tim LaHaye. The book in question is Chris Hedges' American Fascists, which argues that America as we know it is under threat -- not from Islamic jihadists, but from a small group of evangelical Christians who are determined to remake the United States as a Christian state. Warning about "Christianism," a neologism coined to parallel "Islamism," has become fashionable. Ranging from the merely hysterical to the ranting and paranoid, books sounding the alarms about Christian theocracy are appearing in large numbers. Among the crop published in 2006 alone were, besides Hedges' book, American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips; The Baptizing of America by James Rudin; Kingdom Coming by Michelle Goldberg; The Theocons: Secular America Under Siege by Damon Linker; Thy Kingdom Come by Randall Balmer; Piety & Politics by Barry Lynn; and Religion Gone Bad by Mel White. Other popular books sound many of the same themes, including The Conservative Soul by homosexual activist and blogger Andrew Sullivan and the atheist apologetics The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris.
A general tendency of such books is to equate to varying degrees, often in an off-handed manner suggesting that the equivalence was self-evident, Christian and Muslim "extremists," "radicals," or "fundamentalists." Hedges declared that "the Christian Right and radical Islamists, although locked in a holy war, increasingly mirror each other. They share the same obsessions. They do not tolerate other forms of belief or disbelief. They are at war with artistic and cultural expression. They seek to silence the media. They call for the subjugation of women. They promote severe sexual repression, and they seek to express themselves through violence." Sure, we're told, the Islamists are working to impose religious rule on their societies, but so are the Christianists, and the Christianists posed the far more immediate and serious threat. Some even charge that just as the Taliban practiced stonings and beheadings, so would these "Christianists" if they got half a chance.
The threat is imminent. Hedges claims that "those arrayed against American democracy are waiting for a moment to strike, a national crisis that will allow them to shred the Constitution in the name of national security and strength." He even asserts that "those in the movement often speak about such a moment with gleeful anticipation." For now -- but only for now -- the Christian Right is "forced to function within the political system it seeks to destroy."
If there really is a domestic threat of religious authoritarianism that threatens to destroy the Constitution, this would be a matter of considerable concern. But as the Qur'an says, "Bring your proof, if you be truthful" (2:111; 27:64). Good advice.
In support of his claims that "those arrayed against American democracy are waiting for a moment to strike, a national crisis that will allow them to shred the Constitution in the name of national security and strength," Chris Hedges offers only a single quotation from "right-wing strategist" Howard Phillips, who said in a speech to the Council for National Policy that "it is time to leave the 'political Titanic' on which the conservative movement has for too long booked passage" and to "build an ark so that we can and will be ready to renew and restore our nation and our culture when God brings the tides to flood."
A call to shred the Constitution? Phillips' words read more plausibly as a call to a conservative movement demoralized by defeat after defeat not to give up, but to develop a new strategy and await a day in which their message will be received more favorably.
The primary focus of the theocracy foes' fears is a movement arising from Calvinistic circles in the United States, Christian Reconstructionism. According to the anti-theocracy writers, Christian Reconstructionism has insinuated its adherents into the highest levels of government, and want to replace the Constitution with laws mandating the stoning of homosexuals and adulterers. The proof for this comes largely from the writings of the intellectual guiding lights of the Reconstructionist movement, and the chief villains of virtually every piece devoted to exposing its enormities: two American Calvinists, Rousas John Rushdoony (who died in 2001) and his son-in-law, Gary North.
Rushdoony and North may be well cast in this villain's role, for at least according to some reports they apparently do depart from Christian tradition in calling for capital punishment for crimes such as adultery and homosexuality, as specified in the Book of Leviticus. In a 1998 piece in Reason magazine, Rushdoony is said to defend Biblical punishments for a variety of offenders: "blasphemers, heretics, apostate Christians, people who cursed or struck their parents, females guilty of 'unchastity before marriage,' 'incorrigible' juvenile delinquents, adulterers, and (probably) telephone psychics." North is quoted in the same article defending the ancient Biblical punishment of stoning: "Why stoning? There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost."
Foes of theocracy point to statements like this one from the popular Presbyterian minister and writer George Grant: "Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ -- to have dominion in the civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness. But it is dominion that we are after. Not just a voice. It is dominion we are after. Not just influence. It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time. It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less...Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. It is to reinstitute the authority of God's Word as supreme over all judgments, over all legislation, over all declarations, constitutions, and confederations. True Christian political action seeks to rein the passions of men and curb the pattern of digression under God's rule."
Strong words. But do statements like these amount to a manifesto to subvert the non-establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution and establish Christian rule in the United States? The "theocrats" themselves deny this. Chris Ortiz of Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation explains: "The paranoid secularist reads this portion of Grant and links it with the political activism and lobbying of the Religious Right in order to assemble a frightening monster of religious fascism. But, Grant would likely be the first to argue that there is no theocratic conspiracy...In other words, don't confuse the rhetoric or ideology of certain radical thinkers with the mass of conservative Christianity."
Grant is indeed first to argue that there is no theocratic conspiracy, or at least, if there is, that he opposes it. Responding to claims that the passage above is a declaration of intent to destroy the U.S. Constitution, he wrote in an email to me:
The quoted passage is from a long discussion regarding cultural evangelism, not petty partisanship. It is from a discussion of ends, not means. The language is the culmination of a discourse in the realm of eschatological theology, not practical activism...
In a similar vein, Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation declares: "We propose an explicitly Biblical system of thought and action as the exclusive basis for civilization. Only by restoring the Christian Faith and Biblical law as the standard of all of life can Christians hope to re-establish Christian civilizations." Theocracy? Maybe, but the statement goes on to say: "We believe that the source of godly change is regeneration by the Holy Spirit, not revolution by the violence of man... No government in any form can make men Christians or truly obedient; this is the work of God's sovereign grace. Much less should civil government try to impose Biblical law on an unbelieving society. Biblical law cannot be imposed; it must be embraced."
In fact, much of the evidence that theocracy foes point to in order to establish their point that Christians intend to subvert the U.S. Constitution and replace it with Biblical law is actually evidence only that Christian pastors and leaders have for some years been reasserting the right and duty of Christians to participate in American public life, as over against the radical secularists who contend that any political activity by Christian groups constitutes a violation of the Establishment Clause.
The more conspiracy-minded among the theocracy foes, of course, brush aside such denials. The whole thing is a secret plot, you see -- what else would you expect but that the plotters would deny their plotting? After all, according to Chris Hedges, the American values of "compassion, tolerance and belief in justice and equality" are "being dismantled, often with stealth..." There can be no rational response to such paranoia, or any definitive refutation of it, but it is noteworthy to compare these denials to the open statements by Muslim leaders about the Islamic supremacist imperative. For while there is no shortage of Muslim spokesmen who proclaim their rejection of terrorism, those who are pursuing the jihad are generally quite open about their intentions -- in stark contrast to the flat denials from the very Christian leaders who are supposed to be leading the push for theocracy.
Before he left Britain one step ahead of law enforcement and returned to his native Lebanon, the jihadist Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad often boasted of his intention to "transform the West into Dar Al-Islam" and establish Islamic law on British soil. "I want to see the black flag of Islam flying over Downing Street," he said, and his now-disbanded al-Muhajiroun group was dedicated to this goal. The transformation of Britain into an Islamic state could come in two ways, he explained: "if an Islamic state arises and invades," in which case "we will be its army and its soldiers from within." But if no such Islamic state arises, Bakri said that Muslims would convert the West to Islam "through ideological invasion...without war and killing."
Al-Qaeda's second in command, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, articulated a global vision in the summer of 2006: "War with Israel is not subject to a treaty, cease-fire, Sykes-Picot Treaty agreements, patriotism or disputed borders, but it is jihad for the cause of God until the entire religion is for him only. Jihad seeks the liberation of Palestine, the entire country of Palestine and to liberate every land that used to be a territory of Islam, from Spain to Iraq. The entire world is an open field for us...With the grace of God, we have now returned to the field...Dear Muslim brothers everywhere, today we must target the Jewish and the American interests everywhere." [1]
Until November 2003, when adverse publicity compelled them to take it down, the Islamic Affairs Department (IAD) of the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington carried this statement of Islamic supremacism and belligerency on its website: "The Muslims are required to raise the banner of Jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world, to remove all forms of injustice and oppression, and to defend the Muslims. If Muslims do not take up the sword, the evil tyrants of this earth will be able to continue oppressing the weak and [the] helpless..." [2]
In other words, if a country is perceived to be hindering the spread of Islam, Muslims are obliged to wage war against it. The spread of Islam must continue at all costs. There can be no half-measures or peaceful coexistence with unbelievers as equals on an indefinite basis. As the Egyptian jihad theorist Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), whose works are still widely influential among Muslims worldwide, put it in his jihad manifesto Milestones (Ma'alim 'ala Al-Tariq), which has circulated throughout the world and been published in well over a thousand editions: "Islam cannot accept any mixing with Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers]...Either Islam will remain, or Jahiliyyah: Islam cannot accept or agree to a situation which is half-Islam and half-Jahiliyyah...Command belongs to God, or otherwise to Jahiliyyah; God's Shari'ah [Islamic law] will prevail, or else people's desires. 'And judge between them according to what God has revealed, and do not follow their opinions, and beware of them lest they confuse you in matters which God has revealed' (Qur'an 5:50)...'And if they do not respond to you, then know that they are following their own opinions; and who can be more misguided than one who follows his own opinion against the guidance from God? Indeed, God does not guide the wicked people.' (Qur'an 28:50)...The foremost duty of Islam in this world is to depose Jahiliyyah from the leadership of man, and to take the leadership into its own hands and enforce the particular way of life which is its permanent feature." [3]
The jihadist website Khilafah.com puts it succinctly: "Islam makes it a duty upon all Muslims to work to change their countries from Dar al-Kufr [the land of unbelief] to Dar al-Islam [the land of Islam]..." It exhorts Muslims to "carry Islam to the world through invitation and jihad."
Andrew Sullivan, while sounding the alarm about Christian theocrats, concedes that Christian Reconstructionists are "marginal, extremists, and largely disowned by the fundamentalist mainstream." Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the Islamic jihadists, who are active in numerous countries around the world, and whose version of Islam is not being effectively combated by any significant movement of peaceful Muslims anywhere.
Should we turn our attention away from a real threat to an imagined one? That is what Chris Hedges and the other anti-theocracy writers are asking us to do. While fiction has always competed with reality in the public discourse about the Islamic jihad, the Christian theocracy scare books represent projection on a massive scale. Unfortunately, while Chris Hedges leads the hunt for Christian theocrats under our bed, real theocrats continue to advance a violent supremacist agenda worldwide. We ignore or dismiss that at our own risk.
Notes:
[1] "A Video Speech from Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri Regarding the Events in Lebanon
and Gaza -- 7/27/2006," SITE Institute, July 27, 2006.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
HOW MUCH DUMBER COULD PERETZ GET?
Posted by Nurit Greenger, February 27, 2007. |
|
How much dumber could he get...Israel's Defense Minister Peretz is
looking at a military exercises maneuvers thru blocked binocular
lenses. No joking, it is real!
Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
ISRAEL'S ARAB CITIZENS AND THE JEWISH STATE
Posted by Family Security Foundation, February 27, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Tashbih Sayyed and it appeared February 7,
2007 on the Family Security Foundation website
|
|
As another sign of the growing power of Global Jihad, Israel's Arab minority has rejected the idea of Israel as a Jewish state. In a manifesto, "The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel", drafted by 40 academics and activists under the sponsorship of the Committee of Arab Mayors in Israel and endorsed by an unprecedented range of Arab community leaders, Arab leaders have declared that Israel is a bi-national state and Arabs are an indigenous group with collective rights, not just individual rights. They couldn't be wrong more. Blinded by their anti-Semitism, Arabs ignored the fact that neither
are they an indigenous group nor is the Jewish nationhood is a new
phenomenon in Palestine; the Jewish nation was born during 40 years of
wandering in the Sinai more than five thousand years ago and has
remained connected with Palestine ever since. "Even after the
destruction of the last Jewish commonwealth in the first century, the
Jewish people maintained their own autonomous political and legal
institutions: the Davidic dynasty was preserved in Baghdad until the
thirteenth century through the rule of the Exilarch (Resh Galuta),
while the return to Zion was incorporated into the most widely
practiced Jewish traditions, including the end of the Yom Kippur
service and the Passover Seder, as well as in everyday prayers. Thus,
Jewish historic rights were kept alive in Jewish historical
consciousness."
Palestinian Arabs, on the other hand, never had a separate identity. They always thought of themselves as Arabs rather than as Palestinians. It is a matter of record that the Arabs owe their presence in Palestine to the Ottomans who settled Muslim populations as a buffer against Bedouin attacks and Ibrahim Pasha, the Egyptian ruler who brought Egyptian colonists with his army in the 1830s. And during all those times when Arabs lived under the Ottoman rule, they never showed any desire for national independence (emphasis added). According to Bernard Lewis, "From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity." Lewis notes, "There had been a steady movement of Jews to the Holy Land throughout the centuries." In 135 CE Jews took part in the Bar Kochba revolt against imperial Rome and even re-established their capital in Jerusalem. Defeated by the most brutal of the Roman legions under the command of the emperor Hadrian, Jews were forbidden to reside in Jerusalem for nearly five hundred years. Once a year on the ninth of the Hebrew month of Av, they were allowed to weep at the remains of their destroyed Temple at a spot that came to be called "the Wailing Wall." In the meantime, the Roman authorities renamed Judea as Palestina in order to obliterate the memory of Jewish nationhood. A resolution adopted by the first Congress of the Muslim Christian Association which met in Jerusalem in February 1919 underlines the Arab understanding of the situation conclusively. It said, "We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds." Similarly, the representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the
United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May
1947 that said, "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and
that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the
sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later,
Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the United Nations
Security Council, "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing
but southern Syria."
Jerusalem has always remained a Jewish majority -- a symbol of Jewish
yearning to be an independent nation as they thrived in communities
in many of Palestine's towns. "By 1864, a clear-cut Jewish majority
emerged in Jerusalem - more than half a century before the arrival of
the British Empire and the League of Nations Mandate. During the
years that the Jewish presence in Eretz Israel was restored, a huge
Arab population influx transpired as Arab immigrants sought to take
advantage of higher wages and economic opportunities that resulted
from Jewish settlement in the land. President Roosevelt concluded in
1939 that "Arab immigration into Palestine since 1921 has vastly
exceeded the total Jewish immigration during the whole period."
The present Arab declaration challenging the Jewish character of Israel cannot be ignored because it is not just an expression of dissatisfaction by a minority about their socio-economic situation but a reminder that Islamist radicalism and fundamentalism has now decided to challenge openly the legitimacy of the Jewish state using Arab citizens of Israel as its proxy in Israel. It must not be forgotten that the Israeli Arabs are part and parcel of the same Global Jihad that has been murdering our gallant soldiers on the war fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The international community has to act to stop these serious acts on the part of Global Jihad to undermine the only democracy in the Middle East. It is important to note that Israel is the target of Global Jihad for the same reasons as the United States of America and other open societies everywhere in the world. Israel is the only democracy in the region As all of the Muslim states, without any exception, are either autocracies or theocracies or both, they feel threatened by the very existence of a truly democratic state in their midst. This is a common experience of anyone who visits the region that for the oppressed populations of the Muslim countries, the Jewish state serves as a beacon of hope. During my first visit to Israel, I was pleasantly surprised to see that most of the Arabs that I had a chance to talk with preferred to live under the Jewish state. Israel is a pluralistic society Israel is the only pluralistic democracy, respectful of human rights, that exists in the Middle East. The evidence of Jewish pluralism is everywhere; the Arab population in Israel was freer than the populations in any Arab state. Israel's Arab citizens had full freedom of expression and demonstration. They were enjoying full voting rights. They were free to elect their own leaders to the Knesset. They had their own political parties. Newspapers owned and managed by Arabs were thriving. In fact the Israeli Arabs had full rights to citizenship. Having been born and brought up in a Muslim society, I couldn't believe my eyes as I saw Arab citizens of Israel having more dignity, self respect and rights than any of the Muslims living in any of the Muslim states. Israel is truly an open society Israel is the only state in the whole Middle East where women had total freedom of pursuing happiness. I saw Muslim women going to schools, colleges and universities without any restriction or inhibition. I noted with interest that right along with hijab and veil-wearing Arab female students there were many who were wearing jeans. Such an open society is definitely a threat to the traditional Arab society in which women cannot be allowed any kind of freedom -- as free and independent women in a traditional Muslim culture is a sign of diminishing male authority and respect. From a strict Islamist fundamentalist point of view, a society that allows its women to operate freely and independently is a society representing Jahiliya -- the era of darkness, of ignorance and shamelessness. Islam, in an Islamist's view had come to destroy the pillars of shamelessness that supported the era of jahilya. For Global Jihad representing the strictest and manipulated version of Islam the Judeo-Christian culture today is a symbol of all that was Jahilya. And Israel's Jewish heritage and foundations are a direct threat to the domination and continuance of Islamist obscurantism. I saw Arab businesses thriving in Israel. To my amazement, most of my Jewish friends were recommending, supporting and promoting them. Such an Israeli tolerance for a people who have never stopped from aiding their enemies was unbelievable. I visited a number of Arab institutions and found them flourishing. This again explains why the Arabs do not want Israel to exist; it is setting an example for a just society that respects human beings irrespective of their color, creed or ethnicity and above all without stopping to think for a moment that they are potentially an enemy. It is now a common experience in Israel that the Arabs living under Muslim Arab authorities want to be treated in Israeli hospitals, when suffering from life threatening illnesses. And there never have been an instance when any Israeli hospital has ever refused treatment to any Muslim Arab, even in cases when the person who came for treatment was suspected of being a potential terrorist. The world knows that some of the Arabs who received treatments in the Israeli medical facilities did in fact come back as homicide bombers causing death and destruction to the innocent citizens of Israel. It is a real experience to be in Israel. Just like in the U.S., the Jewish state has citizens who have come from more than hundred countries and represent diverse ethnic, religious, and racial groups. All of the continents, Asia, Africa, Australia, the Americas and Europe are represented there and everyone enjoys equal rights. One cannot find even a shade of discrimination in any form. It is a model for the region "Israel's economic, political, scientific and social success have the potential to become a model for the region. The more sensible Arabs in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority, when comparing the miserable life imposed upon them by the bullies of al Fatah, Hamas or Hezbollah with the very superior lifestyle of their Arab-Israeli brothers inevitably conclude that liberty and rationality bring dividends. Israel, which comprises some 10,000 square miles, compared with Arab
countries that total over five million square miles --
not including Iran -- has shown itself to be a model of
democracy and decency. Over one million Arabs live in Israel with
full rights of citizenship. They vote and serve in Israel's
parliament. And yet, bereft of oil, Israel's per capita gross
domestic product tops 24,000 dollars (compared with the oil-rich Saudi
Arabia whose per capita GDP hovers at 13,000 dollars), and it remains
a thriving bastion of democratic liberalism in an ocean of oligarchies
and dictatorships."
Consequently the Jewish state has already become a magnet for the Arabs living in the neighboring Muslim states, explaining the fast growing population of Arabs in the Jewish state; the fast growth is not just because of the birth rate but is also because of the immigration on many pretexts of Arabs from neighboring countries. The rejection of Israel as a Jewish state by Israel's Arab minority has underlined the level of threat to Israel's security which has never been so pronounced. It seems as if all the dark forces determined to undermine and overwhelm democracy and pluralism have joined hands; Hezbollah has convinced the world that Israel is not invincible; Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and other Muslim states have arguably proved their effectiveness in convincing Washington that without validating Palestinian terrorism, it cannot win its war on Islamist fascism; Iran is on its way to gain the second Islamist nuclear bomb; and the international assaults on Israel's character are gaining in momentum. The Islamists' demand to redefine the foundations of Israel is part of the same campaign that has been working not so discreetly in the US to replace the Jeffersonian civic religion by Islamist fascists. It is in the US interest to watch how Israeli Arabs' move to dismantle the Jewish state is shaping up. Just like the manner in which Islamist organizations in the US are taking advantage of our openness to destroy our Judeo-Christian foundations, Israeli Arabs are also taking advantage of a democratic constitution to subvert an open and pluralistic way of life. Israeli Arabs' rejection of Israel as a Jewish state is an extension of their demand for the return of refugees to Israel. They have kept the refugee issue alive for so many decades only because they knew that what they cannot win in the battlefield, they can gain by using the Jewish state's commitment to remain a democracy. It is an historical fact that fighting an internal enemy is much more difficult than defending against an external threat. Israel and the US both have fought off external enemies with success but now both are facing an enemy that has entrenched itself deep within their democracies. This onslaught on our freedoms from within has to be dealt with forthwith before it gets out of hand. Contact The Family Security Foundation by email at operationsdirector@familysecuritymatters.org |
|
ANTI-JEWISH CARTOON ANGERS L.A. KOREANS
Posted by Rick Weston, February 27, 2007. |
|
LOS ANGELES - Korean-American community leaders said they plan to launch a protest against the publisher of a popular South Korean comic book that contains anti-Semitic images. One comic strip in the book shows a man climbing a hill and then facing a brick wall with a Star of David and "STOP" sign in front. "The final obstacle to success is always a fortress called Jews," a translation says. Another strip shows a newspaper, magazine, TV and radio with the description: "In a word, American public debate belongs to the Jews, and it's no exaggeration to say that U.S. media are the voice of the Jews." Yohngsohk Choe, co-chairman of the Korean American Patriotic Action Movement in the USA, said, "I don't have words to describe the outrage I feel." The group met Friday with Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Jewish advocacy group. Cooper said he would travel to Seoul on March 15 to raise concerns about the book. The book, written by South Korean university professor Lee Won-bok, is part of a series called "Distant Countries and Neighboring Countries," which is intended to teach youngsters about other countries. The series has sold more than 10 million copies. Eun-Ju Park, chief executive of Seoul publisher Gimm-Young, said in an e-mail that the author sent an apology to Charles Kim, national president of the Los Angeles-based Korean-American Coalition. Park wrote that she would look into the matter "more closely and correct what needs to be corrected." Contact Rick Weston at matchwest@hotmail.com |
|
KOREAN COMIC AUTHOR: JEWS RULE U.S.
Posted by Bryna Berch, February 27, 2007. |
|
This story is from yesterday's CNN.com
|
|
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- The author of a best-selling comic book series intended to teach children about other countries said Monday he would change a chapter on Jews that has been called anti-Semitic and similar to Nazi propaganda. Rhie Won-bok maintained, however, that his depiction of Jewish control of American media and politics was based on fact and "commonly believed." "The Jews are the invisible force that controls the U.S.," Rhie, a professor of visual arts at Duksung Women's University in Seoul, told The Associated Press. "I wrote the chapter to let people know that you can't understand the U.S. without knowing the Jewish community." More than 10 million copies from the 12-book series titled "Meon Nara, Yiwoot Nara," or "Far Countries, Near Countries," have been sold since it was first published in 1987, according to its publisher, Gimm-Young Publishers. The company boasts that at least one volume is in every South Korean home in this country of 48 million people. The comics with playfully drawn figures have sought to explain European countries, the U.S., Japan and even Korea itself.
Although noting that Jews have faced prejudice for many centuries, the book takes a more sinister view of their role in the United States. Rhie said the September 11 attacks occurred because of Arab terrorists' hatred for the U.S. he blamed on Jews who "move the U.S. in the way they want using money and the media as their weapon." The book also says Korean-Americans are diligent and successful in the U.S. "but in the end, always run into the wall called the Jews." The accompanying picture shows an exasperated man walking up a hill only to be blocked by a brick wall with a Star of David and the word "STOP" in English. Images from the book "echo classic Nazi canards," Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center said in a statement earlier this month. In a letter sent to the publishers, Cooper urged them to review "the slanders in this book that historically have led to anti-Semitism, violence, hatred and even genocide." Rhie asserted he is "not at all anti-Semitic" and that he would remove the parts that have drawn offense or write them differently. "The last thing I want is a conflict between the Koreans and the Jews because of my book," he said. There is no established Jewish community in Korea. |
|
JIHAD'S CAMPUS COLLABORATORS
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, February 27, 2007. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post. Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. |
|
The general tendency of Westerners is to view global jihad as a foreign policy issue. But today it is clear that it is also a domestic policy issue. Over the weekend The Sunday Telegraph reported that a recently circulated British intelligence report warned: "The terrorist threat facing Britain from home-grown al-Qaida agents is higher than at any time since the September 11 attacks in 2001." After foiling the jihadist plot to down US-bound British passenger aircraft last summer, MI5 director Eliza Manningham-Buller claimed that there are some 1,600 British Muslims actively involved in plotting attacks against Britain. According to the intelligence report cited in the Sunday Telegraph, today that number exceeds 2,000. As one senior British political source told the newspaper, "The Security Services have constantly warned that the task of countering Islamic terrorism is a daunting one. There will be more attacks in Britain." It is not surprising that Britain faces the specter of mass attacks carried out by its own citizens in the name of Allah. Repeated exposes of the goings-on in British mosques and in supposedly "moderate" British Muslim communal organizations have shown unequivocally that they are being used as indoctrination centers for jihad. A poll published last month by Britain's Policy Exchange think tank bore out the poisonous impact this indoctrination has had on young Muslims in the country. Thirty-seven percent of British Muslims between the ages of 16-24 would rather live under Shari'a law than under British Common Law; 36 percent think Muslims should be killed if they convert to another religion; 13 percent admire al-Qaida and similar terror groups; and a whopping 74 percent of young British Muslims believe women should wear veils. WHILE IT is true that in the US the danger of home-grown jihadists to national security is lower than it is in Britain, it is also true that there is a growing phenomenon of jihadist violence being perpetrated by Muslim men against American civilians in the name of jihad. Ten days ago, the Investors Business Daily published an editorial enumerating a partial list of acts of terrorism carried out by Muslim men against their fellow Americans since the September 11 attacks. Most recently, Sulejman Talovic entered a shopping mall in Salt Lake City, murdered five and wounded four unsuspecting shoppers before being killed by an off-duty police officer. As was the case when Derrick Shareef, another Muslim male, was arrested in early December for plotting to carry out a similar attack at a shopping mall in Illinois just before Christmas, the media and the law enforcement agencies covering the Salt Lake City massacre have made light of the fact that the perpetrator was a Muslim. While Talovic is dead and so cannot explain his motives to authorities, Shareef was arrested after telling an FBI informant of his plans to murder Jews specifically and Americans in particular for Allah. As Shareef told the informant, "I swear by Allah man, I'm down for it too. I'm down for the cause. I'm down to live for the cause and die for the cause, man." SHAREEF'S protestations of jihadist ardor made little impression on either federal authorities or the media. Upon announcing Shareef's arrest, US Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that he was acting on his own and that he had no outside inspiration for his decision to commit mass murder for Allah. As was the case with Talovic and with Naveed Afzal Haq, who murdered one woman and wounded five during his shooting rampage at the Seattle Jewish Federation last July, the media and federal authorities have hushed up and failed to investigate the jihadist motives for the Illinois attacker or link him to any larger phenomenon. The Investors Business Daily editorial ran under the headline "Sudden jihad syndrome." The term, which has been bandied about by law enforcement officials in both the US and Britain in recent months, encapsulates the view that Muslims can be incited and then move to commit acts of murder in the name of Allah and jihad instantaneously. The attractiveness of the "sudden jihad syndrome" explanation for violent Islamic crime is clear. By arguing that the jihadists are acting on their own after being mysteriously inspired by no one, law enforcement officials and the media are relieved of the thankless task of investigating mosques, Muslim advocacy groups and Islamic centers, where the jihadist indoctrination is conducted on a daily basis. IT IS hard to know what to make of this view. Perhaps there is something to it. Perhaps the message of jihad is so strong that young Muslim men can be inspired to shoot pregnant women in office buildings after the notion of murder for Allah enters the transoms of their minds independently of other outside factors - through vapors or spontaneous generation perhaps. What is clear enough is that since this is the view that is informing policymakers, law enforcement officials and the media in handling a clear trend of jihadist murder, it requires serious empirical study. The obvious place for that research to take place is in the universities. Unfortunately, there can be little hope that universities in the US or in the West in general will devote any serious consideration to this most important sociological, psychological and national security trend. Far from being willing to study the most central issue of our times, universities are leading the charge in either ignoring it, or apologizing for it. On February 15, the Iraqi Ambassador to the UN, Hamid Al Bayati, spoke at New York's Fordham University. During the course of his remarks, Bayati doubted the fact that the Holocaust had occurred. In his words, "I'm not aware of any dictator who used chemical weapons against his own people. Some academics or diplomats would say Hitler used chemical weapons, but I am sure he didn't use them against his own people - his German people." When pressed by law professor Avi Bell on the fact that several hundred thousand German citizens were gassed to death by Nazi Germany, Bayati still refused to take the point. Fordham University is far from alone in providing a platform for Holocaust deniers. Last Thursday the Dean's office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology co-sponsored an event on the Arab-Israel conflict called, "Foreign Policy and Social Justice: A Jewish View, a Muslim View." The man invited to provide the Jewish view was Dovid Weiss, a member of the crackpot Neturei Karta sect. Weiss rose to prominence when he traveled to Teheran last December to participate in Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial conference. While MIT and Fordham were hosting Holocaust deniers in the name of intellectual freedom, their fellow universities were hosting "Israel Apartheid Week." As part of their efforts to criminalize the Jewish state, Arab and Jewish speakers at "Israel Apartheid Week" events refer to Israel as "1948 Palestine" and show propaganda films portraying IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians in Judea and Samaria as murderers. The events are generally sponsored by the International Solidarity Movement. In addition to their campus outreach, the ISM sponsors the weekly riots against the security fence in Bil'in and in Hebron, where its protesters throw rocks at IDF soldiers. Given the violent content of their actions in Israel, it should come as no surprise that their events on US campuses also breed violence. At an "Israel Apartheid Week" event at City University of New York, after watching a propaganda film, 19-year old Binyamin Rister rose and politely asked the ISM presenters if they supported terrorism. When he received no reply he politely repeated the question. Rather than wait for an answer, CUNY security guards dragged Rister from the room and then repeatedly banged his head against the wall of an elevator and threw him head first down the stairs. Rister's injuries from the assault by campus security required him to be evacuated by ambulance in a neck brace to the hospital. In an almost identical case at Georgetown last year, Bill Maniaci a 65-year-old retired Jewish American police officer was brutalized by Georgetown security guards after he asked ISM spokesmen if they supported terrorism. He is currently suing Georgetown for $8 million in damages for the assault. According to Lee Kaplan's report of the CUNY event in Frontpage Magazine, there were seven witnesses to the unprovoked attack against Rister. He too has filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against CUNY. EVEN THOSE propounding the view that jihadist murderers in the US and Britain are inspired to kill after being brought under the spell of the "sudden jihad syndrome" cannot deny that the root of the jihad is ideas. Similarly, it is self-evident that the key to beating the global jihad is victory in the battlefield of ideas. Unfortunately, as the pro-jihadist trend on US and Western campuses, and its impact on idea consumers in law enforcement, the media and policy circles throughout the free world shows, to the extent that those charged with engaging in the battle of ideas are engaged, they fight on the side of the enemy. The Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI) (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!" |
|
SYNAGOGUES USED AS BASES TO FIRE ON ISRAEL
Posted by Daily Alert, February 27, 2007. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein, World Net Daily's Jerusalem bureau
chief. It appeared today in New York Sun
|
|
TEL AVIV -- The ruins of two large synagogues in evacuated Jewish communities of the Gaza Strip have been transformed into military bases used by Palestinian Arab groups to fire rockets at Israeli cities, according to a senior leader of a Gaza militant group. When Israel withdrew from the Gaza in August, 2005, it left intact 20 synagogues of the Gush Katif Jewish communities following an Israeli Cabinet decision against demolishing the structures. Immediately after the Israeli evacuation was completed, Palestinian Arabs destroyed most of the Gaza synagogues. Speaking to The New York Sun from Gaza, a spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees, Abu Abir, said the area in which the synagogues once stood is now used to fire rockets at Israel. "We are proud to turn these lands, especially these parts that were for long time the symbol of occupation and injustice, like the synagogue, into a military base and source of fire against the Zionists and the Zionist entity," Mr. Abir said. Mr. Abir blamed the Jewish state for the desecration of the Gaza synagogues by Palestinian Arabs, claiming the decision to leave the structures intact was part of an Israeli conspiracy. Israel "left the synagogues behind so the world would see the Palestinians destroying them," Mr. Abir said. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
A SECOND BLOOD LIBEL ANTI-SEMITE FROM ISRAELI ACADEMIA
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 27, 2007. |
|
Yehiam Soreq or Sorek is one of the most openly anti-Semitic "academics" employed in Israeli academia. He teaches at the "Beit Berl" college, associated with the kibbutz movement and the Israeli "labor movement" (teh Labor Party and the Histadrut); it is named after the Zionist leader Berl Katsenelson. Sorek teaches history there. He is a vicious anti-Israel extremist, signs all the anti-Israel petitions (here is but one: http://maritimes.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/2941.php ). He differs from the other academic anti-Zionists in Israel mainly in turning out propaganda articles that are much loopier and loonier than those of most of the others --. see below. (His web site in Hebrew is at http://www.beitberl.ac.il/professors/ProfessorsPreview.asp?ID=347 It says he has a PhD from South Africa.) SOrek has now become the SECOND Israeli "academic" to endorse medieval blood libels about Jews supposedly using blood for ritual purposes in the Middle Ages. As you know, Prof. Ariel Toaff from Bar-Ilan University has been making such claims and Bar Ilan University is now under ENORMOUS attack for employing such a person. Toaff yesterday refused to appear before a Knesset committee to answer questions and he may be charged with contempt. Over the past weeks, numerous people, including myself, have been saying that there is not a single Jew in the world who endorses Toaff's ridiculous "research". Alas, we were wrong. There is now one other. Yehiam Sorek. In today's Maariv, he basically endorses Toaff's claims (which Toaff himself is now trying to play down). He proclaims Toaff a brave hero and insists that just as there cannot be smoke without a fire, medieval blood libels against Jews must have some factual basis. Criticism of people like Toaff is as illegitimate, writes Sorek, as similar criticisms against pro-Palestinian propagandists in Israeli academia who write about the "Naqba", the Arab word for catastrophe, favorite nonsense word of the braindead Left when referring to Israel's creation. Yehiam Sorek's blood libel anti-Semitic screed can be read in
Hebrew at
Ben Dror Yemini, editor of Maariv, dismisses Sorek as a vile
anti-Semite and pseudo-academic, in Hebrew at The director or Beit Berl is Ruthie Gavri at Phone 972-9-7476302 ruth@beitberl.ac.il Beit Berl's fax is 972-9-7476340. A form letter on the web for
writing Beit Berl is at You may also wish to write to the Minister of Education, Yuli Tamir, email info@education.gov.il, with a cc to mankal@education.gov.il and owl@education.gov.il Here is an earlier posting of mine on Herr Sorek:
http://www.israel-academia-monitor.com/index.php?type=large_advic&advice_id= 4399&page_data[id]=175&cookie_lang=en&the_session_id= 97a515e465964bc2273301f40c79ca36&PHPSESSID=441c451e14b0eade6a6a48abd467fe53 Sorek's email address is yehiam.sorek@beitberl.ac.il Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com or write him by email at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
ISRAEL'S ENEMIES SPAN THE GLOBE
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, February 26, 2007. |
|
Today's major threats to Israel 's security have connections to Shiite Iran. Iranian ally Syria yearns to once more rule over for the Golan Heights, Hamas and Hizbullah, both financed by Iran, yearn to annihilate the Jewish State, and of course Iran, whose president wishes to "wipe Israel off the map", itself is on the threshold of becoming a nuclear power. Furthermore, the lion's share (or camel's share in the native vernacular) of a morphing Middle East, mostly adherents to a Sunni version of Islam, likewise feel threatened by an emerging Persian juggernaut and its friends. The fact that America and coalition partners destabilized a regional balance of power, toppling and disrupting Iran's proximate archenemies, Sadist Hussein's Sunni Baathist party in Iraq and a Sunni Taliban fundamentalist government in Afghanistan respectively, exacerbates that threat, thus Sunni movers and shakers stain their fashionable robes, unable to hold tea cups steady, sipping with trembling spindly fingers. Indeed, Saudi led OPEC is even willing to pump more fossil fuel, thus lower its barrel price, consequently diminishing the cash flow to Iran's oil dependent economy, disrupting the juggernaut in progress. However, the Shiite regime has underwriting friends in low places, like Russia's egomaniacal Vladimir Putin. Indeed, you can take Vladimir out of the KGB, but you can't take the KGB out of cagey Vladimir; just ask Russia's once most powerful and richest oil oligarch, of partial Jewish ethnicity, Mikhail Khodorkovsky when visiting hours permit, or if it were possible, erstwhile spy Alexander Litvinenko from the grave, not likely to radiate much enthusiasm toward the Don who signed his death warrant from Moscow. Putin's tentacles, however, extend beyond the Eastern Hemisphere, snaking into Venezuela, a nation in turmoil, ruled by virulent anti-Semite Hugo Chavez. Both Russia and Venezuela, economies dependent on the per barrel price of oil, are on the short list of the planet's foremost pushers of that addictive liquid, thus both leaders, positions of power tied to economic results, fortunes intertwined, might be expected to hold hands singing kumbaya while doing business. Not coincidentally, Chavez is a fan of oil revenue dependent Iran and its 'in your face' Imam possessed anti-Semite supreme President Mahmoud AhMADinejad, kindred spirits in Holocaust revisionism. Indeed, sucking up to extreme Islam, Shiite-style, is also good business for the ambitious South American tyrant, no doubt wearing his socialist hat to suck in vast numbers of poor folks, the core component of his domestic power base. Putin, Chavez, and AhMADinejad, albeit the latter somewhat subservient to Iran's anti-Semitic mullahs, have much in common, are collectively potent adversaries of the Jewish State, more essentially by deeds than words, thus should be observed very carefully by Israeli intelligence forces. It goes without say, Uncle Sam's analysts have mega interest as well in this triad, potentially treacherous to a 'war on terror' right in America's own backyard. Lest anyone doubt that a Venezuela crafted by Chavez and an Iran defined by AhMADinejad are not far apart in utter disdain for Jews and Israel, perhaps a quantum leap more so than Putin at least in rhetoric, review the following evidence compliments of the ADL. Anti-Semitism is routinely found in Venezuela's government-sponsored press, with stereotypical descriptions and caricatures of Jews and anti-Israel invective appearing in opinion pieces and editorial cartoons. Some examples:
"President Hugo Chavez and his government institutions have elevated their anti-Israel rhetoric to dangerous levels, and it often crosses the line into anti-Semitism," said Abraham H. Foxman. "It is troubling that the leadership of a Latin American country, that once served as a safe-haven for Holocaust survivors and that still boasts a sizeable Jewish community, has taken a wrong turn into fostering hatred, prejudice and bigotry while supporting countries and groups who call for Israel's total destruction." Chavez and his government have resorted to implicit and explicit anti-Semitic displays, including rehashing the ancient canard of Jewish control, blaming Israel and the Jews for the world's problems, and adopting anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jewish financial influence. Recently, in a series of public statements on Israel's war with Hezbollah, Chavez repeatedly compared Israel to the Nazis and Hitler, and in speaking to his own people he has on at least one occasion dabbled in classical anti-Semitic canards:
Israel surely has its enemies in the Middle East, but not exclusively in that region. Indeed, worldwide connections exacerbate the Jewish State's security dilemma. Yet, we must note the one common bond of oil revenue dependent economies, and must ask ourselves if the ultimate answer for the beleaguered Jewish State, as well as formidable ally America, is to eventually stop buying their oil and convince other industrial nations to do the same. Hmmm. Just a thought! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
PERLE: BUSH FAILED BY HIS OWN PEOPLE
Posted by News Max, February 26, 2007. |
|
This was written by Dave Eberhart and appeared today on www.NewsMax.com. |
|
Richard Perle tells NewsMax that key members of the Bush administration have failed the president -- and Perle names names. In a wide-ranging interview, the former assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan and chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee from 2001 to 2003 under President Bush calls former Secretary of State Colin Powell a "disaster" and says current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice "was in way over her head from the beginning." Others fall within his sights: Al Franken, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, and George Tenet, among others. Surprising words from the man critics of the White House have dubbed "the Prince of Darkness" -- a leading neo-conservative who was one of the key proponents of the 2002 invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Speaking from his home in Chevy Chase, Md., Perle -- the man who was credited with orchestrating the Reagan policies that led to the fall of the Soviet Union -- is busy explaining his role in a less savory subject, the current situation in Iraq. While Perle does see a silver lining and believes that our actions may have prevented greater evil, he worries that the situation is looking more and more like Vietnam, especially as that war was lost on the home front. Perle will be featured in PBS's upcoming two-hour program "The Case for War: In Defense of Freedom." It is one segment of a series called "America at a Crossroads." PBS says the series will explore the challenges confronting the world post-9/11, including the war on terrorism, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the experience of American troops, the struggle for balance within the Muslim world, and perspectives on America's role globally. The "Crossroads" series will launch on Sunday, April 15, and will run on PBS through Friday, April 20, 9-11 p.m. (ET). Perle's "The Case for War" segment will air on April 17. Despite the airtime devoted to Perle, PBS never seems to offer him the opportunity to look at the camera and clearly explain how some of the best and the brightest in the Bush administration got it wrong. Still, there are some surprising turns. In a particularly poignant segment of "The Case for War," Perle talks about the looming threat of Iran, giving this surprising take -- from someone reputedly one of the nation's foremost saber-rattlers: "I don't think we need to send in the Marines, and it's not being contemplated." According to PBS, its "America at a Crossroads" initiative includes an extensive public outreach program designed to create a national dialogue. The outreach program encompasses screenings and discussions in more than 20 cities with U.S. military personnel, leading policy experts and Islamic leaders; an in-depth online presence; and educational initiatives. NewsMax: What do you find most frustrating about this slow agony of progress in Iraq? Perle: I have watched the president from the beginning and my sense is that his instincts have been pretty good and his policy decisions -- the ones that he himself has acted on -- are pretty good. But he has an administration that not only does not implement his policies, they are often hostile to his policies. He has failed to gain control of his own administration. NewsMax: Rather than a documentary defending the decision to go to war in Iraq, perhaps folks would better appreciate Richard Perle doing something along the lines of David Halberstam's Vietnam-era tome "The Best and The Brightest" -- similarly discussing how we got where we are in Iraq with the best and brightest leading the way. Perle: We just don't have the best and the brightest. I think Colin Powell was a disaster. He never liked the president's policies. He did almost nothing to get them implemented. Condi [former head of the National Security Council and now Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice] was in way over her head from the beginning, and the president gave much too much weight to her views. The administration was full of people even in the White House at the National Security Council who were hostile to the president's policies. NewsMax: On the subject of your "America at a Crossroads" segment for PBS: In one of your filmed confrontations with protestors on the National Mall, you tell a woman, "I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm not the president." You're saying to her that you are not the architect of the war and you didn't make the decisions. But you were a powerhouse on the Defense Policy Board. Perle: As a matter of fact, I was not at all happy with the conduct of the board. Now people can differ about what approach would have been more effective. I think we got ourselves, unfortunately, into an occupation [of Iraq] that we could have avoided. We could have avoided it by turning things over to the Iraqis more or less immediately, which is what I was arguing for. NewsMax: Inherent in that view would be the need to maintain the Iraqi army, even though the officer corps may have been riddled with Baathists. Perle: Yes. I think it was a mistake to disband the [Iraqi] army the way it was done. But the big mistake was not handing things over to the Iraqis immediately. If you are in a position of occupation and you can't get the electricity going, you're bound to inspire an insurgency. I don't think that insurgency was inevitable. NewsMax: One of the things that PBS is advertising is that it is hoped this unique series, "America at a Crossroads," is going to provoke a national dialogue, and yet, ironically, our own United States Senate is gridlocked. Perle: They are having a screaming match, not a dialogue. NewsMax: How do you see it playing out on Capitol Hill? Perle: The House and the Democratic leadership have decided to make Iraq a partisan political issue. They are using it to rally Democrats, and it seems to me that they have lost all sight of the national interest. NewsMax: Some have styled what's going on as a looming constitutional disaster -- a potential historic war between two branches of government. Perle: Despite all of the earlier claims about wanting a bipartisan approach to these issues, everything that they [Democrats] are doing is to the contrary. What's sad is getting this nonbinding resolution and then moving with this basically deceptive [Rep. John] Murtha approach, which is to pretend that all they are doing is putting restrictions on funding in the best interest of the troops. In fact, they are trying to make it impossible for the commander-in-chief to dispatch the troops. I've been in Washington now since 1969. I can't recall a more hypocritical coordinated assault by one party than this one. Even in the worse days of the Nixon administration it never reached this. NewsMax: How do you suspect this is all going to end? Perle: I think that the Democrats have injected a note of such bitter partisanship that it is going to backfire. NewsMax: In the 2008 elections? Perle: Even before that. I think that most Americans are unhappy with the situation in Iraq, but they do not want to see a humiliating withdrawal, and they don't want to see a bitter partisan dispute when they realize that the country needs to pull together. Nancy Pelosi is overplaying her hand. Jack Murtha has just gone around the bend. I don't understand him at all, and I think in the end the public, broadly speaking, will say, "Enough of this." NewsMax: Now that Al Franken has declared for the U.S. Senate, do you find him a more serious guy? Perle: He tells me that he is out of a job [host on Air America Radio]. He actually has a decent sense of humor, so he tries to be funny, but he was reasonably serious with me. I didn't think, however, that he had a lot to say of importance. Franken was hung up on the fact that we didn't find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and that whole thing gets a little tedious after a while. The president didn't create [the intelligence organizations]. He made the mistake of keeping [former CIA chief George] Tenet in place, but that is another matter. NewsMax: What about the U.S. intelligence efforts in the ramp-up to war in Iraq? Perle: The intelligence that was available to [the president] after September 11 was that they were categorical in their belief that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. There was no deception. There was no cherry-picking. There was no pressure on the analysts. That whole line is rubbish. I was seeing the intelligence at the time. I was then chairman of the Defense Policy Board, and we had briefings and so I heard the CIA briefings and the Defense Intelligence Agency briefings, and they never left any room for doubt. The idea that that intelligence product was manipulated by the administration is just completely without foundation. But the Democrats have embraced it because it is how they hope to explain the fact that most of them voted for the resolution authorizing force against Saddam. NewsMax: Throughout your program, you adamantly say you were for the regime change in Iraq. The regime change was a good thing... Perle: Saddam is gone, and I think that is a good thing. He was a menace. It is very popular now to suggest that because we didn't find WMD, he wasn't the threat. What we didn't find in truth was stockpiles of WMDs. He certainly had the capacity to produce chemical and biological weapons again when he wanted to do so, and so I believe he was a threat, and I think we had the right to respond to that threat. You can't operate on the basis of what you know later. You've got to operate on the basis of what you know then. NewsMax: So, the fact is that while the ramp-up to the war was clumsy and less than a smooth scholarly enterprise, we got there and it was justified? Perle: Yes, I believe it was justified, and I wish we had handled it a little bit differently, but -- if we were having a debate now about how effectively we handled the post-Saddam situation, it would be a very different debate than the one that we are having. NewsMax: Reportedly, 70 percent of the American public wants the boys to come home... Perle: It depends on how you ask the question. Of course, we all want the boys to come home. If the question you put was "Do you think that we should withdraw even if it means that Iraq subsides into chaos and we will have been defeated and humiliated in Iraq?" you will get an entirely different answer. I think polls on a matter like that are pretty useless. NewsMax: How about the analogy between Iraq and the Vietnam experience? Perle: I think that there are, unfortunately, elements in Iraq that are a lot more reminiscent of Vietnam than I would have wished -- and more reminiscent than was true in early Iraq. I mean, what is beginning to look a little bit familiar is the withdrawal of support on the home front. I don't see troops who were in Iraq demanding that we pull out. NewsMax: How about the recent intelligence that Muqtada al-Sadr and members of his army left Baghdad in advance of the troop surge and fled to Tehran, Iran, where he has family? Perle: It's an indication that we may be able to turn this thing around. One of the mistakes of the administration was in believing that you could deal with Iraq in isolation without a successful strategy for Iran and Syria. What the Iranians are doing now, they have been doing all along, and the administration just hasn't been willing to act on it. |
|
MECCA
Posted by Samson Krupnick, February 26, 2007. |
|
R&B Editor's note: Wahhabis are not Sunnis and "Saudi" Arabia must be destroyed. |
|
We are in a dangerous situation, wherein mass murder ("terror") continues to spread. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made the mistake of permitting Wahhabi Hamas ("Palestinian" branch of the international Wahhabi Muslim Brotherhood, sister organization of Wahhabi Al Qaeda) to participate in Resident Arab ("Palestinian") elections, supposedly in the interest of "democracy". Hamas won the elections with over 70% of the vote, calling for the destruction of the State of Israel precisely as did The Egyptian from Alexandria (alias "Yasser Arafat", previous alias "Abdul Rauf el-Codbi el-Husseini"). The Potemkin Village Fantasy of two nations, Israel and "Palestine", living side by side in peace and tranquility, evaporated. The fantasy of "two states" was never accepted by most Resident Arabs, nor even by a minority of Israelis. The terms by which "Palestine" Authority Chairman, 1972 Munich Massacre Mass Murder Master Mahmoud Abbas would accept a two state "solution" were flooding Israel with 4.6 million Arab "refugees" and Israel's retreat to the 1949 armistice borders. "Arafat" turned down deals offered by Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak and U.S. President Bill Clinton. President George W. Bush refused the terms of Abbas and specified the U.N. resolution of any withdrawal be in consideration of security with safe and defensible borders for Israel. Abbas was interested in playing the part of a man of peace. Wahhabi Hamas took full advantage of its large democratic victory to pursue its objective: "Destruction of the Zionist Entity". Hamas head Ismael Hanieh visited Iran, where he proclaimed, "We shall never recognize the Zionist Entity". He was promised there some one billion dollars and an endless supply of sophisticated arms, including anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles. Meanwhile, bowing to Condoleezza Rice pressure, more arms and equipment were permitted to Fatah, supposedly to battle Wahhabi Hamas. Abbas declared, "More fire should be against the occupiers rather than at Palestinians". Under threat of civil war, both Abbas and Hanieh were invited to Mecca. Wahhabi Hamas secured the support of Wahhabi "Saudi" Arabia in its war with Fatah. Already supported by Iran supplying arms through Syria, Wahhabi Hamas came to Mecca the winner and left the winner. Supposedly this was to be a meeting to bring "peace" to "Palestine". As it appears, Hanieh was the victor and Abbas the loser. Wahhabi "Saudi" Arabia offered one billion dollars for presumed tranquility. Aside from alleged American pressure on "Saudi" Arabia, more prompted them to bring tranquility into the Middle East. "Saudi" Arabia and another five tribal entities ("nations") in this area are dominated by Wahhabis and Sunni Muslims, while Iran and Iraq are primarily Shi'ite. Thousands have been murdered in Iraq by Wahhabis, Sunnis, Shi'ites and Iranian "insurgents". American and its allies failed to "stabilize" this bloody battlefield. The new Iraqi army cannot keep the peace. Shi'ite groups attack each other, making "peace" almost impossible. Leaving this mad house is not practical. Meanwhile, local scandals take up much of our time, spreading in the shadow of the failures of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz in the July-August, 2006 Lebanon War. Attacks continue. While the Lebanese army and U.N.I.F.I.L. troops guard borders, neither prevents smuggling in huge quantities of sophisticated arms and equipment for Shi'ite Hezbollah. Hezbollah dreams of ruling Lebanon. Another war is coming sooner or later with Lebanon. A terrible sin was committed by Ariel Sharon in ordering the ethnic cleansing and expulsion of 10,000 Pioneering Jewish men, women and children from 23 Jewish Pioneering Communities in Gush Katif, and three in northern Samaria, as a "peace gesture" to the Resident Arabs, who considered this crime a great military victory. Gush Katif now headquarters five mass murder organizations, including Wahhabi Al Qaeda. Huge quantities of arms are smuggled into Gaza from Egypt in the south and Lebanon in the north. Meetings continue to take place between Ehud Olmert, Mahmoud Abbas and Condoleeza Rice, following guidelines established by the "Quartet" of the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia. The "Quartet" requires Wahhabi Hamas recognition of Israel, abandonment of mass murder, and of honoring previous agreements, whatever they may be. Supposedly we are well equipped to defend ourselves from Iran with our Arrow missiles and the Israel Air Force is prepared to attach and destroy Iranian nuclear installations as Menachem Begin destroyed the nuclear reactor in Baghdad in 1981. We need a new Government quickly to better face more difficulties properly and effectively with the help of the Almighty. Shalom, Chodesh Tov and Purim Sameach from Yerushaliyim, Contact Samson Krupnick at krup@012.net.il This was distributed by the Root and Branch Association, Ltd (rb@rb.org.il). |
|
A JEW WAS MURDERED WHILE PRAYING IN GUSH ETZION
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 26, 2007. |
|
Last night about 6:30 PM CST, I had a call from Israel - 2:30 AM Israel time. The news was not good. A 42 year old Jewish man, Erez Levanon, z'l, who used to drive to a nearby small forest to stroll and commune with nature, pray with G-d and to find his way to peace was found brutally murdered with multiple stab wounds. It was reported that the murderers hiding in a house in Beit Omar near Bat Ayin, had been caught by the Shimshon unit of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). I am beside myself with rage. I do not believe in the Christian concept of turning the other cheek. If caught, these rotten dregs of a primitive, vicious race should be immediately sliced into pieces and fed to pigs. This was a good, gentle man with three children who will now grow up without their father. I am certain that the non-Jewish Government and despicable Leftist Courts will give these monsters a trial and put them in prison for a while. Then this current corrupt anti-Jewish Government will release them along with other Muslim Arab Terrorists in an early prisoner exchange for kidnapped Jews. This current unholy government has unleashed these radical Muslim hostile creatures to savage Jews wherever they can find them alone and vulnerable. Once the Arabs in the Gush Etzion area, where Erez Levanon was murdered, feared to accost the Jews but the unholy non-Jewish government of Ehud Olmert taught them they had nothing to fear. The corrupt Jew-hating Courts of Israel were there to protect the Terrorists of Islam so why should they worry. I can hear the Leftists cheering that another "settler" has been murdered. One less "settler" to be forced off the land. Do you think it matters to the non-Jews of Kadima, Labor, Meretz that Jews cannot walk in Israel's forests, eat at a restaurant, ride a bus? NOT AT ALL! The real Jews of Israel should be sufficiently enraged to march as a nation to Jerusalem and rip this imposter Government from its comfortable, unearned offices. Never even in its worst moments has Israel, through incompetent leadership, had such low dregs of humanity ruling the nation. Every crooked politicians, embezzler, treasonous dreck (that's shit in any language) has been drawn to this Government like a fly to garbage. The maggots they produce are given other jobs to control the system and the people. In the last few days I watched a dog expert explain why dogs bark incessantly, forcing the neighbors to call the police to shut them up. The "expert" concluded that these barking dogs were merely frightened and barked to give themselves false courage. Shortly after that, I read a speech by Olmert to the effect that after the Holocaust we (meaning he) will not live under an existential threat again - ever. Never again! I could not help but think of a frightened dog barking. But, we have heard such barking before when other Prime Ministers barked their threats that, if the Arabs do this or that, they will know what to do. They knew that barking their fear would influence the people to think they were brave instead of the sniveling, yapping politicians they are. So now a peaceful man, taking a moment of solitude, in a small forest is dead. Like others before him, his children must be raised by one parent and the ripples of pain spread. Don't expect much of the Olmert Government, a Leftist Court that serves the Terrorists and Police force trained to attack "Settlers". The weak Olmert Government had just recently opened up the road to Arab Muslim Terrorists by closing the checkpoints. Another dead Jew means nothing to Olmert and Rice in the dismemberment through re-partition of the Jewish State. Isn't it time to clean out the garbage called the Government? 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.interaccess.com |
|
CRITICAL UPDATE FROM THE GUSH KATIF COMMITTEE
Posted by Buddy Macy, February 26, 2007. |
|
This statement is from Dror Vanunu (gkatif@netvision.net.il), of the Gush Katif Committee. My comments are interspersed in red. |
|
Prominent leaders from the Left sign a petition for Gush Katif. Last week a group of scholars, writers and ex-politicians from the left held a special press conference in the vicinity of the renewed farms of the evacuees in the Ziqim area, south of Ashqelon. They signed a petition against the neglecting of the evacuees and demanding the immediate involvement of the government in their rehabilitation. The petition was presented by Major General (Res.) Uzi Dayan to Lior Kalfa, Chairman of the Gush Katif Committee at the end of a visit and meeting with the expellees. Public Petition "Evacuated with determination -- Rehabilitation with sensitivity. The petition was signed among all by A.B. Yeoshua, Arieh Eliav, Sami Michael, Amos Oz, Yossi Sarid, Gila Almagor, David Grossman, Doron Almog, Yaron London, Shulamit Aloni and others. The following statement was published by the Gush Katif Committee "The Gush Katif Committee welcomes with satisfaction this initiative and the clear demand to the government to put en end to the plight of the evacuees. UJC Support for Gush Katif evacuees. The Gush Katif Committee has been investing significant efforts since the evacuation in order to involve the "United Jewish Communities" in the United States (UJC) in the rehabilitation of the evacuated families and to extend financial aid for the multiple needs of the Gush Katif communities. At first the Jewish federations were reticent to recognize the need for massive assistance under the influence of the message conveyed by the Israeli government even prior to disengagement that "there is a solution for each settler" and that their involvement is unnecessary. The periodical reports that were published by the committee, the pressure on the side of supporters and friends of Gush Katif throughout North America who demanded from the local federations to support the expellees from Gush Katif in the same way that they supported the different projects -- as rehabilitation of the north, project for which the UJC mobilized about 350 million dollar- brought about this change in the attitude of the Jewish Federations and a reassessment of their position. During the past two months a number of delegations from the Jewish Agency, the UJC and heads of major federations have visited the temporary sites of the evacuees, have learnt at firsthand about the hardships faced by the communities and drew mutual reports together with the Gush Katif Committee on the situation and of the special needs of the communities towards complete rehabilitation. During those meetings the delegations became aware of the tremendous difficulties that the people from Gush Katif had to deal with and were astonished to witness an ongoing motivation, a desire to start anew and to succeed to become once again active and resourceful citizens of Israel. Ze'ev Bielsky, chairman of the Jewish Agency accurately expressed this by saying that:" Undoubtedly the situation of the Gush Katif evacuees is far more critical than the situation of the residents of the North who left their homes for 33 days but at the aftermath of the war had a home and a livelihood to return to. [$350 million was raised for the residents of the North soon after the fighting stopped. Despite the much greater severity of the situation that the expellees are still facing (according to the Jewish Agency, itself!), only $2.5 million has been approved for them -- this after 18 MONTHS of neglect! See below:] For years the State of Israel has been eager to settle those regions, now we have to remove the many hurdles and to help you in your endeavor." At the end of January, the UJC Board of Trustees convention took place in Florida and among others matters; the situation of the uprooted communities of Gush Katif was discussed. Rivka Goldsmidt, representing the Gush Katif Committee, spoke with emotion of the plight of the families and her words aroused deep empathy with the terrible reality that has been forced on the Gush Katif families since summer 2005. The decision to extend assistance to the communities was unanimously accepted and a 2.5 million dollars aid (out of the evaluated 86 million dollars program) will be allocated for the support of projects in the fields of employment, education and trauma relief. [That UJC is knowingly giving just 3% of the necessary funds to the expellees, 18 months after their expulsion, is a sin! UJC has well over $100 million remaining from the more than $350 million raised in the Israel Emergency Campaign this past year. EMERGENCY FUNDS ARE, BY DEFINITION, TO BE USED EXPEDITIOUSLY. MANY OF THE EXPELLEES WERE ALSO VICTIMS OF THE WAR IN THE NORTH. WHY DOESN'T HOWARD RIEGER, PRESIDENT OF UJC, APPROVE THE $86 MILLION FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION TO THE FORMER GUSH KATIF RESIDENTS? PLEASE EMAIL MR. RIEGER AND DEMAND THAT HE GIVE THE EXPELLEES ALL OF THE DESPERATELY-NEEDED MONEY. howard.rieger@ujc.org Thank you so much!] Lior Kalfa, chairman of the Gush Katif Committee has expressed his gratitude to Mr. Ze'ev Bielsky, Mr. Nachman Shay, and to Mr. Doron Krakow for urging their respective organizations to bring assistance to the evacuees and for their true willingness to become partners in the complex rehabilitation process: " We hope that this is the first step to the creation of a stable partnership with the communities of Gush Katif. We hope for your intensive involvement in the restoration of our permanent communities, the building of public structures and the professional rehabilitation of families in the years to come. The heads of the Gush Katif Committee and the Jewish Agency are defining the areas of assistance for this allocation: Scholarships for students, help for education and relief programs, community needs and re-employment programs through JobKatif. Contact Buddy Macy at vegibud@gmail.com |
|
WINDS OF WAR: WHERE'S THE MUSLIM OUTRAGE?
Posted by Michael Travis, February 26, 2007. |
|
This comes from the Winds of War website. |
|
Neal Boortz wrote this piece, and recited it on the air to a Muslim who called in complaining about -- oh you know, Muslims being victimized and taking the rap for a small minority of Muslims who are causing all the trouble in the world. But a Canada Survey proves otherwise. But first here's Neal's list of Muslim atrocities that have not produced the Muslim outrage that's due as read to the distressed Muslim caller.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
THREE-DAY MARCH FOR POLLARD
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 26, 2007. |
|
Israel's youth is increasingly leading the struggle to free Jonathan Pollard - and now, a yeshiva high school class in Tiberias is planning a three-day march to Jerusalem calling for his release. Rabbi Avichai Golan, the projects director of the ORT Yeshiva High School in Tiberias, explained to Arutz-7 how the idea came about: "Every year, the 11th grade sets out on a long trek - but this year, with Pollard in jail for his 22nd year, the students decided that they want it to be on behalf of Pollard. We'll be starting out on the first day of the month of redemption - Nissan - for there is no reason that Pollard should not be home in time for the holiday of redemption, Passover, which falls in the middle of Nissan. The students feel that in this way, they can wake up the country to demand that our government submit an official request to the US for his release." Awards and Recognitions At the same time, it has been announced that the prestigious Jerusalem Conference - to be held at the same time in the Hyatt Hotel in Jerusalem - will award its "Lover of Zion" award to Jonathan Pollard. His wife Esther will receive it on his behalf. The award and the march are just the latest manifestations of the increasing public recognition in Israel of Pollard's contribution to Israeli security and of his plight. They follow the bestowing of an award to Pollard by the Torah and Land Institute at its annual conference last month in Bar Ilan University, honorary citizenships in Bat Yam, Beit El, Gush Katif, Kiryat Arba and other localities, and more. 'From Bondage to Freedom' The high school march, entitled 'From Bondage to Freedom,' is scheduled to begin around the Petach Tikvah area, and will end 85 kilometers (52 miles) later, at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. The students will stop at various historic sites along the way, such as Latrun, the battlesites of the Maccabim, the route of the caravans during the War for Independence, and more. The preliminary plan is to spend the first night in Kibbutz Shaalvim, and the second in Kibbutz Tzova. "We hope to attract many other high school students from all around the country to join us on the last day as we make the ascent to Jerusalem," Golan said. "You can imagine what an impact it can have if hundreds of youths waving Pollard banners and wearing Pollard shirts walk along the main Tel Aviv-Jerusalem highway to the nation's capital." However, the plans are still being made on a small-scale - partly because of budgetary constraints. At Arutz-7's request, Golan provided this email address for those who might be interested in contributing: "avital@012.net.il" Once in Jerusalem, the students plan to submit a petition signed by thousands of youths calling for freedom for Pollard to the American Consulate on Agron Street. With the recent statement by former CIA head James Woolsey on Arutz-7 in favor of clemency for Pollard, following years of CIA antipathy towards him, Pollard supporters in Israel feel that many Americans who feared that supporting Pollard implied an anti-American position can now be more open about their true feelings. In addition, leading Jewish organizations such as Agudath Yisrael and the National Council of Young Israel have called upon their constituents to call the White House (1-202-456-1414) and ask for Pollard's release from prison. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor of Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). |
|
TERRORIST AMBUSH VICTIM BURIED IN KFAR ETZION
Posted by Hillel Fendel and Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, February 26, 2007. |
|
The body of Gush Etzion resident Erez Levanon, 42 and father of three, was found late last night in an abandoned village near Beit Omar in the Hevron area. It appears that his murderers stabbed him many times. It is assumed, though the police will not say so with absolute certainty, that the murder was perpetrated by Palestinian terrorists. Eliyahu Mendelovitch, a neighbor of the victim who participated in the search and retrieval of Levanon's body, told Arutz-7 that the murderers most likely waited in ambush for him. Erez often went to the same spot at the same time each day to pray alone, in the custom of Breslover Hassidim. Click here to listen to the interview with Eliyahu Mendelovitch. Rabbi Michi Yosefi, a close friend and neighbor of the late victim, said that Eretz was "humble and did not seek attention, yet managed to touch the hearts of thousands of Jews with whom he came in contact during their spiritual searchings in India." Erez was also a talented musician, who "did wonders with his music and lyrics. He put out a disc that is unlike those sold in stores; something very unique." The Maariv NRG Hebrew website article on the murder includes a link to hear the song "The Heart and the Well," written and composed by the victim.
Erez Levanon's funeral set out this afternoon from Bat Ayin to the regional Gush Etzion cemetery in Kfar Etzion, just a kilometer away. Erez spent the last seven summers in India - first in Manali and afterwards in Bela - meeting with young Israelis seeking to "clean their heads." "What he managed to do there was simply amazing," Yosefi told Radio Kol Chai. "I always wondered where such a talent came from... He had a special strength of faith." Sha'ul Goldstein, head of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, attacked the government policy of removing checkpoints in Judea and Samaria as "gestures" to Fatah head Mahmoud Abbas. Goldstein said that the murder should force officials to reevaluate this policy, as the removal of checkpoints is what allowed the killers to arrive in the area and escape quickly afterwards. Contrary to initial reports, Erez's lifeless body was not found by Arabs, but rather by his neighbors who began searching for him when he did not arrive at a scheduled appointment. UPDATE February 27, 2007 Israeli security forces on Monday arrested two Palestinians in Beit Omar in the West Bank who confessed that they stabbed Erez Levanon, 42, to death in a forest outside his home in Bat Ayin on Sunday. Mudar Abu-Dia and Mousaa Ah'lil, both 18, told police following their capture that they had followed Levanon to a forest that he liked to pray in and there ambushed and slaughtered him. The two boys originally claimed to have been working alone, but the killing was apparently popular enough among the "Palestinians" that the Islamic Jihad jumped in and claimed credit for having directed the youthful murderers. Levanon was a popular songwriter and singer who played music for
patients in Jerusalem-area hospitals and would entertain for free at
bar mitzvas and weddings of those who lacked money. He was a follower
of the 18th century Hassidic master Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav. In
pursuit of the Bratslav tradition of personal prayer, Levanon and
others in the community would often go into the forest where he was
slain to pray. (Jerusalem Post)
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor of Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com)
Nissan Ratzlav-Katz is a write at Arutz-Sheva.
|
|
HOW TO SPEAK LEFTIST
Posted by Michael Travis, February 26, 2007. | |
|
This was written by Bradley Burston and it appeared today in
Haaretz
| |
|
This is the second in a series of exercises in over-generalization , following Ten reasons the left hates Israel - five good, five bad. Apologies are tendered in advance to the rational left, the members of whom often hate the following as much as Israelis do. ______________ Why do Israelis hate the Western left? # Because Arabs can murder, rape, starve, maim, torture, deport, excommunicate, honor-kill, abuse, extort, rocket, shell, assassinate, suicide bomb, humiliate, jail without due process, occupy, and enslave other Arabs without eliciting peep one from the evolved, hypersensitive consciences of the Western left - unless the silence is broken in order to find Israel and its U.S. ally responsible. How to Speak Leftist: Blame the West Repeat until winded: Arabs have been subjugated and colonized for centuries. The interventionist and occupation policies of the IDF and its Western sponsors promote infighting among Arab allies, in order to divide and continue to conquer. # Because Palestinians can meat-cleaver, rocket, machine-gun, bludgeon or bomb Israeli civilians to death, without the Western left making a sound. How to speak Leftist: Blame Israel Example: Talkback in response to apparent terror stabbing death of settler, Monday: It must be easy holding a gun to somebody's head and calling them a terrorist when all along you have been demonizing them and restricting their freedom, but then again you are taking out the holocaust frustrations on weaker people, which in your eyes makes you strong, put your gun down and face the Palestinians even handed and see how far you will get, you are bloody cowards.
# Because in recent years, attacks on Jews, Jewish graves, synagogues and other Jewish institutions in Eastern and Western Europe and in North America have reached levels unseen in recent memory, and in many cases in which Muslims were behind the incidents, the left has been notably reluctant to voice condemnation. How to Speak Leftist: Blame Israel Repeat until winded: Israel's crimes against the Palestinians have been the driving force in the rise of contemporary anti-Semitism and attacks on Diaspora Jews. # Because some elements of the left are willing to countenance and euphemize actual genocide when practiced by Muslims in places like Darfur, while missing no opportunity to accuse Israel of systematic genocide, when describing Israeli attempts to repel suicide bombings and other terror attacks. How to speak Leftist - Example: Talkback response from Mo, NYC: Zionist forces who turn a blind eye to the wholesale depravation and oppression of Palestinians are making Dafur a cause celebre. The questions the left asks are -- why are people whose hands are very dirty with human rights abuses, with wholesale cultural annihilation vis-a-vis the Palestinians (not genocide, but destruction of cultural and institutional resources and identity) -- why are such people suddenly focused on Darfur? # Because nationalism on the basis of Palestinian cultural affiliation is celebrated as the natural right of a disenfranchised people with a common history of enforced displacement, and who trace their origins to ancestral homeland - while Jewish nationalism on the same basis is condemned as inherently and irrevocably racist and illegitimate. # Because the Western left absolves the Palestinians of all responsibility for their fate, holding Israel solely responsible for the plight of the Palestinians, their choice to pledge fealty to the armed struggle rather than call Israel's bluff and take concrete steps toward statehood. # And because the Palestinians are not held accountable for their refusal to wage a specifically non-violent struggle for independence, instead relying on macho-drenched violence, which does little but alienate the world from the Palestinian cause. How to speak Leftist: Repeat until winded The withdrawals from Gaza and Lebanon prove that resistance is the only way to force Israel to relinquish conquered territory. The lopsided pro-Palestinian votes in the UN prove that the Palestinian cause has not been hurt by resistance. Israeli policies make non-violent protest impossible. Postscript: It has been suggested to the Palestinians many times, that they organize a massive non-violent protest in which they simply Get Up And Walk. Walk towards Israel. Hundreds of thousands of people, marching for their rights. It has worked for many other movements in history. No rocks. No cinder blocks. No slingshots. No AK-47s. Just get up and walk. And if Israel responds with violence, which is likely, the Palestinians will win. The world will respect their cause. Not just the Western left. The Palestinians will win a state. Alongside Israel. As it is, the masked testosterone undergrounds only win themselves macho bragging rights, which, for them, appears to be enough. But if the masses renounce violence, the Palestinians will finally win one. Not just the left.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
AHMADINAJAD - A MODERN DAY HAMAN
Posted by Rachel Kapen, February 26, 2007. |
|
With the Jewish holiday of Purim right around the corner (Jewish holidays are observed according to the Jewish calendar so they may fall on different dates, this year it falls on March 4) a holiday when Jews celebrate the victory of good which represented by Mordechai, a simple Persian Jew, and his niece Esther, the Persian queen who becomes a heroine and the rescuer of her people, let us contemplate some lessons we may learn from this happy holiday. As the Purim story goes, recounted in the Book of Esther, or the Megilah (scroll) of Esther, Esther is chosen by the King Ahasuerosh, the great king of Persia and the ruler of 127 nations, to be his queen, not disclosing her Jewish background. Alas, an evil and rabid anti-Semitic prime minister named Haman, Haman the Wicked as known in Jewish lore, concocts a scheme to obliterate all the Jews of the kingdom, to which the not too bright a king gives his O.K. and something has to be done A.S.A.P. Mordechai then appeals to his niece the Queen to reveal her true identity to her husband the king and intercede on behalf of her people which she does, albeit reluctantly at first, and the rest is history. The wicked Haman is severely punished and the Jews are saved and celebrate it till today. However, for the Jews it didn't end there, in present day Persia, now called Iran, there is another evil man and rabid anti-Semite who denies the Holocaust and calls for wiping the Jewish state off the face of the earth. Furthermore, in defiance of the United States and world opinion by continuing to enrich uranium and most probably on the way to create nuclear weapons, he poses a morbid threat not only to Israel and the entire region but globally, as terrorists may get a hold of these mass destruction weapons, a most formidable thought. Granted, there is no Queen Esther or Uncle Mordechai to intercede with this modern- day Haman, but let's hope and pray that as it is written in the Book of Esther: Salvation will come from another place. Contact Rachel Kapen at skapen265466MI@comcast.net |
|
A FOREIGN MINISTER IN DREAMLAND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 26, 2007. |
|
WHAT THOSE CALLED "MODERATE" DO While Israel's Foreign Minister Livni calls Abbas moderate, the website of his Fatah still features a cartoon of Sharon "the butcher." In the cartoon, only, Sharon holds a butcher knife over a bleeding Arab baby on a butcher block, near two Arabs hanging on a meat hook. Another cartoon depicts Sharon whipping an Arab tied by barbed wire to a post (IMRA, 1/28). LIVNI STATES ISRAELI POLICY She admits that withdrawal from Gaza turned it over to terrorist control and it became a nest of terrorists. "Nevertheless," she said, she doesn't regret it and we must "stick to a two-state solution." (Doesn't she regret the bloodshed?) She does not suggest what is in Israel's interest nor how she serves her country by making her priority an Arab state that so far makes war on Israel. She serves her ideology, not country, by refusing to draw conclusions from the facts. She was heartened by Israeli youths imploring her to make peace. She said that setting up an Arab state is the right thing to do. The Arabs first would have to end terrorism (IMRA, 1/28). I think it is the wrong thing to do. It isn't justified by citing the harm from its earlier step and then rationalizing that it was a legitimate step by interposing the word, "Nevertheless." It sacrifices Jewish patrimony and secure borders to reward Muslim imperialists for attempted genocide. Her encouragement by peace-loving Israeli youths should be over-matched by Muslim youths eager to murder those Israelis. She did not say who those Israelis were, what they knew, and how much they would sacrifice if they knew the situation. Perhaps they are blinded by her ideology. It is an ideology that seeks peace in such a way as to guarantee war, which is what her ideology has wrought, so far. She says that the Arabs first would have to end terrorism. They were supposed to end it under Oslo, signed 13 years ago. They don't fulfill their obligations, because with US pressure, Israel gives them concessions anyway. Why believe she would be different, she who ignores Israel's record of giving in? She has yet to give a rational reason for her policy. There is none. HOW SHE REACTS TO BOMBING IN EILAT She said the "world" should pressure Hamas and Israel will decide what to do (IMRA, 1/28). Israel always says it is deciding, and should have decided in advance, but praises its restraint. What "world?" The "world" doesn't care! 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@verizon.net |
|
UN: "JEWS SEEK RACIAL DOMINATION!"
Posted by Michael Travis, February 26, 2007. |
|
This was written by Anne Bayefsky and it appeared February 23, 2007
on National Review Online |
|
A newly released United Nations report epitomizes the foul anti-Semitism which has overtaken the U.N. human-rights machinery. In language reminiscent of Nazi Germany, John Dugard, the U.N.'s "Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967," has announced that Jews seeks racial domination. In Dugard's words: "The IDF inflicts serious bodily and mental harm on Palestinians...Palestinians throughout the OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territory] are denied freedom of movement. Can it seriously be denied that the purpose of such action is to establish and maintain domination by one racial group (Jews) over another racial group (Palestinians) and systematically oppressing them?" Dugard's U.N. mandate is to demonize Israel. Palestinian human-rights violations were deliberately omitted from the job description, first drafted by the U.N. Human Rights Commission in 1993 and continued by the "reformed" U.N. Human Rights Council. Dugard, a lawyer, not only accepted the one-sided mandate, he relished the opportunity to become an advocate of a one-state solution in the name of human rights. What Dugard fears most is not hate and the terrorism it fuels, but "Judaization" -- the idea of a Jew living in claimed Arab land. Deliberately mirroring Nazi imagery, his report refers to Israel's security fence this way: "The Wall being built in East Jerusalem is an instrument of social engineering designed to achieve the Judaization of Jerusalem..." The "Judaization" problem stands side-by-side with this U.N. champion of the Hamas government. According to Dugard, Israel has no right to refuse to transfer funds to the Hamas government. Why? "Predictably, Israel justifies its action on security grounds, but the real reason seems to be a determination to effect a regime change." A look at the Hamas Charter might help determine the wisdom of regime change: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it...There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad..." But according to this U.N. expert the problem is not a government dedicated to killing Jews, but the Jews themselves. The primary tool of the U.N.'s point-man for whipping up modern-day anti-Semitism is to pillory the Jew as racist extraordinaire. Israel is the evil equivalent to apartheid South Africa. Referring to apartheid 24 times in his report, he proclaims: "Israel's laws and practices in the OPT certainly resemble aspects of apartheid." He fails to mention, predictably, that one-fifth of Israel's population is Arab -- citizens who vote and hold seats in the Israeli parliament -- while Arab countries are Judenrein. And Israel is the apartheid state? The ultimate carrying-card of U.N.-driven anti-Semitism is to blame the Jewish state for the world's ills. Dugard exemplifies this most dangerous of canards. He reports: For years the occupation of Palestine and apartheid in South Africa vied for attention from the international community. In 1994, apartheid came to an end...the OPT has become a test for the West, a test by which its commitment to human rights is to be judged. If the West fails this test, it can hardly expect the developing world to address human rights violations seriously in its own countries... Thus the U.N. inverts right and wrong. Why should Sudan stop genocide? It's waiting for the Jews to repent or the Jewishness of Israel to be terminated. Why should Zimbabwe stop murdering and starving its own people, white and black? Why should China grant anybody freedom of speech? Why should Saudi Arabia let women out of the house alone or into any driver's seat? Why should Egypt stop the mutilation of the genitals of the majority of its married female population? They're all waiting for a solution to the Jewish state problem. American tax dollars were used to pay for the Dugard report and its dissemination worldwide by the U.N. Isn't it about time the tap was turned off? Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
LITTLE EHUD'S AMONA POGROM -- FIRST ANNIVERSARY
Posted by Women in Green, February 26, 2007. |
|
[Editor's Note: Nadia Matar's essay was originally distributed on February 1, 2006 by the Root and Branch Association (rb@rb.org).] Excerpt from Root & Branch Editor's Note included with Nadia Matar's essay when originally distributed on February 1, 2006: "Nadia Matar was wounded today, along with M.K.s Aryeh Eldad and Effie Eitam, and hundreds of Jewish boys and girls, in the Israel Government...assault on the Jewish Pioneering Community of Amona...The State of Israel as we have the misfortune to now know it is rapidly passing out of existence. Soon missiles from Hamas, Hizbollah, Syria and Iran will devastate Tel Aviv, Haifa and other centers of power of the current regime" [May national repentance avert further evil than has already befallen us since last year at this time -- R&B Editor, February 25, 2007]. Jerusalem Post Report (Thursday, February 8, 2007): "Knesset Director-General Avi Balashnikov announced Wednesday [February 7, 2007] that NIS 375 million was allocated toward the fortification of the Knesset building. The new fortifications will include the installation of security cameras and reinforcing the Knesset's roof against a potential rocket attack". |
|
Now it's official. After the statements by Olmert the week before last and by Inspector-General Karadi last week, there no longer can be any doubts: The Saison, the "hunting season" against the Jews in the Land of Israel, is evident to all. As Yehudah Lapidot tells us in his book The Saison: The Hunting Down of Brothers, the appellation Saison (hunting season in French) was applied to the attempt by the Haganah in [19]44-45 to eliminate I.Z.L. [Irgun Zevai Le'umi also known as Etzel]". In order to realize the goals of the Saison, the Haganah used almost every means at its disposal, that included kidnappings and protracted interrogations (of Etzel members and supporters), that at times were accompanied by extreme torture; expulsion from places of employment and schools; taking Jews forcibly from apartments, and more. The most drastic step, however, that aroused stormy controversies in the Yishuv (the pre-State Jewish community in Land of Israel), was the surrendering to the British C.I.D. (plainclothes detective branch) of those suspected of belonging to the Revisionist movement in general and to Etzel in particular. The persecution of members and supporters of the Revisionist movement reached its peak shortly after the establishment of the State of Israel, when Ben-Gurion ordered the sinking of the Altalena, and gave the order to shoot at the Jews on the ship. Sixteen Jews on the sinking Altalena and who were swimming towards the Tel Aviv shore were murdered in cold blood. Their only "crime" was belonging to the movement of Menachem Begin. Ben-Gurion gave the order; Yitzhak Rabin was happy to carry it out. The "holy cannon" was the name given by Ben-Gurion's people to the weapon that they used to sink the Altalena in their implementation of this despicable political murder. Ben-Gurion never ceased to regard the Etzel as a political rival that must be eliminated. In collaboration with the British, he initiated a campaign to persecute the Etzel's members and supporters. The Saison and the Altalena episode silenced the Revisionists for many years. At present, the entire Jewish-national camp, headed by the public of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, constitutes a threat to the rule of the Left. Demographically, the Left, with an average of one child, or a maximum of two children, has no successor generation. These children receive a shoddy, spoiled education, without Judaism or Zionism, that turns them into Hebrew-speaking non-Jews: without roots, without knowing what it is to be a Jew, without an understanding of what they are doing here in Israel. In contrast, the many children (God bless them) of the Jewish camp (both the religious and the traditional) are educated to love of the Torah, People and Land, and, before we know it, with God's help, they will be the majority here. The Left is panic-stricken. It still controls the key positions in the country: The Media, State Attorney's Office, High Court of Justice and Knesset -- but its days in power are numbered. It needs to silence the Jewish-national camp, once and for all. Flooding the country with hundreds of thousands of non-Jews from the U.S.S.R. was the first attempt to block the demographic revolution of the Jewish camp. But, a miracle occurred, the majority of those from the U.S.S.R., both Jews and non-Jews, who know what Bolshevism is, and who instinctively understand just who the Arabs are and what they want, voted for the Right! The first scheme to preserve Leftist rule was unrealized. The Oslo Accords were the second attempt in this direction, when the Oslo architects gave cities of refuge in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza to Arafat and his band of murderers, along with weapons and ammunition. The Oslo criminals hoped that the members of the P.L.O. and Hamas would only use these weapons against the Jewish pioneers in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, turn their lives into hell on earth, and thereby force the Jews to leave Judea, Samaria, and Gaza of their own free will and return to within the 1967 lines. In this manner, Shimon Peres and Ben-Gurion's other successors hoped to crush the settlers in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and, through them, the entire Jewish camp. This would have been a cheap and easy solution for the problem of the Jews of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza and their supporters. But, once again, things went wrong: The P.L.O. and Hamas could not restrain themselves, and, instead of heeding the advice of extreme Leftists in Israel and murdering only Jews within Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, those stupid Arabs also began to blow themselves up within little Israel and murder Israelis! Thus, the Arabs let everyone understand that they do not draw any distinction between the "settler" from Tel Aviv and the "settler" from Ofra. Moreover, the Jews of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza were not deterred. Like the Children of Israel in Egypt, "the more they were oppressed, the more they increased" and were strengthened. In their Jewish pioneering communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza -- the Right gained power, this time under the leadership of Israeli war hero Ariel Sharon. The Left no longer knows what to do with itself. It is really losing it. The years pass, but they have not succeeded in neutralizing the Jewish camp. To the contrary! The People is increasingly convinced that it is the policy of the national camp that is correct. This is the reason why Sharon was elected, and not Mitzna. What did the Left do? It used Ariel Sharon to implement the mission of neutralizing the Jewish camp. It threatened Sharon that if he would not realize the policy of the Left, his sons would go to prison. Ariel Sharon, a totally corrupt and egotistical person, did not hesitate to cooperate with them. Overnight, people such as Peres, Sharon, Beilin, Olmert, Livni, Mofaz and others coalesced into a one-dimensional monster, a Party called "Forward" [Kadima]. With determination but without sensitivity, it would quickly crush the national camp, and support the continued rule of the Left. Of course, they still do not openly proclaim this as their aim, they sell the public all kinds of stories, as if "the disengagement is essential to stop the 'Arab demographic problem'". But anyone who uses a bit of his intelligence knows that the truth is different, and that this is a contemptible plan to curb the Jewish demographic problem. First, the Sharon-Peres monster decides to disconnect the Jews from their oxygen: The Jewish Pioneering Communities of Gush Katif and northern Samaria. The mission is carried out with humiliating and intolerable ease. The mamlakhti (state-oriented) and naive Jewish victim dances and embraces the hangman. Color returns to the cheeks of the Left. "Just look, at long last, we finally moderated our bitter rival", they think to themselves. "We beat the "right" with a knockout. Now we can easily toss him out of all the Jewish Pioneering Communities of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza". We will disperse them, defeated and beaten, throughout little Israel -- without assistance, without support, without compensation, without any possibility of rising again. Once and for all, this will take care of our problem with the Jews. Now we can return to the 1949 lines and establish a bi-national state. "At long last, the nations of the world will love us. Without Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and without the annoying Jewish camp". It appears, however, that the Left's rejoicing was premature. The Jewish victim is still breathing! And its youth even kicks! In the attempt to destroy the home in Neveh Daniel and the distribution of the evacuation orders in Hebron, the youth did not act as in Gush Katif. They did not dance or embrace, but dared to raise their head and declare: "Another expulsion of Jews from Israel? Never again! This time we won't let them! Our eyes have been opened. We understand that they want to eliminate us, as the first phase in the elimination of the entire Jewish state. No! Here's where we draw the line!" The Sharon-Peres-Olmert-Livni monster is losing its cool. This cannot go on! How dare the Jews continue to be faithful to their principles? How dare they speak about Greater Israel? Now, the Olmert-Livni-Mazuz-Diskin-Halutz-Karadi gang takes off the gloves and broadcasts to all: Any Jew who is unwilling to commit suicide with dances and hugs -- we will crush him, we will trample him, we will persecute him, we will spray him with tear gas and pepper spray, and even shoot him, if necessary. Although Ben-Gurion had wanted, for a long time, to get rid of Herut and Lehi (the fighters for Israel), the official excuse for initiating the Saison was the assassination of Lord Moyne in Cairo. Moyne had been appointed by the British as Minister of State for the Middle East, and from his headquarters in Cairo he was responsible for the implementation of the White Paper policy. Lehi regarded him as responsible for the expulsion of the "illegal" immigrants' ships, decided to kill him. But, as we said, this was just an excuse to begin the Saison. If there had been no assassination, Ben-Gurion would have found some other pretext. The same holds true for us today. Olmert's official reason for his public and grandiose declaration of war against the settlers of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza as a whole is the "violence of the lawbreakers in Hebron". Anyone with eyes in his head, however, realizes that this is merely a pretext, and this is actually a continuation of the Saison that began in 1944: The Left's organized and ongoing persecution of the national camp. Olmert's speech the week before last with his demand for forceful action against the "Jewish lawbreakers" took us back 62 years, to 1944, when, in a Histadrut convention, Ben-Gurion called for the elimination of the Herut movement, for which he gave operative orders. To quote him:: "We have been requested by the supreme bodies -- the Zionist Executive and the Va'ad Le'umi -- to vomit them [the supporters and members of the I.Z.L.] from our midst, and I want to translate this demand into the language of reality and action. If a young man, a member of these gangs or a supporter of them, works in any factory or office, the workers and the other office employees are required to expel him... I intentionally chose this harsh example, everyone who is connected to these gangs, everyone who supports them -- not necessarily if he uses a pistol or throws a bomb, but anyone who disseminates their literature and pastes their announcements -- he must be removed from his place of work [...]. The same holds true if he studies in a secondary school or other [school] -- and not only if he himself participates in acts of murder and robbery, but even if he brings the terrorists' unclean literature to youth, and disseminates it among them. He must be expelled from the school, so that he will know, and his siblings will know, and his parents will know, that the public rises up against these crimes, that endanger, not only the individual, but the nation as a whole. As regards collaboration with the British, Ben-Gurion said: "To the extent that the British authorities and the police are interested in the destruction of terror [let there be no misunderstanding, (Ben-Gurion did not speak of the Arab terror, he referred to the I.Z.L. as the "terror" gangs -- N.M.), "I repeat, our interest in the elimination of terror is greater and more vital that of the British government". Compare Ben-Gurion's speech with the statements by Olmert, the head of the General Security Service Yuval Diskin, and the Chief of the General Staff Dan Halutz in a special meeting of the security-legal leadership before the evacuations in Hebron, in Amona, and in the other outpost Jewish Pioneering Communities. "The Jewish lawbreakers" threaten the existence of the state; they declared. They engage in a "dangerous ideological criminal activity". They called for stiffer enforcement measures against these Jewish "rioters"; announced that they would increase the use of expulsion orders and administrative detention; and said that they would enlarge the police force in Judea and Samaria -- not in order to stop the Arab terrorists who continue to fire Kassam rockets at Israel and murder Jews on the roads, but to smite, to persecute, and to repress these "idealistic" Jews. Add to this Karadi's statement about the possibility of shooting at Jewish pioneers demonstrating for the territorial integrity of Israel, and we have a return to the time of the Saison in 1944. This frontal attack on the Jewish Pioneers of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza seems daunting. Every newscast, every radio program, and press Â- which attacks and besmirches Jews loyal to Israel, would not shame the anti-Semitic authors of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. We can really identity with what Ya'akov Shavit wrote in his book "The Hunting Season", "In practice, the organized public opinion turned the I.Z.L. into a group that was isolated, shunned, and mercilessly persecuted". The I.Z.L. was described as "insane Jewish fascism" that would lead to the suicide of the Yishuv and "therefore it deserves an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth!" This is the attitude of the ruling Leftist elite today, against the loyalists of Israel. Accordingly, in light of the renewed Saison, it is important for us to remind ourselves and our wonderful youth that such things already happened, and that we have nothing to fear. We should tell everyone that, in the end, the Saison of 1944 did not succeed, and this time, as well, we will not allow them to succeed. Despite the informing, the arrests, the torture, and the surrendering of underground members to the British authorities; despite the Altalena; and despite the paralysis of the national camp, in the long run Ben-Gurion and his band failed to eliminate the I.Z.L. Actually, the opposite is the case. The British eventually left Israel, thanks to the activities of the I.Z.L. and the Lehi. Today we -- the camp of Israel loyalists -- comprise a tremendous camp that continues to realize the idea and vision: That all of the Land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel according to the Torah of Israel, and no one has the right to hand it over to foreigners. Shavua Tov, Chodesh Tov and Purim Sameach from Efrat,
Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
PALESTINIAN HATE EDUCATION AND ITS JEWISH ADVOCATES
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, February 26, 2007. |
|
This was published yesterday in the Jerusalem Post, entitled "Supporting peace education in the PA?." |
|
Anyone who hopes for peace should be horrified by the content of the latest set of Palestinian schoolbooks. In many respects, these new books for Grade 12, written by Fatah-appointed Palestinian educators, are the worst of the textbooks produced by the Palestinian Authority since 2000. These newest books deny Israel's right to exist, anticipate its destruction and define the conflict with Israel as religious, not merely territorial. As is documented in the new report by Palestinian Media Watch entitled "From Nationalist Battle to Religious Conflict," the ideological divide between Fatah and Hamas appears to be disappearing. Hamas has always defined its war with Israel as religious and existential, and now that is what all Palestinian children will learn in school: "Ribat for Allah is one of the actions related to jihad for Allah, and it means: Being found in areas where there is a struggle between Muslims and their enemies. The endurance of Palestine's people on their land these days... is one of the greatest of the Ribat." (Islamic Education, grade 12, p. 86-87) THE PALESTINIAN conflict with Israel is a unique and eternal Ribat with a special Islamic destiny: "The reason for this preference [of the Palestinian Ribat] is that the momentous battles in Islamic history took place on its land." As to when there will be peace with Israel? Never, according to the schoolbooks: "[Palestine's] residents are in a constant struggle with their enemies, and they are found in Ribat until Resurrection Day." Israel's right to exist is denied and Israel's founding is called a theft: "Palestine's war ended with a catastrophe that is unprecedented in history, when the Zionist gangs stole Palestine and expelled its people from their cities, their villages, their lands and their houses, and established the State of Israel" (Arabic Language, Analysis, Literature and Criticism, grade 12, p. 104). Israel is called: "the Zionist entity," and "Zionist Enemy." Israel's existence since 1948 is an "occupation" (ibid pp. 104, 122). The conflict will eventually end - not with peace, but with Israel's destruction, effected by Palestinians of all ages and abilities: "Palestine will be liberated by its men, its women, its young and its elderly" (Arabic Language and the Science of Language, grade 12, p. 44). THE BOOKS anticipate this future destruction of Israel by painting a picture for the Palestinian child of a world in which Israel already does not exist. The place of Israel is marked as "Palestine" on all maps, and "Palestine" is defined as a dawla - the Arabic word for "state," not a geographical region. This "state" is said to have water access to both the Mediterranean and the Red seas, a situation possible only in a world without Israel. (Physical Geography and Human Geography, grade 12, p. 105) Likewise, the size of "Palestine," the "state," is said to be more than 10,000 sq. km., a situation possible only if Israel does not exist, since the West Bank and Gaza Strip together total only 6,220 sq. km. Because Israel has no right to exist, and must be fought and destroyed for Islam, violence and terror against Israel since its founding are justified and glorified as muqawama, resistance: "The tragedy of Palestine of 1948 and afterward the muqawama in which the inhabitants carried acts of most glorious heroism and sacrifice" (Arabic Language, Analysis, Literature and Commentary, grade 12 p. 105). THE WORLD cringed in horror at the Iranian Holocaust denial conference. But the new PA schoolbooks teach World War II without the Holocaust. There are extensive details about the history of the war, lessons about the Nazi "race theory" and even mention of "an international court to bring to trial the senior Nazi leaders as war criminals." (The History of the Arabs and the World in the 20th Century, grade 12, p. 46). However, the books fail to mention why the Nazis were on trial, or that their "race theory" involved elimination of Jews and other minorities. It is clear that the newest PA schoolbooks are a tragic recipe for incessant war. Israel is presented as an illegitimate enemy to be hated, fought and destroyed. Even the most well-meaning student is left with no justification or religious option to accept Israel as a neighbor to live beside in peace. THEREFORE, anyone who is truly interested in peace and peace education should be appalled by these new books, repudiate this hate material and demand that the books be discontinued and rewritten. US Senator Hillary Clinton said earlier this month that this curriculum, together with PA media targeting children, "basically, profoundly poisons the mind of these children" and that these books are "an indoctrination," not an education. But an American Jewish group, Brit Tzedek v'Shalom-Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace has rushed to defend these hate-filled schoolbooks. As reported by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the group wrote Clinton urging her to "re-examine claims that the Palestinian schoolbooks indoctrinate hate." The group argued that the books encourage "a peaceful resolution of the conflict," and are better than those used in most of the Arab world because they "endorse democracy." This superficial defense of PA books, compared to the fully-documented, 35-page PMW report, with its line-by-line descriptions of hate education, leaves us with the strong impression that no one from the group has actually read either the schoolbooks or our report. If so, the group's eagerness to defend these new texts is irresponsible. We just find it hard to believe that Brit Tzedek v'Shalom has actually studied these grade 12 textbooks and has chosen to defend an educational curriculum that denies Israel's right to exist, justifies terror and promises an eternal religious battle for Israel's destruction, knowingly defending incitement to murder. TRAGICALLY, the Palestinian Authority will exploit this Jewish group's ill-considered approval of its new texts. Can Brit Tzedek v'Shalom be so blindly determined to champion the Palestinian cause that it will defend even the indefensible? Groups such as Brit Tzedek v'Shalom who have defended PA schoolbook education in the past, created sufficient uncertainty about PA hate-education to ease international pressure on Palestinian leaders to pursue peace education. Our challenge to Brit Tzedek v'Shalom: If you are as dedicated to peace as we are, you have a moral obligation to publicly retract your defense of the new PA produced textbooks and demand instead that the authority pursue peace education. Otherwise, you will bear moral responsibility as defenders of hatred for the inevitable tragic results of this Palestinian hate education. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -- Palestinian Media Watch -- (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
GROVER NORQUIST, TERRORIST-SYMPATHIZER
Posted by Michael Travis, February 26, 2007. |
|
The first part comes from the Wide Awakes website
|
|
There are no absolutes. I love it when people come here assuming that republicans or conservatives are all stupid hicks. What is disappointing and sometimes mystifying is when you realize that someone in your midst doesn't represent the ideas you thought they did. I've had some experiences with that myself within the ranks of TWA, and when reality finally hits, it can be a devastasting blow. I think it was the same for David Horowitz back in 2003, when he published the article by Frank Gaffney. At the time, Instapundit, and many other bloggers were all over the news. Here is some of the background: Frontpage Magazine had this story back in 2003
It is with a heavy heart therefore, that I am posting this article, which is the most complete documentation extant of Grover Norquist's activities in behalf of the Islamist Fifth Column. I have confronted Grover about these issues and have talked to others who have done likewise. But it has been left to Frank Gaffney and a few others, including Daniel Pipes and Steven Emerson, to make the case and to suffer the inevitable recriminations that have followed earlier disclosures of some aspects of this story. With more background information by David Horowitz, he then shares with the readers of Frontpage Magazine an expose by Frank Gaffney regarding Grover Norquist. Make sure you spread this story far and wide! This has been going on since at least 1998, yet people are refusing to face the facts and put our nation at risk because of political correctness. This is not the time for sensitivity training, people! The association between Grover Norquist and Islamists appears to have started about five years ago, in 1998, when he became the founding chairman of an organization called the Islamic Free Market Institute, better known as the Islamic Institute. The Institute's stated purpose was to cultivate Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans whose attachment to conservative family values and capitalism made them potential allies for the Republican Party in advance of the 2000 presidential election. [Editor's Note: To read Gaffney's article, click here. ] Michelle had this back in July of 2004. The Washington Post reports that Abdurahman Alamoudi, once embraced as a "mainstream" and "moderate" Muslim activist who courted both the Clinton and Bush administrations, will plead guilty today to accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from Libya in violation of U.S. law and attempting to hide it from the government. Despite this defiant public declaration of support for terrorists, Alamoudi was welcomed in GOP elite circles at the behest of power player Grover Norquist. More surprising and disturbing news at the Citizen Soldier: Grover Norquist, whom most conservatives know as Executive Director of the College Republicans, boardmember of the NRA, and head of Americans for Tax Reform, has been exposed as helping Muslim groups and individuals who finance and support Islamic terrorism gain access to the Bush White House. With all of this evidence, who's going after Norquist besides Michelle Malkin back in 2004? Norquist has also been exposed as the founder of the Islamic Institute, a group believed to be funded by foreign governments, Wahhab Islam elements in Saudi Arabia, and U.S. Muslim groups recently raided by a special Treasury Department task force for funding Al Qaeda and Palestinian terrorists. Copies of two checks from Alamoudi to the Islamic Institute:
Read the rest and pass it on. Get the message out there and let's figure out a game plan to do something about it! At Free Republic, they have an old piece from The New Republic, that was published in November of 2001. As president of Americans for Tax Reform, Norquist is best known for his tireless crusades against big government. But one of Norquist's lesser-known projects over the last few years has been bringing American Muslims into the Republican Party. And, as he usually does, Norquist has succeeded. According to several sources, Norquist helped orchestrate various post-September 11 events that brought together Muslim leaders and administration officials. "He worked with Muslim leaders to engineer [Bush]'s prominent visit to the Mosque," says the Arab-American pollster John Zogby, referring to the president's September 17 trip to the Islamic Center of Washington. Says Zogby, who counts Norquist among his clients, "Absolutely, he's central to the White House outreach." Indeed, when Jewish activists and terrorism experts complained about the Muslim invitees to Adam Goldman, who works in the White House public liaison's office, Goldman replied that Norquist had vouched for them. (Goldman denies this, but two separate sources say they heard him say it.) "Just like [administration officials] ask my advice on inviting religious figures to the White House," says Paul Weyrich, another top conservative activist, "they rely on Grover's help [with Muslims]." I want to know what the hell this man is doing now, and why is he in a position of influence when it's a PROVEN fact that he's working with the enemy (American organizations who support terror!). I don't understand some things about the Bush administration, and this is plainly one of them. Norquist served as economic advisor to Angola UNITA leader Jonas Savimbi and was once registered with the Department of Justice as a foreign agent of Angola. He has a pretty high profile. I have several questions -- about his marriage to a muslim, his converting to Islam, his cozy relationship with Islamic terrorism, and whether or not he's getting paid for arranging meetings between Bush and the Saudis. How can you be "tough on terror" on the one hand, but meeting with muslim leaders who support terror right in the white house? This doesn't make sense. 4 COMMENTS
Norquist has argued for years that Muslims should be a vital part of the Republican party. In a June 2001 article in The American Spectator, he wrote that Muslims are "a faith-based, naturally conservative community," noting, for example, that majorities of Muslims oppose abortion and support school choice. Citing surveys by Muslim groups, Norquist claimed that in the 2000 presidential election George W. Bush won more than 70 percent of the Muslim vote nationwide. In Florida, Norquist said, Muslims favored Bush over Al Gore by a 20 to 1 margin: "The margin of victory for Bush over Gore in the Muslim vote was 46,200, many times greater than his statewide margin of victory. The Muslim vote won Florida for Bush." (And, Norquist did not need to add, the presidency itself.) March 19, 2003 9:40 a.m.
"Muslim outreach" and a feud between activists. In February, a long-simmering and mostly behind-the-scenes feud between two prominent conservatives, tax-reform advocate Grover Norquist and national-security expert Frank Gaffney, burst into the open. At issue was the conduct of Norquist's energetic campaign to bring Muslims into the Republican party. While Norquist argues that Muslim political participation will be a key part of the GOP's electoral strategy in coming years, Gaffney charges that aggressive outreach efforts to Muslim leaders have brought the party, and in particular the Bush White House, dangerously close to organizations that have in the past endorsed or, at the least, declined to condemn international terrorism. Among them are the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America, the American Muslim Council, and others whose representatives have been invited to meetings in the White House and with officials across the Bush administration. The feud has now escalated into a full-scale battle. Gaffney and others at his organization, the Center for Security Policy, have distributed thick packets of information to reporters and conservative activists outlining the case against the Islamic organizations. Norquist has responded angrily, barring Gaffney from conservative strategy meetings and accusing him of racism and bigotry. The fight has spread bad feelings on all sides, and has left more than a few conservatives worried that it might do serious damage to the conservative movement. But the argument between Norquist and Gaffney is about much more than two men, or even the conservative movement. At its heart, it is about the Bush White House and whether its contacts with some Muslim groups might someday make the administration vulnerable to charges that it cultivated close relations with groups tied to radical Islam -- even as it conducted a war on terror around the world. The Norquist-Gaffney feud, some conservatives fear, might be just the first act of a very long play. A WAR OF WORDS The conflict began to emerge on January 31, at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Arlington, Va., when Gaffney participated in a panel discussion entitled "Safeguarding Civil Liberties in a Time of War." He discussed the threat posed by recruitment programs run by radical Wahhabi Islamists inside U.S. prisons, on military bases, and on college campuses. And there's more, Gaffney said: "I'm sorry to say there is an active and, to a considerable degree successful, [Wahhabi] political operation aimed not least at the Bush White House." Later, during a question period, Gaffney said he had recently received a press release from the American Muslim Council == which he called "one of the leading Wahhabist sympathizers, and, I believe, [Wahhabi-] funded organizations in this country" -- announcing that a top AMC official had been invited to the White House. Gaffney continued: "And in this press release, they credited one Ali Tulbah [a Bush administration official] for having gotten them into the White House. It turns out that Ali Tulbah's father is one Hasan Tulbah, the treasurer of the Islamist Da'wah Center, a prominent Wahhabi mosque in Houston. But the reason he was able to influence whether [former AMC executive director] Eric Vickers and the AMC were present in this White House meeting was because he is also, I believe, the associate director for cabinet affairs in the Bush White House, responsible in his portfolio, if you can believe it, for the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Justice Department. This is not how we win the hearts and minds of peace-loving, pro-American Muslims. It is a perilous path, and I hope that it will be corrected." Gaffney's remarks were startling, not because he was wrong about Islamist recruitment efforts -- he in fact appears to be right on target -- but because he singled out Tulbah, and suggested that the low-level White House aide played a role in the Islamist political operation. In the weeks since, Gaffney has not offered any evidence to back up his charges. Instead, he now says the problem he was addressing was not Tulbah specifically, but the issue of poor political judgment at the White House. Nor have several experts on Islam and terrorism who are generally allied with Gaffney been able to point to any problems with Tulbah. Gaffney's remarks enraged Norquist, who responded in an open letter to conservative activists. "There is no place in the conservative movement for racial prejudice, religious bigotry or ethnic hatred," Norquist wrote. "We have come too far in the last 30 years in our efforts to broaden our coalition to allow anyone to smear an entire group of people... The conservative movement cannot be associated with racism or bigotry." The reaction was explosive. Even if Gaffney had been wrong to mention Tulbah by name, some conservatives felt, Norquist's reaction was over the top. To make matters worse, Norquist used a standard rhetorical device of the Left: If you can't win an argument with a conservative, call him a racist. "I, for one, don't see it," says David Keene, head of the American Conservative Union and an organizer of the CPAC conference. "If you read the transcript [of the panel], you can see if Frank was right or wrong, but there was nothing racist or bigoted about it." Heightening the tension was Norquist's angry assertion that the White House, and in particular chief political adviser Karl Rove, supported his racism-and-bigotry argument. One witness quotes Norquist as saying, "This is terrible. Karl's upset because we're insulting the people who helped Bush win the election." Another witness recalls that Norquist "said the president and Rove were angry at the conference." In addition, Norquist sent an e-mail to American Conservative Union board members saying that "[t]he White House and the press are increasingly angry with [the American Conservative Union] for some indefensible statements and actions at CPAC this year." The letter caused a complete break inside the conservative camp. Keene has not spoken to Norquist since it was written, and Gaffney, whose organization shares an office suite with Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, was kicked out of Norquist's famous Wednesday meeting of conservative strategists. That is where things stand now. In a recent interview, Norquist denied using the White House to support his accusations: "I never invoke the president or Karl Rove on this position -- in anything." But he refused to back away from his incendiary charges about Gaffney, on one occasion calling him a "sick little bigot." "I'm sorry," Norquist said. "His whole life screams of bigotry, and what he said is just part of a pattern." Gaffney could have held higher-up administration staffers responsible for choosing who attends White House briefings, Norquist argued, but instead "decided to single out the Muslim." He continued: "Frank Gaffney and Osama bin Laden share the same view on the relationship between the United States and Islam. I agree with the president in rejecting Osama bin Laden's and Frank Gaffney's worldview." Suffice it to say that this sort of talk simply doesn't go on in public between two respected conservative leaders. What's more, it is absolutely baffling to anyone who knows only what happened at the CPAC conference. To understand what is really going on, one has to look closely at a conflict that has been building for quite a while. MUSLIMS FOR BUSH Norquist has argued for years that Muslims should be a vital part of the Republican party. In a June 2001 article in The American Spectator, he wrote that Muslims are "a faith-based, naturally conservative community," noting, for example, that majorities of Muslims oppose abortion and support school choice. Citing surveys by Muslim groups, Norquist claimed that in the 2000 presidential election George W. Bush won more than 70 percent of the Muslim vote nationwide. In Florida, Norquist said, Muslims favored Bush over Al Gore by a 20 to 1 margin: "The margin of victory for Bush over Gore in the Muslim vote was 46,200, many times greater than his statewide margin of victory. The Muslim vote won Florida for Bush." (And, Norquist did not need to add, the presidency itself.) As impressive as that sounds, Norquist's numbers are open to serious question. Pollster John Zogby says there is not a great deal of information on Muslim voting, but "my data indicates that it was tilted Democratic in 2000. It went more for Gore and Nader than for Bush." Michael Barone, author of the authoritative Almanac of American Politics, argues that it is impossible to draw an accurate picture of Muslim voters, given the lack of exit-poll information. As for the claim that Muslims gave Bush his winning margin, Barone says simply, "Any 538 voters in Florida can claim credit for winning the presidency for Bush." Nevertheless, Norquist maintains that Muslims played a key role in the Bush victory. In the Spectator article, he gave much of the credit to Khaled Saffuri, his chief adviser in Muslim matters, who in 1998 helped found an organization called the Islamic Institute. The Institute's mission is to "build relationships between American Muslims and policy makers in the United States," and it has in the past promoted conservative positions on such issues as free trade, school choice, and tort reform. While those matters are important, Norquist reserved his highest praise for Saffuri's work in having "brought to the GOP's attention the most important issue for the Muslim community -- the misuse of 'secret evidence' in immigration cases." Urged on by Norquist, Saffuri, and others, Candidate Bush denounced secret evidence during the 2000 campaign. In his second debate with Gore, he brought the subject up when asked a question about racial profiling: "There's other forms of racial profiling that goes on in America. Arab-Americans are racially profiled in what's called secret evidence. People are stopped, and we got to do something about that." In connection with the secret-evidence issue, Saffuri and Norquist made common cause with Sami al-Arian, the University of South Florida computer-science professor who had made a crusade of the issue. (Al-Arian's brother-in-law had been jailed and later deported in a terrorist investigation that made use of secret evidence.) Al-Arian headed the far-left activist group National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom, and made secret evidence its primary concern. Saffuri and Norquist shared a position with al-Arian's group on matters concerning secret evidence, and Bush was photographed with al-Arian during the campaign. Al-Arian also visited the White House in June 2001, a year and a half before he was indicted on conspiracy charges as the alleged head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad in America. The indictment charged that al-Arian and his allies, "while concealing their association with the [Palestinian Islamic Jihad], would and did seek to obtain support from influential individuals, in the United States, under the guise of promoting and protecting Arab rights." During all this time, al-Arian's alleged terrorist ties were public knowledge, having been the subject of press reports and congressional testimony. THE 'WAHHABI LOBBY' GOES TO THE WHITE HOUSE The GOP's Muslim connections attracted relatively little attention in the pre-September 11 world. But after 9/11, when the White House began a very public effort to reach out to Muslims, its choices of Muslim contacts -- made with input from, among others, the Islamic Institute --became quite controversial. One particular meeting on September 26, 2001, sparked criticism that the White House had not taken care to screen out groups that have supported terrorism, in word or deed. Groups invited included CAIR, which, according to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, serves as "an ideological support group for militants"; the American Muslim Council, whose leaders (again according to Emerson) "have openly championed Hamas terrorists, defended Middle Eastern terrorist regimes, and issued anti-Semitic and anti-American statements"; and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, whose "rallies and sponsored events reveal implicit support of terrorist activities." (Gaffney refers to these and other groups as the "Wahhabi lobby.") And that, in turn, brought criticism of the Islamic Institute, because Norquist and Saffuri had been the most prominent advocates of closer relations between the White House and the Muslim community. A significant part of that criticism has come from Gaffney, who points to a number of troubling associations involving the Islamic Institute. Among them:
THE MAIN SHOW The connections call into question the Islamic Institute's role in supporting the White House Muslim outreach effort. But as Norquist points out, the White House has contacts in the Muslim world quite apart from the Islamic Institute, and it would be inaccurate to view Norquist or the Institute as somehow dictating White House policy. Even Gaffney agrees with that. "I think the role that [Norquist] has played personally in this effort on behalf of Wahhabi-sympathetic and -supported institutions is an important one, but it's a bit role," Gaffney says. "It's a sideshow." The main show, he says, is the Bush administration's policy on which Muslim groups will be granted access to the White House. For example, after the White House took heat for the September 26, 2001, meeting with the president, administration officials are said to have pledged to be more careful in the screening process in the future. But, in January of this year, CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper and Jason Erb, communications director and government-affairs director, respectively, were back in the White House for a briefing on immigration policy. (Not long after, a former CAIR employee who had done community-relations work in Washington was arrested in New York on terrorism-related charges.) Gaffney and others have urged the ad ministration to concentrate outreach efforts on more moderate Muslim groups. They worry that the inclusion of groups like CAIR in White House events gives them a credibility they could find nowhere else, making it easier for them to meet with officials in the cabinet departments and on Capitol Hill. What particularly worries some observers is the possibility that White House contacts with some of the Muslim groups and leaders might be more extensive than is publicly known -- and that the president's political opponents will try to exploit them. Indeed, on February 27, California Democratic congressman Henry Waxman wrote a letter to the Secret Service requesting all electronic records of visits by Sami al-Arian to the White House complex. Waxman also asked for "all requests, whether granted or denied, by White House employees that Sami al-Arian be admitted to the White House complex." And he asked whether the Secret Service had identified al-Arian's alleged terrorist connections and objected to his visit, only to be overruled by White House officials. Administration officials say they will try to "accommodate" Waxman's request. Perhaps nothing will come of it, but they cannot simply dismiss his concerns. Waxman functions as a sort of lead scout for Democrats, a congressman willing to make inquiries into topics that might bear fruit politically but that other politicians are too timid to broach. For example, he took a leading role in demanding that Vice President Cheney release documents from his energy task force; even though some Republicans did not take it seriously at first, Cheney ended up facing a lawsuit from the General Accounting Office over the matter (the suit was dismissed). So there is a much bigger conflict going on behind the ugly battle
between Frank Gaffney and Grover Norquist. Conservatives might wish
that it would go away -- or at least that Norquist would stop calling
people racists and bigots -- but they first have to worry about the
administration's Muslim outreach program, which gave rise to the
conflict in the first place.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
ONE HARMFUL HANDSHAKE
Posted by Daily Alert, February 25, 2007. |
|
This was written by Danielle Pletka and it appeared February 19,
2007 in the New York Daily News |
|
Rice's sitdown with Abbas and Olmert is worse than hollow - it's a backslide for the U.S. Today, Secretary of State Rice will sit down with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in a summit that's being advertised as the start of a new effort to outline a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. The meeting may be perfectly pleasant - but it's another triumph of hope over experience. And the thinking that led to this point portends disaster for the United States. Olmert leads a government that may soon fall. Abbas speaks for no one but himself; the unity government he has agreed to lead with Hamas does not recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist. And the United States surely has other, more pressing challenges to face in the Middle East. But Rice, Olmert and Abbas have persuaded themselves that there is, in the tired parlance of the committed peace-processor, a window of opportunity. For the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, the motive is straightforward political expediency. If you can't do anything else, why not engage in distracting diplomacy? For Rice, there is another dynamic at play: The American secretary of state believes that a Sunni Arab world unified by fear of a radical Iran may finally force the Palestinians into peace with Israel. In other words, the Arabs will deliver the Palestinians, and the Americans will deliver the Israelis. This is old think at its worst. Before 9/11, American policy in the Middle East rested on the premise that "moderate" Sunni states - like Egypt and Saudi Arabia - offered lasting stability in the region, by serving as a counterweight to states like Iran and Syria. George Bush repudiated that premise, insisting that true stability would flow from democracy. Now, it increasingly appears that the Bush administration's democracy push is done. American diplomats are again talking up the important role of "moderate" or "reasonable" Arab states, ignoring the fact that most foreign fighters in Iraq are Saudis or that Egypt has launched an unprecedented crackdown on civil society. In keeping with the effort to bolster the "moderates," the administration is trying to funnel $86 million to Abbas for his security forces. The fact that those self-same security forces are indistinguishable from the Fatah terror group known as the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and that Fatah itself pursued a policy of terror over peace throughout its tenure in power, has not slowed the administration's eagerness to engage in a new peace process. The logic behind today's meeting is unclear. Clever State Department diplomats believe that by describing a "horizon," or shape to a future Palestinian state, they will undercut Palestinian rejectionists and, in turn, destabilize Hamas. But embracing one terrorist to weaken another is not a foreign policy strategy, it's just unprincipled gamesmanship. Similarly, the Bush administration's new fondness for so-called moderate Arab states over extremists ignores all the lessons learned after 9/11. Al Qaeda and its ilk have a foothold in the Middle East because supposedly moderate dictators and autocrats deny people basic rights. Getting back into bed with those moderates at the expense of the 300 million people of the region is a terrible mistake for which the United States has paid dearly once already. Secretary Rice is looking for diplomatic successes in all the wrong places. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
HOME GAME PORTRAYS DISENGAGEMENT'S HUMAN SIDE
Posted by Bryna Berch, February 25, 2007. |
|
This was written by David Morris and it appeared February 23, 2007
in Florida Jewish News
|
|
Trauma. Confusion. Abandonment. Words that no doubt capture the emotions felt by close to a million Israelis living in the northern part of the country this past summer during the 34-day conflict with Hizbullah in southern Lebanon. Yet these same words reflect similar emotions experienced just a year earlier during the summer of 2005 when the approximate 9,000 Israelis living in the 22 communities of Gush Katif in Gaza were told they must leave their homes and be resettled in other parts of Israel. The Disengagement Plan called for the evacuation of all Jews by Aug. 15 -- the day after Tisha B'Av--and the eventual handing over of the entire area to the Palestinian Authority. Thank you for supporting our advertisers! As the evacuation deadline was approaching, Avi Abelow, a young businessman living in the community of Efrat located between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, decided he must make a personal commitment. He would go to Gush Katif and spend time meeting and encouraging its residents. Following the 1967 Six Day War, Jewish settlement activity began in northern Gaza and peaked in the 1970's. Many of the settlements established were seen as 'agricultural miracles' as they succeeded in growing, literally out of sand, top-quality tomatoes, exotic fruits and exquisite flowers for export to Europe. "Although my personal politics would have favored a different solution, I saw what was happening as a human tragedy to be shared with fellow Jews who had invested years of their lives building up this area and now saw it come crashing down," Abelow said. "Of course the subject of the Gush Katif settlements was and for many will always remain a very political one. But since the Disengagement, what has happened to these families is a story I believe deserves greater empathy on the part of all Israelis and all Jews throughout the world. For those who lived there, the withdrawal is not going to be seen as a piece of 'history' but rather as an event that changed everything. They had to pay the price for all of us and I think we should at least attempt to understand their plight." Abelow took his video camera along to document what he saw -- the protests, the maze of military checkpoints and the attempts by both the army and police to keep other Israelis from entering Gaza. "I had plenty of difficulties driving my car around, needing to take back roads and often driving through fields in order to reach a settlement," said Abelow. "I noticed that others were filming the events happening around me and I'm sure there were many people filming things I didn't know about and in places I couldn't possibly get to. But I never imagined I would eventually leave my job in Tel Aviv and decide to make a full length documentary based on material taken right from the videos of Gush Katif residents." Abelow knew an upcoming Israeli filmmaker, Yaron Shane, and together they began looking at the some 80 hours worth of footage given to them by 16 different families. They kept seeing scenes from the annual high school basketball tournament between the area's 22 communities that had been taking place amidst all the world media attention concerning the pullout. They also learned that the final championship game was scheduled for August 15--the very last day residents were told they all must leave Gaza. Shane says he and Abelow initially prepared a four-minute clip for Internet play only and that they never intended on making a full-length documentary. "When we saw the site counter quickly rack upwards of 50,000 hits, we knew we had to produce a longer, more detailed look at the turbulent events," says Shane. "We began piecing together into a cohesive whole the different personal and public dramas taking place both within the tournament and outside the gym." Abelow explained that once he and Shane saw the high level of emotion surrounding the basketball tournament and the suspense of who would make it to the final, it was very clear this would be the film's backdrop. They named it 'Home Game.' The film chronicles daily life before and during the evacuation of the 30-year-old farming community of Netzer Hazani, in the southern Gush Katif settlement bloc, as its teenage basketball players prepared for the annual tournament. Abelow, the film's producer, was recently in South Florida for two days trying to build support and convince every synagogue, federation and JCC to show it. He arranged for two screenings at a small synagogue in Miami Beach (where his grandparents belong) and another at the Palm Beach Orthodox Synagogue. "Our goal is for every Jew to have the opportunity to see 'Home Game' and to put aside their political orientations and religious affiliations. Whatever baggage they have that keeps them from feeling empathy for the families and especially the youth of Gush Katif, we want them to leave at the door," Abelow said. "We hope this film can create greater tolerance between different sectors of Israel's population." Over 10,000 people in Israel, the United States and Great Britain have already attended screenings often held at Jewish community centers, synagogues and private homes. Abelow is working on presenting the film on Israeli television and in the country's cinematheques and film festivals. A.B. Yehoshua, the award-winning Israeli writer and recipient of the Israel Prize commented on the documentary saying, "I viewed the film 'Home Game,' and found that it was made in an objective manner, in order to portray the difficulties and the lives of those people living in the settlements of Gush Katif. This cinematic work is fair despite the ideological position behind which it stands. It is definitely worthwhile to see this film in order to expand one's point of view regarding the reality of Israeli life. " So far Abelow has single-handedly managed to screen 'Home Game' in some 120 different locations in Israel. "We started in the religious community and we've expanded rapidly into the secular community. We would like to establish a tradition of showing this film on Tisha B'Av and then discussing its implications in terms of Jewish history. Yes, right now I am looking for money to enable us to expand the number of screenings around the world. But more important that the money, I would like Jews everywhere to plan to visit Israel soon and make a special effort to meet some of the people who experienced this traumatic event." For information, visit: www.homegamethemovie.com. 'Home Game' is available as a DVD and can be purchased by calling (Israel) +972-2-589-2000 or contacting: dani@ruderfinn.co.il. |
|
KOSOVO (AND EUROPE) IN THE BALANCE
Posted by David Nathan, February 25, 2007. |
|
Serge Trifkovic of Sword of the Prophet and Defeating Jihad fame has an excellent analysis in Chronicles Magazine of the continued international pressure on Serbia to hand over Kosovo to Albanian Muslims and the terrorist KLA: On February 2, U.N. special envoy Martti Ahtisaari finally unveiled his much-anticipated plan for the final status of the Serbian province of Kosovo which has been under NATO-UN occupation since Bill Clinton's war against the Serbs in 1999. While avoiding the contentious word "independence," Ahtisaari presented the framework for a new Albanian state that would have all key attributes of sovereign statehood. [...] The period of international supervision envisaged by the plan, as well as a host of "guarantees" and promises of "substantial" municipal autonomy for the few remaining Serbs and other non-Albanians in the province, are but a fig leaf meant to conceal the plan's reality: that on the fundamental issue of Kosovo's legal, constitutional and political status Ahtisaari gives everything to the Albanians and nothing to the Serbs. Even without using the "I" word, the plan proposes de facto separation of Kosovo from Serbia. Its primary focus is to finalize the detachment of Kosovo from the last formal vestiges of Serbia's authority, with the definition of its future status a secondary consideration. Contact David Nathan by email at davenathan@aol.com |
|
KHOMEINI SPEAKS OF ISLAM AND THE WISDOM OF THE PROPHET
Posted by Michael Travis, February 25, 2007. |
|
On sex with Animals: "The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold." Islamic Teachings on sex with infants: "A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister." The complete Persian text of this saying can be found in "Ayatollah Khomeini in Tahrirolvasyleh, Fourth Edition, Darol Elm, Qom" Islamic Teachings on sex with animals: "The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold." Editor's notes: I wonder if it is OK to sodomize a dead animal? What happens if the buyer brings the poor animal back into the city? "If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it." Editor's note: The poor animal first is sodomized and then killed and burned. What an Islamic justice towards animals? Where are the animal rights group? "It is forbidden to consume the excrement of animals or their nasal secretions. But if such are mixed in minute proportions into other foods their consumption is not forbidden." Editor's note: It does not say who should have ablution: the animal or the man? "A man can have sex with animals such as sheeps, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine." From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh" Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
WESTERN SYCOPHANTS AND ISLAMIC OPPRESSORS
Posted by Michael Travis, February 25, 2007. |
|
This was written by Youssef Ibrahim and it appeared January 29, 2007
in the New York Sun
http://www.nysun.com/article/47573 |
|
Ever wondered what might be the correct "Islamic" way to beat your wife, or what a Saudi princess's greatest wish might be if she were king? The wires were buzzing Thursday with reports of "oohs" and "ahs" from the elitist World Economic Forum gathering in Davos, Switzerland, complete with applause for a Saudi royal princess, Lolwah al-Faisal, after she asserted that her first executive move would be to "let women drive." Amazingly, according to the Associated Press news dispatch on this lame comment, the audience erupted in applause. How can what passes as an elemental right in today's world -- when uttered by a Saudi female belonging to the most oppressive, religiously fanatical ruling family in the world -- be treated as a sign of progress in a kingdom of darkness? The problem with Western sycophants toadying up to Islamic oppressors for money or favors is that those Westerners insult the oppressed majorities by treating their tormentors as precocious 12-year-olds to be coddled when stating the obvious or giving the "right" answer. Princess Lolwah has since returned to her country where she -- and all other women practically been erased from society by law. It is a place where women are reduced to walking black tents, where they are denied basic rights to education, work, travel, and equality, and where they are left with the options of being someone's first, second, third, or fourth spouse. Indeed, a place where imams are allowed to preach the proper way to beat a wife and whip non-Muslim infidels. Western enablers at the World Economic Forum fail their most fundamentalist reformist obligations by overlooking these oppressive practices. Instead, the Davos forum should have focused on illuminating landmarks such as the U.N. Arab Human Development Report of 2005, which described in excruciating details the many ways women have been cancelled as human beings under Saudi Arabia's religious jihad. So woeful are the violations detailed in the report that one apologist, Saudi Arabia's Prince Talal Bin Abdul Aziz, the president of the Arab Gulf Program for the U.N. Development Organizations, attempted in a lame foreword to disassociate religion from such abuses, writing that Islam had "no connection with any of the mistaken practices carried out against women." Just as with his relative, the disconnected princess in Davos, Prince Talal is wrong on factual grounds. Saudi Islam as practiced today and proselytized to the rest of the world with oil money is an oppressive and anti-life discipline. Less than two years ago, there was a priceless piece of Islamic jurisprudence that illustrated how disconnected talk of reform is from practice in the Arabian Peninsula under Saudi hegemony. An eminent, and very pro-Saudi, Islamic cleric, Sheik Abdullah Aal Mahmud of Bahrain, enshrined himself with a television broadcast on June 20, 2005, on the Bahraini government-owned network as he asserted that Islam indeed sanctions the beating of wives and instructed his millions of viewers on the "correct" way to do it. "If the husband wished to use beatings in the treatment of his wife, it is essential, absolutely essential, to never do it in front of the children. The beating must remain between him and her and with the conditions outlined, which are that he does not draw blood nor leave a perceptible bruise on her body and avoid her face as well as dangerous [sic] parts concerning the body. If the husband violates these directives, he then violates the limits set by the almighty. ... Because the woman is not to be seen as merchandise to which he can do whatever he pleases." Amazingly, the sheik was sincerely trying to show how humane Islam is in its prescriptions on how to treat women. For the princess's Western enablers at Davos, the same sick logic applies. To show a symbol of oppression as one of liberation treats twisted views as worthy of respect. It is irresponsible. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE
Posted by Rachel Saperstein, February 25, 2007. |
|
We have returned to our refugee camp after our trip to Florida. The trial, Moshe Saperstein vs. Palestinian Authority / Palestine Liberation Organization, lasted two days. [My husband had been wounded in his remaining left hand and left leg by a PA/PLO shooter in February 2002.] The PA had defaulted and had no representation in court. Now it was only a matter of determining compensation. The attorneys for my husband were brilliant, articulate and fully prepared with documentation captured from PLO headquarters showing that Yasser Arafat had ordered and paid for the deadly attack that left three dead and my husband further disabled. In addition, a surveillance camera had captured the event on film. A jury of eight voted unanimously to compensate my husband with sixteen million dollars. And pursuant to the Anti Terrorism Act of 1990 the judge was duty-bound to treble the amount. I was on the stand for over an hour describing our life in Gush Katif. When I spoke of my husband's suffering I spoke from the heart, and clearly touched the hearts of the jurors. My husband concluded his own remarks on the stand with "Don't feel sorry for me, because I don't feel sorry for myself." We felt a sense of justice but also of futility. No one has ever forced the PA/PLO to pay its debts. Despite other similar judgments no one had received compensation. Despite severe jet lag I plunged into work, holding meetings with the staff of each Operation Dignity project. The Orange Gallery had been out at exhibitions. Our work was now on exhibition in Holland. The square in front of our two pre-fabs has been paved. Furniture rescued from Gush Katif was now in the Gallery. Earthenware urns stand ready for Spring planting. We will create an orange garden around the seating area. Our official opening date in March 19, the First of Nissan, the month of Passover -- our holiday of freedom. I emphasize, with the greatest pride, that the Orange Gallery is a Gush Katif project. Not one shekel of government money was used, or even offered. We took control of our own lives with strength and determination. We created a Gallery for our artists and artisans, and our Bnei Menashe sisters. And you, my dear friends, by your belief in us, gave us the funds and encouragement to succeed. Be proud of your accomplishment, and continue to support us. See our website, www.theorangegallerygk.com KATIFNIK director Natan Anavi reports "We gave out flyers and have been getting calls to repair all those pesky things that never seem to get fixed. People always remember to make repairs before the Pessach holiday." Our Bnei Menashe women have produced beautiful chalah and matza covers, and a Shabbat bag. You'll be seeing their work on our website. While out for a power walk last night I met some neighbors. "While you were away the Expulsion Authority called a meeting but we refused to attend," they said. "Why?" I asked. "They won't allow our married children to live near us at the new Nitzan site. They won't allow long-term renters to live with us. We want all our people together! They may have destroyed our Gush Katif homes, but they'll never destroy our spirit!" It is good to be back. OPERATION DIGNITY is bringing hope, financial aid and employment to our people? OPERATION DIGNITY needs your help to revitalize a once proud people. Send your check, earmarked "Operation Dignity" to Central Fund for Israel
OR Central Fund for Israel
Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe lived in Neve Dekalim, Gush
Katif, Gaza, Israel. Rachel Saperstein was a teacher at the Neve
Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council. Her
book, "Eviction: A Gush Katif Viewpoint", with photos by Moti Sender
can be ordered from www.pavilionpress.com.
Moshe Saperstein is a Jerusalem Diarist, one of the group of
Israelis who are recording their experiences living in Israel. He
lost an arm while fighting in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. He was again
wounded in a February 2002 incident when he drove his car into a
terrorist who had just shot and killed a young mother traveling in the
car in front of him. He writes frequently of his physical and
emotional struggles.
|
|
LEST THE SWORD SLIP FROM OUR HAND
Posted by Avodah, February 24, 2007. |
|
This was written by Ze'ev Schiff and it appeared yesterday in Ha'aretz
|
|
When Yaakov Peri stepped down as chief of the Shin Bet, in 1994, Jibril Rajoub, then head of Preventive Security Services in the West Bank, called Peri to express his sorrow. "This is a terrible blow to the security of the state!" said Rajoub. The state he was talking about was Israel. And the fact of the matter is that Rajoub, in his day, did work hard to prevent the second Intifada. This same Jibril Rajoub has now appeared on television and shocked his Israeli acquaintances with the remark that in the end, the Palestinians will recover every inch of land between the river and the sea. Rajoub's standing is no longer what it was, but this sudden, Hamas-style declaration undermines our trust in the statements made by so-called "moderate" Palestinians. With all due respect to my Palestinian friends, I can only conclude from these remarks that we must shut our ears when the Palestinians scatter promises about wanting to live alongside Israel. It is not words that matter, but deeds, and deeds alone. Another shocking phenomenon emerges from the appalling account of former cabinet minister and senior Fatah official Sufian Abu Zaida, in an interview with Haaretz correspondent Avi Issacharoff (February 5). Abu Zaida described how his neighbor, a colonel in the PLO, and his nephew, were executed. First they were shot in the legs, and finally in the back, with the gunmen telling jokes while pulling the trigger. Before they shot the nephew, they tried to make him drink acid. On a previous occasion, Abu Zaida's house was firebombed, and an attempt was made to kidnap his son. "Do you understand how much they hate us?" asked Abu Zaida. "The chances for peace with Israel are greater than the chances for peace between Hamas and Fatah." Sheik Ra'ad Salah, head of the Northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, should be reading this. In his fury over the work at the Mugrabi Gate, he repeatedly accused the Israelis of being "murderers." But Sheik Ra'ad knows, of course, what the whole world knows and can see on TV: Arabs in Iraq are brutally murdering other Arabs, most of them innocent. Sometimes they even kill them at prayer, and destroy mosques. Sheikh Ra'ad knows what members of the Islamic Movement in Algeria did to tens of thousands of citizens, including women and children, just a few years ago. But in his eyes, Israelis are the murderers. There is only one conclusion, and Moshe Dayan already said it in his eulogy over the grave of Roi Rutenberg, who was murdered by Arabs from Gaza in the 1950s: "This is our life's choice: to be prepared and armed, strong and determined, lest the sword slip from our hand and our lives be cut down." When ex-Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy says Israel doesn't need the recognition of Hamas, he is shifting the focus of the argument. He is getting into the fundamental, the moral and the diplomatic. The key issue here, and our primary concern, is the continuation of terror; today manifested in the continued rocket fire, the refusal to release Gilad Shalit, the attempts to carry out suicide bombings and the massive smuggling of arms. Bringing an end to these things constitutes part of the Quartet's demands. Of course Israel must help Mahmoud Abbas, and through him, the suffering Palestinian people. But it cannot participate in a sneaky attempt by Hamas to use a moderate and positive-thinking man like Salam Fayad, who would have been the finance minister in a unity government, to put aid money into the hands of Hamas ministers, including those heading the movement's military wing. Having a moderating force in the Gaza Strip and within the Palestinian Authority is in Israel's interest, but it is not enough. Israel must also insist that the Palestinians pass the critical test of reining in terror and fully abide by all agreements. Contact Avodah at Avoda15@yahoo.com |
|
SURRENDER TO JIHAD? NEVER
Posted by Bryna Berch, February 24, 2007. |
|
This was written by Franklin Raff and it appeared on the World Net Daily website. Franklin Raff is senior executive producer at Radio America. |
|
Editor's note: On Monday, Feb. 19, Franklin Raff gave this speech at the National Religious Broadcasters' Conference International Christian Prayer Breakfast for Israel in Orlando, Fla. When I returned from the place that was called Gush Katif -- from the disengagement in Gaza -- returned with the memory of IDF soldiers dragging their Jewish brothers and sisters out of their homes, shackling them up in the dust and permanently banishing them from their property. I thought for a moment of the Judische Ghetto-Polizei, the infamous Jewish ghetto police. And almost perversely, it seemed, I saw them praying together, weeping openly together, forced soldier and forced refugee, as Qassam rockets fell on our retreat. Qassam rockets, launched by Arabs and aimed at us, as we went through the process of giving them houses, greenhouses, villages, farms, cooperatives and endless fields. Green fields, green fields in the desert, fields my distant ancestors first irrigated and made arable -- which I saw for the first time on that last day, and which my children will never see. I am a Southerner by birth. As we say, by the grace of God I am a Virginian, and I grew up on a farm. Wherever I travel in the world I know the smell that earth has when it is blessed by God and by the working hands of free men who love God. That last evening as we gathered in a field in Neve Dekalim -- in Gaza -- to make a minyan for evening prayer before the final evacuation of the Jews, I was struck by the smell: the same smell I remember from our farm when I was a boy. Nitrogen and mud and life and freedom. Perhaps you know that smell. I have been to Iraq, to the farms along the Euphrates River where the men drink tea in the shade while their wives stoop and toil in the fields, covered head-to-toe in the hot sun in black hajibs. The soil there is dusty, and it smells only of salt. When I returned from what was called Gush Katif, from that glorious smell which in the days to follow became the smell of bulldozer diesel exhaust and high explosives -- also an unmistakable smell -- I understood, in a visceral way, the tragedy of "land for peace." I understood fully, for the first time in my life, the fable about the scorpion and the frog, which had baffled me as a child. And you know why this fable confuses children. They do not yet believe in evil. And you remember the frog in the pot of water as it comes to a boil. If the path to destruction is taken in small, incremental steps, the frog will make minimal protestations, if any, before he takes his final breath. Evil exists. The beast which has many disguises. The seductive thief of individual liberty, the destroyer of families. The disarmer of private citizens. The beast gently disposes of our freedoms and seizes our property. He then erases our bodies and our culture and our history and the memory of our God. The annihilator of God's message and God's children, Christian and Jew alike, is alive, and his armies are advancing. So, who will defend Israel -- not when it is too late, not when its ruins become one more monument to the folly of appeasement -- but now. Who will defend Israel? We will. This time, the Jews are not alone. Today, together, we defend Masada. I am blessed to live in a time in which righteous Jews and righteous Christians love each other. I will pray that it will be so until the final days. Our leaders in Washington and Jerusalem will beg us to surrender. They will beg us to surrender, and they will throw Nobel Peace Prizes around like Judas' silver coins. But we will not surrender. To the jihad, which openly promises the destruction of Israel, the overthrow of the United States and our Constitution, the universal establishment of the Caliphate and the enslavement of women and we so-called infidels, I will not surrender one inch of my country, not one inch of Dearborn, Mich., not one inch of my native Virginia, and not one more inch of Judea and Samaria. Never. Ru'ach is Hebrew for Spirit, or the Sprit of God. It is a cognate of Re'ach, or wind, and smell. We are tied to the land. But what we stand to accomplish by defending it has everything to do with spiritual territory. This, we will defend. Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done. |
|
THE DEMOGRAPHIC THREAT IS DYING
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, February 24, 2007. |
|
Enclosed you'll find excerpts from (non-solicited!) Hagai Segal's column in Makor Rishon (Feb. 23, 2007), which reflects the collapse of a 20 year monopoly by Israel's "Prophets of Demographic Doom." Shavoua' Tov and may we heed the lessons of last week's portion of the Torarh (Terumah): Contributions transform & elevate reality (Temoorah, Rom in Hebrew), constitute a cohesive social and economic force, rewarding givers and receivers, Yoram |
|
"YORAM ETTINGER IS RELENTLESSLY UNDERMINING DEMOGRAPHIC HYSTERIA. It has been many months since this polite person, a top expert on US policy, has conducted 4-5 daily briefings with policy-makers and public-opinion molders, sharing with them his PowerPoint presentation on the demographic reality. Each such presentation lasts for 1-1.5 hours, but Ettinger does not relent and does not get bored. He is as enthusiastic as if each presentation were his first presentation... "THERE HAS BEEN A DRAMATIC BENEFIT FROM ETTINGER'S EFFORTS. Ettinger has already convinced most politicians and journalists that Israel's leading demographers have been mistaken and have misled. The larger political parties and most Israeli newspapers have admitted that Ettinger and his partners -- and not Prof. DellaPergola and Prof. Sofer -- are right: The number of Arabs in Judea & Samaria is barely 1.5MN and not 2.5MN. There is a solid, long-term Jewish majority, since the 1960s, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and the demographic momentum is Jewish and not Arab. Arabs produce fewer babies and escalate emigration. "ETTINGER'S DETAILED FINDINGS HAVE BEEN WIDELY DOCUMENTED by most Israeli newspapers. In brief, he has been able to instill a terminal doubt in the conventional estimates of the Palestinian population. He has proven that such estimates are based on deceit and erroneous projections. Hundreds of thousands Palestinians, who reside abroad, are counted as de-facto residents by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Jerusalem Arabs are double-counted as Israeli Arabs and as Palestinians, and no reference has been made to the sharp decline in Arab population growth rate. A significant gap has been developed between the actual and the perceived number of Palestinians, which highlights the baseless demographic fatalism. "ETTINGER'S DILIGENCE HAS ALREADY PRODUCED RESULTS... Even left-wingers, such as former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and former Justice Minister Dan Meridor have accepted his findings. Senior members of "Ha'aretz'" and "Ma'ariv's" editorial board have been exposed to Ettinger's presentations, and have covered it in their newspapers. Former Finance Minister, Baiga Schochat has slept better, as a Jew, since he saw the presentation. The "Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies" published the AIDRG study. A significantly smaller number of Israeli reporters and columnists still wave the demographic threat. Although Prime Minister Olmert is still reluctant to watch the presentation, the current pace of Ettinger's initiative suggests that the Israeli government will soon accept AIDRG's updated data. "THE ESSENCE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IS A GREAT DEAL OF TENACITY. Ettinger does not rest on his laurel... If Ettinger can convince his interlocutors that the demographic problem is by far less severe than previously (mis)perceived, than it is possible to convince them that a withdrawal from Judea & Samaria would be wrong. SOME INVESTMENT, SOME MONEY, 20-30 ETTINGERS, AND THE SUN SHALL RISE." Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il |
|
JEWISH LEFT WHINES ABOUT LEFTIST ANTI-SEMITISM - WHAT DID THEY EXPECT?
Posted by Don Feder, February 24, 2007. |
|
Among the many groups for whom I feel absolutely no sympathy is the Jewish left - which has lately been agonizing over the prevalence of Jew-hatred at anti-war rallies. Signs comparing Israelis to Nazis and identifying Jews as the enemies of humanity have become de rigueur at (you should pardon the expression) peace rallies. Jewish leftists -- at least those who still feel a connection to the Jewish people -- are dismayed. An article in the January 27 Contra Costa (California) Times calls our attention to the San Francisco Anti-Defamation League's first conference on how progressives "can protect themselves against anti-Semitism -- from the liberal left." Among other examples of tolerance and brotherhood cited by the Times, at one San-Fran demonstration last year, Arabs chanted "Jews are our dogs." According to the article, many on the lox-and-cream-cheese left is upset with former President Pinhead's latest book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" -- which condones suicide bombings. (Carter calls on peaceful Palestinians to stop terrorist attacks if Israel begins "respecting international law" -- rolling over and playing dead. ) Jewish progressives wonder why the movement seems to single out Israel for hysterical denunciations, and if their comrades haven't replaced "Israel" for "Jew" in the old anti-Semitic formulation. (Try to imagine Carter writing a book called "Saudi Arabia: Equality Not Misogyny" or "Iran: Democracy Not Theocracy.") Regarding the group-therapy for Jewish leftists, Jonathan Bernstein, director of the ADL's San Francisco regional office, says, "We have heard from so many people who feel ostracized and alone and don't really know what to do with this problem." Bernstein complains that said good people shouldn't "have to pick between being Jewish and whatever worthwhile cause." That some Jewish leftists are uncomfortable with the movement's uglier antics is surely one of humanity's great tragedies -- ranking right up there with the heartbreak of psoriasis. According to organizers, the conference (which was held the following weekend) would include a discussion of "coping strategies," "having a rally within a rally," and "on the spot responses to hurtful language." Wow, "on the spot responses to hurtful language" -- talk about getting tough with anti-Semitism. I'm reminded of a Woody Allen movie where the comedian is at a cocktail party and some of his Upper East Side friends start discussing how to respond to the Nazis marching in New Jersey. One suggests putting on a satirical play parodying the brown shirts. An agitated Allen says that -- harsh as that may be -- instead, perhaps they should consider getting rocks and clubs and beating the Nazis to a bloody pulp. Now that's a coping strategy I can relate to. Leftist anti-Semitism is as old as the left. Since the French Revolution, polemicists have cast Israelites as the quintessential capitalist exploiters -- never mind the prevalence of Jews in various socialist movements. (Voltaire charged that the Jews were "born with a raging fanaticism in their hearts.") Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (the father of modern socialism and anarchism) -- who coined the expression "Property is theft" -- explained: "The Jew is by temperament an anti-producer. He is an intermediary, always fraudulent and parasitical, who operates, in trade and in philosophy, by means of falsification, counterfeiting, and horse-trading." What then should be done with this irredeemably anti-social element? "The Jew is the enemy of mankind," Proudhon advised. "It is necessary to send this race back to Asia, or exterminate it...By fire or fusion, or by expulsion, the Jew must disappear." Said genocidal raving predated the Holocaust by a century. Karl Marx, old Uncle Fuzzy-Whiskers (the scion of a German-Jewish family that had converted to Christianity for social position) explained the Jewish problem this way: "What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money." No wonder Hitler and Stalin got on famously, until that unfortunate incident of June of 1940. After the fall of the Third Reich, the Soviet Union became the worldwide nexus of anti-Semitism. After the fall of the Soviet Union, anti-Semitism's Mecca shifted to -- well, Mecca. In the Moslem world, Mein Kampf and "The Protocols of Zion" are best-sellers and rabid Jew-hatred is standard fare in political, religious and cultural discourse. So, naturally, Islam has become the left's pet religion and Islamacism its principal ally. Besides an unremitting animus toward the Jewish state, the anti-war left has embraced many of the old anti-Semitic stereotypes of its revolutionary forebears. Feminist author Phyllis Chesler observes: "The Jews and the Jewish state have become the symbol of Satanic America, capitalism, imperialism, colonialism." Consider Noam Chomsky -- Hugo Chavez's favorite philosopher. Sure he wants to see Israel destroyed, and trusts in the good will of Hamas and Fatah for the safety of those Jews left in Palestine. Sure he associates with Holocaust-deniers. And sure he admires Iran's version of Jack The Ripper. But is the Jewish-born Chomsky an anti-Semite? In a 2002 interview with a Palestinian solidarity group, Chomsky declared, "By now, Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population." When a Marxist says someone's "privileged" it means they're getting something they didn't earn and don't deserve. Chomsky hates American society. Thus the avatar of the New Left and leading intellectual light of the anti-war movement is saying that Jews have risen to the top of a rotten, corrupt culture that spreads war, famine and misery across the globe. Did they attain that favored status by dint of their virtues? For today's left, the Jew is the corporate executive, exploiting his workers, raping the environment and reaping obscene profits. He's the globalist, pushing a world economy run by multinationals. He's the neo-con manipulating the White House and Congress to engineer a war with Iran -- to enhance Israel's security. He's the quintessence whatever the left despises at any particular point in time. And not just the loony left, not just the fringy left -- but the establishment left. Toward the middle of last month, in an online posting at Arianna Huffington's website, retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark was asked why he thought America would attack Iran. Clark replied: "You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers." Why the Israeli press, and not the Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh or Fox News? And, in case you haven't guessed it, "the New York money people" isn't code for Episcopalians. In his 2004 campaign, Howard Dean urged that regarding Israel and the Palestinians, the United States should adopt an "even-handed" approach. This is another way of saying that between an historic ally and a people who invariably side with our enemies and never miss a chance to tell us how much they hate our guts, America should be strictly impartial. Any objections from Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to Carter's vile comparison of Israel to South Africa's former white supremacist regime? Not that I'm aware of. Is the Democratic Party anti-Semitic or merely soft on anti-Semitism? Nothing could be more damning than the party of Old Joe Kennedy's embrace of Al Sharpton -- the man who sparked a full-scale pogrom in Crown Heights in 1991 and a massacre at Freddy's Fashion Mart in 1995. (Instead of "New York money people," Sharpton prefers "diamond merchants with blood on their hands" and "interlopers.") During the 2000 campaign, Al Gore obediently appeared at a Sharpton-organized debate at Harlem's Apollo Theater -- which would be comparable to George Bush carrying the torch at a cross-burning. Anywhere you look on the left, you'll find spiritual descendants of the Cossacks and storm troopers -- anti-Semites or those who condone anti-Semitism. Peace and justice don't grow in a cesspool. Instead of kvetching about "hurtful language" and devising "coping strategies," Jewish leftists -- those who are more Jewish than leftist -- should reconsider their "whatever worthwhile cause" -- which may not be that worthwhile after all. Don Feder was an opinion writer for the Boston Herald and a syndicated columnist. He is currently a political/media consultant. This article appeared in www.FrontPageMagazine.com |
|
HEZBOLLAH'S REVENUE STREAM FLOWS THROUGH THE AMERICAS
Posted by Nurit Greenger, February 24, 2007. |
|
The "Party of God," Hezbollah, its chief sponsor Iran, is the terror organization with the most American blood on its hand; it is the terror organization U.N. Resolution 1701 declared it must be dismantle and disarmed, yet not even a year later it is sitting stronger than ever on Israel's northern border with Israel. The U.S. government declared Hezbollah's leaders, specially designated global terrorists, yet, it is in proximity of each US citizen; it is here in the United States sitting strong in your neighborhood. Because of the U.S. porous borders with Mexico and Canada Hezbollah operatives have easy access to carry out recruiting operations, interstate criminal enterprises such as, cigarette smuggling, human smuggling, drug trafficking, and counterfeiting. They are using our fund raising system and their "charitable work" of fund raising in the millions of dollars enables the organization to purchase high-tech weaponry and materials that is delivered to the group's Lebanese headquarters. The mighty dollar, Washington and the big, very big, interest groups and loose laws is the "Achilles Hill" of every Unites States citizen. For all those who appose closing the borders, this is a story of how the United States is aiding and abetting world terror. This was written by Steven Emerson and comes from The Investigative Project on Terrorism (202-363-8602 or articles@ctnews.org). It appeared March 2007 in The American Legion Magazine. Steven Emerson is executive director of The Investigative Project and author of American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among US (Free Press). |
|
Since 9/11, U.S. counterterrorism policy has focused primarily on the threat from al-Qaeda. But before Osama bin Laden's men brought down the Twin Towers, the international terrorist organization with the most American blood on its hands was Hezbollah. Even now, Hezbollah continues on its terrorist path. Last summer, the world watched as violence erupted in the Middle East after Hezbollah's cross-border raid into Israel resulted in the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the killing of eight others. Meanwhile, the organization has honed techniques for financing its killing with proceeds from a wide range of illicit activities. Hezbollah, the "Party of God," began as a radical Muslim Shiite organization in 1982, in response to the first Israeli-Lebanese war. Its stated goals were, and are, wiping Israel off the map and establishing a Shiite state in Lebanon. Its chief sponsor is the Islamic Republic of Iran, which provides major financial support as well as weapons and paramilitary training. Syria, Lebanon 's neighbor, also lends substantial support. The two major leaders of Hezbollah are Secretary General Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and the organization's spiritual chief, Sheikh Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, both named "specially designated global terrorists" by the U.S. government. Fadlallah issued the fatwa authorizing the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks that killed 241 Americans, the government has charged. The "Party of God" has evolved from a guerrilla and terror force, establishing itself as a "legitimate" political party in the Lebanese government and acting as a representative of Lebanon 's large Shiite population. Having gained high political profile, Hezbollah continues to maintain its armed militia and terrorist training bases. Close to Home. Hezbollah's achievements as a multinational terror organization right here in the United States offer a glimpse into how the group functions. Our nation's porous borders with Mexico and Canada give Hezbollah operatives easy access to carry out fund-raising and recruiting operations. High-level Hezbollah agents have conducted complex, interstate criminal enterprises, raising millions of dollars and enabling the organization to purchase high-tech weaponry and materials to be sent to the group's Lebanese headquarters. These networks demonstrate clear chains of command and engage in a wide array of activities, including cigarette smuggling, human smuggling, drug trafficking, counterfeiting and "charitable work." Perhaps the best-publicized Hezbollah fundraising scheme in the United States involved a Charlotte, N.C., cigarette-smuggling ring. Operatives bought cigarettes in North Carolina and resold them in Michigan without paying Michigan's higher taxes. Mohamad Youssef Hammoud, the group's ringleader, was convicted in 2002 on several charges: conspiracies to launder money and traffic in contraband cigarettes, immigration law violations and attempted bribery. Evidence in the trial revealed links between ringleader Hammoud and Sheikh Nasrallah, including a photo of the two men together. The case demonstrated the ease with which illegal immigrants take advantage of the U.S. system, raising money from illicit activities to support both an American Hezbollah cell and the group's headquarters in Lebanon. The most high-profile case of a Hezbollah trained fighter on U.S. soil involved Mahmoud Youssef Kourani. In March 2005, Kourani pleaded guilty to conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, and in June 2005, he was sentenced to 54 months in prison. The FBI affidavit in the case alleged that Kourani had sent $40,000 to his brother Haidar, Hezbollah's chief of military security in southern Lebanon. An informant told the FBI that Mahmoud Kourani claimed he had trained in Iran on behalf of Hezbollah and was a member of the Hezbollah unit responsible for the kidnapping and murder of Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon in 1988. According to government documents, "On approximately Feb. 4, 2001, Kourani surreptitiously entered the United States by sneaking across the U.S.-Mexico border in the trunk of a car. He reached Mexico by bribing an official at the Mexican consulate in Beirut to give him a Mexican visa." In addition to human smuggling, Hezbollah financiers have engaged in large-scale drug operations in North America. A federal indictment in January 2002 charged 36 individuals nationwide, including Ohio resident Mohammad Shabib. Investigators believe that since the early 1990s, Shabib managed to deposit roughly $8 million skimmed from drug sales into Chicago bank accounts. Part of the loot is believed to have benefited Hezbollah activities. A New Front. Hezbollah operatives have frequently sought out sympathetic members of the Lebanese Diaspora to assist them, several of whom have owned and operated Lebanese restaurants. Salim Boughader Mucharrafille, owner of Cafe La Libanesa in Tijuana, Mexico, was arrested in December 2002 for running a ring that allegedly smuggled at least 200 Lebanese compatriots into the United States, including an employee of Al- Manar, Hezbollah's television station. Although it was never confirmed, Boughader was suspected of having helped Kourani to slip over the border. Last May, a Mexican judge sentenced Boughader to 14 years in prison for organized crime and human smuggling. The case of Rady Zaiter, a.k.a. David Assi Alvarez, is an example of drug-running activities designed to benefit Hezbollah, using a restaurant as a front. In June 2005, Ecuadorian police broke up an international drug-trafficking ring led by the owners of El Turco restaurant: Zaiter and his partner, Maher Hamajo. The restaurant in Quito served as the logistical center for the ring's activities. Drug mules carried cocaine in double-bottomed suitcases bound for other countries in South America, as well as Europe and the Middle East. According to investigating authorities, Hezbollah received at least 70 percent of the drug money. Additionally, officials confiscated more than $150,000 and 2,000 euros. Further arrests were made in Brazil, Syria and the Dutch Antilles, bringing the total apprehended to 19 people. El Turco, like the Detroit-area restaurant La Shish that was recently allegedly linked to Hezbollah, was a very popular restaurant, appreciated by the locals. In May 2006, Detroit-based restaurant owner Tala1 Khalil Chahine and his wife, Elfat El Aouar, were indicted on federal tax-evasion charges. They allegedly concealed more than $20 million in profits from their La Shish restaurant chain and funneled some of those funds to Lebanon. In 2002, Chahine attended an Al-Mabarrat charity event in Lebanon at which he and Sheikh Fadlallah served as keynote speakers. Chahine admitted he attended the charity fund-raiser, reinforcing federal prosecutors' statement that he has "connections at the highest levels of Hezbollah." According to the Department of Justice, "Chahine was the representative at the (Al-Mabarrat Lebanon) event of a worldwide group of fund-raisers." Federal prosecutors also alleged that agents searching Chahine's Michigan house discovered a letter thanking him for his sponsorship of 40 Lebanese orphans -- a term the Department of Justice considers "a euphemism used by Hezbollah to refer to the orphans of martyrs." Al-Mabarrat has a U.S.-based branch headquartered in Dearborn, Mich. Founded in 1991, the Al-Mabarrat Charitable Organization-USA, Inc., has repeatedly changed its name over the past 15 years. Although Al-Mabarrat acknowledges on its Web site that it works in conjunction with the Al-Mabarrat Association in Lebanon (whose logo it shares), it omits the fact that Al-Mabarrat Lebanon is run by Sheikh Fadlallah. Despite Al- Mabarrat USA's direct link to a Fadlallah-controlled organization, the U.S. branch continues to operate unfettered. Hezbollah's use of Al-Mabarrat as a fund-raising front is a savvy strategic move, mirroring a tactic long exploited by terrorist groups operating on U.S. soil. By utilizing charities, terrorists can generate popular support by providing some legitimate services, attract contributions from donors both unwitting and aware, and attempt to obscure financial trails. But such operations extend far beyond the United States. Worldwide Reach. Hezbollah revealed its strong South American presence to the world with the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. The attack killed 29 people and wounded more than 240. The group struck again in the Argentine capital in 1994, killing 86 at a Jewish community center in the largest terror attack against Argentina to date. Hezbollah has long used parts of South America as a training ground, in particular the tri-border area where Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay meet. It has demonstrated a keen interest in extending its activities to other parts of Latin America, including Venezuela, Cuba, Panama and Colombia. The best example of the extent of Hezbollah's South American reach is the 2002 arrest of Assad Ahmad Barakat in Brazil. Designated by the U.S. Treasury Department as a Hezbollah fundraiser, Barakat has been called one of the terrorist organization's most prominent and influential members. He is believed to have transferred up to $50 million to Hezbollah since 1995. Two of his businesses -- Casa Apollo, a wholesale electronics store, and Barakat Import-Export Ltd. -- were used to launder terrorist money and facilitate the movement of Hezbollah operatives. Both have been designated by the U.S. Treasury Department as terrorist fronts. Although Europe has thus far been exempt from Hezbollah attacks, numerous intelligence experts and officials assert that the group's operatives maintain cells across the continent. German authorities, in particular, have expressed concern about the presence of several hundred Hezbollah members in their country. Hezbollah has established several front charities, mainly operating from Great Britain and Germany, to raise funds earmarked to support the group's members in Lebanon. For example, the British-based Lebanese Welfare Committee, HELP Charity Association for Relief and Abrar Islamic Foundation are among the charities suspected of channeling funds to Sheikh Nasrallah and Hezbollah. Reports of an increase in Hezbollah recruiting have emerged in eastern European countries, specifically Slovakia, Bosnia and Russia. And over the past few years, Hezbollah has sent operatives with European identification papers to Israel in order to collect intelligence for future attacks. Efforts by European authorities to curtail Hezbollah's influence have included France 's 2004 ban of Hezbollah's television station and chief propaganda machine, A1-Manar, from that nation's satellite television providers. Spain and the United States have made similar moves. Finally, Hezbollah has been actively fund-raising in Africa for the past two decades, tapping a pool of Shiite Muslim communities, especially in Senegal and the Ivory Coast. The organization engages in mafia-style extortion, all the while receiving money from its large sympathetic donor base. The money generated from the group's African operations alone runs well into the millions of dollars. The Ivory Coast is used not only for fund-raising but also as a safe haven for Hezbollah operatives on the run. Iran has also stepped up its Ivory Coast presence, financing mosques and sending imams to preach in them. While al-Qaeda has long utilized the African "blood-diamond" trade to facilitate its operations, Hezbollah has recently begun taking its own share in various West Africa countries, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burkina Faso, Togo and Sierra Leone. A blood diamond, also called "conflict diamond" or "war diamond," refers to the precious gem mined in war-torn countries of western and southern Africa, and sold, often clandestinely, in order to finance insurgents, rebels and terrorists. The extortion of diamond merchants is believed to be a tactic adapted by Hezbollah from its South American experience. New Alliances. One issue with wide-ranging implications for U.S. consumers is the growing alliance between Hezbollah, its regional sponsors, and emerging elements in Latin America -- notably Venezuela, where the terrorist group is calling for a stronger relationship with President Hugo Chavez. After Chavez visited Lebanon last summer, a Hezbollah official told an Indian newspaper, "Mr. Chavez is closer to us than any other Arab leader, and we hope that we will be able to benefit, as he has, from this particular experience (in Lebanon)." The affection seems mutual. On a trip to Iran in July to meet with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Chavez said, "The brave resistance of the Lebanese people and Hezbollah symbolizes their indomitable spirit and reveals how the Islamic and Arab world is fed up with U.S. policy in the region." Venezuela, an OPEC nation, owns CITGO Petroleum, identified on CITGO's Web site as a "wholly owned subsidiary of Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela." Filling up at any of the 14,000 CITGO gas stations across the United States thus funds a government that is on the record as being a strong supporter of Hezbollah. Criminal activity in the United States has raised millions of dollars for Hezbollah as well. The question remains whether Hezbollah members and supporters within our borders possess the wherewithal to carry out attacks if ordered to do so. Although no direct evidence exists of an imminent attack, their presence, as well their ability to conduct illicit operations often undetected by U.S. border security and law-enforcement officials, presents a significant threat to U.S. national security and the safety of American citizens. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
THAT SO-CALLED PALESTINIAN UNITY GOVERNMENT CAN'T SEEM TO RECOGNIZE ISRAEL
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, February 24, 2007. |
|
King Abdullah, reciting from his Wahhabi Koran in a recent no Jews allowed ceremony held in Mecca, pronounced Fatah head hancho Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas high muckamuck Ismail Haniyeh kindred spirit anti-Semites, never to recognize Israel for as long as they may live. There were no objectors at the ceremony, attended only by Sunnis attempting to woo adulterer Haniyeh more so than Abbas, the former indeed being courted by lustful Persian Shiite suitors, back into the fold of righteous Arabs, knowing the true chain of command chosen to trod in the tracks of Prophet Muhammad, Allah's right hand warrior. No Rice was tossed at the unified duo while boarding jets en route to a brief honeymoon in wild and crazy Gaza-by-the-sea, where jubilant celebratory creeps regularly fire Qassam missiles into Israel, not just in honor of the occasion, but almost every day. Indeed, there was no need for music in such a religious atmosphere, thus the string-along Quartet composed of out of tune music makers from the United States, European Union, Russia, and the United Nations were not even invited to play their signature song, "You Can't Always Get What You Want," ironically a message that ultimately would be directed at Israel. No doubt, the two name double game Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen, four decade understudy to Yasser Arafat, ever the snake charmer bedecked in Armani suits, never was that far apart from a not-so-subtle Haniyeh in his hatred of Jews and Israel, but uses different tactics when schmoozing with Western pie-in-the-sky peacemakers. After all, anyone that trivializes the Holocaust as he did, in the early 1980s, composing a doctoral thesis linking Zionists to Nazis, as well as questioning the magnitude of the infamous butchery, despicably even questioning whether gas chambers were utilized, and in fact never renouncing the revisionist filth, is in his heart of hearts not so different than Haniyeh or for that matter Iran's Imam obsessed President Mahmoud AhMADinejad, infamous for his own Holocaust denial conference as well as the profane utterance suggesting Israel must be "wiped off the map." Furthermore, Fatah's Abbas, remaining the default negotiating partner of Western and some Israeli 'land for peace' shlemiels, despite being the more respected member of a not so odd couple of convenience with Hamas' Haniyeh, in effect is even more perilous to Israel than the more outspoken hate-spewing but candid leader of that so-called Palestinian unity government. "Crazy", indeed, should be a new signature song for the Quartet and any Israeli 'peace at any price' groupies who might still wish to break pita with Mahmoud the 'smoothie', allegedly unified with a blatant terrorist cadre for the sake of harmony. All of Judea, Samaria, and the eastern sector of Jerusalem, garnished by a right of return to core Israel, would be put on the table, along with a peace offering by the 'smoothie' that carries as much weight as an underfed butterfly. Inviting Abbas to the dance, something he could not achieve as Arafat's shmata washer and boot licker, would in all likelihood be an unmitigated disaster for Israel, especially if the Quartet inserts fossil fuel contracts with Saudi led OPEC into its calculations at the expense of the Jewish State. Keep Abdullah happy and everybody's happy, as far as certain petro-addict members are concerned. Indeed, such fossil fuel junkies might accept assurances from Abbas as he forswears violence against Israel out of one side of his mouth, handing him the Jewish shlamazal's farm, while his more honest jihadist 'unity government' partner froths at the mouth like a rabid dog, lining up deadly Qassams with 'who knows what' in their warheads, to launch at Israel after the hugs and handshakes are done, sealing the Faustian covenant. When the bar is set so low that so-called Palestinian negotiators are merely expected not to trip over it, when recognition of Israel's right to exist is bizarrely still an issue, when Israel is expected to cede land justifiably secured in 1967 in the course of vanquishing Arabs intent on annihilating the Jewish State, an expectation never to be foisted on any other sovereign government under similar circumstances, when a Holocaust revisionist remains the one hope of civilized nations on a fool's errand to stabilize a conflict, vastly overblown in presumed significance on, in fact, totally unrelated events occurring in other Middle East enclaves, when hubristic negotiators possessing personal agendas, unable or unwilling to grasp the smallest part of the Arab mindset, form a Quartet that blows hot air into bugles that play nothing but Taps for Israel, it is time for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to say thanks but no thanks to 'well intentioned' meddlers posing as mediators, while reading the riot act to Abbas and Haniyeh, promising them they will indeed recognize the consequences of Israel's world class weaponry, if not the State itself, if out of control jihad junkies, under their jurisdiction, continue tossing Qassams and deploying homicide/suicide mutants at what is indeed a world class nation about to lose its one last good nerve. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
11 EMORY PROFESSORS: WHAT'S JIMMY CARTER AFRAID OF?
Posted by SPME, February 24, 2007. |
|
This was published in THe Emory Wheel, February 18, 2007 by Alan Abramowitz, David R. Blumenthal, Sander Gilman, Herbert R. Karp, Harvey Klehr, Melvin Konner, Howard I. Kushner, Deborah E. Lipstadt, Andre J. Nahmias,Raymond F. Schinazi, Donald G. Stein. It is archived at www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=1856 |
|
Once again, Jimmy Carter has shrunk from debate. Despite having written a book whose purpose he claims was to promote dialogue and discussion, he has consistently dodged appearing with anyone who could challenge him on the numerous factual errors that fill the pages of his slim book. First it was at Brandeis University, where he was invited to appear with professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School. Dershowitz, who has written two books and numerous articles on the topic (not to mention being a respected First Amendment scholar and one of America's most distinguished attorneys), was not even allowed into the building until Carter had left. When it became known that Carter was anxious to speak at Emory, the administration consulted a group of faculty and was advised that the most fair and academically valuable format would be to have Carter appear with someone who could engage in a productive interchange and discussion on the topic. This clearly would be the only way for the event to meet the educational standard of a leading university. Everyone agreed that the best person for this interchange was Ambassador Dennis Ross, who was the main negotiator on the Arab-Israeli situation in both the first Bush administration and the Clinton administration. He was responsible for organizing Camp David II, Clinton's last-ditch effort to find a resolution to the situation. Ross agreed to appear, but Carter pointedly refused to appear with him or with any other expert. No explanation was given. Is this the behavior of a man who wants to promote dialogue? What precisely is Carter afraid of? Could it be that Dennis Ross -- who, like President Clinton, places the blame for the failure of the negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis at Camp David II squarely on the shoulders of Yasir Arafat -- would tell the former president, who blames Israel for everything, that he is simply wrong? Remember Ross and Clinton were there; Carter was not. The Brandeis event had sanitized pre-screened questions, no follow-up, and an audience of students clearly mesmerized by being in the presence of a former president. At least at Brandeis, Dershowitz appeared after Carter to point out that Carter's remarks (carefully scripted to appeal to the largely Jewish audience at Brandeis) were very different from what he said in the book and in numerous media events, including Al Jazeera television, where he falsely claimed that most of the critics of his book have been representatives of Jewish organizations. He has also stated on Al Jazeera that rocket barrages against Israeli homes and families are not terrorist acts. These flirtations with anti-Semitism -- however unconscious -- have frightened Jewish -Americans. The Wheel says that it's best to let Carter have "the last word" because to do otherwise will "only prolong the debate indefinitely into the future." As if the debate will go away if Jimmy Carter is allowed a platform all by himself. Would the Wheel recommend that George W. Bush "be given the last word" on Iraq because to do otherwise would "prolong the debate"? The Wheel has joined Carter in his attempt to stifle debate even while he claims to be seeking it. A prolonged debate with a free exchange of ideas is what an academic institution is all about. In fact, Bush, who is not known for his responsiveness to the press, has the courage to face seasoned reporters who ask tough, unscripted questions with even tougher follow-up questions. These reporters are trained to recognize when a president is dissembling, being evasive or deliberately misleading the public, and they respond accordingly. Remember, this is a book which has been described as "moronic" (Slate), "strange," a "distortion" (The New York Times) and "cynical" with a "bait-and-switch" title (Washington Post). The Emory administration has thus far failed to create an event with a semblance of balance. The talk of having "someone" or a "panel on the topic" next semester is an embarrassment for an institution which proclaims that it is dedicated to "creative inquiry." We shall absent ourselves from this staged event, which will be more a political opportunity for Carter to air his biases than an open exchange of ideas. It is unworthy of an institution with Emory's aspirations, and we have to say sadly that at this moment we are not proud of Emory. Alan Abramowitz is the Alben W. Barkley Professor of Political Science. David R. Blumenthal is the Jay and Leslie Cohen Professor of Judaic Studies. Sander Gilman is a Distinguished Professor of the Arts and Sciences. Herbert R. Karp is an Emeritus Professor of Neurology and Medicine. Harvey Klehr is the Andrew W. Mellon Professor of Politics and History. Melvin Konner is the Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Anthropology. Howard I. Kushner is the Nat C. Robertson Distinguished Professor of Science and Society. Deborah E. Lipstadt is the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies. Andre J. Nahmias is the Richard W. Blumberg Emeritus Professor of Pediatrics. Raymond F. Schinazi is a Professor of Pediatrics and Chemistry, and the Director of the Laboratory of Biochemical Pharmacology. Donald G. Stein is the Asa G. Candler Professor of psychology, emergency medicine and neurology. Contact Scholars For Peace in the Middle East (SPME) at spmeff@spme.net |
|
THE DIPLOMATIC FETISHISTS
Posted by Jake Levi, February 24, 2007. |
| This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post |
|
Iran has an interesting take on international law. According to Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki, the UN Security Council's Chapter VII resolution from last December requiring Iran to cease all its uranium enrichment activities is illegal. As he put it Wednesday during a friendly visit in Turkey, "We were against [the resolution] for being illegal and politically motivated." Anyone with even a casual acquaintance with international law should recognize that Mottaki's statement is not merely incorrect. His rejection of the legality of Security Council Resolution 1737 is an expression of contempt for the very foundations of the law of nations which have been almost universally adhered to since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. What comes across most clearly in Mottaki's statement is that little has changed in Iran since the Khomeini revolution in 1979 brought the current regime to power. Back then, in their first stab at international diplomacy, the mullahs showed that their regime stands opposed to all the norms of civilized behavior that have formed the basis of the nation-state system since the end of the Thirty Years War. The Iranian takeover of the US embassy in Teheran and the holding hostage of 52 embassy employees for 444 days was not merely an act of state terrorism. It was a declaration of war against civilization. And so, it should come as a surprise to no one that Mottaki rejects the Security Council's right to force Iran to abide by its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran voluntarily signed and ratified. He is behaving in a manner that is wholly consistent with Iran's international behavior since the overthrow of the Shah. Similarly, the US and its Western and UN partners responded to Iran's provocation in a manner that is wholly consistent with their treatment of Iran since the revolution. For the past 27 years, the US, the European Union and the UN have responded to Iran's contemptuous disregard for international law and civilized norms of behavior by seeking to appease the mullahs. Wednesday US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed this consistent preference in an interview with CNN. Brushing off the allegation that the US may be planning to forcibly prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons Rice said, "The United States is on a diplomatic path and we believe in this diplomatic path." She continued, "If Iran will, in fact, suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities we can sit down together, reverse 27 years of the isolation of the United States from Iran and Iran from the United States. We can talk about anything. The United States has no desire for confrontation with Iran. None. We would rather have with Iran the opportunity to discuss whatever matters Iran would like to discuss." So as far as Rice is concerned, diplomacy is not only her chosen method of dealing with Iran. It is the only method for dealing with Iran. Muhammad el Baradei, who as chairman of the International Atomic Energy Agency is charged with reporting Iranian non-compliance with Resolution 1737 to the Security Council, took Rice's diplomatic line to the next logical level when he said last month, "the only solution to the Iranian issue... is dialogue, is negotiation." Baradei argues this point in both practical and normative terms. Practically speaking, he said Tuesday that it is impossible to put the Iranian nuclear genie back in the bottle because the Iranians have already acquired the know-how to build atomic bombs. Baradei made that statement after meeting with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani. At the meeting Larijani told Baradei that Iran remains steady in its rejection of the Security Council's demand that it suspend its uranium enrichment activities. Aside from explaining why it is pointless to try to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear bombs, Baradei explained that it would also be wrong to check the mullahs' behavior. "Our experience without exception is that sanctions alone do not work and in most cases radicalize the regime and hurt the people who are not supposed to be hurt... [S]anctions have to be coupled at all times with incentives and a real search for a compromise based on face-saving, based on respect," Baradei opined. Perhaps Rice's enthusiasm for appeasing Teheran is influenced by people like former senator and Democratic contender for the presidency John Edwards. This week Edwards reportedly said that the greatest short-term threat to world peace is the possibility that Israel will bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. Perhaps it is similar voices in the James Baker and Brent Scowcroft corner of the Republican Party that are motivating Rice to behave like the Europeans and the UN. Whatever the explanation for the US's French-style Iran policy, the EU for its part insists on negotiating with Iran in spite of the fact that last week an official EU document acknowledged that the Europeans know full well that their four-year nuclear diplomacy with the Iranians has failed to delay even slightly Iran's acquisition of atomic bombs. That is, Europe maintains its "jaw jaw" with Iran in spite of the fact that it knows that by doing so it is all but ensuring that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons which it has publicly pledged to use to eradicate Israel. THE IRANIANS are more than willing to humor the West's diplomacy fetish. Even as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday that "It is worth it to stop other activities for 10 years and focus only on the nuclear issue," he and his colleagues announced their willingness to discuss their nuclear weapons program with the US and anyone else who asks (aside from Israel), so long as those discussions don't impinge on their freedom to build their nuclear bombs. From Washington to Brussels to Moscow to Turtle Bay, everyone applauds the fact that both the so-called international community and its Iranian antagonist desire negotiations. This, they say, is proof that there is no reason to abandon diplomacy. But this is nonsense. The American, European and UN defense of negotiations with Teheran is nothing more than a willful act of collective delusion. For while it is true that everyone wants to talk, it is equally true that there is absolutely nothing to talk about. In theory, nations engage in negotiations in order to advance their national interests, whether separately or collectively. In the case of Iran, the US and its allies seek to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. They maintain that the best means of achieving that aim is diplomacy. For its part, Iran wishes to acquire nuclear weapons unmolested. It chooses to negotiate with the West in order to achieve that aim. The problem here is that the sides' intentions are mutually exclusive so one side's gains come at the other's expense. Since Iran refuses to suspend its uranium enrichment, diplomatically engaging its emissaries serves only to legitimize the regime and enable its leaders to acquire nuclear weapons under the cover of international diplomacy. THIS SAME disturbing pattern repeats itself with the so-called international community's engagement of the Palestinians. This is particularly the case in the aftermath of the Mecca agreement which relegated the Fatah terror organization to the position of junior partner in the Hamas terror organization's government. As with Iran, so too with the Palestinians: While everyone agrees that negotiations are the answer, they ignore the fact that there is nothing to negotiate about. The so-called international community argues that it wishes to engage the Palestinians in order to peacefully resolve the Palestinian conflict with Israel. For their part, the Palestinians in Hamas and Fatah claim that the purpose of negotiations is to advance their strategic aim of destroying Israel. In their dealings with both Iran and the Palestinians, the leaders of the so-called international community assert that were they to abandon diplomacy they would strengthen the most radical elements on the other side. As Baradei put it with regard to Iran, "We know that if you jolt a country's pride, all the factions, right, left and center will get together and try to accelerate a program to develop a nuclear weapon to defend themselves." Unfortunately, experience shows that just the opposite is the case. The so-called international community's engagement of the Iranians and the Palestinians has in no way weakened the most radical elements in those societies. Rather, it has weakened the West's willingness to confront those radical elements and so brought about an effective radicalization of the West. Case in point is Britain. Until recently, the British treated Hamas like the genocidal jihadist movement that it is. But Wednesday Britain's policy collapsed completely. In a speech before Parliament, Prime Minister Tony Blair said, "It's far easier to deal with the situation in Palestine if there is a national unity government. I hope we can make progress, including even with the more sensible elements of Hamas." But of course, there are no "sensible elements of Hamas." So what sort of "progress" does Blair believe it is possible to make? Moreover, while Ahmadinejad may be the most outspoken Iranian leader on the issue of eradicating Israel, he is by no means alone in his intention. Every Iranian leader from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on down has expressed a desire to see Israel wiped off the map. Engaging these fanatics in talks that have already failed can only serve to strengthen their commitment to carry out their monstrous, openly acknowledged plans. What we have here is a full-blown eclipse of rational policy-making with diplomatic fetishism. What Rice, Blair, Baradei, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are all forgetting is that diplomacy is a means and not an end. By engaging the Palestinians and the Iranians, they willfully ignore the fact that if you are not using diplomacy to advance your aims, that diplomacy will be exploited by your antagonist to advance his aims. If Israel had an even slightly competent government, our leaders would be pointing out the perversity and stupidity of fetish diplomacy. But Israel's government is not even slightly competent. The Olmert-Livni-Peretz government has descended to a level of incoherence that makes it seem like a waste of time to even bother criticizing it. Its moves are transparently motivated by nothing more than a desire to hold onto power for as long as possible. In light of this abysmal state of affairs, it falls to private individuals to remind the diplomatic fetishists that diplomacy is a means, not an end. If their current policies are played out, the fact that they abjured war and remained faithful to diplomacy will not excuse them when Hamas transforms Gaza, Judea and Samaria into a Taliban state; destabilizes the Jordanian monarchy; and murders thousands of Jews in Israel. Their commitment to diplomacy will not make posterity more forgiving of their failure to prevent a second Holocaust. You are not being peacemakers when you engage the mullahs and Hamas. You are preparing the ground for a huge conflagration. Contact Jake Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
AUSTRALIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY DUMPS ISRAELI SCHOLAR OVER MUSLIM REMARKS
Posted by The Gathering Storm, February 24, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Jason Frenkel and it appeared February
17, 2007 in Judeoscope
|
|
AIJAC 'dumps' scholar over Muslim remarks THE Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) has withdrawn its support for a visiting Israeli expert on Islam who earlier this week urged Australia to cap its intake of Muslim immigrants. AIJAC executive director Dr Colin Rubenstein issued a statement on Friday distancing the organisation, which has partly sponsored Hebrew University Professor Raphael Israeli's six-week Australian visit, from the academic's claims that "life will become untenable" unless the Muslim population is kept in check. Professor Israeli said Australia was in danger of being swamped by Muslims -- especially from Indonesia -- and called for a "preventative policy" to protect national security and ensure Muslims remained a "marginal minority". But Dr Rubenstein rejected Professor Israeli's "implication that the Muslim community as a whole is a threat or danger". "Islamist extremism is a genuine and serious global problem, but it is completely wrong to single out all Muslims for suspicion or negatively stereotype the Muslim community as a whole in this way." Dr Rubenstein said AIJAC had censured Professor Israeli over the "unacceptable and unhelpful" remarks, and "will not be co-hosting any of his further appearances in Australia". Professor Israeli had just begun a stint as a scholar-in-residence at the Shalom Institute in Sydney, where he is teaching a course on "Understanding Islam". Shalom Institute CEO Hilton Immerman said that while Professor Israeli's views do not necessarily represent those of the Shalom Institute, which "rejects any form of racial stereotyping or ethnic quotas", the course would proceed. An author of 20 books on the Muslim, Arab and Chinese worlds, he was also scheduled to give talks in Melbourne, Perth, Brisbane and New Zealand. However, Dr Rubenstein told the AJN that he was unsure whether the talks would go ahead given that AIJAC had withdrew its support. In an interview with the AJN, Professor Israeli said radical Islam would not be defeated by a war of words. "You have to infiltrate all those circles where the Muslim radicals operate, to arrest them, and to limit immigration into western countries where these Muslims, who are bent on destroying western civilisation ... to limit immigration, even students who apply to come from Islamic countries to the West," he said. "It serves no purpose when you have this home-grown terrorist, who has been preparing for years to blow up undergrounds in London, and all you do is lead a war of words. The war of words doesn't help. There is a whole gamut of actions that are possible in order to check this threat of Islam." Citing France, where Muslims comprise about nine per cent of the population, as an example, Professor Israeli warned growing Muslim communities could change the political, economic, and cultural fabric of a country. "You have to adopt some kind of preventative policy. In order not to get there, limit the immigration and therefore you keep them a marginal minority, which will be a nuisance, but cannot pose a threat to the demographic and security aspects of a country." But Islamic Council of Victoria director Waleed Aly branded the comments "ill-advised and foolish" and said Professor Israeli didn't understand Australia. "It is clearly possible in the current environment to say things about Muslims that you simply cannot say about anyone else," Aly said. "The fundamental problem at the heart of this is that he seems to be suggesting that increased marginalisation of Muslim populations will somehow produce something other than mutual resentment. It should be obvious to anyone really that it's doomed to failure." Officially, there are fewer than 300,000 Muslims in Australia according to the 2001 Census, but Islamic community officials estimate the actual number to be at least 500,000 -- about 2.5 per cent of the population. "Even though it's so low, they are so vocal, and they make so much noise," Professor Israeli said. "And therefore the situation has to be checked before they increase their numbers, because don't forget in your immediate proximity dwells the largest or most populous Islamic country in the world [Indonesia], and by necessity, there is demographic pressure from there to channel the surplus of populations to wherever it's possible. "And one of the big possibilities is Australia, so they will continue to come legally, or illegally, and settle here, and when they get to the rate of the 10 per cent like in France, then you will see life will become untenable." He said France might already be at the "point of no return". "Then they control whole sections of the economy, there are areas in France where you cannot be elected to Parliament without the support of the Muslims and so on. And therefore, by increasing their numbers they start to have an impact on the social, economic, political and cultural nature of the country." He warned that radical Muslims would find it easier to "melt" into the community and plan terrorist acts without scrutiny from authorities if the growth of Australia's Muslim population was allowed to continue. "You will have then large concentrations of Muslims, so it's not thousands, it will be millions, and when they become millions it's a big mass where individual Muslims, including terrorists, can melt, and then go look for them. "In England they already have that problem, they cannot locate them, they cannot sort them out from the general population, and sometimes you have to impose a curfew on a whole area to catch one or two or three terrorists, and by doing that you do an injustice to an entire population, and then they start complaining that they are discriminated against." Immigrant Muslims had a reputation for manipulating the values of their adopted countries to suit their own ends, he said. "And that's why Islam has become feared in western countries, which are open, democratic, and tolerant of others. And Muslim populations, which are very often minorities, very often abuse that hospitality and use democracy, openness and tolerance to their benefit, to spread their faith and to intimidate their hosts, and very often, to impose their standards and values upon them." Jihad Watch (www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/2007/02/015305print.html) posted this comment by Raphael Israeli I became a celebrity two days after I arrived, and that subsumed all the rest of my activities. When the storm erupted, the dhimmi-like Jewish leadership cancelled all activities, in a shameful submisssion to the Muslim thugs and under the false claims of a "multi-cultural society" in Australia, which they know is not true. The story is two-sided: I gave an interview and said many harsh words about Islam in Europe, which the reporter extrapolated as applying to Australia too. The other issue is the political correctness which does not allow those things to be said, though privately everyone supports what I said. In any case, my teaching on Islam stands and it even increased interest in my lectures, but the public lecture tour was cancelled and the Jewish leadership shamefully disowned me instead of standing up for me. I blamed the violence of Muslims in the world (and by implication here) for the troubles they are having, but they chose to accuse the messenger. They apologized to the thugs and brought upon themselves the disgrace of unconditional submission. They do not want to rock the boat. They are scared to stir things up. The easiest way for them was to sacrifice the guest they invited, thus punishing not me, but the Jewish audiences who need the education for which I was brought here. I was also struck by the provinciality of the place, where a minor item of gossip about one individual who said something becomes a national issue. I am not the Minister of Immigration. Before me the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Costello have said harsher things after Muslim riots, but someone elected to seize upon this opportunity now and sweep Australia into a storm in a tea-cup. Contact The Gathering Storm by email at gatheringstorm@mail.com |
|
JONATHAN POLLARD, REMEMBERED AND FORGOTTEN
Posted by Daryl Temkin, February 23, 2007. |
|
White House Telephone Number: 1-202-456-1414 Every call is tallied by subject matter.
|
|
For the last twenty-two years, Jonathan Pollard is a name that has been remembered, forgotten, remembered, and forgotten. In recent days, a rekindled memory is being resurrected for people to once again call out the name, Jonathan Pollard. Similar to a Simon and Garfunkel lyric which compares the visionary architect Frank Lloyd Wright to generations of other architects, the lyric reads, "Architects may come and architects may go and they never change 'their' point of view", we have now experienced more than two decades of American administrations who promise to modify the Pollard penalty, but these promises have gone unfulfilled. Over the years, how many ranking American officials have convinced Jewish communal leaders that they will reconsider the Pollard decision, that they will correct this excessive punishment which would lead to his release and/or pardon? All those promises were short lived and replaced with claims of secret damaging evidence. The Pollard case is about a man in his twenties who saw that significant security information which America had promised to supply Israel concerning weapon and troop movements in various Arab countries was being illegally withheld. Pollard's tolerance for the various American officials who made their personal decision to place Israel in greater jeopardy became too painful for him to bear. Pollard made contact with an Israeli who received and then transferred to Israel the copies of the security information which should have been legally given to Israel. This was done in the hope of securing Israel's future safety. Two decades later, it still is evident that none of the information transferred placed America at risk and no American security agent's identity has been compromised. No one has died or has even been threatened due to Pollard's actions. This was a case of giving information to a friendly nation which was legally entitled to that information. However, it appears that certain American officials decided to prevent Israel from receiving this information which could threaten its security. In spite of the fact that Israel has remained America's close friend and America was supposed to share this specific information with Israel, Jonathan Pollard did commit a crime. There were other ways that Pollard could have tried to bring attention to the fact that American officials were denying and defying American policy. However, Pollard decided to do what he saw to be most expedient and immediately effective. A plea bargain was strongly recommended to Jonathan in order to prevent a life imprisonment sentence for this crime. The American justice system was abused, the plea bargain was actually used as an admission of guilt, and the judge maliciously sentenced him to a lifelong imprisonment. This degree of punishment for comparable crime is unprecedented. Many legal scholars and journalists have researched this case and cannot justify the extreme degree of criminality assigned to Pollard. It would appear that if Pollard was exposed to such top-secrets that twenty-two years later, he would still be considered a "loose canon", a risk threatening the balance of America's security -- everyone knows how ridiculous that is. Many believe that Pollard is kept behind bars because he is capable of testifying to the criminal activities of ranking American officials who up to this point have escaped justice. If this be the case, then, for those people, securing and continuing Pollard's life sentence is not negotiable. There are unsupported allegations that what Pollard did may have gotten into the hands of the Soviets, and, also, there is an ongoing claim that there is a secret file on Pollard which cannot be released. Investigators remain puzzled as to what could possibly be in that secret file. Some expect that the secret file is so secret that it doesn't even know about itself. After all the thankless and risk-filled concessions that President Clinton required of Israel, it was understood that when Clinton completed his term of office, he would thank Israel with a last minute pardon for Pollard. As Clinton made his last minute pardons of significant criminals, the Jewish world waited breathlessly for the name of Jonathan Pollard to be announced. Unfortunately, Mr. Clinton joined the ranks of his predecessors and did nothing. Clinton left major segments of the Jewish and non-Jewish community in shock because they were mistakenly expecting the President to be a man of courage, a man of his word, and a man who would not be swayed. That omitted Clinton pardon will forever remain a moment of consequential disheartening memory. Once again, Israel was left compromised without the gesture of thanks. And the keys to Jonathan Pollard's cell were once again hidden if not thrown away. The name Jonathan Pollard would fade from memory as a helpless situation and a cause which few people would keep alive. Except there were some outstanding persons who made it their business to visit Jonathan. Among them, the famed activist, Rabbi Avi Weiss, and the Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick, a truth- seeking journalist who writes with wisdom, insight, and passion. Avi, Caroline, and others who have reported on their visits with Jonathan came away as if they had returned from a ghostly planet. Not because of the shock in seeing and experiencing the oppressive and sparse high security federal prison environment, but because their personal experience with Jonathan was so profound -- as if they were evidently touched and extraordinarily impressed by his intellect. Since in prison, purportedly Jonathan has devised a breakthrough solution to obstacles in hydrogen technology and alternative fuel advancements. Outstanding scientists have learned from Jonathan's solutions and have reported their amazement with his technological insights and scientific concepts. But it appears more important that Jonathan be kept imprisoned for crimes that few, if any, understand then to allow the world to benefit from the possibility that he may have a solution to an alternative fuel technology. Now as the eight years of the George Bush administration comes to a close, there is a chance for Mr. Bush to do what his predecessor failed to accomplish. More and more high ranking governmental officials are admitting that there is no longer a legitimate reason for keeping Pollard behind bars. Simply put, it is time to right the wrongs of the past and to bring Jonathan Pollard back into memory and obtain his release. Rabbi Pesach Lerner has urgently called on all concerned citizens to phone the White House at (202) 456-1414 between 11:00 A.M. and 2:00 P.M., EST, and make it known that they support the pardoning of Jonathan Pollard. That's all you need to say to the White House operator. The ironic and sad dimension of Pollard is that if he had been a dangerous life-threatening terrorist, he most likely would have been released from prison long ago. Its time that our country reclaims its values, stops protecting criminals, and punishes those who really put America's future at stake. Let us not forget Jonathan Pollard again. Perhaps with enough social outcries, our protest calling for justice will be rewarded. Hopefully, soon, Jonathan Pollard will rejoin our society and justice would regain a humane level. We need a Frank Lloyd Wright style visionary who will have the courage and ability to take another point of view. Call the White House and spread the word to all your contacts to do the same and perhaps together, we can start "seeing" another point of view. Daryl Temkin, Ph.D. is the director of the Israel Education Institute which is devoted to teaching history and contemporary issues of Israel to Jews and Non-Jews. Contact him at DarylTemkin@Israel-Institute.com |
|
15 YEAR OLD GIRL ATTACKED BY ARAB WOMAN
Posted by Hebron Jewish Community, February 23, 2007. |
|
A 15 year old Hebron girl was attacked this morning by an Arab woman, who hit her and threw her glasses to the ground. A Canadian 'anarchist' named Jacob Kornblum also attacked the girl and assisted the Arab attacker to escape. Following issuance of a complaint tonight, the two attackers were arrested by Hebron police for interrogation. Hebron's leadership demands that the attacking foreigner from Canada, together with other anarchists in Hebron, be immediately deported from Israel. Their provocative activities and incitement against Hebron's Jewish community cause tremendous tension, are dangerous, and could easily lead to bloodshed. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com |
|
ENGAGING IN DISENGAGEMENT -- FIVE HORRIBLE DAYS IN GAZA
Posted by Bryna Berch, February 23, 2007. |
|
This was written by Amy Klein, Religion Editor at Jewish Journal
(http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/preview.php?id=17253) |
|
One of the first news stories I covered in Jerusalem 10 years ago was the excavation of holy artifacts by the city. Ultra-Orthodox Jews were protesting the excavations, because they said they were disturbing ancient Jewish graves upon which the entire city was built. It was a common problem and even an old news story in Israel, but it was the first time I witnessed it. Pairs of police officers picked up Chasidim lying down in front of the bulldozers, carrying each bearded, black-coated man by the shoulders and feet to a waiting van. As the men were carted past me -- struggling, kicking, shouting, even calling me names -- tears came to my eyes. I tried to mask them, furiously writing notes. "Is this your first time here?" the head of the Israel Antiquities Authority said, more as a statement than a question. He offered me a tissue. "It's hard to watch," he said. It was true. The sight of men in uniform dragging religious Jews away provokes a visceral reaction in any Jew: nausea, cramps, tears. It evokes the images of the Holocaust, no matter how dissimilar the situation may be. Perhaps that's why it's so heart-wrenching to watch the handful of new documentaries covering "the disengagement," as the unilateral evacuation of 8,500 Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip was called, when men and women in uniform marched in to confront, corral and drag away the (mostly religious) settlers. No matter that the uniformed people were Jews, and they weren't taking the settlers to their death but busing them to within Israeli territory. Still the shadows of the Holocaust haunt. Especially from the perspective of the settlers, who primarily believe their mission -- to settle the Land of Israel and serve as a buffer zone to protect the rest of Israel from destruction -- is a direct response to the horrors of the Holocaust. That is why they are not willing to leave -- or be forced from their homes, and that is why, for many, it is worse that the people in uniform are Jews. "If you're a Jew, you can't do this!" one of the settlers screams at the police in "Storm of Emotions," one of the two new disengagement documentaries showing at the 22nd Israel Film Festival. "You look like Nazis!" a woman shouts. "You obey orders fanatically. You think we're fanatics. You're order fanatics," another says, again evoking the famous German soldier's defense of, "We were just following orders." But following government orders is what the police and soldiers are doing in Gush Katif, the bloc of 21 Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. Some police don't believe in the evacuation, some don't want to be the ones to evacuate the settlers. Even for those who believe it is the right thing to do -- because they are tired of risking their lives for such a small percentage of the population, or because they think it will bring about peace, or because they don't want Gaza to be part of Israel -- the actual evacuation is a horrible experience. "Storm of Emotions" is a small picture -- insider, even -- portraying the evacuation from the perspective of the police, who helped the Israel Defense Forces implement the disengagement. The film zeroes in on a few officers (the most interesting is a kippah-wearing Modern Orthodox officer who believes he can ameliorate the situation of his co-religionists but suffers the most slings and arrows of the settlers) and attempts to portray their plight: how they tried to be as gentle as possible, tried to prevent eruptions of violence and tried to evacuate Gush Katif peaceably. The vérité, television-like "Storm," which was short-listed in the Oscar's documentary feature category, offers a narrow window on the disengagement that sometimes lacks wider context. "Withdrawal From Gaza," however, presents a fuller picture with broader historical overview. "Withdrawal," also showing at the Israel Film Festival and starting March 23 at the Laemmle Town Center 5 in Encino, is a more polished, feature-like documentary that tells the poignant stories of the settlers -- a doctor, zookeeper, terror victim's widow, American amputee -- shows the stunning and idyllic beauty of Gush Katif beachfront, in addition to providing numbers and facts. Fact: It was pre-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who decided to settle Gaza in 1967, but as prime minister ordered its evacuation. Fact: Many of the residents of Gush Katif came from Yamit, the seaport settlement in the southern Gaza Strip that was evacuated in 1982, when Israel gave the Sinai back to Egypt. Fact: By 2005 8,500 settlers lived in Gush Katif, and half left before the evacuation, but another 4,000 came down to support settlers, enacting civil disobedience that led to what might be called the five worst days in Israel's history. In the hindsight of 18 months, it may seem that the disengagement was always a fait accompli from the moment it was decreed, but what these new disengagement documentaries show is that history is not so simple. (In addition to "Storm" and "Withdrawal," two others Gaza docs received international attention: "Five Days" was boycotted at Edinburgh's festival last summer, because of the war in Lebanon, and "Unsettled," a slick, MTV-like documentary following 20-somethings on both sides, won this year's jury prize at Sundance.) The documentaries remind us -- even such a short while later -- that despite the results, in the beginning nothing was cut and dried. For one thing, the settlers did not believe for a moment they would ever have to leave. "It's my hope that we'll stay here," the religious zookeeper says in "Withdrawal." "We're still waiting for a last-minute miracle." All the films have the requisite shots of the man in the tallit and tefillin praying on the hills; the women in kerchiefs with their eyes closed, swaying; the groups of teens dancing and singing. It's an awesome -- some might say foolish -- collective faith that the edict would never come to pass. The settlers believed they could prevent evacuation. Even without a miracle from God -- one which they prayed for vehemently -- they believed in their physical powers: They held sit-ins at synagogues, stood behind barbed-wire on rooftops and linked hands to become human chains in the streets. Together with West Bank settlers clad in orange (color for opposing disengagement), many stood their ground until the end, refusing to walk on the bus, forcing soldiers to drag them there. "Two weeks from now, I will either be dead or in jail or in hospital, because I'm not just going to walk out of my house and say goodbye," one American said in "Withdrawal." In July 2005, nobody knew how violent the evacuation would be. Were the settlers armed? How would the army and police remove them? What would happen if they wouldn't go? Would an evacuation be possible? But in 2007, knowing the ending -- that the settlements were evacuated without much injury or harm -- there is another more pressing question: What has the withdrawal from Gaza wrought? That's one question the films cannot answer, given that they were made so close to the actual event. Some films end with epigrams telling where the evacuees live, but none can tell us what the long-term effects will be on them -- or their evacuators. How will their lives be affected? Although disengagement only lasted five days, one thing that all the films make clear is that the disengagement was indeed a "Storm of Emotions" for settlers, as well as soldiers. The disengagement ruptured Israeli society, unearthing the long-simmering rift between secular and religious, settler and peacenik, as never before in its history. Whether Israel -- and Israelis -- will recover from this remains the real question for five -- or 10-year anniversary documentaries. Will the Gaza disengagement be a footnote in Israel's tumultuous history, just one of many battles, or will it be, as one of the settlers cries out to the evacuators: "It's a crime that will haunt you the rest of your lives." |
|
ANTI-SEMITISM EQUALS RELIGIOUS TERRORISM
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 23, 2007. |
|
At present, terrorists are either assassinated, captured and imprisoned or killed in the act of trying to kill others. The Muslim Terrorists' anti-Semitic hatred of Jews should be defined as anti-Semitic religious Terrorism -- but, it is more than that. It is a state of mind that permits and recommends deadly force. When we go back in history, we find that Church-taught Jew-hatred was an acceptable, even honorable practice of predatory hunting. In the Muslim world since Mohammed initiated Islam in the 7th century, Jews (and Christians) were viewed as "Dhimmis" (second-class people) with few rights while living among Muslims. The Christians considered killing of Jews a "noble" sacrifice to a Jew they call the son of G-d and their Lord. Anti-Semitism, whether practiced by some Christians, Muslims or even by aberrant Jews is nothing less than religious Terrorism and a license to murder Jews. Therefore, if we kill Terrorists who are driven by religion to murder us or try to murder us, why would we desist in killing anti-Semites who either provoke the killing of Jews or who themselves have their hands on the knife, sword, rope or gun that draws Jewish blood? Why are anti-Semites not made responsible for killing Jews both before and after the deed? Were not Jews like the "Judenrat", also deserving assassination in their time -- any less than the Gestapo who shot or gassed the Jews? Anti-Semitism is unlike any other prejudice, given its history of causing the murder of Jews in unlimited numbers for centuries. Why should Christian village priests in their sermons or Muslim village mullahs, calling out from the muezzin, who provoke the local peasantry to rape, pillage and murder Jews, be spared when the ideas in their religions urge others to kill Jews? As I said before, does it make any real difference between the one who provokes or the actual wielder of the knife or gun or gas? Worse yet, why do we behave so passively, like a deer caught in the car headlights who stands frozen, immobile, letting them murder us with impunity? On March 22, 2004, the crippled, wheelchair-bound master organizer of Terror, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, founder and head of Hamas, who was dedicated to the murder of Jews and the destruction of the State of Israel, was finally killed in a targeted assassination -- far too late for his victims. Israel killed Yassin after enduring more than three years of continuous Hamas Terrorism. Being wheelchair bound did not minimize his crimes. (1) When Yassin gave orders to kill Jews, was he not one and the same as the Muslim Arab Terrorists who carried out his orders. He was assassinated and rightfully so. Jewish anti-Semites should not be exempt from retribution when they either assist our mortal enemies in justifying their hatred by provoking them to kill Jews because the Jewish anti-Semite sets the mind of the Terrorists that it is acceptable to kill Jews. An example of Jews encouraging the enemy is when Jewish Left Liberal women (called: "Machsom" or Women in Black) go to the Army checkpoints. Israeli soldiers are screening Arab Muslim cars and trucks, searching for explosives or other weapons -- all intended to massacre Jews. These Women-in-Black scream at the soldiers who are risking their lives to keep bombs out of Israel's cities. These women give encouragement to the enemy and, thereby, assist in the murder of their fellow Jews. Americans are presently hunting Terrorists in many parts of the world. Sometimes they kill them with a sniper shot; sometimes with a remote controlled UAV, firing a Hell-fire missile; sometimes in a full scale battle. Why do they kill Terrorists? Simply because Terrorists have killed Americans and others as in 9/11? The blowing up of 3 American Consulates in Africa and Lebanon as well as the Marine Barracks in Lebanon in 1983? The USS Cole? Road-side bombs, suicide bombers, sniper drive-by shootings, suicide bombers? And other Terror attacks in London 7/7, Madrid 3/11, Breslan 9/1, in Bombay 7/11, in Thailand 1/04-2/18 & 19/07? In other words the killing or the provoking of the killing of Americans and others is sufficient reason to hunt and kill our adversaries. Why are Jews not accorded the same privilege in protecting their families in the Land of our forefathers? If Americans find sufficient reason to conduct summary executions, as surgically targeted assassinations for known Terrorists and their leaders, why should Jews hesitate to similarly execute their pursuers? Anti-Americanism (when accompanied by deadly force) is equal to anti-Semitism (when accompanied by the will to murder). Granted the murder of Jews has gone on far longer than the nation of America even existed. But now, Islam has America (and all the Free West) in its sights. The killing of Americans will ramp up, accumulating its own history of being a target with no other reason than America and Americans are nonbelievers in Islam. Killing such deadly adversaries seems entirely reasonable and justified to the Terrorists motivated by their religion. We Jews have been hounded, murdered, raped, disposed of what we owned for a few thousand years. In ancient times, we fought our adversaries on the fields of battle until we were dispersed by the Roman legions and became a fractional minority who could no longer fight with our diminished numbers. As a minority, we became unfair game for Jew-haters in distant lands. Now time has passed and we Jews have returned to our ancient homeland. Regrettably, our enemies still wish to drink our blood -- as they often say. Now we can assassinate their leaders and kill their Terrorists. But, anti-Semite Jew-hatred still prevails. The European nations who have killed us for centuries now wish to make common cause with the Muslims who also wish to see us dead and gone. We even have a sizeable collection of Jewish anti-Semites who share their goals, that of eliminating the only Jewish nation on this planet. If Americans can eliminate their enemies, why can't the Jews adopt this Biblical credo of an eye for an eye, etc.? Let us ponder this solution for whatever race, religion, etc. that pursue us. If we are to be hunted like animals, then let us be as lions, bears, sharks and turn our skills against our adversaries. We tried making peace and living with them, but they refused to accept peace. We have no choice left. "Ein Breira!" Anti-Semitism is not merely a temporary attack such as when the Turks committed Genocide on their Armenian population. After they butchered over a million Armenians, they stopped. Not so, the enemies of the Jews. No matter how long they hunt and kill us, no matter how great the numbers they kill, they continue the hunt. They gather in hate-filled organizations, usually with a title and a theme telling themselves and others that they do not hate the Jews per se but, just some of the things we do. Some of the most scurrilous hate-filled institutions are manned by anti-Semitic Jews. Their hatred is even more bizarre and palpable than that of Gentile nations, given that they too are hunted in the end. The Jewish anti-Semites know this but, a pathological anti-Jewish worm in their minds drives them on, even if they themselves might die because they encouraged the Religious Terrorists. Such anti-Semitism may be likened to something like the Ebola Virus that makes the body's organs liquify and the patient's immune system simply fails. Modern medicine tries to fortify the immune system and kill off the virus but nothing stops anti-Semitism other than killing the virus -- permanently and world-wide. In closing, it is worthwhile to review the ancient laws of Torah as given in Parasha Mishpatim in Chapter 21 of Shmot (Exodus) in the Tanach (Bible): The Parasha (Torah portion of the week) Mishpatim speaks of penalties within the laws of Torah when men are held responsible for various injuries unto deaths they have caused, as follows. For example, "One who strikes a man who dies shall surely be put to death. If a man shall act intentionally against his fellow to kill him with guile, from My Alter shall you take him to die." (Vs. 12-14) The Parasha goes on to speak that "when there is a fatality, you shall award a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a bruise for a bruise." (Vs. 23-25) Clearly this is a well thought-out judgement for men to live by, assuming they live by any law whatsoever. Men be they -- Gentile or Jewish -- certainly need the above laws to control their murderous passions. Perhaps we have waited far too long to apply that Law. What do you do when there is not a real Jew in the Israeli Government? What do you do when the entire Israeli Government meets the criteria of anti-Semites? For American who are just getting a taste of Religious Terrorism which Jews have had to experience for thousands of years, perhaps you will begin to understand why Religious Terrorists deserve summary execution!: REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, 10/23/83 REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of Khobar Towers, U.S. Barracks Saudi Arabia, 6/25/88 REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of PanAm Flight 103, 12/21/88 REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 2/26/93 REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of U.S. Embassies-Nairobi & Dar es Salaam, Africa, 8/10/98 REMEMBER the MUSLIM attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon & (probably) the White House or Congress on 9/11/01 which killed 3,000 people. REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombings in Madrid 3/11/04 REMEMBER the MUSLIM murders of at least 368, ½ children in Beslan, Russia 9/1/04 REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombings on 4 commuter trains & buses in London 7/7/06 (7/7 is a multiple of 11) killing 52, injuring 700 commuters REMEMBER the MUSLIM nearly simultaneous bombings of 7 commuter trains and stations on 7/11/06 in Mumbai (Bombay) India -- killing at least 180, wounding as many as 450. REMEMBER the MUSLIM 54 bomb and arson attacks in Thailand from January 2004 to 2/18 &19/07 killing more than 2000. ` REMEMBER all the AMERICANS and others whose lives were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks. This is only a fraction of what the War of Civilizations by Muslims against all non-believers has produced so far and it is ALL Religious Terrorism. Only when we grasp that salient fact, will we in the Free West be able to conquer, control or combat it so we can all live in real peace. ### 1. "The Targeted Killing of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin" by Jonathan L. Snow Foundation for Defending Democracy March 26, 2004 2. "Chumash" (Five Books of Moses in Tanach) Stone Edition "Shmot" (Exodus) Chapter 21: vs12-14 & vs. 23-25 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.interaccess.com |
|
JIHAD IN HOUSTON
Posted by Michael Travis, February 23, 2007. |
| This was written by William P. Welty and it appeared today in Arutz-7 |
|
[How is it that only the Israelis know that World War III started on September 11, 2001?] Sooner or later it was bound to happen ? Jihad would come to the United States. (Not that it hasn't been here since the Oklahoma City bombing, mind you.) And by this statement, I don't mean attacks on America's infrastructure, such as the assault on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the apparent attempted assault on the White House that occurred on 11 September 2001. No. I'm thinking of something much more simple than elaborate plans to fly commercial aircraft into buildings. I'm thinking of something as simple as the murder of a Jew by a Muslim. In Houston, Texas, no less. The Muslim man has confessed to the crime, which his own roommate witnessed as a near decapitation of the Jewish victim. Amazingly, the press is reporting that Houston police say they don't have a clue as to why he did it. Honest, I'm not making this up... The story made the January 12 edition of the Houston Chronicle and www.WorldNetDaily.com on January 13. According to the details of the reports, killer Mohammed Ali Alayed, a Saudi Arabian national, was in the US on a student visa when he slashed the throat of Ariel Sellouk, the son of Moroccan Jewish immigrants to the United States and a personal friend. Alayed "went to a local mosque after the killing." I called the Houston Chronicle's Andrew Tilghman, who is assigned to the paper's Court House Bureau, to discuss the matter. Mr. Tilghman wrote the Chronicle story on the slaying. We discussed the puzzling statement that appears in paragraph three of the World Net Daily story, concerning the Houston Police Department's alleged inability to attribute religious motives to the slaying, despite the "religious reawakening" of Alayed to a "conservative, Islamic lifestyle". Does one light a candle to see the sun? It turns out, according to my interview with Tilghman, that the prosecutors chose not to pursue hate crime indictments because by doing so, the prosecutors risked complicating the case. "Does it really matter why Alayed murdered Mr. Sellouk?" mused Mr. Tilghman during our conversation. Good point, Andrew. I concluded my conversation with Mr. Tilghman by suggesting to him that I'd attempt to send him a list of other Islam-motivated murders that have taken place within the borders of the United States of America since the Oklahoma City bombing. I didn't bother to mention that I won't count the 2,800 Islam-motivated murders that took place in the United States on 11 September 2001. After all, as President Dubya points out, Islam is a religion of peace. Concluding Thoughts We are Dar al-Harb[*] ? and proud of it. [*] Dar al-Harb: The Domain at War: Territory under the hegemony of unbelievers, which is on terms of active or potential belligerency with the Domain of Islam... ( Glossary of Islamic Terms by Muhammad Ishaq Zahid; Copyright © 1998-1999 by The Sabr Foundation.) Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
WORLD-WIDE BLITZ AGAINST ISRAEL
Posted by Nurit Greenger, February 23, 2007. |
|
The increasing blame on Israel for problems in the PA, the mounting pressure from Russia and now British Prime Minister Tony Blair willingness to deal with Hamas, one can-should understand how demented and dangerous the world is... Now Jews are defined as a "race," and Israeli army is guilty of terror worse than that of Arab terrorists... many of the United Nations' members are simply pathetically useless and the organization itself is dangerous to the world! With stopping the flow of funds, the USA [and somewhat Israel] has the tools to stop much of the cyclical madness, which unfortunately she chooses not to do! This article was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu; it appeared in Arutz-Sheva and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/121662#replies |
|
(IsraelNN.com) The United Nations, Russia, Arab states and the media have escalated an international broadside against Israel while touting the Hamas-Fatah coalition. A report by the U.N. Human Rights Council has provided the background for the Arab position, backed by Russia, that the Western-led economic boycott of Hamas must be lifted in order to fight poverty in the Gaza area. The council report was commissioned to John Dugard, who formerly campaigned against South Africa apartheid and who concluded that the racist policy is similar to that of Israel. He defined Jews as a "race" and charged that the Israeli army is guilty of terror worse than that of Arab terrorists. Dugard's draft is to be published next month in a full report by the U.N. Dugard wrote that "Israel's laws and practices in the [Palestinian Authority (PA)] certainly resemble aspects of apartheid. Can it seriously be denied that the purpose of such action is to establish and maintain domination by one racial group, Jews, over another racial group, Palestinians, and systematically oppress them?" The report accuses Israel of terror by flying jets that set off sonic booms, forcing "residents to live in fear of settler terror." Dugard also alleges that Israel still is "occupying" the Gaza region despite the expulsion of Jewish residents from their communities and the handover of the land to the PA. "Gaza became a sealed off, imprisoned and occupied territory," he wrote. He cited Arabs for committing war crimes by attacking Israel with Kassam rockets, but added that the IDF has "committed such crimes on a much greater scale." U.N. Report Ignores Economic Aid to PA Media throughout the world have headlined the report's assertion that Israeli "restrictions on trade and movement" have created conditions where "the poorest families are now living a meager existence totally reliant on assistance, with no electricity or heating and eating food prepared with water from bad sources." The report's timing "is especially sensitive, coming to light after both Israel and the U.S. indicated that they will maintain the boycott after the planned Fatah-Hamas coalition cabinet takes office unless it clearly commits itself to recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and adherence to previous agreements with Israel," noted the London Independent. The report ignores aid that has been redirected through the offices of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in order to bypass Hamas, leaving the PA as one of the world's largest recipients of foreign economic aid. The International Monetary Fund (International Monetary Fund (IMF) has reported that the PA received $709 million in aid in 2006, double the amount received in 2005. The aid figures do not include hundreds of millions of dollars invested by various U.N. agencies in Gaza. In addition, Hamas leaders have smuggled more than $60 million into Gaza. Another report by a U.N. agency and published by Reuters News Agency blames Israel's attack on Gaza's "only power station" for leaving the "Occupied Palestinian Territories" without electricity. However, Dugard does not mention that Israel's Ashkelon power plant also provides electricity to many PA residents. Britain To Deal with 'Moderate' Hamas Elements The increasing blame on Israel for problems in the PA, along with the mounting pressure from Russia have contributed to a change in the policy of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has indicated he is prepared to deal with Hamas. "It is far easier to deal with the situation in Palestine if there is a national unity government," he said. "I hope we can make progress, including even with the more sensible elements of Hamas." The United States has been the staunchest opponent of lifting the sanctions against Hamas, but American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has conceded that Abbas out-maneuvered Israel by collaborating with Hamas to form a unity government, which she stated has made the situation "more complicated." The result was a meeting this week between her, Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, that analysts agreed was an exercise in rhetoric, although the conversation included angry shouts between the Israeli and PA leaders. Mashaal To Visit Moscow The Quartet so far has insisted Hamas meet international demands, but the terrorist organization continues to drum up international support, starting with Russia, one of the members of the Quartet. Syrian-based Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal is scheduled to visit Moscow from Sunday to Tuesday, as Moscow continues to ignore Israeli pleas that international powers not conduct talks with leaders of the Hamas organization. Abbas, the leader of the Fatah movement, has been courting European nations, claiming that the unity government is committed to meeting international conditions even though Hamas explicitly refuses to do so. Fatah has paid lip-service to the conditions, but terrorist attacks by Fatah terrorists continue almost daily. Abbas also has conditioned his "recognition of Israel' on demands, which every recent Israeli government has categorically stated are unreasonable. Abbas has said a Jewish state could be recognized only after Jerusalem becomes the capital of a new Arab country and millions of Arabs in foreign countries are allowed to live in Israel. Abbas's problem is that "Hamas is considered to be more powerful than Fatah," according to Turi Munthe, associate fellow at the Royal United Service Institute in London. Muslim States Pressuring Quartet A group of 57 Muslim countries meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia has agreed to step up pressure and try to force the Quartet to lift the economic sanctions against Hamas. The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) also continues to accuse Israel of endangering the Al Aksa mosque by conducting archaeological operations near the Temple Mount. "In light of the positive developments in Palestine and formation of the national unity government, the international embargo against Palestinians has no justification," said Ekmel Al Deen Ihsanoglu, Secretary-General of the OIC. He called on the Arab countries, including oil-rich kingdoms, to provide financial and moral support to Jerusalem Arabs and the Palestinian Authority (PA). Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
AN UPSIDEDOWN WORLD
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 23, 2007. |
|
This article is called
"An Upside-Down World" and it was written
by Nick Cohen. It appeared
February 23, 2007 in
Wall Street Journal
|
|
LONDON -- The other day Ken Livingstone, the mayor of my hometown of London, organized a conference on Islam and the West. It was a carefully rigged affair in which handpicked speaker after handpicked speaker stood up and announced that the democracies were to blame for the tidal wave of murder sweeping the world. To provide a spurious air of balance, the organizers invited a few people who dissented from the line of the Muslim Brotherhood and its British allies. Agn.s Poirier, a French feminist, was one of them, but she pulled out because although there were no special facilities for Christians, Hindus and Jews, Mr. Livingstone had provided separate prayer rooms for Muslim men and Muslim women. She wanted to know: Does Ken Livingstone's idea of multiculturalism acknowledge and condone segregation? It clearly does, but what made this vignette of ethnic politics in a European city worth noting is that commentators for the BBC and nearly every newspaper here describe Mr. Livingstone as one of the most left-wing politicians in British public life. Hardly any of them notices the weirdness of an apparent socialist pandering to a reactionary strain of Islam, pushing its arguments and accepting its dictates. Mr. Livingstone's not alone. After suicide bombers massacred Londoners on July 7, 2005, leftish rather than conservative papers held British foreign policy responsible for the slaughters on the transport network. ("Blair's Bombs," ran the headline in my own leftish New Statesman.) In any university, you are more likely to hear campaigns for the rights of Muslim women derided by postmodernists than by crusty conservative dons. Our Stop the War coalition is an alliance of the white far left and the Islamist far right, and George Galloway, its leader, and the first allegedly "far left" MP to be elected to the British parliament in 50 years, is an admirer of Saddam Hussein and Hezbollah. I could go on with specific examples, but the crucial point is the pervasive European attitude to the Iraq catastrophe. As al Qaeda, the Baathists and Shiite Islamists slaughter thousands, there is virtually no sense that their successes are our defeats. Iraqi socialists and trade unionists I know are close to despair. They turn for support to Europe, the home of liberalism, feminism and socialism, and find that rich democrats, liberals and feminists won't help them or even acknowledge their existence. There were plenty of leftish people in the 20th century who excused communism, but they could at least say that communism was a left-wing idea. Now overwhelmingly and everywhere you find people who scream their heads off about the smallest sexist or racist remark, yet refuse to confront ultra-reactionary movements that explicitly reject every principle they profess to hold. Why is the world upside down? In part, it is a measure of President Bush's failure that anti-Americanism has swept out of the intelligentsia and become mainstream in Britain. A country that was once the most pro-American in Western Europe now derides Tony Blair for sticking with the Atlantic alliance. But if Iraq has pummeled Mr. Blair's reputation, it has also shone a very harsh light on the British and European left. No one noticed it when the Berlin Wall came down, but the death of socialism gave people who called themselves "left wing" a paradoxical advantage. They no longer had a practical program they needed to defend and could go along with ultra-right movements that would once have been taboo. In moments of crisis, otherwise sane liberals will turn to these movements and be reassured by the professed leftism of the protest organizers that they are not making a nonsense of their beliefs. If, that is, they have strong beliefs to abandon. In Europe and North America extreme versions of multiculturalism and identity politics have left a poisonous legacy. Far too many liberal-minded people think that is somehow culturally imperialist to criticize reactionary movements and ideas -- as long as they aren't European or American reactionary movements. This delusion is everywhere. Until very recently our Labour government was allowing its dealings with Britain's Muslim minority to be controlled by an unelected group, the Muslim Council of Britain, which stood for everything social democrats were against. In their desperate attempts to ingratiate themselves, ministers gave its leader a knighthood -- even though he had said that "death was too good" for Salman Rushdie, who happens to be a British citizen as well as a great novelist. Beyond the contortions and betrayals of liberal and leftish thinking lies a simple emotion that I don't believe Americans take account of: an insidious fear that has produced the ideal conditions for appeasement. Radical Islam does worry Europeans but we are trying to prevent an explosion by going along with Islamist victimhood. We blame ourselves for the Islamist rage, in the hope that our admission of guilt will pacify our enemies. We are scared, but not scared enough to take a stand. I hope conservative American readers come to Britain. But if you do, expect to find an upside-down world. People who call themselves liberals or leftists will argue with you, and when they have finished you may experience the strange realization that they have become far more reactionary than you have ever been. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments -- both seriously and satirically -- on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com or write him by email at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
OPERATION PRAYER SHIELD -- TAKE IT ANOTHER STEP
Posted by Matthew S. Finberg, February 22, 2007. |
|
Americans For A Safe Israel is proposing a very nice collective action to pray for the rectification of Medinat Yisrael in its approach to Yesha (see below). I commute back and forth between Boulder, Colorado where my law offices are and Givat HaYovel (where I really live), #1 on the Shalom Achshav (Peace Now) hit parade for destruction. Even though we are within the legal boundaries of Eli and directly next to Shilo and the site of the Mishkan (Tabernacle), the Supreme Court will be hearing the eviction case March 7. We read in the Torah a few weeks ago that Moshe prayed with all his strength for Divine intervention at bank of the Sea of Reeds when the Egyptians were in hot pursuit of Am Yisrael. To paraphrase HaShem, he said Moshe, what are you doing? There is a time for prayer and a time for action; this is a time for action. Moshe looked up and saw Nachshon walking into the sea, with complete bitachon, until the water reached his nostrils. HaShem then split the Sea providing safe passage to our People. With all due respect and thanks to AFSI for its current program and consistent support for the Land and People of Yesha, THIS IS A TIME FOR ACTION! Come Home! Prayer is always good, but we need you. If you can make Aliyah, do so now and settle in the threatened communities (many of which are listed below in the AFSI announcement). If you cannot make Aliyah now, rent a house, townhouse, or caravan (they are very inexpensive by American standards) and come and stay as often as possible for as long as possible. I will help you do this if you would like my assistance. BECOME A FACT ON THE GROUND! BE NACHSHON! Your action may be the tipping point which will save Eretz Yisrael from the despicable plans of those in power who seek to dismantle Her. With love of Israel,
Contact Matthew Finberg by email at matt@finberglaw.com |
|
A MITZVAH RABBA: The Plight of Jonathan Pollard
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, February 22, 2007. |
|
This was written by Rabbi Aryeh Zev Ginzberg and appeared February 2007 in The Jewish Observer Magazine. Rabbi Ginzberg, founding rav of Ohr Moshe Torah Institute in Hillcrest, NY, is currently rav of the Chofetz Chaim Torah Center of Cedarhurst (Long Island), New York. He is a frequent contributor to the Jewish Observer. [J4JP Note Re Hebrew Terminology: The Jewish Observer Magazine, where this article originally appeared, is geared towards an audience which is largely familiar with the Hebrew terminology that appears scattered throughout. To assist readers unfamiliar with the terminology, J4JP has added a Lexicon below.] |
|
It is human nature to pursue the big score. The three million dollar lotto jackpot doesn't attract much attention. By contrast, the powerball 100 million dollar jackpot finds people standing on long lines for a chance (slim as it may be) for the big score. Mitzvos (lehavdil elef havdalos) are no different. The seemingly small mitzvos are performed without passion or excitement. The "big mitzvos," the ones that one may think offer the greatest reward, should really draw attention. The problem is, however, that the Mishna in Pirkei Avos teaches that we have to treat all mitzvos alike, for we do not know which are considered "big" or "small" mitzvos. Yet there is one mitzvah that transcends this Mishna, one that Chazal refer to as a " mitzvah rabba," and that is the mitzvah of pidyon shevuyim -- gaining release for captives. The Gemara relates how Ifra Hurmiz, who was the mother of the king, once threw a pouch filled with gold coins before Rav Yoseif and told him, "Use it for a mitzvah rabba." Rav Yoseif pondered what could be characterized as a mitzvah rabba, and concluded that pidyon shevuyim is just such a mitzvah (Bava Basra 8a)... The Rambam (Hilchos Ma'tenas Aniyim 8:10) explains that there is no greater mitzvah than redeeming captives, and that this duty takes priority over even feeding or clothing the poor. Chazal explain that being held captive is considered worse than hunger and death, because it encompasses everything... In fact, Ginas Veradim (Yoreh Dei'a 3:10) explains that while there is much discussion in the poskim whether pidyon shevuyim is part of the mitzvah of tzeddaka or is in a category all by itself, most opinions view it as part of tzeddaka. Our sefarim are replete with stories about our gedolim and the great efforts they exerted to perform this mitzvah. (See Sefer Yalkut Lekach Tov, Parashas Shelach, page 127, which relates how Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik zt" l of Brisk traveled on Yom Kippur in an attempt to fulfill the mitzvah, even though it was very unlikely that he would succeed in his efforts.) Chizuk: To Give and to Gain I've long contemplated visiting Jonathan Pollard. I had come across a press release reporting that Pollard, very ill, was about to "celebrate" his twenty-second year in jail. I reached out to Rabbi Pesach Lerner, Executive Vice President of the National Council of Young Israel, who has distinguished himself by supporting Jonathan Pollard in a myriad of ways for the last decade or more, and asked him to arrange for me a visit with Pollard... The day arrived. While not usually at a loss for words, I wondered: how does one offer verbal chizuk to someone who has endured, is enduring, and is destined to continue to endure the shiva medurei Geihinnom (seven levels of Geihinnom) each and every day? His first seven years were spent in the infamous maximum security facility, the USP Marion, including four years in solitary confinement, several levels below ground. [J4JP: Jonathan spent most of the first 7 years in solitary confinement, not 4 years!] Then, in 1993, he was transferred to the Butner Federal Correctional Facility near Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, where he remains today. I agonized for nothing. I traveled to Butner to give chizuk and instead received chizuk. Jonathan Pollard is an amazing individual with an insatiable appetite for life. He is strong and upbeat despite his predicament, and has an unimaginable level of bitachon. To live and walk around in a place that is home to some of "the worst violent criminals in the United States" with a yarmulka on his head and tzitzis on his body is not only unbelievable, it is heroic. His pride in being a Jew and his love for Eretz Yisroel are simply inspiring. He shared with me his close personal relationship with the late, unforgettable Torah leader, Rabbi Moshe Sherer z"l, who, for a period, spoke to him on the telephone very often. When Jonathan called, Rabbi Sherer always took the telephone. Rabbi Sherer once said to him, "Jonathan, I want you to promise me three things. You will keep Shabbos, eat only kosher, and never grow to hate Hakadosh Baruch Hu, despite whatever happens to you." I asked Jonathan Pollard, "If Rabbi Sherer were to walk into this room right now, what would you say to him?" He paused for a moment, then smiled and said, "I would say, 'Rabbi Sherer, I kept my promise to you on all three.'" I asked him to describe his daily routine and what life is like in a place surrounded by barbed wire, electronic iron gates and thousands of hardened criminals responsible for every and any type of violent crime imaginable (and unimaginable). He did so with remarkable detail. Most of what he said is too horrific to describe. I will limit myself to the details of his life that he shared with me. His cell door is unlocked at night. Every night, before going to sleep, he places a contraption of sorts on top of the door, so that if someone would enter, the booby trap would fall to the floor, and the noise would awaken him, and he would hopefully avoid having his throat slit in his sleep. It is impossible to imagine what it is like to be on guard for your very life seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day for one week, let alone for an incomprehensible twenty-two years. Jonathan Pollard does not have to imagine it, for he lives with it each and every day of his life. Keeping the Promises I asked him how he manages to fulfill the three promises he made to Rabbi Sherer years ago in this place that the inmates refer to as "hell on earth." He explained each point with clarity and commitment, reflecting great courage. Being a person of superior intellect (as is obvious after just a few minutes of conversation), he was selected to head the administration in the prison factory where many of the inmates work each day. That type of work (the most respectable job in the institution), however, would not allow him to avoid chillul Shabbos and Yom Tov, and would also force him to interact with the fellow inmates on a regular basis. He therefore had himself switched to the degrading job of cleaning latrines and toilets several times a day, each and every day. This difficult, backbreaking job could sink any man's spirits, especially someone of superior intelligence. Yet, to Pollard, it represents a victory, as it reduces the possibility of violating Shabbos, and allows him the solitude to daven (as he does every day), and carry on Jewish living to the best of his ability under those circumstances. His adherence to kashrus (his second promise) has not come without a huge price tag. Subsisting on canned tuna and sardines for so many years has caused his body to have a dangerously high mercury level that has resulted in a severe blood pressure problem, a heart condition, and a host of other maladies that have brought his health to a very precarious state. Not only are there no complaints, but he also views this as another small victory against his detractors. His third promise is the most difficult one. For a man who has suffered so much for more than two decades, and is totally ignored by the country that he attempted to help, to remain steadfast in his emuna and bitachon is truly a heroic feat of epic proportions. He explained how he does so with three different deep and heartfelt thoughts, expressed in different parts of our four-hour conversation. At first he said, "I promised myself at the beginning of this nightmare that I would come out the same way I came in." Then he added, "I love my land, Eretz Yisroel, and I love my wife more than my enemies hate me." Finally, toward the end of our conversation, he made the following bold explanation: "I don't represent myself. I represent all Jews. Our enemies are watching me to see if they can break me. For that alone I must remain strong. I must stay strong in my emuna and bitachon to show the world what Klal Yisroel is all about." Pollard's Motivation What motivated Pollard to do what he did? One can gain an insight from several articles published years ago that reported a conversation that Pollard had with his supervisors in the U.S. Department of Naval Affairs. He asked them why information about the poison gas capabilities of Israel's sworn enemies was being withheld from Israel. He was reportedly told, "Jews are too sensitive about gas." Did the information he conveyed to Israel help them? In 1998, William Northrop, the Middle East Bureau Chief for New Dimensions, wrote that Israeli intelligence experts called him "the ghost of the sealed rooms," for it was largely due to his efforts and sacrifice that they were prepared when Saddam launched El-Abed, the Iraqi missile, at Israel in January of 1991. This author has no intention of discussing the pros or cons of Pollard's actions and whether they were halachically permitted or not. We will leave that to the beis hamidrash. The purpose of this article is to focus on what the Torah community has done (or has not done) for Pollard in the past, what it is currently doing (or not doing), and what we must do in the future. We as a community have neglected him long enough. In 1993, a kol korei (public proclamation) was issued calling for Klal Yisroel to do its utmost for Pollard, and it was signed by no less than thirty gedolim from a broad range of kehillos. Since that kol korei was issued, the major response has been one of silence. Jonathan Pollard constantly questions his visitors regarding the lack of voices from the Torah community. "What happened to the kol korei of a decade ago?" he asks. Response to the Kol Korei It may be of no surprise that secular Jews throughout the world have ignored the Pollard story, both on an individual and an organizational basis. In fact, just six days after he received his life sentence, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations sent a letter dated March 10, 1987 to the United States State Department, promising to never interfere on Pollard's behalf. We have not galvanized and organized ourselves after the issuance of the kol korei in 1993. We should be asking ourselves the question that Jonathan Pollard asks. In my address at Shalosh Seudos at the recent National Convention of Agudath Israel held in Stamford, CT on Thanksgiving weekend, I posed this question to the esteemed assemblage that included rabbinical leaders, lay people, and hundreds of wonderful Jews. All had the same two reactions: We were not aware of this. To the contrary, what can we do? What is it about the Pollard issue that prevents people from getting involved? I decided to find out, and I selected ten rabbinical leaders and, with a sense of respect, asked each of them why they hadn't taken any initiatives on the matter. Let me share briefly a sampling of their thoughts, with some comments. Some felt that every legal option had been pursued, and had failed. With the U.S. Supreme Court confirming the life sentence,[J4JP: the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. It did not confirm the sentence. It ignored it!] it is really a hopeless situation. I offered an insight from the Zohar that says that there was a criticism directed at Avraham Avinu for not continuing to daven for the people of Sodom, even after being told by Hakadosh Baruch Hu that there were not ten righteous people in the city. And even though Avraham understood that according to midas hadin (strict justice), the city was to be destroyed, he should have davened anyway... Even though the legal situation clearly looks hopeless, the Zohar instructs us that we must continue to try. Several others pointed out that efforts were made, and after so many failures, one becomes fatigued. While that is understandable, Jews should never give up. When a person loses his energy, his entire perspective and even his way of life suffers... and sometimes, even his entire destiny. This, too, is to be found in the Torah's description of Bnei Yisroel in their battle with Amaleik. It says "ve'atta ayeif veyageia -- and you were tired and fatigued." This implies that if Bnei Yisroel permit an ayeif state to take hold of them, then and only then can Amaleik overtake them. Being tired or even exhausted from previous efforts on Pollard's behalf should not be permitted to take its toll on us. We must redouble our efforts as he begins his twenty-second year in Geihinnom. And finally, one rav suggested that some people are not aware of Pollard's religious dedication. They judge him by his physical demeanor, such as his long, shoulder-length hair. I shared with him an incident involving the late Satmar Rebbe zt"l The Rebbe felt greatly indebted to the late Agudah leader, Reb Elimelech Tress l"z, for having saved him from the inferno in Europe. When Mr. Tress passed away, the Satmar Rebbe came to the levaya and also paid a shiva call to his family. Jonathan Pollard has given his freedom, career, health, future and very life for Klal Yisroel and Eretz Yisroel. Who among us, with our finely trimmed hair, can make a similar claim? Consulting Gedolei Eretz Yisroel The day after the Agudah Convention, I flew to Eretz Yisroel to present this issue to the senior poseik and Torah authority, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv shlita, and for his position as to our communal responsibility to focus our efforts on freeing Pollard. I was zocheh to spend a considerable amount of time with Rabbi Elyashiv in his home on Wednesday, November 29th, 2006. Rabbi Elyashiv showed great interest in the case, and when he heard that I visited with Pollard just a few weeks ago, he questioned me in great detail about his health, state of mind, and level of commitment to mitzvos. He commented that although Pollard is being held captive because he committed a crime, his long and difficult sentence is not in line with his crime. Clearly, at this stage, he is being penalized because he is a Jew. Add to that the long period of his suffering -- now 22 years. It is clearly a chessed gadol -- a great act of compassion -- to do whatever we can do for him. When I asked if I could quote him that this is indeed a "chessed gadol," he said, "No." He then quickly continued, "What you can say in my name is that it is a 'chessed gadol me'od -- an extremely great act of compassion.'" Rabbi Elyashiv then concluded with a beracha that all who involve themselves in this mitzvah be zocheh to all the berachos of "osei mitzvos." (Rabbi Aryeh Elyashiv shlita, grandson and confidante of the Rav, was present during this conversation.) Should we initiate a massive letter-writing campaign throughout the community, and in all the yeshivos and Bais Yaakovs, to our senators and congressmen? For this, we turn to the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages) of Agudath Israel of America for guidance as to the proper course of action. Since this writing, the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah has met on this matter, and issued the statement that appears on the facing page. [J4JP: See http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/020507.jpg ] One thing is obvious. We must do whatever we can. Not only for the sake of Jonathan Pollard. Klal Yisroel is currently in a very difficult situation. How much do we all need the individual and collective zechus of a mitzvah rabba! [For more information on the Pollard case, one can visit the website www.jonathanpollard.org, or call the National Council of Young Israel office (212) 929-1525 ext. 115, or e-mail Rabbi Pesach Lerner at plerner@youngisrael.org.] To assist Jonathan Pollard and enable him to buy the food items he desperately needs from the prison canteen, and enable him to pay for the phone calls he needs to make, etc, etc. contributions can be sent to Young Israel Charities, 111 John Street, suite 450, New York, NY 10038, att: Pollard. J4JP LEXICON: Here are the approximate meanings in English of some of the Hebrew words in the above article: Mitzvah: commandment; an obligatory divinely ordained imperative Mitzvah Rabba: an exceptionally great mitzvah (lehavdil elef havdalos): to make clear distinction Geihinnom: Hell Pirkei Avos: Ethics of the Fathers Chazal: Our Sages of Blessed Memory Chessed: a mitzvah to perform; an act of lovingkindness Sefarim: religious books; holy books Gedolim: Sages; Great Leaders pidyon shevuyim: the mitzvah of redeeming a captive chizuk: strength and encouragement; moral support emunah: faith in G-d; belief in G-d bitachon: trust in G-d; reliance upon G-d Klal Yisroel: the Jewish People Yarmulke: Kipa Tzitzis: ritual fringes Chillul Shabbat: desecration of the Sabbath Daven: Pray Hakadosh Baruch Hu: The Holy One Blessed Be He Beis Hamidrash: Jewish study hall Kehillos: communities To be zocheh to all the berachos of osei mitzvos: to merit all the blessings that accrue to those who perform mitzvos. Zechus: merit Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard by email at justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
INFILTRATION IN THE IRAQ TRANSLATOR PROGRAM:AN INTELLIGENCE DISASTER!
Posted by Michael Travis, February 22, 2007. |
|
[Editor's Note:
From the Department of Justice
U.S. ARMY TRANSLATOR PLEADS GUILTY TO UNAUTHORIZED POSSESSION OF CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CONCERNING IRAQI INSURGENCY BROOKLYN, NY -- A U.S. Army contract translator pleaded guilty today in federal court in Brooklyn to illegally possessing national defense documents. The defendant, whose true name and identity remains unknown, was indicted on March 30, 2006, following an investigation by the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force ("JTTF"). Previously, in November 2005, the defendant was indicted for using a false identity to procure his United States citizenship and to gain access to classified military materials, and he pleaded guilty to those charges on Dec. 20, 2005. When sentenced by United States District Judge Edward R. Korman, the defendant faces a maximum sentence of 60 years of imprisonment on his two convictions. This article was written by Jerry Gordon, a member of the Board of the American Congress for Truth and its Middle East Affairs analyst. |
|
In the U.S. Eastern District Court in Brooklyn on Valentine's Day a Muslim and naturalized American citizen with five different aliases -- stretching from Mauritania to Morocco to Lebanon -- pled guilty to a charge of illegally possessing classified documents and was sentenced to 13 years, according to a report in the New York Sun. A light sentence for committing espionage and passing classified documents to Iraqi Sunni insurgents during one of his two stints in Iraq. Federal prosecutors allege that he did this when deployed at Al Taqqadam Air Base west of Baghdad in March 2004. The irony is that his military superiors reportedly gave him high marks for his work with an Intelligence unit in Iraq. Little did they know what he really was doing. He was found out when he applied for a security clearance. He even entered the U.S. back in 1989 under false pretenses seeking 'political asylum.' The information he passed on may have caused the deaths and injuries of hundreds of U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqi civilians in the horrific Najaf battle in 2004. In his Brooklyn apartment on his home computer was evidence that he was an al Qaeda sympathizer. One example cited in a New York Daily News report was a photo of the second airliner that hit the Twin Towers on 9/11 with the caption " we fly straight to you." He is a spy who used false documents to become a U.S. citizen, engaged in deep espionage against our government and put our troops in the field at great peril. This person was recruited originally as a translator for the 82 Airborne in Iraq by a multi-billion dollar U.S. company headquartered in Manhattan, L-3 Communications-Titan Group. Titan has received over several billion in procurements for in country translation services in Iraq for INSCOM-the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command since it began contract translation services in 1999. In 2005, Titan merged with giant L-3 Communications, a defense contracting firm specializing in global communications, surveillance and intelligence technology. This followed SEC investigations about bribery charges and Army procurement penalties concerning Titan because of the revelations involving translators in the detainees 'controversy' at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. The combined entity continues to be awarded translation services contracts by the Army. This Brooklyn federal court trial of an al Qaeda translator is just the tip of the iceberg confronting the Pentagon and its contractor Titan concerning Iraqi insurgent infiltration of our military in the field. Thus, wreaking death and destruction on our soldiers and loyal Iraqis. If you go to L-3 Communications-Titan Group website, you'll see postings of translator positions in Iraq clearly labeled as putting yourself in harm's way. The announcement for qualified linguists interested in assignments in Afghanistan and Iraq states that applicants 'must be willing to live and work in harsh conditions co-located with US Army. ' That's an understatement. According to a report in USA today, one hapless Titan linguist, an Iraqi Kurd was captured and beheaded in October 2004 in a grisly video posted on the internet. Of the more than 665 contractor deaths in the War in Iraq, L-3 Communications -- Titan Group Iraqi translators accounted for nearly one third or 216-fatalities. This is 'deadly duty ' blared the headline of a San Diego Union-Tribune report. How did we let this counter intelligence debacle occur with such disastrous results? The short answer was Titan's screening program for local personnel in Iraq enabled infiltration through ineffective and unprofessional interrogations. When information gathered by professional counter Intelligence linguist/analysts was presented to U.S. military commanders pointing this out it was sloughed off. According to informed sources, the late Saddam Hussein and his Intelligence cadres prepared the way. Beginning in 2002 he enlisted Iraqis loyal to him to infiltrate as English speaking operatives into American bastions in the event of a conquest. These operatives were trained to gather intelligence and foment insurgency. When President Bush gave his stirring graduation speech at West Point in June 2002 in the run up to the Iraq War, Saddam Hussein allegedly ordered an accelerated English language training program for 'qualified' members of his intelligence and Ba'athist cadres to become 'lay behind assets' in the event of an American invasion and conquest. The purpose was to infiltrate the unwary American military forces and bore from within by providing intelligence and targeting for insurgents. As one of my sources said; 'pretty wily, but effective strategy.' To find out how this incredulous lapse in counter-intelligence occurred, I spoke with qualified sources who conducted screenings of Iraqi personnel at Camp Falcon in South Baghdad. The sources were former military intelligence specialists and linguists working under separate contractual arrangements. In the aftermath of the conquest of Baghdad in April 2003, local U.S. military intelligence personnel were approached by English speaking Iraqis offering to be of 'assistance.' In May of 2003, the first of a series of contracts with Titan were issued to procure U.S. law enforcement trained personnel to assist military commanders at Camp Falcon in screening local employees. According to these sources, the Titan Local Employment Personnel screenings resulted in a rejection rate of less than 8 per 5,000 persons. That contrasted with a rejection rate of former Military Intelligence specialists and linguists of one-third (33%). Camp Falcon was heavily infiltrated by Hussein's lay behind assets and the information they provided to insurgents resulted in the deaths of several hundred Iraqis and U.S. personnel. The sources indicated that they passed the counter intelligence information up the line from the Camp Falcon to CENTCOMM intelligence, only to receive little or no response. One of the other U.S. contractors, Kellogg Brown Root, found the procedures and information helpful and implemented more effective screening filtering out suspected insurgents and sympathizers. These Sources indicated that after they left Iraq, 'the situation worsened.' The media was pre-occupied by the alleged abuses in the Abu Ghraib Prison and litigation by Iraqi detainees against defense contractors like Titan and CACI. No attention has been paid to how insurgents infiltrated Camp Falcon and the defective screening procedures put in place by Titan. For this our taxpayers paid the convicted al Qaeda sympathizer who pled guilty in the Brooklyn Eastern Federal District Court over $100,000 as a translator. Meanwhile billions went to Titan for ineffective translator services resulting in the deaths of potentially hundreds of Americans and thousands of innocent Iraqis. This is a dimension of the "translator scandal" that needs Congressional scrutiny and a quick fix on the Pentagon's procurement pipeline for required translators in Iraq and elsewhere. Otherwise, as my sources said, "it will get worse.' Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
OPERATION PRAYER SHIELD AND DAYS OF PRAYER AND ACTION
Posted by AFSI, February 22, 2007. | |
|
AFSI announces the launching of 'Operation Prayer Shield' and 'Days of Prayer and Action' to unite Jews and Christians in support of the threatened communities of Judea and Samaria and the preservation of the biblical sites. Please read the material below and join us in this effort by forwarding this information and signing on your church or synagogue.
| |
President Bush's State of the Union Speech was a reaffirmation of the administration's misguided "Road Map" policy for "Peace in the Middle East." The policy requires that Israel relinquish Judea and Samaria -- the so-called West Bank -- to the Arabs for the establishment of a PLO state. It would appear that the U.S. State Department is encouraged to revive the "Road Map" -- knowing that they are dealing with the weakest government ever to lead the Jewish State. Military experts over the last several decades have recognized that Israel would find it nearly impossible to survive if an enemy were to occupy the mountain areas of Judea and Samaria. For the Bible-believing community, the "Road Map" is unacceptable for reasons that transcend strategic interests. The names and places so familiar to students of scripture are the names and places of Judea and Samaria. Those communities include but are not limited to: Hebron Genesis 21:1,2
AFSI is proposing a series of Days of Prayer and Calls to Action in support of the threatened communities in Israel's Biblical Heartland. All of the communities in the Biblical Heartland are threatened with expulsion and destruction as we saw in Gush Katif. 'Land for Peace' (as embodied in the U.S. plan called the 'Road Map') is a real threat. It is our hope that the collective prayers of Israel's friends will be answered and the message of Christian concern these days exhibit will favorably influence decision makers in Washington. If we are successful, the United States can play a vital role in saving the Biblical Heartland from the spreading threat of Islamo-fascism. We look forward to seeing the calls to action spread across the country from church to church, raising a loud voice of support for the Biblical Heartland of Israel.
Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel
advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave.,
Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax:
212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website:
www.afsi.org. Barry Freedman is Executive Director.
|
|
OFFICIAL ANTISEMITISM ERUPTS IN VENEZUELA
Posted by Boris Celser, February 22, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Karl Pfeifer and appeared in Engage Online
It was posted on Engage Online by David Hirsh. A number of images
from Sammy Eppel's presentation are available online at |
|
Armed police raided the Jewish elementary and high school at the Jewish Cultural Centre in Caracas on 29 November 2004 implementing a court order that alleged that materials of a criminal nature, such as electronic equipment, arms and explosive devices were concealed in the building. The swoop started at 6.30 am, when school buses and parents had already started to bringing children to the school, but, after rooting through the building for three hours, the police left having found zilch. The court order, it has since been revealed, had been issued three days earlier but the police waited until Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, arrived in Teheran for a state visit to Iran. That was two years ago, but things have only got worse in the intervening period. Indeed, since election of the left-wing populist Chavez in 1998, Venezuela has witnessed a proliferation of virulently anti-Israel and anti-Zionist propaganda, frequently entwined with nakedly anti-Jewish slogans. The Jewish population in Venezuela numbers only around 25,000 out of a total population of close to twenty-seven million. So, why does the official media of a government that claims to be socialist, devote its energy to poisonous attacks on a very small Jewish community? One possible explanation given is the fact, that one of Chavez's important early advisers and political mentors was a -- now deceased -- Argentine Holocaust denier called Norberto Ceresole, a friend of the French fascist Robert Faurisson and the French ex-Communist Roger Garaudy who converted to Islam and also took up Holocaust denial. Ceresole strongly believed that Latin America must forge alliances with Arab nations to fight the United States and what he called "the Jewish financial mafia." The tendencies towards distortion of the Holocaust might, further, be explained partly against the background of the increasingly close relationship between oil-rich Venezuela and Iran and other Muslim countries. As such, this kind of nonsense has been incorporated into the Chavez government's anti-imperialist rhetoric with Israel is viewed as a key factor in US politics and, thus, an enemy of the 'anti-imperialist revolution'. Antisemitic ranting is not confined to government circles but is spread throughout the mass media. For example, in the Diario VEA newspaper, as recently as 20 September, the hardcore antisemite Basem Tajeldine raved: "The Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis was directed to eliminate the social basis of Judaism that believed in assimilation with the Europeans, the low class majority of Jews ... The ideological affinity and the great ties of collaboration that existed between German Zionism and Nazism is undeniable ... Sionazis is the most appropriate term to catalogue (sic) the organisation of the political capitalist Jewish elite of Israel that is responsible for the present Holocaust of the Arab people". Similarly in El Diario de Caracas earlier this year, Tarek Muci Nasir claims that "The only resource they [the Jews -- Editor] have left to stay united, is to cause wars and self- genocide," Nasir goes on to urge that his readers "pay attention to the behaviour of the Israelite-Zionist associations, unions and federations that conspire in Venezuela to seize our finances, industries, commerce, construction, even infiltrating public positions and politics" and warns that "Possibly it will again be necessary to expel them from the country, like other nations have done before... this is the reason why the Jews are always in a continuous stateless exodus and thus in the year 1948 they invaded Palestine." Commenting on the September visit to Caracas by Iranian's fanatic president Ahmadinejad, Freddy Pressner, head of the Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela, expressed "outrage", citing the Iranian leader's open denial of the Holocaust and his statements about erasing Israel from the face of planet. Chavez's bloc with Iran is making Venezuelan Jews worry about their own security for the first time. Sammy Eppel, a Caracas-based columnist, addressed the deepening antisemitism in Venezuela in his presentation at a recent conference, in Budapest, of the Tel Aviv University-based Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism. In his lecture, he revealed that he had found no fewer than 195 examples of antisemitic content in the official and pro-government media in a 65-day period ending on 31 August 2006. Among slides shown by Eppel was one depicting the front page of a government publication called Docencia (Teaching) which denounced the "Jewish killers" perpetrating the war in the Lebanon and which conflates the Star of David with the Nazi swastika, Eppel pointed out that, until a few years ago, "there were hardly any antisemitic articles" in the Venezuelan media and that "the government has adopted an antisemitic policy." At meetings between Jewish community leaders and top-level government officials, including Chavez himself, the government, according to Pressner, has bleated that its hands are tied, saying, "We'll do what we can, but we can't deny people freedom of speech." The antisemitism evident even in the political cartoons published in government-owned newspapers is now finding explosive expression at street level. For example, antisemitic slogans, bearing the "signature" of the Venezuelan Communist Party and its youth organisation, have even been sprayed on the walls of the Jewish Cultural Centre in Caracas in broad daylight. The perpetrators were filmed on CCTV but when a complaint was lodged with the police and interior ministry nothing happened. It is clear beyond any question that under Chavez's leadership, Venezuela is experiencing a disturbing rise in antisemitism, fostered in large part by Chavez's own rhetoric and that of governmental institutions. The relentless and baseless attacks on the Jewish community are now putting it at great risk. Contact Boris Celser by email at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
PALESTINE IS A LIE
Posted by UCI, February 21, 2007. |
|
This was written by Gary Cooperberg, who runs Project Shofar. Contact him at gary@projectshofar.org> |
|
Goebels, the Nazi master of propaganda, discovered how easy it is to manipulate public opinion. If you tell a lie, no matter how preposterous, repeatedly and with much publicity, eventually people will accept it as truth. The Arabs exploited this concept very successfully vis a vis the alleged "palestinian" people. They created a total fiction, they taught it to their children and they repeatedly announced it to the world as if it were true. Today one is hard put to find anyone who would deny that this fabrication is the absolute truth. One neednt be an historian to know that the so-called "palestinian" people were created in 1964 for the purpose of making Arabs appear to victims of Israeli aggression and thus to build a framework to replace Jewish Israel with a new Arab Palestine. In this weeks online Jerusalem Post we can find a subtle but dangerous implication of this recognition of falsehood in their latest reader poll. The two choices we are given are as follows: Israel should negotiate first with: Saudis, "moderate" Arab states; or Palestinians. The unwritten premise is that we have no choice but to negotiate with both entities. It is interesting to note the quotes around the word "moderate" (which imply that even they realize that there is no such thing), and it makes you wonder why they are missing around the word "Palestinians" (the lack of which implies that they do believe in its legitimacy). It is bad enough that we have enemies who seek our destruction, but it is far worse that we have a government and a so-called free press which lends credence to the claims of our would-be annihilators. When was the last time a Knesset Member suggested that there is no legitimate "Palestinian" entity? How is it that the President of the United States can dictate to us that we have an obligation to create yet another Arab enemy state on Jewish soil and our leaders find merit in the suggestion? Where are the protests? The silence is deafening. It seems that we are so overwhelmed by the successful "big lie" campaign, that almost no one is willing to stand up and counter that lie with Truth! How can we hope to win the war being waged against us when we refuse to accept the fact that we are, indeed, at war? We have deluded ourselves into believing that we are engaged in a "peace" process. But this is just not true. The only time nations engage in a peace process is after a war is won. The only reason the Arabs are willing to participate is because they think that they have won and are now trying to dictate the terms of our surrender. We can only have a real peace process after we decisively win the war. And you can be sure that were the Arabs to really win the war there certainly would not be any peace process. The fact that this country still exists serves as indisputable proof that G-d is constantly watching over us. Our errors bring us terrorism and suffering, but the state, as a whole continues to grow in spite of us. Would we just take the time to notice this fact we could end the suffering immediately and hasten redemption. Peace will not be found in Washington nor in Ramallah. It will be found in Jerusalem once we have leaders who are no longer ashamed to stand up as Jews, and who fear G-d more than our enemies and so-called powerful friends. The Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI) (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!" |
|
E.U. EGGS ON BEDOUIN LAND GRAB; HISTORICAL OPPORTUNITY ISRAEL MISSING
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 21, 2007. |
|
BEDOUIN LAND GRAB IN NEGEV & HEBRON HILLS
Arabs have developed a formula for stealing land in the southern Hebron Hills. They dwell temporarily in caves next to Jewish communities. Then they trespass, in order to attract opposition. Left wing activists "photograph violence and alleged Jewish vandalism, often staged by the Arabs." Israeli and foreign news agencies report as planned. They portray the Bedouins as "trying to live on their homeland which Jews have taken over." "The media do not question the source of vandalism, despite photographic proof that the Arabs have" damaged farms. Reuters reports sympathetically about one Bedouin family as having "settled in the area more than 100 years ago." "History shows that Arabs never held title to the land. During the Ottoman Empire, a local historical expert said, the leading families of the Hebron suburb of Yatta sat among themselves and divided up the lands arbitrarily. Virtually no one ever worked the land until Jews began developing the area in the early 1980s." "The Jewish National Fund operates the nearby Yatir forest and requires the Arabs to take all of the fallen branches..." Reuters reported the requirement as unjust. It omitted the reason. The reason is to prevent the Bedouin from setting fire to the fallen branches, as they often did. The Bedouin inhabit the caves only "for about three months during the year when they herd their sheep in the area. 'They never built in the area..." The Jews did. "The Reuters feature described the Arabs sleeping on floors while residents in the nearby community of Shani 'live in red roof-topped homes, some with backyard swimming pools.' However, there is only one community pool in the town and no others exist." "Moreover, it is customary for Bedouins to sleep on thick mats stuffed with wool from their sheep. Many Bedouins who have in recent years moved into houses still maintain the tradition, especially those of the previous generation." Again, hardship is implied but non-existent. "Financed by the EU, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has paid many Arabs and Bedouins to move from the Hebron area and occupy the land. One of the favorite methods of the Arabs to attract sympathy is to trespass on Jewish communities on the Sabbath, when Jews are not allowed to travel, or cross the land during the week on the premise that it is a short cut to school. They have used this method next to the community of the Maon Farm, attracting confrontations photographed by activists of the International Solidarity Movement, who often escort them." "However, one security officer said he received rabbinical permission to travel on the Sabbath and photograph trespassing and vandalism by Arabs. The rabbis decreed that allowing the Arab actions without an immediate response threatens the existence of the communities and lives of the residents." (Arutz-7, 1/25.) P.A. RESUMES PAYING SALARIES The P.A. Finance Minister says that he has resumed paying P.A. employees (IMRA, 2/14). Half the employees are terrorist police. Many of the rest indoctrinate in terrorism. He should thank Israel for resuming its relaying of excise taxes to the P.A. and for not guarding the Gaza border through which Hamas smuggles millions of dollars. He also should thank the US for continuing to finance the P.A., contending that it is helping one faction against another, though both factions have the same goals and similar means, and helping one enables the other to call it a collaborator. What would jihad do without Western complicity in its own demise? HISTORICAL OPPORTUNITY ISRAEL MISSING The whole world is being treated to the Palestinian Arabs' inability to run their own affairs (they just fight and beg). Plainly they don't deserve statehood. By disgracing themselves, they present Israel with an historic opportunity to destroy the "two-state solution," because it is not a solution. Letting the P.A. Arabs rule themselves means war and chaos. Hamas was thought to offer an opportunity to at least produce an honest, efficient, viable regime, but it concentrates on war. Giving terrorists territorial control facilitates war, says Ephraim Inbar. So far, so good. Then Mr. Inbar, of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, suggests a remedy that is even worse. After pointing out that foreign rule over those Arabs is not good, he suggests foreign rule. To him it is not foreign, because they would be fellow Muslim Arabs -- Egyptians and Jordanians. He claims that they did a good job of running Gaza and Judea-Samaria, before. Dr. Aaron Lerner finds the remedy a descent into unreality, after a realistic analysis. First, Egypt lets arms flow into Gaza, to be used against Israel. Second, letting the armies of Egypt and Jordan come so close to Israel, even if their governments were decent now, would be foolish, because they could become Islamist any time (IMRA, 1/28). No, they did not do a good job of running Yesha. Egypt kept the Gazans unemployed, except for terrorist gangs it let loose upon Israel, until Israel had to wage the Sinai War in 1957. Jordan kept the Arabs of Judea-Samaria poor, it destroyed the captured synagogues, and its snipers fired upon Jews in the new city of Jerusalem. Both Arab governments did not promote self-rule nor visions of peace. Mr. Lerner worries about Islamists taking over Egypt and Jordan, a prospect that should prompt the US to stop arming Egypt. But he also should remember what enemies Israel's neighbors were before the rise of Islamism. Islamism is worse, but Islam is hostile enough! Lerner suggests that Israel resume its supervision of the Palestinian Autonomy. He has the secularist-type of solution, which is purely security-minded. Like Inbar he would hold those territories of Yesha, with their secure borders, Jewish religious and historical patrimony, and Israeli legal entitlement to them, in custody for the Arabs. In the end, it is inadequate for security and unjust. I think that Israel should annex the vacant parts of Yesha and with malign neglect, encourage the Muslims to move away from Yesha and from Israel. Then Israel would have secure borders, declining terrorism, and, after a barrage of foreign criticism, respect. The trick is how to get Israelis to overcome their appeasement-mindedness and to learn how to present a Zionist case. 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@verizon.net |