ABU MAZEN RETURNS TO BASE Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 31, 2005.

Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen - his adopted Terrorist nickname) has returned to Russia to visit his trainers. This is the man who wrote his thesis in the Soviet Union that the Holocaust was merely a fable. This is the man who Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has started to support - with fervor! It is instructive to note that Abu Mazen returns to meet Vladimir Putin, Russia's President now, but formerly high in their KGB. Putin himself has started to return to his KGB days and Cold War attitudes. Abu Mazen follows a four day visit by Bashar Assad, President of Syria, cutting a deal for Russia supplies SS-18 Missiles (that we know about)! Clearly, itis time to once again re-target Russia with our own ICBMs as Putin deploys new Ballistic Missiles. What does Abu Mazen want from his former and present handlers of the Soviet Union - now Russia? What weapons will he request once there is an open Airport in Gaza and Sea Terminals? Will he get artillery, missiles, armor and shoulder-fired missiles - all shipped out in the open - thanks to Sharon. With the first major attacks by the Arab Muslim Palestinians against Israeli cities which should be followed by dismissing the Israeli government. This should be followed by mass arrests of top Government officials of both Likud and the Labor Parties - for treason. Trials to follow but, in the interim, enforced detention to insure those responsible are cut off from communicating with either the Palestinians or such foreign nations with whom they have been working...under the table. In the meantime, the Left Liberal Press in Israel, the U.S., Foreign Media are gleefully cheering a few days of seeming quiet, although there have been numerous mortar and Kassem Rockets attacks - not worth reporting. Several weeks of arranged quiet, in order to push the Sharon-Bush evacuation is a typical betrayal of Jews. When Arab Muslim Terrorists are quiet for 5, 10 or 50 years only then can one say there is a possible opportunity for peace. Abu Mazen's short-term agreement with his Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezb'Allah, Tanzim, Fatah Terrorists is merely grim humor as the Jew-hating Media puts out cheerful stories of how the Jihadists have shown their peaceful side. Serendipity: As I was penning these thoughts, my friend Murray Kahl sent me the following article. It is called "Russia Backs Abbas As Middle East Peace Hopes Build" and was in today's Israeli and Global News. MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia pledged its "active" support for the Palestinians amid growing signs of a revival in the long-dormant Middle East peace process as visiting Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas voiced "high hopes" Moscow would advance the drive to restart peace talks. "You are the recognized leader of the Palestinian people and we will actively support you," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Abbas in front of reporters after the two held talks. Speaking afterwards at the Kremlin where he held a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites), Abbas said there was now a "historic" opportunity to rekindle the Middle East peace process and said Russia had a decisive role to play in doing so. "There is a historic chance to bring about peace in the region," Abbas said. "Russia's support in bilateral relations and in the framework of the quartet will be of decisive neimportance in establishing a universal and stable peace in the Middle East," the Palestinian leader said in remarks spoken in Arabic and translated into Russian by an interpreter. Putin said he hoped Abbas would succeed in implementing measures needed to improve the Palestinian-Israeli relationship and bolster the Palestinian economy. "We are ready to cooperate with you and the international community in an active way to resolve these issues," Putin said. Abbas underscored that his decision to travel to Moscow before visiting the United States or the European Union (news - web sites) was deliberate and said the Palestinians "have placed high hopes in Russia advancing the peace process." Abbas' trip to Moscow came as Israeli media reported that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - - web sites) was deliberate and said the Palestinians "have placed high hopes in Russia advancing the peace process." Abbas' trip to Moscow came as Israeli media reported that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's (news - web sites) top advisors were to meet Monday in Washington with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) to discuss prospects for an Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire. Rice was scheduled to travel to the region February 6 and 7 and an Israeli official said a summit between Sharon and Abbas could take place the week beginning February 6, coinciding with Rice's trip. Moscow, a member of the Middle East "quartet," enjoyed close relations in Soviet times with the Palestinians and other Arab states but its influence in the region has dwindled since the break-up of the Soviet Union. Analysts said Russia, which has also developed warm relations with Israel since then, was examining various ways to reassert its interests in the Middle East and elsewhere, and Abbas' visit marked Putin's first direct engagement in the peace process in four years. "The main goal of the Palestinian visitor is to obtain Russia's support in anticipation of difficult negotiations with the Israelis," the respected centrist daily Izvestia said Monday. "But the question remains open: Is Moscow ready at this time to support the representative of the late Arafat -- not just with words but with concrete deeds?" the paper added, referring to the former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (news - web sites). Both the Palestinians and Israelis have taken several critical steps towards resuming peace talks since Arafat's death. On Sunday, tens of thousands of Israelis demonstrated against their government's plans to pull out of the Gaza Strip (news - web sites), as officials announced the army could pull back from several West Bank towns within days. Abbas has also secured an unofficial "cooling down" period from Palestinian militant leaders but wants Israel to reciprocate by ending military operations and starting to release Palestinian prisoners so that he can cement a full ceasefire. 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). To Go To Top

SYMBOLISM VERSUS SUBSTANCE; SYRIA CONTRADICTS ITS GOLAN POLICY Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 31, 2005.

SYMBOLISM VS. SUBSTANCE After having failed before at ending the Arab-Israel conflict, ex-Senator Mitchell, now at Columbia U., arranged a conference at his Institute there, to try again. He called the subject peace in the Middle East, as if the Arab-Israel conflict were the only one in the Mideast and an insurgency were not raging in Iraq. Is the over-reaching title due to carelessness or conceit? Mitchell invited Israel's ambassador. The ambassador was inclined to come. US Jewish leaders strongly advised him both to accept and to reject the invitation. Those who urged him to decline said his presence would symbolize Israel's condoning of Islamist professors' biased treatment of Jewish students. Those who urged him to attend said he was needed to engage the University and use the opportunity to raise the issue of biased treatment. Some advisors are exercised not over what he might accomplish, but over what they think his presence symbolizes. Anything connection to Columbia, even debating it, they take as approval of everything to do with the University. On the whole, neither side recognizes or admits that there is another side to that matter. It is common for people to see only their own side. I think he should go, so long as the particular host is not vicious, the format allows for presentation of his view, and some people there would be open-minded enough to give the presentation some thought. An interesting aside is whether Sen. Mitchell modified his position since his failed diplomacy. His approach had distorted international law in favor of the Arab aggressors. He thought a solution would be appeasement of the fanatical aggressors, a stance that must fail. Bias for one side could cost the cooperation of the other. In this case, there can be no amicable solution when one side seethes with implacable bigotry and wants to annihilate the other. Evil simply must be fought. Why not oppose Arab aggression? The State Dept. has not modified its similarly flawed and failed position. Inflexibility could mean inability to learn, but given the State Department's traditional anti-Zionist bias, its relentlessness reflects unregenerate hostility to Israel. What is Mitchell's excuse? DON'T CALL TERRITORIES "ISRAEL" Unfamiliar with the proper names for distant countries, many Americans are confused by overlapping jurisdictions and synonyms. Propagandists exploit their perplexity. The Palestine Mandate, originally to be co-terminus with the Land of Israel, was delineated by the British and French. Britain then lopped off the Golan Heights and illegally excluded the Transjordanian provinces from Jewish development, the main purpose of the Mandate. When Britain violated the Mandate again, this time barring Jewish immigration into the other provinces, Jewish nationalists eventually revolted and won independence. The UNO proposed another partition, but that had no binding force and was irrelevant. Upon declaration of statehood, modern Israel was beset with civil war and invasion. By the time of armistice, it had a fraction of the area in the Land of Israel, a.k.a. Palestine. In the later, Six Day War that the Arabs started with a blockade and mobilization to invade again, Israel ended up in possession of the provinces of Judea, Samaria, Gaza (and the Golan and the Sinai). Although Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are part of the Land of Israel, they are not part of the State of Israel. Israel has the right, under international law and Jewish law to annex those provinces, but it did not. It incorporated only the Golan and small portions of Judea for the normal expansion of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, some Jewish nationalist writers blur the distinction between Land and State of Israel. When they refer to "Israel," meaning the State, they include the territories. STATE DEPT. DOESN'T KNOW THE ISSUES? Deputy Sec. of State Armitage said, "And we'll work rigorously to try to get the disengagement from Gaza into effect, which will be a first, and the first time the Palestinian people are reclaiming land that was occupied, taken from them." IMRA points out that this is not a relocation of troop from one area to another, but an abandonment of territorial claims and the chance to return (IMRA, 1/8). Sec. Armitage implies that there would be no Israeli return. There is and was no "Palestinian" people, there are Arabs. The Deputy Sec. of State is referring to Arabs who did not have sovereign title to the land. They also did not have military possession of it. It was illegally possessed by Jordan and Egypt. Legal title to the land was held by the Palestine Mandate, under whose terms, the Jewish people were supposed to be settled on the land. Therefore, the land was neither taken from the Palestinian Arabs nor occupied. Doesn't the State Dept. know that? Probably it does, but it asserts what suits its machiavellian maneuvering, to take the land from the Jews. IS THE U.S. TRYING TO BRIBE THE P.A. LEADERSHIP? The U.S. has given more than $10 million to the new P.A. leadership, hoping to win its favor. The money is meant to be channeled into the same officers in the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Force 17 whom Arafat had subsidized, to ensure their loyalty to him. The EU pays the salaries of the P.A. police (IMRA, 1/8). Imagine, while supposedly engaged in a war on terrorism, the West is subsidizing P.A. terrorists! Shouldn't that be found illegal in the US? SYRIA RECOGNIZES TURKISH SOVEREIGNTY OVER HATAY When Syria was split off from the Turkish Empire and turned into a Mandate, the Hatay province (known to the Arabs as Alexandretta), was left with Turkey although it was populated mostly with Arabs. Syria claimed it. Now in the interest of good relations, Syria has recognized full Turkish sovereignty over the province. The Turkish Ambassador to Israel was asked if that were a precedent for Syrian claims to the Golan, now officially part of Israel. He denied any analogy for two reasons: (1) the Golan is contested (but so was Hatay); and (2) The UN determined that the Golan is occupied (IMRA, 1/9). The UN is politically biased. Its decisions flout international law and justice. It is no judge. LIKE THE ARABS, THE U.S. ALWAYS ASKS EVER MORE OF ISRAEL Sec. of State Powell asserted that the conditions defined in the Road Map must be met. Then he asked for additional, "confidence-building" measures from Israel (i.e., futile gestures of appeasement), such as the release of Arab prisoners (IMRA, 1/9) likely to murder more Israelis. Why does the US ask for more from Israel than is in the agreement, and less from the Arabs than is in the agreement? Why should Israel offer anything to the Arabs, who are trying to murder Israelis? Wouldn't you call that State Dept. ploy biased, not being pro-Israel? REFORM NOT ONLY THE P.A. BUT ALSO NGOS Everyone talks about the need to reform the P.A. and the opportunity to do so now that Arafat no longer runs it. People should be aware of the need to reform the NGOs, such as Amnesty Intl, Oxfam, Christian Aid, and Human Rights Watch, equally part of jihad. Those "and dozens of smaller allied groups in the region have contributed to incitement to terrorism -- when they should support reconciliation. Their activities amplify Palestinian (s.b. western Palestinian Arab) rhetoric that labels Israel as an 'apartheid regime', and Jews as 'imperialists' and 'colonialists', while whitewashing terror and condemning the Israel defensive actions." Those biased NGOs call Israeli defense war crimes, but excuse non-state terrorism by the P.A. militias as exempt from international law. Thus those NGOs protect terrorists from censure and unfairly censure Israel. That promotes war. Hypocritically, the NGOs present themselves as peacemakers, rather than opponents of human rights that they are. Those same groups practically ignore mass-murder in less publicized areas, such as Central Africa and until recently, Sudan. It seems that their activities are self-serving publicity-seeking. (It must help in fundraising). Unfortunately, there is no accountability for those NGOs. Coasting on past reputations, their motives and methods are not questioned. They should be questioned when they falsely allege an Israeli land-grab as the reason for the war (that the PLO's Marwan Barghouti admitted setting off for jihad), and ignore P.A. incitement to violence and its corruption. Other groups, such as the Ford Foundation, church groups, and European governments pour money into those NGOs. These subsidizers of evil pretend to be champions of peace. Finally, Ford Foundation went too far, its excesses became noticed, Congress took umbrage, Ford had to apologize, and there has come some scrutiny. Ford Foundation now demands "transparency" in other groups' activities or finances, but does not exhibit it with its own beneficiaries (IMRA, 1/10 from NGO Monitor). Thus the Foundation still supports terrorism against Israel, but no longer honestly can claim it is inadvertent. ANTI-U.S. P.A. SERMONS Preachers on the P.A. payroll accuse the US of conducting itself in Iraq as did the Mongol hordes there in the past, burning everything its troops come across, like terrorists. (The troops rebuild what the Arab terrorists destroy.) The P.A. preacher in Jerusalem accuses the US of disseminating a false Koran, to deceive Muslims (though the US distinguishes between ordinary Muslims and Islamist radicals). He claims that the US is making war on Islam, itself. He depicts the US as giving Israel a free hand (as the US actually demands that Israel uproot its settlements in the Territories). P.A. preachers complain that the US supports dictatorships (such as the P.A.). Israel is described as a cancer spreading throughout the Mideast (where it is banned). Israel invested in Southeast Asia, which caused the area to be corrupt, which is why it had the disaster. (IMRA, 1/10). According to some Arabs, Israel tested atomic bombs, casing the earthquake that set the waves off. ISRAELI VERSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT Israel razed five structures that Bedouin build illegally in the Negev. Thousands more remain untouched (Arutz-7, 1/10). 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

TRAINING TO EXPEL JEWS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 31, 2005.

Clearly, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres have made their position clear. They have declared war on part, if not all, of the Jews of Israel. Having declared war, their next step will be to use the Israeli Military and Police Force which would leave open charges of being war criminals. Since, in Israel, high ranking political scoundrels never go to jail, it will be the Military and the Police who will be individually charged. Every Commander - on down to the private - will be charged with their only defense being: "I was only obeying orders!" The next message to the soldiers and Police will be: "Are you ready to be charged and go to jail as war criminals?" Will this be what will be your reputation for years to follow? Will you be forever marked as a Jewish Kapo who attacked and dispossessed Jews? There will be future elections, with new people who may decide to indict and try soldiers and police who beat Jews and dragged them from their homes. Sharon's plans will likely turn into a disaster where Kassam and Katyusha Rockets will rain down from improved Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorist positions. Who will then be blamed for the evacuation of Jews and the disaster that inevitably follows? The blame will fall upon those who carried out Sharon's 'Disengagement' [read: Retreat] mission. This article is called "Training to Expel Jews," and was in today's Arutz Sheva, www.IsraelNationalNews.com. A Border Guard police base near Beit Horon in the Binyamin region - northwest of Jerusalem - is being turned into an expulsion training school. Thousands of Border Guardsmen will be trained there to carry out the mission of removing close to 9,000 Jews from their homes in northern Samaria and Gush Katif. The training course includes breaking into houses, isolating homes in which opponents of the plan have holed themselves up, and dealing with those inside. Destroying buildings and arresting groups of resisters are also featured in the course. The trainees will take breaks from their physical training with lectures and workshops on democracy, refusal, civil rights and the like. [Freeman Ed. Note: [Lectures will be in Orwellian Newspeak: black is white, war is peace, civil disobedience is anti-democratic etc] No fewer than 18,000 policemen will take the course in the coming months. At the same time, some withdrawal opponents are stepping up their efforts to encourage policemen and soldiers to refuse orders to expel Jews from their homes in the Land of Israel. Over 10,000 soldiers and policemen have already signed their commitment not to fulfill orders. Police and Border Guard officials say that refusers will be fired outright, while those who fulfill the orders will receive a pay raise. At least one commanding officer, in a recent letter accompanying a reserves call-up notice to his soldiers, noted prominently that the tour of duty does not include missions related to the disengagement/expulsion. In the apparent fear that soldiers might not want to show up for duty, the commander wrote, "The dates of active duty do not correlate to the expected dates for the disengagement, such that dilemmas regarding this matter are not relevant." Posters at last night's giant anti-disengagement rally showed a picture of a soldier about to enter a Yesha home, greeted by a sad-faced family of young parents and several children standing in apprehension at the door. The caption reads, "Commander, I can't do it." 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). To Go To Top

THE ALTALENA AFFAIR Posted by Women in Green, January 31, 2005.

This was written by Prof. Yehuda Lapidot. It is archived at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Altalena.html The Altalena, purchased by Irgun members abroad, was originally intended to reach Israel on May 15, 1948, loaded with fighters and military equipment. Weapons purchase and organizational matters took longer than expected, however, and the sailing was postponed for several weeks. Meanwhile, on June 1st, an agreement had been signed for the absorption of the Irgun into the IDF and one of the clauses stated that the Irgun had to cease all independent arms acquisition activities. Consequently, representatives of the Israel Government were informed about the ship and its sailing schedule. The Irgun headquarters in Paris did their best to keep the Altalena's preparations for departure a secret, but it was difficult to conceal the movement of 940 fighters and the loading of a large quantity of arms and ammunition. It was feared that if the plans were discovered, attempts might be made to sabotage the Altalena at sea. For this reason, when it raised anchor on June 11th, no cable was sent to the Irgun command in Israel, for fear that it would fall into the wrong hands. These precautionary measures proved fruitless, however, and the following day Radio London reported that the Altalena had sailed from Port-de-Bouc (France) in the direction of Israel with 1,000 Jewish volunteers and a large quantity of weapons on board. It should be recalled that the first truce had begun on June 11th. When the Irgun leaders in Israel learned through the broadcast of the embarkation of the vessel, they feared that this breach of the truce conditions (i.e., the ban on bringing military equipment and fighters into the country) would be revealed. Menachem Begin decided therefore to postpone the arrival of the ship, and the Irgun staff secretary, Zippora Levi-Kessel, sent a wireless message to the Altalena to stay put and await orders. A similar cable was sent to Shmuel Katz (member of the General Headquarters), who was then in Paris, but contact with the ship was poor and the message was not understood. On June 15th, Begin and his comrades held a meeting with government representatives, at which Begin announced that the ship had sailed without his knowledge and that he wanted to hold consultations on how to proceed. In his diary for June 16th, David Ben-Gurion wrote the following about the meeting: Yisrael [Galili] and Skolnik [Levi Eshkol] met yesterday with Begin. Tomorrow or the next day their ship is due to arrive: 4,500 tons, bringing 800-900 men, 5,000 rifles, 250 Bren guns, 5 million bullets, 50 Bazoukas, 10 Bren carriers. Zipstein (director of Tel Aviv port) assumes that at night it will be possible to unload it all. I believe we should not endanger Tel Aviv port. They should not be sent back. They should be disembarked at an unknown shore. Galili informed Begin of Ben-Gurion's consent to the landing of the ship, adding a request that it be done as fast as possible. Zippora Levi-Kessel then wirelessed the vessel to come in at full speed. The following day, a working meeting was held between Irgun representatives and Ministry of Defence personnel. While the Irgun proposed directing the Altalena to Tel Aviv beach, Ministry of Defence representatives claimed that the Kfar Vitkin beach was preferable, since it would be easier to evade UN observers there. The ship was therefore instructed to make for Kfar Vitkin. Whilst there was agreement on the anchoring place of the Altalena, there were differences of opinion about the allocation of the cargo. Ben-Gurion agreed to Begin's initial request that 20% of the weapons be despatched to the Jerusalem Battalion. His second request, however, that the remainder be transferred to the IDF to equip the newly-incorporated Irgun battalions, was rejected by the Government representatives, who interpreted the request as a demand to reinforce an 'army within an army'. This was far from Begin's intention; rather, he saw it as a question of honor that the fighters enlist in the IDF fully-equipped. The Altalena reached Kfar Vitkin in the late afternoon of Sunday, June 20th. Among the Irgun members waiting on the shore was Menachem Begin, who greeted the arrivals with great emotion. After the passengers had disembarked, members of the fishing village of Michmoret helped unload the cargo of military equipment. Concomitantly with the events at Kfar Vitkin, the government had convened in Tel Aviv for its weekly meeting. Ben-Gurion reported on the meetings which had preceded the arrival of the Altalena, and was adamant in his demand that Begin surrender and hand over of all the weapons: We must decide whether to hand over power to Begin or to order him to cease his separate activities. If he does not do so, we will open fire! Otherwise, we must decide to disperse our own army. The debate ended in a resolution to empower the army to use force if necessary to overcome the Irgun and to confiscate the ship and its cargo. Implementation of this decision was assigned to the Alexandroni Brigade, commanded by Dan Even (Epstein), which the following day surrounded the Kfar Vitkin area. Dan Even issued the following ultimatum: To: M. Begin By special order from the Chief of the General Staff of the Israel Defence Forces, I am empowered to confiscate the weapons and military materials which have arrived on the Israeli coast in the area of my jurisdiction in the name of the Israel Government. I have been authorized to demand that you hand over the weapons to me for safekeeping and to inform you that you should establish contact with the supreme command. You are required to carry out this order immediately. If you do not agree to carry out this order, I shall use all the means at my disposal in order to implement the order and to requisition the weapons which have reached shore and transfer them from private possession into the possession of the Israel government. I wish to inform you that the entire area is surrounded by fully armed military units and armored cars, and all roads are blocked. I hold you fully responsible for any consequences in the event of your refusal to carry out this order. The immigrants - unarmed - will be permitted to travel to the camps in accordance with your arrangements. You have ten minutes to give me your answer. D.E., Brigade Commander The ultimatum, and in particular the demand for an answer within ten minutes, was insulting and unrealistic. It was made, according to Even "in order not to give the Irgun commander time for lengthy considerations and to gain the advantage of surprise." Begin refused to respond to the ultimatum, and all attempts at mediation failed. Begin's failure to respond was a blow to Even's prestige, and a clash was now inevitable. Fighting ensued and there were a number of casualties. In order to prevent further bloodshed, the Kfar Vitkin settlers initiated negotiations between Yaakov Meridor (Begin's deputy) and Dan Even, which ended in a general ceasefire and the transfer of the weapons on shore to the local IDF commander. Begin had meanwhile boarded the Altalena, which was now heading for Tel Aviv. He hoped that it would be possible to enter into a dialogue with the Provisional Government and to unload the remaining weapons peacefully. But this was not the case. Ben-Gurion ordered Yigael Yadin (acting Chief of Staff) to concentrate large forces on the Tel Aviv beach and to take the ship by force. Heavy guns were transferred to the area and at four in the afternoon, Ben-Gurion ordered the shelling of the Altalena. One of the shells hit the ship, which began to burn. There was danger that the fire would spread to the holds which contained explosives, and the captain ordered all aboard to abandon ship. People jumped into the water, whilst their comrades on shore set out to meet them on rafts. Although the captain flew the white flag of surrender, automatic fire continued to be directed at the unarmed survivors. Begin, who was on deck, agreed to leave the ship only after the last of the wounded had been evacuated. Sixteen Irgun fighters were killed in the confrontation with the army; six were killed in the Kfar Vitkin area and ten on Tel Aviv beach. Three IDF soldiers were killed: two at Kfar Vitkin and one in Tel Aviv. After the shelling of the Altalena, more than 200 Irgun fighters were arrested on Ben-Gurion's orders. Most of them were released several weeks later, with the exception of five senior commanders (Moshe Hason, Eliyahu Lankin, Yaakov Meridor, Bezalel Amitzur and Hillel Kook), who were detained for more than two months. (They were released, thanks to public pressure, on August 27, 1948). Years later, on the eve of the Six-Day War, in June 1967 (after Ben-Gurion had retired from political activity and Levi Eshkol was Prime Minister), Menachem Begin joined a delegation which visited Sde Boker to ask David Ben-Gurion to return and accept the premiership again. After that meeting, Ben-Gurion said that if he had then known Begin as he did now, the face of history would have been different. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

NEVER AGAIN? THE U.N. GETS A P.R. BOOST Posted by Anne Bayesky, January 31, 2005.

On Monday, the United Nations marked the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp with a day-long special session of the U.N. General Assembly, followed by the opening of an exhibition. Throughout the event, the words "never again" were repeated many times. But what exactly did they mean to U.N. members and officials? Here is the cynical response: They meant that the secretary-general has been seriously weakened by the Oil-for-Food scandal and ongoing congressional and criminal investigations, as well as the sexual abuse of refugees in the Congo by U.N. peacekeepers and the mishandling of sexual-harassment charges in-house. A secretary-general seeking to serve out his remaining two years in office finds throwing something toward the Jews, in the form of commemorating a 60-year-old catastrophe, a relatively inexpensive means of redemption. The scope of the exercise was strictly controlled. The Europeans agreed to promote the special session on the condition that there were no resolutions and no final declaration - in other words no lasting statement of purpose or resolve. They were not prepared to do battle with Arab and Muslim states over texts or outcomes. Not a single substantive U.N. document was distributed. The ground rules for the special sessions of the General Assembly for the previous decade were completely different - this one would be "commemorative" only. One hundred thirty-eight U.N. members agreed with the proposition to hold the special session, and one more decided to speak at the actual event. Of the remaining 50 U.N. members, half were from the Organization of the Islamic Conference. U.N. member states delivered 41 speeches over the course of the day. Only five of those speeches mentioned Israel. Even the speeches of the United States, the European Union, Canada, and Australia failed to refer to Israel. Nobel-laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Weisel, who spoke at the outset, mentioned Israel once; citing a number of examples of steps that the allies might have taken, he added "if Britain had allowed more Jews to return to Palestine, now Israel, their ancestral land...it would have prevented or reduced the scope of the tragedy." Weisel also called for condemnation and prosecution of suicide-terrorism as a crime against humanity (without mentioning the context). An evening reception brought hundreds of Jews to the public entrance of the U.N. where an exhibit containing photographs and artwork from Yad Vashem was unveiled. Walking through it, one comes across the word "Israel" on one occasion, in the last sentence, which reads: "Most of the Holocaust survivors immigrated to the state of Israel after its establishment in 1945 following a resolution of the United Nations." When the exhibit was opened, the assembled crowd sang Hatikva, the Israeli national anthem - although this breach of U.N. protocol is said to have been approved on the grounds that the song was for all victims of the Holocaust. The rules of the game were articulated by U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz while speaking on behalf of the United States: "We have agreed today to set aside contemporary political issues, in order to reflect on those events of 60 years ago in a spirit of unanimity." And except for an indirect comment by Jordan and a direct reference to Palestinians by Venezuela during the day's speeches, the game plan was followed. The upshot? The United Nations looks better in the eyes of many. The secretary-general improved his image. Israel, the perpetual U.N.-loser, was queen-for-a-day. But the nagging question is, where does this leave "never again"? Widening the lens, we notice that last month the U.N. adopted 22 resolutions condemning the state of Israel, and four country-specific resolutions criticizing the human-rights records of the other 190 U.N. member states. Also in December the public entrance of the U.N. sported the annual solidarity with the Palestinian people exhibit, featuring a display about Palestinian humiliation at having to bare midriffs at Israeli checkpoints. (No mention was made of the purpose of the checkpoints or the Israelis who have died from suicide belts on Palestinians who circumvent them.) On exactly the same day that the secretary-general announced the holding of the commemorative session, January 11, 2005, he also pushed forward the U.N. plan to create a register of the Palestinian victims of Israel's non-violent security fence. (There are no plans to create a register of Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism.) In March the U.N. will begin its annual session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, at which Israel will be the only U.N. member state not allowed to participate in full because U.N. states continue to prevent it from gaining equal membership in a regional group. The U.N. remains without a definition of terrorism, never having transformed the names of Palestinian terrorists from abstract entities into the targets of specific U.N. condemnation or consequences of any kind. And any day now we can expect the secretary-general to continue his pattern of denouncing Israel's lawful exercise of self-defense as "extrajudicial killing" or as a morally reprehensible contribution to "a cycle of violence." In other words, U.N. demonization of Israel and the green light to the killers of Israelis that such demonization portends will not skip a beat. This is the face of modern anti-Semitism. Jews everywhere are indebted to the willingness and ability of Israelis to live and breathe self-determination. When contemporary political issues are set aside, and an affirmation of the centrality of the Jewish state's well-being to the Jewish people's well-being is not key to a commemoration of the Holocaust, "never again" is an empty phrase. Worse, situated in a place where a U.N. General Assembly resolution said Zionism was racism until 1991 and the 2001 U.N. Durban Declaration delivers the same message, it plays into the hands of those who would separate Jews from Israel for no other reason than to divide and conquer. The speaker of the Italian senate, Marcello Pera, was the only non-Israeli participant who was prepared to stand against the wheeling and dealing in the backrooms, telling the General Assembly that the anti-Semitism of "today...feeds on...insidious distinctions...made between Israel and the Jewish state, Israel and its governments, Zionism and Semitism. Or...when the struggle for life led by...Israelis is labelled 'state terrorism.'" The less-cynical response to our original question - about the meaning of "never again"? Some Holocaust survivors such as Nesse Godin and Congressman Tom Lantos were able to speak directly - during the unofficial lunchtime break organized by Bnai Brith, in a room far from the General Assembly. Some people listened. Some people heard. The pictures of Auschwitz are still in the front hall of the U.N. for a little while longer. A blow was struck against Holocaust deniers. And for one day, the democratic state of Israel was not the most reviled member of the U.N. (less than half of whose members can be called "free" according to Freedom House). When all was said and done, however, the U.N. got a lot more than it gave. Improving the image of the U.N. and its secretary-general could prove more costly than Israelis have bargained. Anne Bayefsky is an international lawyer and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. She is a visiting professor at Touro and Metropolitan Colleges in New York. To Go To Top

THE HUMAN PARADIGM Posted by Jim Baxter, January 31, 2005.

Consider: The way we define 'human' determines our view of self, others, relationships, institutions, life, and future. Important? Only the Creator who made us in His own image is qualified to define us accurately. Choose wisely... there are results. Many problems in human experience are the result of false and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised in man- made religions and humanistic philosophies. Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe. The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human reason cannot fully function in such a void, thus, the intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values. Humanism makes man his own standard of measure. However, as with all measuring systems, a standard must be greater than the value measured. Based on preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appetites, desires, feelings, emotions, and glands. Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament, cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist lacks a predictive capability. Without instinct or transcendent criteria, humanism cannot evaluate options with foresight and vision for progression and survival. Lacking foresight, man is blind to potential consequence and is unwittingly committed to mediocrity, averages, and regression - and worse. Humanism is an unworthy worship. The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the foot- dragging growth of human knowledge and behavior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcendent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philosophies and religions are man- made, humanism, and thereby lack what only the Bible has: 1.Transcendent Criteria and 2.Fulfilled Prophetic Validation. The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival equip- ment for today and the future. Man is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by nature and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural foundation of his environments, institutions, and respectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is oriented to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the universe. See the complete article at Homesite: "Human Defined: Earth's Choicemaker" http://www.choicemaker.net/ Jim Baxter can be reached at jbaxter@choicemaker.net. To Go To Top

THE ELEVENTH COMMANDMENT Posted by David Wilder, January 31, 2005.

Last night some 200,000 people stood in the streets between the Knesset and the Prime Minister's office, ostensibly demanding either elections or a national referendum as a prerequisite to implementation of Sharon's expulsion policy. "Let the nation decide!" In all actuality though, the mass gathering screamed to the heavens: please - stop this madness. The Yesha Council did a good job getting people out, but part of the message they espoused was disappointing. As reported by Israel National News, "Yesha officials called on the crowd to reject calls for the refusal of orders in the IDF, stressing such a move would destroy the military. They also decried the raising of a hand against soldiers, police, and border police, setting the ground rules for a tough fight, but one that does not cross the lines of a law-abiding society." What's the problem with these points? They show a complete and total misunderstanding of how to lead opposition to Sharon's plans. They suggest that we 'play by the rules,' - not Sharon's rules, rather those established by a normal society. However, Sharon is not playing by those rules: he's devising his own rules as the game progresses, doing whatever he wants, however he wants. The fact that he has totally reversed his own campaign promises, the fact that he is now implementing the policies voiced by his opponent, Amram Mitzne, who was thoroughly trounced in the last election, the fact that he ignored a supposedly binding Likud referendum as well as a vote of the Likud Central Committee, the fact that he refuses to go to the people because he is scared that he might actually lose, the fact that he is conducting a massive campaign to delegitimize the same people he once regarded as heroes, that fact that he is returning to the one-way street called Oslo, leading to an inevitable head-on collision we've already experienced, again and again and again, with over 1,500 fatalities and thousands of casualties, the fact that according to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Minister Meir Shitrit, not to mention Peres and all the other poodles presently serving as ministers under Sharon, the expulsion and destruction of Gush Katif and the northern Shomron communities is only the beginning - the remainder of communities of Judea and Samaria are on line for the guillotine - all these facts, and many more, clearly establish two sets of rules: one for Sharon and one for everyone else. Two examples: During my interview with David Bedein last week, he revealed that police invaded homes of Sderot residents, warning and threatening them not to protest during a governmental visit to the city - this despite continued missile attacks and fatalities there. And last night, buses on the way to the demonstration were randomly stopped and 'searched' - what did the police expect to find - child suicide bombers? One of the buses was stopped a few kilometers outside Jerusalem, on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road, and the search crew took its time looking for hard, criminal evidence against its passengers. Losing patience, the travelers left the bus and started walking down the middle of the highway - 'if you won't let us drive, we'll go by foot.' All traffic came to a stop and the police caught the message fast. Soon the bus was on its way into Jerusalem. This second incident provides a good example of 'not playing by the rules' - and it works. This is what the Yesha Council has yet to learn. If we continue to 'play by the rules' we are bound to lose. First and foremost on the list of 'our rules' is refusal to obey orders to evict families from their homes. The claim that refusal to obey orders will destroy the army is a moot point. Why? Because what good is an army without a land to defend? It is the declared intent of many members of the current government, in conjunction with the United States, Russia, Europe and the United Nations, to dismember Eretz Yisrael. Forget George W. - Sharon has, time and time again, declared his allegiance to the 'roadmap,' a plan leading to the disintegration of the State of Israel and the rise of the State of Palestine, G-d forbid. We will not have to worry about whether or not our soldiers obey orders in the future; should they refuse, there will be foreign forces here to do the work for them. So states the 'roadmap!' True, under ordinary circumstances, refusal to obey orders should and would be viewed as virtually unthinkable. However, our lives, privately and collectively, are ruled by priorities: in this case, without Eretz Yisrael, our armed forces are unnecessary - Eretz Yisrael certainly takes priority over a dictator's decree. I have difficulty comprehending why the leaders of the Yesha council do not understand this. You know, last week everyone was making a big whop-de-do about the events marking the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Aushwitz. This too, I had trouble fathoming. Speeches in the UN, a memorial to the slaughtered, singing HaTikava, our national anthem, it didn't move me. Why not? Many times, during meetings with correspondents from around the world, I tell them: "There is much we must learn from the Holocaust. One of the main lessons I have learned is from the refusal of the allied forces, including Britain and the United States, to bomb the camps and stop the mass murders. This taught me that the United States and Europeans were basically telling us, in other words, 'we don't want you here.' For had they valued Jewish lives, they would not have allowed the Nazis to continue exterminating them, by the millions. So, what did Jews do? They came to live in Eretz Yisrael and established the State of Israel. Now, we are being told that we cannot continue to live in our land - and the same people who refused to stop the Nazi extermination are leading the call to expel us from our homeland. So, I ask the reporters, where do they want us to go - they don't want us in their countries, but they refuse to allow us to live with security in our own land - so where should we go?" The journalists look at me with a blank stare and, as a rule, do not respond. My problem with the 60th anniversary events is exactly that - why did it take SIXTY YEARS for the nations of the world to stand up and recognize, in some manner, what they were responsible for. The proceedings at the UN should not have taken sixty years to occur. They should have taken place annually since the founding of the organization. More significantly, in my opinion, in truth, Aushwitz has not been liberated. We are still there, behind barbed wire fences, being led like sheep to the crematorium. Then, the Jews had little recourse - there was no IDF, there was no State of Israel. But today there is. Yet, we are continuing to be led by the nose, by the same peoples who assisted, either actively or passively, with the Nazi extermination machine sixty years ago. The massive world attempt to force us to rid ourselves of our land is certainly nothing less than Aushwitz - because the world still does not recognize the legitimate, G-d-given right of our people to our land. There really is no doubt: Gush Katif will lead to Beit El and Shilo, and they will lead to Hebron and Hebron will lead to Jerusalem. Tel Aviv and Haifa are only a matter of time. That is the way they see it - those who refused to destroy Aushwitz - they are the same people, the same cultures, the same mentality. They haven't changed. And it seems, neither have we. We still haven't learned. This past Shabbat morning, sitting in Ma'arat HaMachpela, I listened as we read in the Torah, the Ten Commandments. It is normally a very spiritually uplifting experience, especially at such a holy place. But this year, hearing the ancient words chanted, I couldn't help but think, what about the eleventh commandment. Why have we forgotten the eleventh commandment? Why don't we remember - we are we so good at forgetting? Again, meetings between Dachlan and Mufaz, Abu Mazen and Sharon, terrorist prisoner releases, pulling the army out of the 'cities, ' the same show we've seen so many times before. And we know what the results will be. The Eleventh Commandment: Never Forget. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com To Go To Top

BADIL - PROMOTING EXTREME PALESTINIAN REFUGEE DEMANDS Posted by NGO Monitor Organization, January 31, 2005.

SUMMARY: Promoting a politicized and ideological agenda supported by government and humanitarian funding agencies, the BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights is one of the most active NGOs promoting the "right of return". The second part of NGO Monitor's analysis examines the activities of this and some other Palestinian NGOs on this issue. Following NGO Monitor's analysis of the promotion of the Palestinian position regarding the 'right of return' by prominent human rights organizations, the second part of this analysis examines the activities of BADIL and briefly highlights some statements of other Palestinian NGOs on this issue. The NGO network, including many Palestinian and Israeli Arab groups, is actively involved in promoting the extremist political demand known as 'the right of return'. The BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights, established in Bethlehem in 1998, is one of the most active on this issue. Its declared goal is to "provide a resource pool of alternative, critical and progressive information and analysis on the question of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons." With a budget of over $400,000, BADIL receives funding from sources including Oxfam, the MCC, Canadian International Development Agency, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, the Swiss Foreign Ministry and church groups. BADIL's 2003 Annual Report says that the organization "has pending applications for 'special consultative status' with UN ECOSOC and for membership with the highly politicized Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO). PNGO's website does not, however, currently list BADIL as a member. Adopting the language of demonization and a highly distorted version of the 1947/8 war, BADIL claims that "Sources of flight [of Palestinian refugees] include indiscriminate attacks on civilians, massacres, looting, destruction of property (including entire villages), and forced expulsion. Israeli military forces adopted 'shoot to kill' policies along the armistice lines to prevent the return of refugees...A smaller number of Palestinians have become refugees due to policies and practices akin to low-intensity transfer." Regarding the 'right of return', BADIL claims that "there is no legal contradiction between the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the right of refugees to return." The organization refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, openly declaring the goal of using the 'right of return' to "alter the demographic balance in Israel so much that it would destroy Israel's Zionist, exclusionist character...But the preservation of this character of Israel is neither an international responsibility nor a moral-juridical-political fact that outweighs in importance the restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people." Despite the support it receives from a number of governments and philanthropies, BADIL further makes the statement that "The UN has no obligation to protect or safeguard the Zionist character of Israel, particularly in its demographic aspect; On the contrary, the United Nations is a guarantor of the rights whose denial was a prerequisite of the Zionization of Israel; and The UN is obligated to the Palestinian Arabs to restore their rights and to undo the actions of Israel which led to the denial of those rights." BADIL uses UN Resolutions selectively in order to promote its agenda. Thus it claims that Resolution 194 states: "refugees wishing to return to their homes...should be permitted to do so." Quoting selectively, BADIL purposely excludes significant parts of this Resolution which actually states "that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property...Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of refugees and payment of compensation..." (emphasis added). BADIL's agenda of demonization and distortion of history is evident in a 15 September 2004 press release misleadingly titled "They say 9/11 changed the world. What about September 16?" Failing to mention the role of Christian Phalangist militias in the events surrounding the 1982 Sabra and Shatilla massacres, BADIL attributes the blame solely to Ariel Sharon claiming that "An Israeli commission of inquiry found that he and other Israelis were responsible for the massacre." BADIL also publishes the "al-Majdal" magazine whose September 2004 editorial addresses the ICJ ruling on Israel's security barrier, arguing that "Academic, consumer, cultural, and sports boycotts, divestment and a campaign for sanctions by states must all be considered." BADIL was also a signatory to an August 2002 call to boycott Israel, including an endorsement of the NGO Program of Action conceived at the 2001 Durban conference. BADIL's statement emphasizes the Durban declaration's call for the "launch of an international anti-Israeli Apartheid movement as implemented against the South African Apartheid..." It is evident that BADIL has engaged in promoting a politicized and ideological agenda. The basis for funding by government and ostensibly humanitarian funding agencies to such a blatant Palestinian political group is entirely unclear. OTHER PALESTINIAN NGOs PROMOTING THE 'RIGHT OF RETURN' The politicized agendas of Palestinian NGOs MIFTAH and Al-Haq have previously been the subject of NGO Monitor analyses. MIFTAH claims that the refugee issue was the result of "a systematic policy of ethnic cleansing" and "attacks aimed to annihilate the entire Palestinian territory and population". MIFTAH also accuses Israel of carrying out a "continued pursuit of "transfer"". Dismissing Israeli security concerns, MIFTAH claims that "Palestinian refugees broadly accept that exercising their right to return would not be based on the eviction of Jewish citizens but on the principles of equality and human rights." This is a thinly veiled reference to a single state solution that would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state. Indeed, MIFTAH refers to Israel as "a Jewish democracy, and this oxymoron should not be confused with real democracy." Al-Haq, an active participant at the 2001 Durban conference also promotes the 'right of return' based on UN Resolution 194, criticizing US President George W. Bush's April 2004 remarks on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Referring to the resolution, Al-Haq claims that "Israel's rejection of this fundamental right on the ground of protecting the demographic balance within its borders is not merely ironic in light of their ongoing efforts to change the demographics of the OPT, but without basis." The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict. Note that the original article contained dynamic links to additional material on the organizations discussed - see http://www.ngo-monitor.org. [Editor's Note: The original contains live links to additional material.] To Go To Top

HAGGADAH FOR YOM AUSCHWITZ Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, January 30, 2005.

I think the closing of Auschwitz was at least as monumental an event as the Exodus. Of course, everyone, except me, calls it liberation rather than closing. To me however, every reference to liberty in connection with Auschwitz is too reminiscent of the famous inscription over its gates: Arbacht Macht Frei. Somewhere between 1.1 and 1.5 million Jews - many times more than followed Moses out of Egypt - had been liberated there of the burden of their lives before the Soviet army arrived at the camp's gates. Yes, I know, other people suffered and died there along with Jews, and my heart aches for them too; but they were collateral damage, accidental victims of the killing machine built with the specific purpose of exterminating my people. A machine that could have never been built had not most Christians around the world been, at least, silently complicit in its construction. Yes, I know about Raoul Wallenberg and other Righteous Gentiles who risked and often lost their lives trying to save Jews. Each of those heroes has a tree planted in his name at Yad Vashem. Unfortunately, the resulting forest will be insufficient to provide an operational base or even a hiding place for the Jewish partisan movement when Arabs occupy the rest of Israel. Obviously, were there enough Gentiles believing that merely being Jewish is not a good enough reason to be murdered, Israel would be in no danger of Arab occupation. The six million Jews who perished in the Holocaust constituted less than one-tenth of all World War II casualties. But mine is a tiny nation. The enormity of evil unleashed against us is incomprehensible. The Holocaust took away between one-third and one half of the entire Jewish population of the world. I don't know if today, six decades later, it has reached its pre-World War II numbers. What I do know, however, is that Jewish communities that had existed in Europe for many centuries before being destroyed by the Holocaust will never come back. They were alive with a unique blend of ancient Jewish and local culture. They financed kingdoms that let them stay on their land. They gave the world uncountable doctors, philosophers, poets, and musicians. They produced Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein. They are as dead as every Jew killed at Auschwitz. Their few survivors were scattered around the world. They left behind a vacuum reeking of burned Torah scrolls and burned human flesh. Today, this vacuum is being filled by Muslim invaders irreversibly turning the continent into a province of the Caliphate, ruthlessly pushing it back to the darkest of the Dark Ages. Such is the price Europe is paying for the betrayal of its Jews. But is it justice? No, it's suicide; it is the continuation of the Holocaust. Today, the world is poised to uproot and scatter Jewish communities in Israel and to replace their population with Arab terrorists. Calling those communities settlements does not change the meaning of what's happening. The Holocaust is raging on. Or is this already the next one? If we keep reminding ourselves that we, every single one of us, personally came out of Egypt three thousand years ago, then there are six million reasons for us to feel that the Holocaust was committed against every one of us personally. If you are a Jew born after World War II, you were born only because Germans and their enthusiastic helpers failed to kill your parents or grandparents. Not that they didn't try. Whenever and wherever you were born, every Jew who left a German death camp through the chimney of its crematorium took a part of your soul with him. You might not feel the loss because you were born with it, but trust me, the loss is there. It's yours forever, and it's very personal. Considering the entire history of the Jews, it's not the only scar on your soul. Judging by the direction the world is going, it won't be the last one either. Every time a Jew in Israel gets blown up by an Arab murderer, a part of your soul dies along with that Jew even before you hear of it in the news. Everyone's soul is different. Some people's souls are big and strong; every loss hardens them against the enemy. Some people's souls are small and weak, and they end up like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres. Unfortunately, my theory does not explain how these soulless cripples become so powerful. Can it be that the Jews, just like every other nation on earth, have the government they deserve? What can we do? Cause a tsunami? Nah, that's silly. Let's do a Jewish thing instead. Let us observe Yom Auschwitz every year, in every family. Even though I am an ignorant person and don't know what date January 27, 1945 was on the Jewish calendar, I feel we should leave January 27 to the Gentiles to contemplate their betrayal of us if they choose to do so; or to go about their business as usual if they don't. We will celebrate Yom Auschwitz according to our own calendar, our own count of days and sorrows. I can imagine a conversation at the office on the eve of Yom Auschwitz. "Why are you taking a day off tomorrow?" the Gentile manager asks his Jewish employee. "Tomorrow is a Jewish holiday,: the employee explains. "Which one is that?" the boss wants to know. "Yom Auschwitz," the Jew says. "Yom what? Oh, never mind. Have a merry one!" "Thanks, boss!" The next day, the entire family will gather around the dinner table wearing striped clothes. Truly observant people will have special garments modeled after prisoners' uniforms. For the rest of us, anything with stripes will do, just like a pair of green socks would suffice on St. Patrick's Day. It would be appropriate to borrow a part of the Yom Kippur ritual and abstain from eating for the preceding 24 hours, to have the pangs of hunger remind the celebrants of their suffering at the hands of the enemy. At each table, two places will be set aside for two of those who did not survive the Holocaust. Why two? Because there are less that six million Jewish families in the world. If we only set aside one, some of the victims' souls will feel forgotten, and we don't want that to happen. Fortunately, there are more than 3 million Jewish families, so there will be more than 6 million chairs set aside. That's good. The extra chairs will be there for those homosexuals, and Gypsies, and Ukrainians, and Poles, and everybody else who burned in the same ovens with us. Often without realizing it, they weren't that different from us when they were alive; they certainly aren't different enough from us now to be excluded from these festivities. Similar to the way it is done at a Passover Seder, questions will be asked by children and answered by wise elders. Thus, a child who, against all evidence, believes in the inherent goodness of all human beings, might ask, "What despicable crimes have we committed to deserve such a terrible fate?" A child who recently started kindergarten, might ask, "Daddy, why did you kill Jesus?" An obnoxious child might ask, "What did we do to Arabs in Jenin that was similar to what Germans did to us at Auschwitz?" And an innocent child might ask, "What does it mean - 'Never again?'" Responding to the child who believes in human goodness, the elders will explain that Jews have been persecuted throughout history not for crimes they might have committed but simply for being Jews. They should make it clear to the children present that every single accusation that has ever been leveled against Jews as a community was a libel; that in all cases, without exception, the accusers knew their accusations to be false, but neither such knowledge nor the innocence of the Jews has ever prevented a pogrom. To the child who just began attending kindergarten, the elders will respond that neither her father, nor any other Jew killed Jesus. Killing Jesus was only one of the Jewish crimes invented by anti-Semites. The elders will emphasize that no matter how many centuries have passed since the alleged crucifixion, every Jew who has ever lived has been held personally responsible for that particular crime, and many Jews have paid for this fabrication with their lives. The elders will refuse to insult the memory of Holocaust victims by explaining to the obnoxious child the sheer idiocy of his question. And to the innocent child they will say that the words "Never again!" were originally used to express the determination of the Jews to never again allow themselves to be treated the way Germans treated them during the Holocaust; but, since Israel began its gradual surrender to its weak and infinitely evil enemy, those words have become completely meaningless. As a result, we are as defenseless today as we were on the eve of Kristallnacht. At the conclusion of the feast, the eldest person present will ask everyone the most important question: "Those who were first to accuse Jews of killing Jesus, knew they were lying." Those who accused us of killing Gentile children and using their blood to make matzos, knew that was not true. The authors of the Protocols knew their creation to be libelous from its very first word to the very last one. The authors of the Iranian TV series about Jews stealing Arab children's organs know Jews don't do that. Those who compare Jenin to Auschwitz, know the difference between the two. Why do they do it? Why do they keep regurgitating old lies against us and inventing new ones?" A child would answer, "Because they hate us." "But what do they really hate us for if we are not guilty of anything they accuse us of? And why do we never hate our haters back?" For a few moments, the room will be very quiet. So quiet, that if you hold your breath, you will be almost able to hear Gentile victims of the Holocaust weeping. Happy Yom Auschwitz, everybody! Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com To Go To Top

TAKING TO THE STREETS AGAINST UNILATERAL RETREAT Posted by Judy Lash Balint, January 30, 2005.

Is Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to uproot dozens of Jewish communities in Gush Katif and northern Samaria in trouble? If Prime Minister Sharon were to listen to the people, the answer would be `yes.' An estimated 150,000 gathered outside Israel's parliament building on Sunday evening for a mass demonstration that organizers dubbed "the mother of all Israeli demonstrations." Under the theme of "Let the People Decide," the huge crowd waved placards and Israeli flags and listened to speeches from a long line of politicians and rabbis, all of whom berated the once right-wing leader for his about face on giving away Israeli land. Several speakers were from Sharon's Likud party. They warned the prime minister that if the so-called disengagement plan is carried out, irreparable harm would be done to the fabric of Israeli society. Popular Likud Knesset member, Uzi Landau railed against Sharon's tactic of bringing the leftist Labor party into the government. "They call this a unity government?" he asked. "It's a lie. Sharon threw out the parties who didn't agree with him. This government has no mandate for a one sided withdrawal," Landau concluded. David Levy, a veteran Likud Knesset member, told his fellow Likudniks to "wake up!" As the crowd roared its approval, Levy asked how the Likudniks could sleep at night knowing that the plan they narrowly approved is "pitting brother against brother." Levy warned that the withdrawal would endanger the whole country, as terrorists will be emboldened and have closer access to Israel's population centers. Cheers went up from the crowd, as National Religious Party leader, Effie Eitam declared: "We are telling you Ariel Sharon - you have no mandate to expel Jews. "We are telling you - you have no right to divide this nation." Israel's media repeatedly claims that a majority of the public supports the Sharon plan, but actual poll figures are hard to come by. For protestor Hannah Baum of Netanya, the ninety-minute drive to Jerusalem was worthwhile, just to show that not all those who are opposed to the uprooting of Jewish communities are over the Green Line "settlers." Months before Ukrainian democracy supporters started sporting orange, the Gush Katif campaign decided to use the color as a symbol of the sun and sand that marks their region. At the Sunday demo, every speaker on the dais was decked out in orange scarves, and most demonstrators wore at least one piece of orange clothing. At one point, officials asked for the crowd to raise their orange placards over their heads, so that an entire sea of orange would cover the streets directly in front of the Knesset building. A centerpiece of the protest was a mass pledge to go to Gaza to prevent the evacuation should it take place. In a series of film clips, demonstrators viewed the `before' and `after' Sharon. Before the last election, Sharon spoke out strongly against his opponent's ideas of dismantling Jewish communities. Little more than a year after his election, the new Sharon announced his eviction plan. As the last clip drew to a close, the chant of "Arik, Go Home," swelled through the streets. Speaker after speaker called on Sharon to hold a referendum or go to new elections. "This is not about our homes only," said Gush Katif's leading rabbi, Yigal Kaminetsky, "It's about our national home." Golan Regional Council head Eli Malka, who pledged the assistance of Golan residents for the anti-disengagement campaign, reiterated the theme. Tens of thousands of mostly religious teenagers were on the streets in a show of commitment to the country. Their representative, 14 year old Neve Dekalim resident Smadar Golan, addressed the gathering. "I was born in the first intifada," she noted. "I don't know what it is to live without terror," she continued in a steady voice. She told the crowd that her community in Gush Katif is "the security fence for the whole country." Speaking to Prime Minister Sharon on behalf of the demonstrators, Golan honed in on what appears to have been one of Sharon's worst political moves. "You didn't even come to talk to us to explain what was going to happen," she complained. "We had to hear about it through the media - and you portrayed us as obstacles to peace." [Editor's Note: 141 pictures of Sunday's Jerusalem Rally can be seen at http://www.jr.co.il/rally/r058.htm Contact Jacob Richman by email at jrichman@jr.co.il] Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

HOW TO ENSURE ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 30, 2005.

Many of us concerned with the continued existence of Israel have often spoken out about what we saw as the re-partition of Israel. We tried to bring the betrayal of Israel into the sunlight - to show what the Left is doing in the shadows, while proclaiming their patriotism. Many of us have written about Oslo as the method which the Leftists used to direct the nation in favor of Palestinians while trying to establish a bi-national State. That translates into eliminating the Jewish part of the State with a flood of incoming Arab Muslims. Now we see Sharon's hand-picked State's Attorney Menachem (Mani) Mazuz selected as a solid Leftist who might overlook Sharon's sons in their questionable deals for dear old Dad. But now, Mazuz has tried to create a ruling wherein the JNF (Jewish National Fund) no longer had control of the land, presumably intended for an only Jewish State. Remember those pushka coin boxes for the JNF forests? Remember collecting all your weekly tzadaka (charity) coins in those boxes...saving up to buy Land for the Jews to have a State finally - as refuge to build a country of their own. Well, Mazuz, Sharon's pick, says that the Land purchased by the JNF organization with countless coins from Jews the world over must be sold to Arab Muslims equally. Clearly, Mazuz is another Lefty insider - like Sharon, like Chief Justice Aaron Barak, gnawing away at the pillars that support a Jewish State. Sharon, who has never shown loyalty to the Likud Party (or any Party) has now come out of the closet as a fully blown Leftist, dedicated to re-partitioning the Jewish Land of Israel as if he actually held personal title to the Land. Mazuz is merely a smaller version of Sharon, Peres and the Oslo Gang leading the parade into a secular nation. Sharon has already demonstrated that he is ready to bring hostile Arab Muslim Terrorists into Gaza, followed by abandoning Judea and Samaria, then the Golan and finally Jerusalem. This will merely serve to bring the inflowing Arab Muslim Terrorists into closer killing range of the Israeli cities. Sharon is cleverly dividing the Jewish people into handleable sections, either by intimidation, bribery or merely by ignoring large sections of the public, counting on their apathy. There are many components to the re-partition of the Jewish State of Israel. Oslo was and is still one. The Labor Left held meetings with Arafat and the PLO while it was illegal to do so in the early 1980s. Rabin and Peres were never investigated for these illegal meetings because they and the Supreme Court were party to the legislation that made that law. Crooks and traitors simply are not held to account for their perfidy - let alone be indicted, tried and sent to jail. Those early meetings led to Oslo. Oslo 1 & 2, Wye, Beilin's Geneva Agreements, and now Sharon's Disengagement. They were all moved ahead through the efforts of foreign nations who had vested interests in Arab nations. In most countries that is called "treason" but, in Israel traitors, crooks never seem to go to jail if they are in high places. You cannot imagine how many foreign nations became involved in manipulating Israel through the political Left. Their interests swirled around oil, weapons' sales, and always the cash flow to the Banks and other investment institutions. Naturally, there was a back flow of cash, commissions and other bribery to the political Party who made the greatest effort to appease the Arab Islamists and their supporting foreign interests. It has now become a toss-up between the Labor Left of Peres and Sharon's co-opted Likud. I would call it a dead heat as to which one was best at betraying the Jewish nation and the Jewish people. So, what else can these corrupt scoundrels do to re-partition Israel? Well, Oslo has failed but, like a voodoo corpse, it keeps coming back - rotting and carrying the stench of betrayal. Since Oslo was signed on September 13, 1993, more than 1700 Israelis have been murdered by homicide bombers, snipers, etc. - with tens of thousands wounded, many maimed for life. Sharon has offered "Disengagement" meaning "Kick the Jews off the Land in Gaza and give it to the Palestinian Arab Muslims" since they generally cannot or will not build it up for themselves. Even now, Sharon is negotiating the release of 900 convicted and jailed Terrorists as one of those infamous gestures of "confidence building". Then there is the planned grant of immunity for 300 wanted Arab Muslim Terrorist terrorists (not yet in jail) - all of this as a display for Condoleezza Rice's visit. (See January 29th article: "A PARTNER IN CRIME" by E. Winston) But, following ethnically cleansing the Gaza District of Jews, Sharon's poodles, namely Mofaz, Olmert, Mazuz, the next fragmentation will be the elimination of the Jews of Judea, Samaria, Golan and Jerusalem. Don't you believe the denials that will be forthcoming from these corrupt leaders because they lie like any Arab. The simple fact is that the government of Israel is composed of low minded, uninspiring officials who would sell their mothers for a shekel and then deliver her up. Mazuz is merely a small shot trying to keep up with the big shots in deceit and corruption. I guess if there were fewer Judges, lawyers and corrupt politicians, the people would use the old laws. The Bible recommends stoning. The early West of America used tar and feathers with the crooks driven out of town on a rail. But, we're too civilized to treat corrupt politicians as they should be treated. Remember, we told you so - about the breaking up of Israel into smaller and smaller pieces so in the end it will all belong to the Arab Muslims. Then Sharon and Peres will have to escape from the remaining Jews rage to any of the nations they were dealing with under the table. 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). To Go To Top

SAUDIS SPREAD HATE THROUGH U.S. MOSQUES Posted by Tamar Rush, January 30, 2005.

"Propaganda Against Jews, Christians mainstreamed Within Our Borders" is from World Net Daily. The government of Saudi Arabia is disseminating propaganda through American mosques that teaches hatred of Jews and Christians and instructs Muslims that they are on a mission behind enemy lines in a land of unbelievers, according to a year-long study by a Washington human-rights group. The 89-page report by Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, "Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques," concludes the Saudi government propaganda examined reflects a "totalitarian ideology of hatred that can incite to violence." The report says the fact it is "being mainstreamed within our borders through the efforts of a foreign government, namely Saudi Arabia, demands our urgent attention." The report asserts: "Not only does the government of Saudi Arabia not have a right - under the First Amendment or any other legal document - to spread hate ideology within U.S. borders, it is committing a human-rights violation by doing so." The Center for Religious Freedom says Saudi Arabia's "extremist Wahhabi ideology" is followed by a distinct minority of Sunni Muslims worldwide, "as is evident by the millions of Muslims who have chosen to make America their home and are upstanding, law-abiding citizens and neighbors." Former CIA chief James Woolsey, chairman of the board of Freedom House, writes in the forward that such publications that "advocate an ideology of hatred have no place in a nation founded on religious freedom and toleration." Among the key findings of the report: Various Saudi government publications gathered for the study, most of which are in Arabic, assert it is a religious obligation for Muslims to hate Christians and Jews and warn against imitating, befriending, or helping them in any way or taking part in their festivities and celebrations; The documents promote contempt for the United States because it is ruled by legislated civil law rather than by totalitarian Wahhabi-style Islamic law. They condemn democracy as un-Islamic; The documents stress that when Muslims are in the lands of the unbelievers, they must behave as if on a mission behind enemy lines. Either they are there to acquire new knowledge and make money to be later employed in the jihad against the infidels, or they are there to proselytize the infidels until at least some convert to Islam. Any other reason for lingering among the unbelievers in their lands is illegitimate, and unless a Muslim leaves as quickly as possible, he or she is not a true Muslim and so too must be condemned. For example, a document in the collection for the "Immigrant Muslim" bears the words "Greetings from the Cultural Attache in Washington, D.C." of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, and is published by the government of Saudi Arabia. In an authoritative religious voice, it gives detailed instructions on how to "hate" the Christian and Jew: Never greet them first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never imitate the infidel. Do not become a naturalized citizen of the United States. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel; Other Muslims, especially those who advocate tolerance, are condemned as infidels. The opening fatwa in one Saudi embassy-distributed book, published by the Saudi Air Force, responds to a question about a Muslim preacher in a European mosque who taught that it is not right to condemn Jews and Christians as infidels. The Saudi state cleric's reply rebukes the Muslim cleric: "He who casts doubts about their infidelity leaves no doubt about his." Since, under Saudi law, "apostates' from Islam can be sentenced to death, this is an implied death threat against the tolerant Muslim imam, as well as an incitement to vigilante violence; Sufi and Shiite Muslims are viciously condemned; For a Muslim who fails to uphold the Saudi Wahhabi sect's sexual mores [i.e. through homosexual activity or heterosexual activity outside of marriage], the edicts published by the Saudi government's Ministry of Islamic Affairs and found in American mosques advise "it would be lawful for Muslims to spill his blood and to take his money"; Regarding those who convert out of Islam, the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs explicitly asserts, they "should be killed"; Saudi textbooks and other publications in the collection, propagate a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim's duty is to eliminate the state of Israel; Regarding women, the Saudi publications instruct that they should be veiled, segregated from men and barred from certain employment and roles; The report states: "While the government of Saudi Arabia claims to be 'updating' or reforming its textbooks and study materials within the kingdom, its publications propagating an ideology of hatred remain plentiful in some prominent American mosques and Islamic centers, and continue to be a principal resource available to students of Islam within the United States." The Center for Religious Freedom said the research, translation and principle analysis of the materials for the report were carried out by both Muslims and non-Muslims who wish to remain anonymous for reasons of security. To Go To Top

BRITISH INTELLECTUALS VILIFY ISRAEL AND ITS JEWISH SUPPORTERS Posted by Marion Dreyfus, January 30, 2005.

Deplorable 'debate' with disgraceful underpinnings and gang-up. A replay of the tactics of WWII, but done by the 'good-guy' side this time. This article was written by Melanie Phillips and is called "Intelligence Squelched" (http://www.currentviewpoint.com). On Tuesday evening I had the misfortune to take part in a high-profile and packed debate in London in the 'Intelligence Squared' series. The motion was 'Zionism today is the real enemy of the Jews'. The motion was proposed by three Jews: Avi Shlaim, the 'revisionist' Israeli historian; Jacqueline Rose, a professor of English; and Amira Hass, a journalist for Ha'aretz in the disputed territories. Opposing it were three Jews: myself, Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli Labour foreign minister, and Raphael Israeli, professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at the Hebrew University. My side lost by 355 to 320. It is hard to convey the sickening nature of this event, and not just because we lost. The sub-text of the motion was that the Jews are responsible for their own destruction; the real danger they are in comes not from Islamic terrorism, nor the attempt to ethnically cleanse the Jews from Israel, nor the rise in anti-Jewish feeling in Britain and Europe, but from the Jews themselves because the Israelis have turned into monsters. Thus the attacks on them, far from being deplored, are implicitly endorsed; and, to carry this thinking to its logical conclusion, the way to defend the Jews is to remove the source of the contagion - in other words, to destroy the state of Israel. This grotesque libel, which doubly victimizes the Jews - first by ignoring and even inciting the real terror they face, and second by blaming them for it - is of course now a commonplace in Britain. What made this debate all the more troubling was that this shocking motion was proposed by three Jews. The Jews who were opposing it were therefore placed in the appalling position of having to defend the Jewish people from a calumny about Jews which was issuing from the mouths of other Jews. This sport of Jew-baiting has now become the vogue among the British media, which uses Jews to unleash the most blatant untruths and vicious lies and libels about Israel so that the media can disavow any anti-Jewish prejudice, on the grounds that Jews cannot be anti-Jew. Alas, would that this were so. Without claiming to understand the motives of the three Jewish persecutors of Israel who strutted their repellent stuff on Tuesday night, the history of the Jewish people has always been punctuated by Jews with a troubled relationship with their own ethnic identity who have gone along with or even become the prime instigators - see Marx or Freud, for example - of diabolical calumnies against their own people. They, of course, do not see it this way. Indeed, one of the most astonishing and odious aspects of their behaviour is the way they claim the moral high ground. Israel, they say, has betrayed the ethics of the Jewish people. To arrive at this analysis, they rely upon blatant lies, omissions and distortions about both the history and present situation of the Jews in first Palestine and now Israel. They single out and concentrate on examples of bad behaviour by Israel - which undoubtedly happen and should be deplored - while decontextualising them so that the rarity of such events is not acknowledged, Israel is held to an impossibly perfect standard of behaviour which would be expected of no other country in such a parlous situation, self-defence is turned into aggression, and the ways in which Israel behaves infinitely better than most other countries faced with a similar situation are resolutely ignored. They take the existential threat to Israel and twist it into its opposite, so that Israel is presented instead as posing an existential threat to the Palestinians. They dwell obsessively, maliciously and disproportionately upon the 'crimes' of Israel - which are for the most part actually examples of Israel's attempt to defend itself - while ignoring totally the real crimes, the massacres and aggression and tyrannies, which are perpetrated against the peoples of Arab countries, including the Palestinians, by Arab states. This scapegoating of the Jews, this moral inversion which blames them for their own destruction, is a calumny which has repeated itself over and over again throughout the long history of the oldest hatred. For this ancient libel to be perpetrated by Jews themselves is, as I have said, nothing new. It is nonetheless unutterably shocking to hear it in action in 21st century Britain. I came away from that debate feeling the kind of emotion one feels - in a totally different context - when forced to listen to or even watch the details of pedophile assaults on children. It is a physical numbness, a feeling of the very darkest despair; a feeling that a very great evil has been unleashed which reveals the depths of pathological malice to which human beings can descend - to turn on their own at a time when they are already under murderous attack. It seems like a repudiation not just of their Jewishness but their humanity. And all this wrapped up in the highest level of sanctimoniousness, humbug and sheer, laughable, intellectual dishonesty and vacuousness. Thus Professor Avi Shlaim - whose 'scholarship' has been comprehensively shredded by Ephraim Karsh and others - brazenly re-interpreted the motion to allow him to defame Israel by claiming that 'Zionism today' was one and the same thing as the policies of Ariel Sharon in the disputed territories. Not only did he grossly distort the history and present circumstances of Israel's presence in those territories, but his approach begged the question of what in heaven's name - if Sharonism was 'Zionism today' - the myriad political parties in Israel opposed to Sharonism were. Were these not Zionists too? The fact was that by proposing this motion, Shlaim has associated himself with a statement which - despite his denials - singles out the Jews as having no right to their own country, and singles out Israel as the one country in the world whose existence is illegitimate. Zionism is today, as it has always been, the national liberation movement of the Jewish people and Israel is its territorial expression. There are many different types of Zionism today, as ever; Sharon's version is but one. The motion condemned Zionism today, full stop. As a result, this debate will be used by the enemies of Israel and of the Jewish people to do them further harm - and Shlaim, Rose and Hass made that possible. To Go To Top

AMERICA, THE HONEST BROKER? Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 30, 2005.

This was written by Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent. It is called "CIA set to oversee the PA-Israel security cooperation" (www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/533515.html). It is archived at IMRA (http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=23887). IMRA notes: To the CIA's credit they did an excellent job training a generation of Palestinian snipers. The problem was that instead of using their skills to fight Palestinian terrorists, these CIA trained snipers have been murdering Israelis ever since. The CIA faces a tremendous conflict-of-interest challenge when put in the "monitoring" role. The CIA is involved in American efforts to deal with terrorists impacting American interests around the world and the Palestinian security officials have intimate contacts and relations with their terrorist brothers around the world. The CIA can ignore illegal Palestinian activity in return for Palestinian information and assistance relating to other terrorist groups. It should also be kept in mind that the CIA's mandate is not to serve the truth but to serve American interests. If it serves American interests to proclaim that night is day, up is down or that the Palestinians are in compliance the CIA will do just that. Speculation? Hardly. Representatives of the CIA were sharing pitas and coffee with Palestinian security officials while they were busy coordinating and directing terrorist operations and weapons producing projects. The CIA didn't expose the operations - Israel did.] The Central Intelligence Agency is set to resume its role in security coordination between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in an effort to stabilize the situation in the territories, senior officials said Saturday. The Bush administration has been eager to establish a mechanism that will prevent the escalation of sporadic violent incidents into yet another total conflagration between the two sides. More specifically, the U.S. is concerned about an extreme Israeli reaction to acts of Palestinian violence that are initiated by groups interested in undermining the diplomatic process. As such, U.S. officials would like to see a stabilization on the ground at this critical juncture, when terrorist acts are at a minimum, and find ways of neutralizing the effect of any possible terrorist attacks. This the Americans believe can be done through the revival of a tripartite consultative group, headed by officials of the CIA in the area, and including Israeli and Palestinian security officials. CIA chief Porter Goss and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley discussed the matter with Shin Bet head Avi Dichter when he visited the American capital. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom had similar talks in his meetings with Hadley, and the same message was brought by outgoing State Department chief of the Middle East section, William Burns, in talks in Jerusalem. However, during weekend deliberations at the Defense Ministry, no enthusiasm was expressed at the possibility of a revived three-way security coordination mechanism. The tripartite security coordination meetings were set up as a result of the 1998 Wye Accord and collapsed at the start of the intifada in late September 2000. Nonetheless, the conclusion of the discussions at the Defense Ministry suggest that if the U.S. is keen to revive the mechanism and asks Israel to participate, there is no possibility that Jerusalem can refuse. Sources say it is not clear whether the Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas will be interested in cooperating with the United States in matters of security. In their talks with senior American officials, Israel took the stance that any progress on the issue will depend on the effort undertaken by the PA in preventing terrorism, and in dealing with perpetrators of terrorist acts and punishing them. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and senior Palestinian Authority security official Mohammed Dahlan met late Saturday night in an effort to achieve further progress on matters of security coordination. The two men concentrated on the sensitive security situation in the West Bank and sources close to the talks said that the possibility exists that Israel will transfer security responsibility of major towns to the PA in a week. The Mofaz-Dahlan meeting was also part of paving the way for the meeting between Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, scheduled for the second week of February. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. To Go To Top

EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 29, 2005.

Matthias Dapfner, Chief Executive of the huge German publisher Axel Springer AG, has written a blistering attack in Die Welt, Germany's largest daily newspaper, against the timid reaction of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat. He is one German who gets it. A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements. Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us. Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians. Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush.. Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U. N Oil-for-Food program. And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement... How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany. I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time". What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction. It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness. Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed. In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China. On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass. For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything. While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive". These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house. Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. To Go To Top

A PARTNER IN CRIME Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 29, 2005.

If the following report by DEBKAfile is accurate, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz have become co-conspirators in protecting 300 top ranking Terrorists by providing them immunity. That would mean that all their prior crimes against the Jewish people - including murder - would be declared null and void. Not only would they NOT be targeted for assassination but, they could not be arrested for past crimes. Sharon has gone completely mindless or brain-dead and has drawn others into his sphere - like Mofaz. By this crass decision, he has made every Jew an expendable target. He, like Rabin and Peres before him has casually made these gestures of Terrorist releases, many of whom have gone back to killing Jews. If ever a dictator and his men belonged in prison, it is Sharon, Peres, Mofaz for releasing killers to kill more Jews. This concept of immunity goes well beyond mistakes of judgement. Nor is it merely dementia. We are facing a government that has gone completely mad. Mofaz meets with known the Terrorist and killer of Jews, Mohammed Dahlan offering a deal of immunity for 300 hunted Terrorists. While Sharon, Mofaz and Peres are ready to jail Jews for defying his orders, they offer freedom and future immunity to known Arab killers of the highest order. What did it cost in men, blood and just plain police and/or military work to get killers behind bars in the first place, only to be released to kill again? Those who should be assassinated for Terror crimes will now be protected by Sharon, Peres and Mofaz, et al. What will it cost in dead Jews, civilians, police and military for the betrayal of the State that is about to occur? Is this the great protector that we depended upon or have we invited the devil into our home. Sharon and his gang cannot be trusted anymore than the Oslo Gang. So, kill a Jew and you are guaranteed a Grant of Immunity? "Israel to Offer 300 Top-Flight Terrorists Immunity" DEBKAfile Exclusive Report January 29, 2005. An offer of immunity for 300 wanted Palestinian terrorists in the Gaza Strip and West Bank will be put by Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz before Mahmud Abbas's informal representative Mohammed Dahlan Saturday night, January 29 - according to DEBKAfile's exclusive counter-terror sources. The beneficiaries, members of Hamas, al Aqsa Brigdes, Tanzim, Jihad Islami and the Palestinian Fronts, include also wanted murderers. Israel's provisos are that the men withdraw from active orchestration and execution of terrorist attacks and refrain from crossing into Israel. If caught outside Palestinian territory, they will be put on trial. To show the offer- which is still secret - is serious, on Thursday, Israeli authorities freed Said Massaini of Nablus, described by DEBKAfile's military sources as a senior al Aqsa Brigades operative who holds the rank of colonel in the Palestinian security service. He was captured a day earlier in his hideout and released by order of Mofaz. The expected immunity is the most sweeping allowed in the 12 years since Israel signed the 1993 Oslo peace framework accords. According to DEBKAfile's Palestinian sources, Abu Mazen will offer the men coming out of hiding a fresh start in good jobs with the Palestinian Authority's administration in the hoping of keeping them away from their former pursuits. Israel's policy-makers find this multiple immunity gesture an easier pill to swallow than opening up its jails to the massive release of hardened terrorists "with blood on their hands" - even though they recognize that it does not preclude any future demands. It follow on the heels of a series of Israeli gestures designed to shore up Mahmoud Abbas' authority as Palestinian leader and give him every chance to bring an end to the war. They include a halt in the targeted killings of terrorists (which decapitated the Hamas leadership), suspension of military action in Gaza Strip areas handed over to Palestinian security forces, curbs on counter-terror activity in the West Bank, resumption of diplomatic contacts with Palestinian leaders that were frozen after six Israelis were killed in bombing attack at Karni border terminal, the temporary reopening of that terminal Friday for perishable Palestinian goods (strawberries) to reach Israeli markets and a promise to reopen all three border terminals from Gaza to Israel next week. The transfer of security in West Bank towns to Palestinian control is due soon. Not a single Palestinian terrorist group has responded with a quid pro quo commitment to call off hostilities and terrorist action. On the list of 300 is top West Bank terrorist mastermind Ibrahim Bader, nephew of the Hamas overseas master Khaled Mashal, whom Israel has hunted for four years. He stands to gain his freedom from pursuit even though the disposition of his and his fellowers' logistical resources and weapons stores is still up in the air, along with the dismantling terrorist organizations in toto. Many Israelis are celebrating the ten-day decline in Qassam and mortar fire from the Gaza Strip while Palestinian security forces take up their new positions. However, no attempt is being made to stop the manufacture of war materials in Gaza workshops or curb the flow of illegal weapons through smuggling tunnels from Sinai. Abbas says often and encouragingly that the Hamas and Jihad Islami are close to a truce - albeit one adamantly opposed by the Popular Front, al Aqsa Brigades factions and sections of the Gazan Popular Resistance Committees. He explains that he needs Israel's concessions to "stabilize" the current reduction of hostilities and make it a lasting reality. His people are demanding that his meeting with Sharon, provisionally set for February 8, will be used to proclaim a unilateral Israeli ceasefire. He will then seek a corresponding pledge from the Palestinian groups. The Israeli government led by prime minister Sharon and Mofaz is taking Abbas unreservedly on trust although it is not clear on whose behalf he and Dahlan speak - the more so since Friday, January 28, when a landslide municipal election victory was announced for Hamas. The terrorist group carried seven out of ten Gaza Strip districts, capturing 75 of the 118 council seats. This is not just a grave blow for Abbas and Dahlan and their ruling Fatah but also for Israel and its efforts to ease the lives of the territory's population which were supposed to benefit Abbas - not the group that is dedicated to the Jewish state's destruction. By their vote, the Gazan masses demonstrated their belief that they owe Israel's relaxations - not to Israeli goodwill, Abbas' diplomacy or Dahlan's credibility, but to Hamas and its implacable Qassam blitz and murderous suicide offensive, which they perceive as having brought the Sharon government to its knees. Dahlan's failure to bring in the vote for Fatah, although he was credited as the boss of Gaza for more than a decade by Israel and the Americans, is the story of the emperor's clothes. If the Fatah wants to avert a similar contretemps at the July 17 elections to the Palestinian legislative council, it will have to invest in much more serious campaigning than the effort mounted by Dahlan in Gaza. The problem here is far more acute: Hamas needs no more than 40 percent of Palestinian parliamentary seats. Together with the smaller rejectionist, pro-terror Palestinian Front factions, the Islamist terrorist group will then be able to exert control over Palestinian government policy from the second half of 2005. If by then, the terrorist groups have not been fully dismantled and disarmed, they will be in a position to resume violent operations under the leadership of 300 top-flight masterminds. $ID To Go To Top

SUE SHARON AND HIS ACCOMPLICES Posted by Women in Green, January 29, 2005.

This article is by Adina Kutnicki and was written January 12, 2005. Imagine these glaring headlines: "Bush Unleashes Terror Prisoners, Empties Guantanamo as Gesture to Osama"; "Bush Satisfied With 100% Effort from Osama to Halt Terror Attacks -- Results Irrelevant". If the above headlines sound too farfetched, you have not been reading Israeli newspapers, nor listening to Israeli newscasts. As Israel's war with the Arab "Palestinians" enters its fifth year, the following urgent question needs to be asked and answered immediately: why in heavens name isn't there a collective roar from the Israeli public when headlines continually blare that Sharon "contemplates" (doublespeak for "intends") new prisoner releases? Let all sane and rational people digest these salient points. Are unsuccessful murderers, due to incompetence or happenstance, "A OK" to unleash on the public? And is the ONLY thing required of Abbas to receive this most magnanimous "gesture" to exert "100% effort"? Does it mean that if Abbas speaks in forked, elegant English to his western audiences (but truthfully to his Arab audience), that is all which is required of him? If he repeats ad infinitum that he is trying his very, very best to rein in the terrorists -- but can't/won't stop the bombers, the shooters and the rocket launchers from killing -- that Sharon and his gang will STILL release CAPTURED terrorists? Has Sharon gone mad? As a non-mental health professional, I am not in the position to give a qualified psychiatric diagnosis to Sharon's inner demons. However, it is an open secret that politicians cynically abuse their elected mandates in pursuit of self-interested goals. This is despicable, but unfortunately not a new phenomenon, especially in the realm of dirty Israeli politics. The mere fact that Sharon's two closest confidants are Weissglas and Peres speaks volumes as to the corruption of this government. Both are "in bed" with PA/PLO financial ventures. One is rightfully be judged by the company they keep, whether in or out of politics. Let all lovers of Jewish Israel stop repeating the tired mantras -- Sharon is a war hero! He would never lead his people astray! He must know things that he just can't say. What he sees from there we can't see from here. This is all for our collective benefit. Nonsense. Of course, Sharon has information to which the average Israeli is not privy. All leaders in government do. However, every signal, overt or otherwise, oozing from Sharon should lead one's inner voice to the conclusion that he is now beating to his own drummer. Whether he is going back to his leftist roots, to keep himself or his sons out of prison, or changing horses for other reasons is irrelevant. All that matters is this: he is leading Israel down the road to ruin. There are some issues in life not worth fighting over because of the time and energy required to expend. However, the abuses by the current government, mainly orchestrated by Sharon (with Peres pulling strings in the background) demands that the Israeli public exert all measures of civil disobedience and democratic means available to topple the present government. Sharon is not only Israel's Prime Minister, he is its Commander-In-Chief. He has abrogated his most important mandate to the people -- to protect them from enemies near and far. This government has been by every rational standard failing to protect its citizens. Every other disastrous decision of this government emanates from this dereliction of this sacred duty. Imagine on a smaller scale a General purposefully leading his troops into an enemy trap. Upon capture, this General would be first put up for court martial, and then tarred and feathered by its citizens. What can the public-at-large do at this very dangerous juncture in Israel's history? Top flight civil and criminal lawyers should be flooding the courts with massive Class Action lawsuits. While there is a very strong case against him for violating generally accepted democratic norms/principles, the crux of the lawsuits should address his failure to protect. In any normal country such a leader would be ousted immediately, and brought to trial. Each and every elected government official who facilitated Sharon's dereliction should be named as co-defendants. This is not at all farfetched or unworkable. It has become a legal tactic by many groups/people infected by the cancer of Islamic terrorism to sue and hold responsible foreign governments, banks and assorted others for their crimes against humanity. The inherent immorality of unleashing CAPTURED terrorists is beyond dispute throughout the civilized world. The first logical step in correcting this grave injustice is to first sue Israel's governmental leaders, for in effect, aiding and abetting terrorists. Can anyone honestly argue that this isn't EXACTLY what the Sharon government is doing? Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

INTERVIEW WITH SAMMY GHOZLAN Posted by Annie Cohen, January 29, 2005.

Enlightened' Europe turning even uglier as Jew hatred spirals out of control. This article is by Matthew Schofield. PARIS - For the past four years - as friends erased "Dirty Jew" graffiti from their office plaques and her French-born daughter puzzled over "go back where you belong" comments from strangers on the street - Evelyne Chiche has spent a piece of each day wondering if she was living in the wrong country. This spring, the 62-year-old Jewish radio host plans to move to Miami. "I think it's important for my grandchildren here that I move, to provide them with a safe place should they need to get away," she said, waiting until a nearby businessman left the restaurant before talking about being Jewish. "France has changed." Today, 27 world leaders - a king and queen, presidents and prime ministers - will gather in Poland to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, where 1 million people, mostly Jews, were murdered. But as the world focuses on the past, an increasing number of European Jews are concerned, to quote Sammy Ghozlan, a retired Calais police chief who now investigates anti-Semitic crimes, that "After decades of peace, the old taboos against anti-Semitism are broken. There is no future here for a Jew." Nobody maintains that Europe is again suffering the kind of hatred that gave rise to Auschwitz and other death camps that claimed 6 million Jews in Adolf Hitler's mad rush to his "final solution" to the "Jewish problem." But the rise in anti-Semitism, chronicled in upward trend lines of European reports on attacks and threats against Jews, has prompted open concern in a continent whose history, from the Spanish Inquisition and medieval ghettos to the Dreyfuss affair and Hitler's rise, is riven with attacks on Jews. In the past few months a Jewish school has been firebombed in suburban Paris, Jewish gravestones have been painted with swastikas in Germany, France and Russia, and Jews have been verbally abused, spat on and beaten in England and France. Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, an international Jewish human-rights organization, calls the wave of violence "the largest onslaught against European synagogues and Jewish schools since Kristallnacht," the night in 1938 when Nazi sympathizers stormed the shops and homes of Jews throughout Germany, smashing property and beating people. Nearly 100 Jews were killed. This week, leaders throughout Europe have taken pains to use the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz as a pledge not to forget or repeat the atrocities. On Tuesday, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder told a gathering of Holocaust survivors, "Never again should anti-Semites succeed in haunting and hurting Jewish citizens and bringing shame over our nation." Still, Deidre Berger, the director of the American Jewish Council in Berlin, admits to an eerie feeling as she tracks studies from around the continent that show rising attacks and threats against Jews. She speaks in an office that's protected by three sets of security doors. "The medieval stereotypes of Jews - controlling, bloodthirsty, vengeful, unscrupulous - are back," she said. Why anti-Semitism is growing is open to debate. Ghozlan, who grew up in the Paris suburbs and founded an organization to track anti- Semitic attacks, traces the rise to the Palestinian uprising against Israel that began four years ago. He also thinks that part of the rise is demographic: Arab immigrants now make up about 10 percent of the French population. Berger echoed Ghozlan and other workers who track anti-Semitism across the continent in saying the Palestinian uprising had fueled anti-Semitism, particularly among leftist political parties. She finds that trend especially worrisome, since it broadens the anti- Semitic base from its traditional repository among neo-Nazi and neo- nationalist movements. What began as a pro-Palestinian movement turned into an anti-Israel movement then became anti-Jewish, she said. "The left and the right of the political spectrum can't be divorced from the mainstream," she said. "When the center is so strongly anti- Israel, it gives license to the extremes." There are no official statistics on what percentage of anti-Semitic acts have been committed by ethnic Arabs. In France, for example, it's illegal even officially to quantify the population by ethnic categories. Comprehensive European figures are also difficult to come by. Figures collected by the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia, the European Union's clearinghouse for data on the subject, show an uptick in attacks since 2000, though the most recent report contains comprehensive statistics only through 2002. Tracking anti-Semitism also is complicated because each country has a different way of collecting statistics and a different way of defining an anti-Semitic crime. For example, uttering the words "the Jews should be gassed" is a crime in Germany, while in Belgium the threshold is much higher. Still, the trend seems clear. In Germany, according to statistics from the Federal Office for Internal Security, crimes "with an anti- Semitic background" grew from 817 in 1999 to 1,334 in 2002. More ominous may be the increase in the number of crimes German police described as violent: from 16 percent of the total in 1999 to 28 percent in 2002. In Belgium, police recorded a 72 percent increase in anti-Semitic acts from 2000 to 2002, from 36 to 62. The Netherlands reported 46 cases of anti-Semitic violence in 2002. Nowhere is the trend more visible than in France, where numbers from the Interior Ministry show that anti-Semitic acts - attacks and threats - reached a high of 1,513 in 2004, up from 593 the previous year. And Jewish groups say most anti-Semitic acts aren't reported. Ghozlan said it was understandable that France would be the focus of Europe's anti-Semitic tensions. It's home to both Europe's largest Jewish population, 600,000, and its largest Muslim population, about 6 million. French President Jacques Chirac speaks urgently about the need to fight anti-Semitism and has formed high-level committees to study it. He's said there's no need for Jews to leave France. Yet concern remains high among many Jews that anti-Semitism is growing faster than officials are willing to acknowledge. Ghozlan founded the Bureau Against Anti-Semitism in France in the fall of 2001 and began logging incidents that the police hadn't categorized as anti-Semitic. When he began, he figured it would be a short-lived diversion. But more than three years into it, he can't see the workload lessening. "In the beginning, buildings were the victims," he said. "So security was increased, and the buildings are fortresses now. But people - on the Metro (subway), in school, at work, on the sidewalk - are not safe, and the phone calls come every day." Sylvie Rasset, a lifelong Parisian, is another one who worries. Last April, her 17-year-old son was riding a city bus home when a group of Arab-looking young men - guessing his heritage - forced "the dirty Jew" off the bus at knifepoint, before beating, kicking and spitting on him as he lay on the sidewalk. "He worries about leaving the house since then," she said. "I do too. I have two years before retirement, but when that has passed, we will move, to Israel or the United States, but away from the fear." In 2004, the number of French Jews immigrating to Israel rose by 15 percent, to about 2,400, according to Emmanuel Weintraub, executive committee member for a coalition of Jewish groups in France. There are no similar figures for how many may have left for the United States or elsewhere, but Weintraub said talk of leaving France was a constant source of conversation among Jews. He maintains that while he's convinced the French government is working on the problem, concern is warranted. "I equate today's problems to the anti-Semitism of 120 years ago," he said. "This is not progress. People everywhere are wondering if there is a Jewish future in Europe. The question is not easily answered." The concern is common. "More and more, we hear that while we're doing a very good job of being concerned about dead Jews, there's not much interest is dealing with the issues of living ones," said Anne-Elisabeth Moutet, a journalist who tracks the rise in anti-Semitism for a number of European publications. "Nobody would say that Paris 2005 is Berlin 1935. But there is an increasing feeling here that nobody really cares about what happens to the Jews." Added Ghozlan: "I would very much like to say that our work will result in a change for the better in France, but I am a pessimist. Look, Jews in France come from families who either survived the Holocaust or were chased from northern Africa. This does not breed optimism." This was distributed by Communaute-Juive-France, the Jewish Community of France. To Go To Top

UN CONTINUES TO FUND HAMAS Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 29, 2005.

Friends, I've got a problem with people who wax poetically contrite about dead Jews, but continue to fund the killing of live ones. U.N., spare me your memorials, and put your money where your mouth is. This article is called "Despite Israeli Alerts, U.N. Transfers Thousands to Hamas Affiliates" (from http://www.nysun.com/article/8395). It is by Benny Avni - Special to the Sun, January 28, 2005. Naomi UNITED NATIONS - A United Nations agency transferred thousands of dollars to a Palestinian Arab charity affiliated with terrorism long after Israel warned of the terror connection, though the U.N. publicly claimed payments to the organization had stopped. The blunder points to trouble inside the U.N. Development Program, a huge operation headed by Mark Maloch Brown, who has recently been appointed Secretary-General Annan's chief of staff, largely for his organizational skills and his ability to handle the press. The U.N. plans to launch an internal probe as a result of the revelations uncovered by The New York Sun. According to a UNDP letter that was seen by the Sun, the agency transferred the sum of $6,000 to an account in the Jenin branch of Cairo Amman Bank in September 11, 2003. The account belongs to the Jenin Zaka, or charity committee. A subsequent letter from UNDP, dated October 3, 2003, written in Arabic and addressed to the head of the Jenin organization, actually states that the transfer was a mistake and demands a return of the funds. "It was transferred to your account by mistake," the letter states, adding that the money "was intended for the Tul Karem Charity Committee." Both committees were identified by the Israeli Defense Force as part of a charity network affiliated with Hamas, the terror organization that has boycotted the recent election in the Palestinian Arab areas. The head of the Jenin committee, Ahmed Salaatnah, spent time in Israeli jails between 1993 and 1995 for terrorist activities in the Izz a Din al Kassem, the operational military branch of Hamas responsible for a chain of suicide bombings. The money transfers in the fall of 2003 are interesting because it was made clear to the head of the UNDP office in Jerusalem, Timothy Rothermel, by the IDF four months earlier that the charity organizations were fronts for Hamas. In a June 25, 2003, letter to the Israeli authorities Mr. Rothermel acknowledged that he has "taken note" of Israeli concerns about the Hamas af filiation, but claims that money transfers to them would stop only once the "deteriorating humanitarian status" of the population ended. Dore Gold, the former Israeli ambassador to the U.N., exposed the UNDP support for the two charity committees in a recent op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal. In a subsequent letter to the editor of the Journal, U.N. undersecretary-general for communication, Shashi Tharoor, claimed that after the June 25 letter, which acknowledged the Israeli complaints, "no further payments were made by the U.N." to the Hamas affiliates. The documents, however, clearly show that at least one transfer of thousands of dollars was made in September. Mr. Tharoor told the Sun that he relied on information from UNDP. A UNDP spokesman, William Orme, said yesterday that his agency is checking into the new facts, and that if the documents discovered by the Sun are accurate, an internal investigation will be launched immediately. "We were told no payments were made following June 2003," he said. Mr. Maloch Brown was not available for comment. The gentle request to return the money, which was made by the UNDP's Mr. Rothermel to the formerly jailed terrorist Mr. Salaatnah, makes little difference, since according to Israeli intelligence sources both the Jenin and the Tul Karem committees are part of the Hamas civil infrastructure in the territories. That infrastructure, according to an Israeli intelligence document seen by the Sun, has turned the terror organization into the most powerful political force there. The Jenin charity and its sister organization in Tul Karem, which was founded in 1981, are part of the Hamas vision of creating an Islamic state as an alternative to the secular leadership of Fatah, now headed by the recently-elected Mahmoud Abbas. Both the Tul Karem and the Jenin committees were outlawed by Israel in 2002 for their terrorist connections. Unlike the U.N., which makes a distinction between the terrorist and civilian parts of Hamas, American and European authorities do not. Israeli soldiers discovered documents in the office of the Tul Karem committee that show direct connection to the now-infamous Holy Land Foundation, the American-based Hamas charity that was shut down by the Bush administration in December 2001, in a post-September 11 attempt to shut down terror-funding charities. Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. To Go To Top

SABRI, ZUHEIR, AND MY FRIEND JIM Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, January 29, 2005.

Yesterday marked the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. While others were tragically murdered there and elsewhere by the Nazis as well, Jews were marked for total extermination. Indeed, one of every three Jews alive at that time fell victim to the Final Solution. Months earlier, with both Holocaust Memorial and Israel Independence Days fast approaching, I was reminded of a incident which exposed a lingering problem that just wouldn't go away.. Since Auschwitz, the world has become fairly adept--with some notable exceptions (including the former Palestinian Arab Prime Minister and now newly-elected Arafatian successor, Mahmoud Abbas, much of the "Arab" world, and the family of Mel Gibson who are Holocaust deniers)--at sympathy for dead Jews. Indeed, many showed up to commemorate that anniversary. It's empathy for live ones that's still the problem... An intelligent and caring non-Jewish colleague and I had been discussing events in the Middle East. For the sake of my friend's privacy, let's call him "Jim." It was after one of the Arabs' latest acts of "heroism"...another civilian bus blown up, more innocents incinerated, maimed, etc. Among Jim's many attributes, he's also a history buff. After our discussion, Jim was honest with me: "You know, I like you, Jerry, so that's why I listened to you.....otherwise your passion would have turned me off." G_d bless Jim. Why, he has even taught students about the Holocaust.....but ouch, anyway! And within this episode lies the much bigger problem. How is it that the Gentile world--especially the intelligent and caring portion of it--does not understand the passion of a people who not long ago were turned into lampshades and soap simply for being who they are...a people whom the Gospel of John declared to be sons of the devil, the perpetually condemned wandering deicide folk, so all tragedies encountered were explained away simply as their "just due"? How is it that the two thousand-year existence of this people, since it dared take on the mighty Roman conqueror for its freedom, is apparently unknown or brushed aside by far too many others having the same conversation that Jim and I were having the other day? But, back to the Middle East... Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, the no-nonsense realist and patron saint of the Likud, perhaps said it best when he spoke of appetite versus desperation and need. Love him or hate him, Jabotinsky was honest. And unlike many of his starry-eyed Zionist colleagues almost a century ago, he saw the true nature of the conflict between Arab and Jew in the Middle East. Leo Pinsker spoke of the need for the "autoemancipation" of the Jews, the perpetual, unwanted guest--never host--ghost people, even before the harsh realities of a supposedly enlightened France opened Theodore Herzl's eyes. The Dreyfus Affair would soon lead Herzl, the father of modern political Zionism, to write Der Judenstat....The Jewish State. Jabotinsky, likewise, understood all of this as well when he spoke of the Jewish condition both during the pre-and mandatory period for Palestine. He knew that Arabs also had rights in the region, but when he spoke of this, he expressed it in terms of appetite versus desperation. It was understandable that Arabs, who remembered their own proud, conquering, and caliphal imperial past (imperialism is evidently only a nasty word when non-Arabs so indulge), should want to return to those days of dominance and glory after the collapse of their own rival successor, the over four centuries old Ottoman Turkish Empire. That Arabs would want to make Palestine their 6th, 7th, or 8th state (today almost two dozen) made perfect sense to Jabotinsky. But Jews didn't have this luxury. For them, the familiar pattern of millennial existence-- most lately and violently manifested in the pogroms of Eastern Europe and Russia and hints of what was yet to come in Germany--added desperation and necessity to the quest for the rebirth of their own sole state. And while the frightened mellahs of dhimmi Jewish existence in the Arab/Muslim world experienced no "Holocaust" per se, their experience over the ages was also not without memories of massacres, forced conversions, subjugation, humiliation, and existence as kilab yahud "Jew dogs" of their neighbors. While it is true that the suicide/homicide bomber who today deliberately kills innocents also does this out of "passion" and "desperation," Jabotinsky saw the difference...something that too many others today still don't--or won't-- see. There was no need for this situation to have arisen among the Arabs. There are those today who like to make the argument, "if Jews can have a state, why not Palestinians?" For some, this is simply an honest slip of ignorance. But for far too many others--academics included--it represents something far worse, for they know better. While I won't get into argument over whether a distinct Palestinian Arab nationalism exists today, it certainly didn't exist before the rise of modern political Zionism. In fact, the former arose specifically to negate the latter. There's volumes of evidence to support this. Virtually all the writings of politically conscious Arabs on the eve of the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish Empire spoke of a greater Syrian Arab or Pan Arab identity. The "Palestinians" were the Jews. When the Middle East and North Africa were being divided after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the hopes and dreams of many diverse subject peoples were once again reawakened. Britain's Sir Mark Sykes, America's President Woodrow Wilson, and others fueled the fires with talk of self determination for those populations. Arabs made out very well in the long term aftermath. Unfortunately, they refused to grant anyone else even the right to think in such terms in what they declared to be "purely Arab patrimony"... be they Kurd, Jew, Berber, black African Sudanese, or whomever.. Since Muhammad and successor imperial Arab armies had also once conquered much of the region (occupying and settling much of it), they saw themselves as the sole legitimate heirs to the Turks. We're still living with the results of this mindset today. The majority Berbers' language and culture have been largely "outlawed" in North Africa. A reading of the Kurdish nationalist Ismet Cherif Vanly's book, The Syrian 'Mein Kampf' Against the Kurds (Amsterdam 1968), is instructive as well. Two million Black African Sudanese have been killed, maimed, enslaved, etc. resisting this forced Arabization, and nothing further needs to be said regarding similar attitudes Arabs have had regarding the mere thought of kilab yahud Jews--half of whom were refugees themselves from Arab/Muslim lands--having any such political rights in the Dar al-Islam. None other than the eminent Arab historian, Philip Hitti, had this to say about the matter in his History of the Arabs: "This bipartite (Arab) division of the world into an abode of peace and an abode of war finds parallel in the communistic theory of Soviet Russia." Yet the problem is even worse than it first appears. Berbers and Kurds, for example, had largely been converted to Islam. It turns out that that was still not enough. Those same Arabs who propagandize today about "racist Zionists" saw/see themselves as the only fit rulers in the region....even over fellow, but non-Arab, Muslims. This attitude helped to lead to the Abbasid Revolution and the uprising of the non-Arab (particularly Iranian) Mawali populations centuries earlier. And it had subsequent implications for the largely ethnic divide between Sunni and Shia Islam as well. When, in 1922, the British divided the original land of the Mandate for Palestine they received on April 25, 1920 so that all of the territory east of the Jordan River was excluded from the Jews (an act Emir Abdullah attributed to Allah in his memoirs) -- 80% of the total area-- a story has it that Jabotinsky remained silent. Many, including the British, expected "otherwise," to say the least. Later, when he was asked why he did not speak up after Colonial Secretary Churchill's machinations, he explained that he wanted to prove the same point that Ehud Barak's offer at Camp David and Taba seventy-eight years later did: It didn't matter to Arabs how big a Jewish State was. Any Israel, regardless of size, would not be tolerated. Arabs refused a much-truncated Jewish State after their acquisition of Transjordan in 1922 the same way Arafat insisted that a 9-mile wide Israel, left in peace, was still too much to ask for. Abbas and his fellow Arafatians offer, instead, in their own videotaped words, an updated version of the "peace of the Quraysh," the pagan tribe the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad, made a temporary truce--a hudna-- with until he gained the strength to deal the final blow. While it's been stated over and over a thousand times, it needs to be said yet again. The passion of the Arab homicide bomber was born because Arabs used their own people as pawns in a political game to deny Jews a tiny sliver of the rights so fervently demanded for themselves. It's not a matter of Jews wanting to deny "stateless Palestinians" a nation, yet that is often how Israel's detractors portray the situation. In their attempt to create yet another state of their own--on the ashes of Israel, not along side it--Arabs came to realize that it would make better press to speak in terms of creating a state for "stateless Palestinians" than calling for the creation of a 22nd or 23rd Arab state at the expense of the one of the Jews. Listen to Zuheir Mohsein, official with the PLO's military wing and Executive Council, in his interview with the Dutch newspaper, Trouw, on 3/31/77: " There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, etc...It is only for political reasons that we now carefully underline Palestinian identity....this serves only a tactical purpose...a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel." In contrast, the passion of the Jew grew out of millennia of exile, massacres, forced conversions, demonization, dehumanization, ghettoization, expulsions, inquisitions, blood libels, existence as kilab yahud and/or "deicide people," the Holocaust, and--as Pinsker eloquently put it in the late 19th century--his status as perpetual stranger in someone else's land. My zealousness has also grown out of all these differences. I get no pleasure when an Arab child is killed. But all of this was truly unnecessary. And the Arab child is not deliberately targeted as his Jewish counterparts are, but is a victim of his own murderous brethren using him as a human shield--a direct violation, by the way, of the Perfidy Clause of the Geneva Conventions. My passion grows with every pizzeria, teen club, bus, Passover Seder, Bar Mitzvah, and such that is attacked, the victims being killed or disfigured and maimed for life. It is the passion born of the heads of Jewish children deliberately smashed beyond recognition, their blood smeared on the walls of caves where their Arab abductors took them, a generation after Nazis took sadistic pleasure in doing likewise to Jewish infants in front of the eyes of their mothers before sending the latter to the gas chambers. It is the passion born of Arab public displays of fabricated Jewish body parts hanging from ceilings to commemorate such heroic deeds as the pizza parlor disembowelments and incineration. And it is the passion born of the silence of that same United Nations regarding all of this while it is so quick to condemn Israel for the measures it's forced to take to survive. So, Jim, I plead guilty. No one will ever claim that I have been ambiguous about any of these issues. And, I must admit, I find it amazing (probably worse) that intelligent and caring people don't "get it." It's simply called self-preservation. Or, are Jews not allowed this? Many in the non-Jewish world don't want to be reminded of such things because, inevitably, it leads to soul-searching about the role much of the Gentile world had in paving the long and tortured road to Auschwitz over the ages--something, understandably, it would rather not do. It's much better for one's own sanity to virtually portray Hitler or Eichmann as alien Martians than to see them as simply the logical, updated byproducts of centuries of violent and indoctrinated Jew-hatred. Fair and just plans have repeatedly been offered to--and rejected by--Arabs to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. And it's necessary to place the very core issue of Arab refugees itself into a much broader perspective. Hundreds of millions of people became refugees over the last two centuries....many resulting from the partition of the Indian subcontinent into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India at the same time a similar partition was planned for Arabs and Jews in Palestine. There would have been no Arab refugees had they accepted the 1947 U.N. partition of the 20% of the land left into a Jewish and another Arab state, the latter having already received the lion's share of the land with the creation of Transjordan in 1922. Arabs rejected the partition and invaded a newborn, miniscule Israel instead from the surrounding countries...hence the Arab refugees. Before this, Arabs came pouring into Palestine--due to the economic development by the Jews--from all over the Arab world, but especially from Egypt and Syria...Arab settlers building Arab settlements in the land. Scores of thousands were recorded, in just a brief period of time, by the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission, coming in from Syria alone. Regarding the one half of Israel's Jewish population who were refugees themselves from Arab/Muslim lands, here's what Sabri Jiryis, Palestinian Arab researcher at the Institute for Palestinian Studies in Beirut, had to say about this in the publication, Al-Nahar, on 5/15/75: "This is hardly the place to describe how the Jews of Arab states were driven out...how they were shamefully deported to Israel after their property had been confiscated...actually, therefore, what happened was only a kind of 'population and property exchange,' and each party must bear the consequences." President Bush, in his official April 2004 response to Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza Plan, addressed the refugee issue nicely: Israel would not be required to commit national suicide by absorbing the descendants of real or alleged Arab refugees. Now, if the State Department doesn't muddy the waters with Foggy doublespeak in an attempt to emasculate the potential for good this statement can bring about by requiring the Arabs to dismiss their pipedream of Israel being delivered up to them on a silver platter a la Czechoslovakia 1938, real progress towards peace might actually become possible. Unfortunately, Arafat's "moderate " successor, Mahmoud Abbas, while dressed in a coat and tie and a practitioner of the sugar-coated word, still has such ultimate plans in mind and openly ran for office on a platform calling for Israel's destruction...but "by other means." His recent deployment of police in Gaza to ward off a major Israeli offensive in response to the latest Arab atrocity--committed under his watch--must thus be understood within this broader context as well. Arabs could have had their additional state decades ago. The sad reality, however, is that poll after poll taken amongst them still show that even if Israel caved in to virtually all of their demands regarding the disputed territories, as in Jabotinsky's day, it still would not make a difference in terms of their acceptance of the sole Jewish State. It would simply turn Arafat's "peace of the Quraysh" into reality. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. To Go To Top

IRAQI ELECTIONS: BUSH'S BETRAYAL OF AMERICA Posted by Elan Journo, January , 2005.

President Bush claims that holding elections on January 30 will bring Iraq a step closer to freedom, an outcome allegedly vital to America's security. But the Iraqi election will bring neither freedom to Iraq nor security to America. Consider the beliefs of the Iraqis who will be voting for "freedom" in the upcoming election. Like so many peoples in the Middle East, Iraqis regard themselves as defined by their membership in some larger group, not by their own ideas and goals. Most Iraqis owe their loyalties--and derive their honor from belonging--to their familial clan, tribe or religious sect, to which the individual is subservient. This deep-seated tribalism is reflected in the parties running in the elections: there is a spectrum ranging from advocates of secular collectivist ideologies (communists and Ba'athists) to those defined by bloodlines (such as Kurds and Turkmens) to members of various religious sects. What will be the result of an election featuring such voters and candidates? Iraqis will merely bring to power some assortment of collectivists and Islamists. Whatever constitution those leaders eventually frame will reflect their desire to arrogate power to their particular group and to settle old scores, such as the longstanding enmity between the Shi'ite majority and Sunnis. It may well permit barbaric treatment of individuals, commonly accepted throughout the Islamic world, such as "honor-killings" of women believed to have had sex before marriage, or the banning of "un-Islamic" speech. And in the long term, the new nation may become an active sponsor of Islamic terrorism. Perhaps the most alarming outcome for U.S. security would be a popularly elected theocracy aligned with or highly sympathetic to Iran's totalitarian regime. Iran is reported to have smuggled nearly one million people into Iraq to vote and has donated millions of dollars to sway the election in favor of a Shi'ite-led government. Already, Iranian intelligence officials are said to roam the hallways of Iraqi party offices, on whose walls hang pictures of Iran's supreme leader. That a theocracy may rise to power in Iraq appears to be totally compatible with the President's conception of "freedom." As he told Fox News in October, if Iraq votes in a fundamentalist government, he would "be disappointed. But democracy is democracy... If that's what the people choose, that's what the people choose." This certainly is democracy--in its literal sense of unlimited majority rule. But it is not freedom. Political freedom does not mean the expression of a collective will, nor the granting of power to one pressure group to exploit others. It means the protection of an individual from the initiation of physical force by others. Freedom rests on the idea of individualism: the principle that every man is an independent, sovereign being, that he is not an interchangeable fragment of the tribe; that his life, liberty, and possessions are his by right, not by the permission of any group. Democracy (i.e., majority rule) rests on the primacy of the group; if your gang is strong enough, you can get away with whatever you want, sacrificing the life and wealth of whoever stands in your way. This is why America's Founders rejected democracy and created a republican form of government, limited by the inalienable rights of the smallest "minority": the individual. Our system does have elections, of course, but they are only legitimate within a constitutional framework that prohibits the majority from voting away the rights of anyone. Can freedom be achieved in Iraq? In the near future, no--which is one of many reasons why it is suicidal for Bush to treat Iraqi freedom as the centerpiece of American self-defense. American security does not require that the terrorism-sponsoring nations of the Middle East be free, only that they be non-threatening--a goal that can be achieved by making it clear to the leaders of these nations that any continued sponsorship of terrorism will mean their immediate destruction. In the long run, if Iraqis or other peoples of the Middle East are to become free--a task that is their responsibility, not America's--they must first recognize that their current ideas and practices are incompatible with freedom. They must recognize that they need to adopt a philosophy of individualism. A good first step toward teaching this lesson would be not granting them the pretense of elections. Elan Journo is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (http://www.aynrand.org/), in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand--best-selling author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" and originator of the philosophy she called "Objectivism." Send reactions to reaction@aynrand.org. To Go To Top

FACING AN EXPLOSIVE FUTURE: ISRAEL, IRAN AND ANTICIPATORY SELF-DEFENSE Posted by Evelyn Hayes, January 28, 2005.

This was written by Professor Louis Rene Beres, Professor of International Law at Purdue U. He can be reached at beres@polsci.purdue.edu Israel now faces grave dangers from Iran, a hostile Islamic state deeply involved in production of nuclear and certain other weapons of mass destruction. In essence, the Jewish State will soon have only two options vis-a-vis Iran: (1) sit tight, do nothing militarily, and hope that deterrence, political agreements and/or economic sanctions will prevent Iranian mega-aggression; or (2) strike preemptively against pertinent military targets, thereby expressing what international law calls "anticipatory self-defense." Should it choose the former, Israel would avoid offending the "international community," Yet, this choice would carry a substantial risk of inviting unconventional war and unconventional terrorism. Should it choose the second option, Israel would give offense to the international community and very likely undermine its special relationship with Washington, but it would also likely reduce the risk of overwhelming destruction from Iran. The second option would generate unpopularity for Israel, and would probably be less than entirely effective, but it would assuredly be more gainful than being popularly dead. Does Israel have the right to strike first under international law? In the best of all possible worlds, reasonable concerns about an overbroad right of anticipatory self-defense would be well taken. Here, for example, a specially-constituted world body - a UN-type institution displaying both real authority and real capability - could ensure that powerful aggressor states do not act at will. But we do not yet live in such a world. Instead, states continue to coexist within the decentralized dynamics of Westphalian law that have obtained since the middle of the seventeenth century. In this world, one still very much like the world satirized by Voltaire's Candide, states that would renounce altogether the right of anticipatory self-defense could be blatantly suicidal. For a state such as Israel, a state less than half the size of San Bernardino County in California and smaller than Lake Michigan, a state that is surrounded by twenty-two hostile Arab states, (soon to be twenty-three, after the creation of "Palestine") such renunciation could be tantamount to an acceptance of its own genocide. It is true that the right of anticipatory self-defense can be abused and that maintaining this right under international law always carries certain serious risks. Yet, an across the board renunciation of anticipatory self-defense would carry even greater risks. Indeed, where it is supported by distinguished scholars, the informed argument for anticipatory self-defense has assuredly grown stronger in the nuclear age. Waiting patiently to absorb an enemy attack before striking could now represent the reductio ad absurdum of "legalism" in international law. This is the fallacy or error in reasoning that treats law as an automatically effective set of rules. The right of self-defense by forestalling an attack appears in Hugo Grotius' THE LAW OF WAR AND PEACE. (1625). Recognizing the need for protection against "present danger" and threatening behavior that is imminent in point of time, Grotius indicates that self-defense is permitted not only after an attack has already been suffered, but also in advance, where "the deed may be anticipated." Or, as he says a bit further on in the same chapter, "It be lawful to kill him who is preparing to kill...." Emmerich de Vattel takes a similar position in his THE LAW OF NATIONS (1758). Here, he argues that it is lawful to resist and even to anticipate attacks by other nations so long as aggression is truly forthcoming. "The safest plan," says Vattel, "is to prevent evil, where that is possible. A Nation has the right to resist the injury another seeks to inflict upon it, and to use force and every other just means of resistance against the aggressor." Today, some scholars argue that the specific language of Article 51 of the UN Charter overrides the customary right of anticipatory self-defense. In this view, which effectively undermines the authoritative non-treaty sources of international law identified at Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, Article 51 fashions a new and far more restrictive statement of self-defense. This narrow interpretation ignores that international law must refuse to compel a state to wait until it absorbs a devastating or even lethal first strike before acting to protect itself. Regarding Israel's preemptive attack in June 1967, neither the Security Council nor the General Assembly censured this attack, thereby signifying implicit approval by the United Nations of this particular resort to anticipatory self-defense. During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, in a flagrantly lawless action, Iraq launched thirty-nine Scud missile attacks directly against Israeli civilian populations. On October 7, 1991, more than seven months after the conclusion of hostilities, UN inspectors discovered a complex of buildings that had served as Saddam Hussein's covert nuclear weapons program. It was here, at an installation called Al Atheer, about 40 miles south of Baghdad, that Iraq planned to "design and produce a nuclear device." And these preparations were underway after Israel's strike at the Osiraq reactor ten years earlier. What would have been Israel's fate, after absorbing 39 Iraqi missile attacks during the Gulf War, if Prime Minister Begin had not previously asserted the right of anticipatory self-defense under international law in Israel's 1981 destruction of Baghdad's Osiraq reactor? One needn't have a good imagination to answer this particular question! Would Israel's critics have preferred Israel to absorb multiple nuclear attacks as the price of conforming to his restrictive view of permissible self-defense? Would this have been a reasonable preference under international law? I think not. For the Arab world, Israel was the aggressor in 1948 and, again, in 1967. Significantly, when Israel avoided preemptive measures in 1973, an avoidance Israel's critics would doubtless describe as lawful, the resultant Arab surprise attack on Yom Kippur almost ended in a total Israeli defeat. Regarding the War of 1948, the United Nations placed responsibility for aggression on the Arab states. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or the British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution of the General Assembly. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council: "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein." The Arabs themselves were altogether open in accepting responsibility for starting their first war on Israel. Jamal Husseini told the Security Council on April 16, 1948: "The representatives of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday they they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight." As for the British commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb, he commented as follows: "Early in January, the first detachments of the Arab Liberation Army began to infiltrate into Palestine from Syria. Some came through Jordan and even through Amman....They were in reality to strike the first blow in the ruin of the Arabs of Palestine." Israel came into being on May 14, 1948. The five Arab armies of Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq immediately invaded the new ministate. Their combined intention was expressed publicly by Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." This is the war Arab states still seek to defend under international law. Let us consider the 1967 (Six-Day) War. On May 15, Israel's Independence Day, Egyptian troops began moving into the Sinai, massing near the Israeli border. By May 18, Syrian troops, too, were preapring for battle along the Golan Heights, where - from 3000 feet above the Galilee, they had shelled Israel's farms and villages with impunity for years. Egypt's Nasser ordered the UN Emergency Force, stationed in the Sinai since 1956, to withdraw. After the withdrawal of the UNEF, the Voice of the Arabs proclaimed, on May 18, 1967: "As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain any more to the UN about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence." Two days later an enthusiastic echo came from Hafez Assad, then Syria's Defense Minister: "Our forces are now entirely ready...to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. ...the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation." President Abdur Rahman Aref of Iraq, a country now more closely identified with the aggressions of recently-deposed Saddam Hussein, joined the chorus of genocidal threats: "The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear - to wipe Israel off the map." On June 4, Iraq formally joined the military alliance with Egypt, Jordan and Syria. On June 7, 1981, Israeli fighter-bombers destroyed Iraq's Osiraq nuclear reactor shortly before it was to go "on line." At the time, the general community reaction was overwhelmingly hostile. Even the UN Security Council, in Resolution 487 of June 19, 1981, indicated that it "strongly condemns" the attack and that "Iraq is entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction it has suffered." No less than Israel's own citizens, both Jews and Arabs, American and other coalition soldiers who fought in the 1991 Gulf War may owe their lives to Israel's courage, skill and foresight in June 1981. Had it not been for the raid at Osiraq, Saddam Hussein's forces might have been equipped with atomic warheads in 1991. Ironically, the Saudis, too, are in Jerusalem's debt. Had it not been for Prime Minister Begin's resolve, Saddam's Scuds falling on Saudi Arabia might have spawned immense casualties and lethal irradiation. The jurisprudential correctness of Israel's 1981 expression of anticipatory self-defense against Iraq is manifestly obvious. International law is not a suicide pact. Narrowly technical interpretations of permissible force notwithstanding, no state - Israel included - can be required to invite overwhelming aggression. Recently this point was made with considerable specificity in a report to Prime Minister Sharon by "Project Daniel." This report, ISRAEL'S STRATEGIC FUTURE, is now available online, and should be studied closely in the months ahead by all interested parties. To Go To Top

OK, SO WHAT'S THE PLAN? Posted by Israel Zwick, January 28, 2005.

I consider myself fortunate that I get to travel to Israel about twice per year. I would love to visit the Jewish communities in YESHA, which are more commonly known as 'settlements' in the West Bank and Gaza. However, the precious little time that I have there is usually devoted to spending time with my children and little grandchildren. On my last visit, I was playing with my 22-month old grandson, Avi, when his mother, Sara, called out, 'Avi, it's almost shabbos, you have to put your toys away.' Avi then proceeded to identify his muktse toys, the ones that he is not allowed to play with on shabbos, and put them away in a designated area. With great pride, I watched how he diligently completed the task while Sara praised him and then rewarded him with a big hug. Excitedly, I remarked to my wife, Devorah, 'Our little grandson just gave me the key to everlasting peace for the State of Israel.' 'Is that so?' she asked incredulously, 'Did you also find the goose that lays golden eggs?' ' Seriously,' I said, 'I believe that the world's great diplomats ' George, Tony, Kofi, Arik, and Mahmoud ' have a lot to learn from our little grandson.' 'I can agree with that,' Devorah responded, 'but why would the Palestinians have to put away their muktse toys before shabbos, their holy day is on Friday?' 'Not exactly, 'I tried to explain, 'but they need to learn some of the basic principles of parenting skills. At each stage in a child's development, parents try to teach independence, responsibility, and social skills according to the developmental capabilities of the child. So at 2-years, parents can teach a child to put away his toys, share toys with other children, and not hit his baby sister. At 3 years, a child can learn to verbalize his needs instead of whining, crying, and throwing tantrums. As the child goes into the school-age years, he learns to develop greater independence and responsibility. He learns to dress himself, cross the street, do homework, and to respect the needs of other children in school. He learns to accept responsibility for more household chores such as sorting laundry or taking out the garbage. At each stage, parents and teachers try to teach behavior that is socially and developmentally appropriate, while discouraging behaviors that are inappropriate. They do this by exposing the child to positive and adverse consequences for his behaviors. 'I get it now,' exclaimed Devorah, 'Israelis and Arabs need to learn to share their toys together.' 'Now you're getting closer,' I explained, 'Israelis and Arabs need to learn to get along with each other in progressive stages, according to their capabilities. You wouldn't ask a 5-year old child to go to the store by himself and bring back milk and eggs. Similarly, you can't expect a Palestinian State to function adjacent to Israel until they both develop the skills for harmonious coexistence and mutual cooperation.' Devorah looked puzzled, 'Now you lost me with all those big words.' 'It's simple,' I explained, 'You can't have two independent states in such a small area without extensive cooperation between the two. This cooperation has to develop in progressive stages. You can't do step 2 before step 1, you can't put the cart before the horse.' 'Why would the Arabs have to learn to use carts and horses if they are so good at driving trucks and blowing them up in crowded places?' 'Now, you're getting even closer. The first step is that the Arabs must cease and renounce terrorism. It must be made emphatically clear that this is not acceptable behavior in civilized society and that they will get nowhere as long as they persist in this barbaric activity. The State of Israel must emphasize that as long as terrorist activity continues, there can be no concessions to the Arabs. The IDF will do whatever is necessary to provide security for its citizens, even if it has to conduct an operation similar to what the US military did in Fallujah. On the other hand, when terrorist activity ceases, then the IDF can withdraw forces from civilian areas, reduce checkpoints, and improve the quality of life for the Arabs living in the territories. Do you want to hear the rest of plan?' 'I see that I'm not going to be able to get out of this so easily. OK, so what's the plan?' 'The next step is that the Arabs must stop the incitement to hatred, violence, and jihad from the media and classrooms. The Europeans can help here by providing assistance to develop new textbooks and children's programming on TV. When the incitement stops, then Israel can offer to initiate academic exchange programs in the high schools and colleges. This would continue to foster confidence, understanding, and tolerance between Arabs and Jews. Step 3 would be to reduce the high population density in the Arab refugee camps. The UNRWA camps in Gaza and the West Bank have some of the highest population densities in the world. Polls indicate that as many as 40% of the residents would be happy to resettle elsewhere if a suitable offer were made. It's time for the international community to make an effort towards voluntary resettlement of these so-called refugees. For $10 billion dollars, over 5 years, many of these families can be resettled in other Arab countries, Europe, and North America. Resettlement would be strictly voluntary with no coercion. Israel would reciprocate by promising not to use the vacated land for Jewish settlements. The areas vacated by the Arabs would be used for new housing, recreational, and commercial areas. The housing would be for Arabs, but the recreational and commercial areas would be open to Arabs, Jews, and tourists. Step 4 would initiate mutually beneficial projects between Israelis and Palestinians. There could be a joint Chamber of Commerce that would promote trade between the two, and with European countries. There could also be a joint Bureau of Tourism that would assist travel agencies in organizing tours through Arab and Jewish areas, such as a four-day tour through Old Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem, Jericho, Massada, and the Dead Sea. There could also be a joint Emergency Response Team that would respond to large-scale disasters such as airplane crashes, sinking ships, explosions, and large fires. When mutual cooperation is established and operational, then Step 5 could be considered. This would establish a semi-independent Palestinian State, modeled after the relationship of the Vatican to Italy, or Puerto Rico to the United States. Other creative governmental relationships could also be considered.' 'What comes after that,' asked Devorah. 'Actually, I haven't given much thought yet to Step 6 because so far there is no indication that the Arabs are even ready for Step 1.' 'So what do you think are the chances of this plan being adopted?' 'Now it's probably close to zero, but with Arafat gone, there is some slim hope.' 'So why do you bother with all this?' asked Devorah. 'Because it's the right thing to do. The Arabs and Jews have been fighting for the last 80 years, not just since 1967 as many believe. The conflict has been fueled and driven by hatred, intolerance, greed, money, oil, and politics. Maybe it's time to recognize that this hasn't worked and a new approach is needed based on tolerance, acceptance, understanding, and mutual cooperation.' 'Stop dreaming and get ready for shabbos. Hadlokos nerot is in a half-hour.' I always admired Devorah for her common-sense wisdom. Shabbat Sholom. Israel Zwick can be contacted at israel.zwick@earthlink.net To Go To Top

WHAT TO DO ABOUT IRAN; ISRAELI LEFT IS EXTREMIST; EMPTY ISRAELI THREATS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 28, 2005.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT IRAN Strategic decisions in Iran are made by extremist clerics. They do not fall in with the mutual deterrence of nuclear power during the Cold War, but threaten to unleash their bombs, when they get them, especially on Israel, regardless of the consequences. What should Israel do? Choice one, wait and pray for internal reform in Iran. Unfortunately, Iranian reformers have been crushed. Two, wait and hope for US military action. Hope is diminishing, as the countdown to Iranian nuclear capability has only a few months to go (and the US has not prepared public opinion). Israel does not do well in depending upon outside rescue. Three, strike Iran's facilities. Israeli forces would have to travel far, penetrate Iranian defenses, find dispersed targets, and repel retaliation. It probably could do this, if it acts swiftly. Unfortunately, the facilities could be rebuilt swiftly (with the Russians making still more money from it). An otherwise friendly successor regime might resent Israel for it. Four, Israel would negotiate its own nuclear disarmament in return for international guarantees on Iran. International guarantees don't work, as proved again by Iran's development of weaponry contrary to IAEA safeguards and NPT pledges (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/04, p.13 from Gerald Steinberg, Jer. Post, 10/5). What international guarantees would there be that the Arabs wouldn't develop nuclear weapons? Israel needs its own as deterrent against other weapons of mass-destruction and even against a concerted Arab attack with overwhelming force. This would be all the more true, if Israel relinquishes territory now affording it secure borders. "International guarantees" offered to Israel usually are a fraudulent enticement for Israeli appeasement. A FIFTH SOLUTION? Iranian opposition movements have united. The people want democracy to replace theocracy. Although he pledges his second term to freedom, Pres. Bush denies funds to Iranian freedom-fighters. If Iranians overthrew their dictatorship, they would pose less of a threat to other countries, even if, out of national pride, they continued to develop nuclear weapons (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/4, p.12 from Wall t. J, 12/8, Ed.). The "Wall St. J." is puzzled over Pres. Bush's seeming self-contradiction. I think it is rooted in State Dept. politics, a poor reason. In any case, the new unity of pro-democracy movements among Iranians invites another examination of the opportunity to change regimes in Iran. Pres. Bush may have waited too long. Iran may become too close to having nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, for the new movement to take power. The US should be preparing its military option now, to be ready on short notice. The alternative could be worse than 9/11. UNO PEACEKEEPERS & DISEASE SPREADERS Poor countries earn needed foreign exchange by providing UNO peacekeepers. A third of those countries have the highest AIDS rates, but, except for S. Africa, refuse to have their troops tested. They are suspected of spreading AIDS (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 7/24). SEEKING MUSLIMS' GOOD WILL While the US spends hundreds of billions of dollars on defending, building up, and relieving Muslim areas, Islamic terrorists blow up places all over, even in Iraq. Nevertheless, Fox News has a new theme, echoed by our Sec. of State, which is to hope that our aid to Muslim tsunami relief victims may invoke Muslim goodwill. It won't. It can't. Since we are not Islamic, and they don't care what good works we do, they wish to deem us enemies (Winston Mid East Analysis, 1/6). Nor do they give much aid to innocent Muslims. Our Sec. of State is not attuned to foreign cultures. An understanding of the implacable hatred of Islamists must be had, if we are to ward off jihad. MAKING IT EASIER FOR TERRORISTS HERE Led by Mexico, foreign governments have been issuing ID to their nationals in our country. Many of the recipients are here illegally. Identification cards enable them to use banks, thereby pouring billions into the US economy. Banks welcome the change, though N.Y. State Gov. Pataki does not accept such ID. The ID helps illegal aliens to stay here. This foreign move infringes on US sovereignty, for it is the federal government's duty to determine who receives legal residency and may benefit from it. The federal and state governments should not collaborate in helping illegal aliens to evade our immigration laws, but should be enforcing them (NY Sun, 1/24, letter). Among the illegal aliens are terrorists. The ease of obtaining ID facilitated 9/11. EHUD BARAK'S SOLUTION Former General Ehud Barak agrees with the secret service assessment that if the IDF abandons the Philadelphi arms smuggling, border-straddling town, in addition to the rest of Gaza, the P.A. would bring in long-range rockets to bombard Israel's cities with. He said the solution was to withdraw from all of Yesha and build security fences at the new border. How would fences stop the rocket attacks from flying over and past? (IMRA, 1/6.) Wouldn't running away from the terrorists encourage their pursuit? WHAT WOULD ARAB REFUGEES DO IN THE P.A.? Unemployment rages in the P.A., where Abu Mazen and associates have stolen development funds and continue to praise terrorism. He is the West's unlikely hope for reforming the P.A. economy and taking the belligerence out of its military forces. He wants Palestinian Arab refugee descendants to go to Israel, but if Israel won't accept them, he would. What would they do there? Help him try to conquer Israel and share the loot? PM Sharon's withdrawal plan would create the vacuum into which those refugee descendants would move. Instead of considering such strategic defects in the abandonment plan, the largely leftist Israeli media focuses mostly on growing Israeli resistance to the plan. Prominent leftists call for a civil war (IMRA, 1/7). Can't persuade fellow Jews to abandon key Jewish territory to the jihadists? Then kill them? Rather extremist ideologues, the leftists are. ANOTHER ISRAELI BLOW TO POLLARD Jonathan Pollard has asked the Israeli government for recognition as a "prisoner of Zion." The government rejected his application on the grounds that: (1) It does not know that he would want to live in Israel. But it does know. He constantly refers to his desire to live there (IMRA, 1/6). (2) The spy's espionage was not a Zionist activity. Mrs. Pollard disputes that contention. Does the government pretend that its intelligence agencies do not serve the country by espionage? (IMRA, 1/8.) Remember Mossad's reputation of great service to the country? The government knows as well about Pollard's Zionist proclivity as it did about any of the other prisoners of Zion from the former USSR. The government excuses are so shoddy, that they reveal bias. What a shameful government! ARAB AIRPLANES INFRINGING ON ISRAELI AIR SPACE Israel accorded Egyptian and Jordanian airliners over-flights at designated points. "Unauthorized Egyptian passenger aircraft have been increasingly violating Israel's airspace near Eilat, prompting the IAF to station Hawk anti-aircraft missile batteries and fighter planes close by, ready to shoot down the Egyptian planes if they take a hostile turn. In several cases, fighter jets have actually been scrambled, then returned quietly to base." Egypt has ignored Israeli complaints. "The beefed-up air defense is also there to deal with potential attacks by Saudi Arabian F-15s, deployed at the Tobuq air base just 200 kilometers away despite Israeli protests. Israel has received intelligence that al-Qaida has recruited Saudi fighter pilots and fears they could stage a 9/11-type surprise attack." (IMRA, 1/6.) IRAN COUNTERACTS U.S. SANCTIONS ON SYRIA Anticipating US sanctions against Syria, Iran is investing billions of dollars in Syria to cushion the blow and to build up a Syrian port in case the US embargoes an Iranian one (IMRA, 1/6). MORE EMPTY ISRAELI THREATS "Israel warned the Palestinian Authority it is considering renewing its operations in the territories following Friday's killing of an Israel Defense Forces soldier in the West Bank, Israel Radio reported..." "IMRA: Obviously an empty threat, since Israel gives no deadline and does not specify what is expected. If serious, Israel would insist the Martyrs' Brigades be disarmed. Abbas denounced the attack, done by his Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, "but Abbas didn't denounce his Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. By assigning "lots of reasons behind it," Abbas shields the attackers and deflects blame to Israel (IMRA, 1/6). Arafat also denounced attacks but not the attackers and did nothing to prevent future attacks. Most Israeli threats are empty. The government could not get away with them if the country had an independent media. If it did, some journal or TV station would note that the threats are not fulfilled. A watchdog media would teach the people that the threats are just meant for public relations with Iran. When the public will have become skeptical, it would not let empty threats against the Arabs stop the public from agitating for action. The threats impair public relations for nothing. Retaliation, being infrequent, comes as a shock and also impairs Israel's reputation. 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

WHY INVEST IN ISRAEL? Posted by Yoram Ettinger, January 28, 2005.

1. ISRAEL TOOK TWO OF THE TOP THREE PLACES in the WALL ST. JOURNAL's 2004 Technology Innovation Awards: The silver award wet to Given Imaging, Ltd (pill size video camera) and the bronze award went to InSightec Image Guided Treatment, Ltd. (breakthrough surgical system). For further info: http://www.dowjones.com/innovation/ei-winners-2004.html. INTEL's sales of the Intel-Israel-developed Centrino have exceeded $5BN (Globes, Jan. 20). HP employs 2,000 persons in its 4 sites in Israel. 150 were hired during 2004. $22MN were recently invested in the new (Indigo) ink plant in Kiryat Gat (Globes, Jan. 20). CISCO' R&D center in Israel is the largest outside the US, employing 400 persons (Globes, Jan. 11). Switzerland's Serono is investing $20MN in anew bio-tech R&D center in Ness Ziona (Dec. 30, 2004). $66BN is the market value of the 110 Israeli companies traded in overseas stock exchanges. According to Yediot Achronot (Dec. 30, 2004). Seven Israeli companies raised $1.2BN in the US stock market (Sineron, Signature, Shopping.Com, Lipman, Ness, PowerDesign, Ormat). $2.8BN Applied Materials employs 1,000 Israelis - including 600 R&D employees - up from the initial 100 during the early 1990s, when it acquired Israel's Orbot ($110MN) and Opal ($175MN). Five years later, Applied acquired Israel's Ormid for $27MN. 2. 2004 A TURNAROUND YEAR: A 46% rise in funds raised by Israel's high tech companies ($1.46MN - compared with $1MN - raised by 428 companies). $366MN were raised during the 4th quarter of 2004, compared with $246MN in the 4th quarter of 2003 (Globes Business daily, Jan. 25, 2004). Israel's hitech 2004 exports have reached the level of 2000 - $13BN (Globes, Jan. 4). 3. STANDARD & POOR has upgraded Israel's ratings outlook to stable (from negative), noting Israel's fiscal responsibility, the $9BN US loan guarantees, the renewed economic growth and the improved balance of payment. According to Globes (Jan. 12) S&P raised Israel's credit ratings to "A" and "A1" (domestic currency) and "A-" and "A1" (foreign exchange). Citigroup's SMITH BARNEY has upgraded Israel to "overweight" from "Neutral": "[Israel's] positive domestic trends that we highlighted last October continue to strengthen...Our Israeli equities combine value and defensive characteristics that will be important in the more volatile environment we expect to see this year. We see Israel's long period of underperformance as reversing in 2005...Growth is likely to have reached 4% in 2004, compared with expectations of 2.6% just a year ago, leaving the prolonged early-decade recession behind. Exports remain the key driver of growth (40% of GDP), although private consumption should continue to strengthen in 2005, growing 5.1% (having risen 3.2% in 2004). With inflation negligible, interest rates are likely to remain at around 3.5% for some time...External balance remain healthy, boosted by an increase in tourism revenues...and the appointment of Stanley Fischer, formerly of the IMF and Citigroup, as governor of the Central Bank of Israel (Globes, Jan. 24). 4. Cadence has acquired Israel's Verisity for $282MN (Globes, Jan. 14). US-based UGS has acquired Israel's Technomatics for $228MN in cash (Globes, Jan. 5). Kodak has acquired Israel's Orex for $50MN in cash (Yediot Achronot, Jan. 19). The $4BN SanDisk has acquired Israel's MDRM for $15MN (Globes, Jan. 5). Germany's AG Software has acquired Israel's SabraTec fro $12MN (Globes, Jan. 10). Shamrock has acquired 25% of Israel's Polimar (Globes, Dec. 28). 5. JAFCO, Yamanouchi, Yasuda, Novel BioVentrues, OrbiMed Advisors, Millenia Partners, Forward Ventures, CMEA Ventures, PA Consulting, HBM BioVnetures and SR One participated in a $43MN 3rd round by Israel's Predix Pharmaceuticals (The Marker, Jan. 26, 2005). Medical equipment giant, Guidant led a $10MN round in Israel's Rimon Medical, completed a $26MN round. Carlisle, USVP, France Telecom and Nova participated in a $23MN 4th round by Israel's Actelis (Globes, Jan. 25). BGV (3Com), Accell VC Fund and APEX participated in the 1st $20MN round by Israel's GoNetworks (Jan. 28). APEX, Benchmark, Sigma Partners participated in a $20MN 4th round by Israel's Digital Fuel (Ha'aretz, Jan. 6). NY-based Radius VC fund and Hospital For Special Surgery participated in an $18MN round by Israel's Impliant (The Marker, Dec. 29). Intel Capital co-led, with Pitango, a 1st round of $12MN by Israel's Gteko (The Marker, Dec. 29). The first part of the round was led by Liley Ventures and LBK (The Marker, Dec. 29). INTEL, SAP, Walden, Index Ventures, Azure and Platinum participated in a $10MN round by Israel's Zend (Globes, Jan. 25). Sequoia and APEX participated in an $8MN 3rd round by Israel's BitBand (Dec. 28, 2005). US-based Bessmer VC Fund led a $7MN round by Israel's Cyota (Ha'aretz, Dec. 23). Motorola participated in a $6MN round by Israel's Lomus (Globes, Jan. 25). Toibb Enterprises led a 3rd round of $4.4MN in Israel's VKB (Globes, Jan. 20). Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is an editor and consultant who lives in Jerusalem. To Go To Top

UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL IS IRRESPONSIBLE Posted by Steven Plaut, January 28, 2005.

1. This article, "Unilateral withdrawal is irresponsible," was written by Michael Rubin, who is resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and editor of the Middle East Quarterly. It is from today's Ha'aretz. The Baghdad restaurant grew silent, all eyes on the television. It was January 29, 2004. Every Arabic news channel had its cameras trained on a Beirut runway, where a German transport plane was due to land. Israel had just released Sheikh Abdel Karim Obeid, once leader of Hezbollah's southern Lebanon operations, after almost 15 years in an Israeli prison. The group of largely pro-Western Iraqis had tears in their eyes. "The first Arab victory over Israel was [the withdrawal from Lebanon] in May 2000. This is the second," an Iraqi professor explained. Six weeks earlier, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had announced plans to withdraw unilaterally from the Gaza Strip. A broad range of Israeli politicians cautiously endorsed the move. While European diplomats wrung their hands nervously, President George W. Bush called Sharon's plan "historic and courageous." Nothing could be more untrue. While Israelis might fear civil and political strife if settlers are forced from their homes, Sharon's plan will reinvigorate terrorism not only in Israel, but as an international tactic of choice. The power of television is tremendous across the Middle East. Arabic satellite stations like the Qatar-based Al Jazeera, Hezbollah's Al-Manar, and Iran's Al-Alam deluge their audiences with images of American defeat: the 1983 U.S. withdrawal from Beirut, and the flight from Mogadishu a decade later. Watching television on any Baghdad evening, I would see American diplomats fleeing Vietnam. To the Iraqi audience the message was clear: Bush may say America has staying power, but it is weak. Al Jazeera mastered has information warfare. On days without American casualties, the station simply rebroadcasts images of the previous day's roadside bomb. The Iranian government primes its audience with similar messages. While critics rave about the latest Iranian art films, the normal fare for ordinary Iranians is far different. Sitting among Iranian soldiers packed into a Shiraz movie theater, I watched a Rambo-type film pitting Hezbollah characters against hapless Israeli soldiers. I tried to be inconspicuous as the crowd began to shout "kill the Jew" in anticipation of events on screen. The message to the soldiers was clear: Violence works. Imagery can be equally powerful on Israeli television. More than 20 years later, older Israelis remember television pictures of residents of Yamit battling soldiers during that settlement's 1982 evacuation. But while such images will have a profound impact on the Israeli electorate and their replication may cause some government ministers to reconsider their support for Sharon's plan, far more damaging to Israel and the United States would be the subsequent pictures. Images of Hezbollah and Hamas flags flying over Jewish settlements like Netzarim and Kfar Yam will torpedo hope not only of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, but also of an end to terrorism in Iraq, Turkey, Kashmir and against the West in general. Israelis and some in the Palestinian Authority may be sincere in a desire for peace, but rejectionists abound, not only in Lebanese and Syrian refugee camps, but also in Iraq's Sunni Triangle, Iran's Revolutionary Guard bases and Pakistani seminaries. A Hamas flag over Netzarim will justify 37 years of terrorism. The reasons for Israel's withdrawal will be irrelevant on the streets of the Islamic world. If terrorism can free Gaza, why not the West Bank, the Galilee, Indian Kashmir or democratic Iraq? Why compromise if terrorism obviates the need for concession? There is a limit to the West's stamina. Neither Israelis nor Americans should assume their opponents would be unwilling to pay the price of continued violence. As the Shi'ite commemoration of `Ashura approaches, millions will commemorate the 680 martyrdom of Imam Husayn, ritually cursing Sunni leaders of the day, as if Husayn's death was yesterday. The price of continued terrorism and insurgency might be high, but terror masters themselves often do not pay the price. Earlier this month in Baghdad, I interviewed Iraqis fleeing violence in the northern city of Mosul. Without exception, each said that the insurgents who invaded the city were in their mid to late teens; they complained that the insurgent leaders were using impressionable youth as cannon fodder. But so long as oil-rich Arab states and Iran are willing to subsidize incitement on television, in schools and in mosques, there will be no shortage of recruits. Not only Israelis, but also Iraqis, Indians, Turks, Americans and Europeans will pay the price. Seeking peace is honorable, but Sharon is gambling. Whether motivated by a sincere desire for peace or for an egotistical need to rewrite his place in history is irrelevant. Unilateral withdrawal is irresponsible. Should Gaza be part of a comprehensive deal, pictures of Hamas flags over Gaza will be immaterial, for they can be counterbalanced with images of Israeli embassies hoisting flags in Damascus, Riyadh and Tehran. But if Sharon goes ahead with Gaza disengagement, generations both inside and outside Israel will be sacrificed upon the alter of his legacy. 2. Ah, the honor of being called "totalitarian" by America's chief Stalinist, by the Khmer Rouge's favorite professor, and by the friend of Holocaust Deniers everywhere. This is from the UK Times Higher Education Supplement (http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2019130). It is called 'We have our eye on you...so watch out' and was written by Michael North, 28 January 2005. Do websites such as Campus Watch seek balance or do they undermine integrity? Michael North reports Israeli academic Neve Gordon was not too bothered by the image of himself transmuting into Hitler posted on Masada2000 - a website containing a "hitlist" of 7,000 people it deems "enemies of the Israeli state". He says: "I didn't take it seriously. It was totally pornographic." More worrying, says Gordon, a professor of politics at Ben Gurion University, is that such sites have the same audience as the less sensational right-wing websites that target academics who express views sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. They also share, he says, a myopia about the nuances of the Middle East debate. Campus Watch, in the US, and Israel Academic Monitor, in Israel, post articles that attack academics' work, encourage donors to these academics' institutions to withdraw funding and urge universities either to sack the academics or to thwart their progress up the career ladder - all in the name of free speech. Gordon, who is on sabbatical at the University of California, Berkeley, has been targeted by both websites. He says that the Israeli site, written in English, is failing to have a big impact. "It is asking students to become collaborators and to report professors, but it needs a broader Hebrew audience." In contrast, Campus Watch, a slick site sponsored by the Middle East Forum in the US, has, according to Gordon and other US academics, strongly contributed to the post 9/11 campaigns to discredit left-wing academics. Joseph Massad, assistant professor in modern Arab politics at Columbia University, New York, is at the sharp end of the pro-Israeli groups' zero tolerance approach. His bid for tenure is being opposed. He says: "The Campus Watch website appears to be the first salvo in a much larger campaign targeting US universities and especially academics doing work on the Middle East who have critical views of the policies of the state of Israel and of US Middle East policy. Since then, there have been more protracted campaigns, the latest of which is one targeting me that is spearheaded by a Boston-based Zionist group called the David Project and the right-wing newspaper the New York Sun. The campaign has led a congressman to ask Columbia to fire me." Rachid Khalidi, professor of Arab studies at the Middle East Institute at Columbia and an American of Palestinian origin, has also been targeted by Campus Watch. He has a taped phone message that says: "Khalidi, Columbia, alumni love Campus Watch because they keep an eye on thugs like you. We have our eye on you. You'd better watch out." Khalidi believes the aim of Campus Watch is to have a "chilling effect" on free speech - a term echoed by two other academics targeted by the website, Eric Foner, professor of history at Columbia and Yvonne Haddad, professor of the history of Islam at the Center for Muslim Christian Understanding at Georgetown University. Foner says: "The purpose of these sites is intimidation, not information. Encouraging students to report on comments professors make that they deem unfair or unpatriotic could have a chilling effect on education." Khalidi adds: "There is a dearth of proper debate in the media and politics about the Middle East. The only place where these views can be found is in academia. They want to shut down this last window." Khalidi claims Campus Watch is closely linked to a wider campaign of actions against so-called pro-Palestinian academics. He cites the recent attempt by some members of Congress to push through a law threatening funding to universities whose faculties do not stick to the defence of US government policies; changes in grant proposals demanded by rich university funders, such as the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, to affirm that beneficiaries do not support terrorism; and the back-door (recess) nomination of Daniel Pipes, founder of Campus Watch, to the government-funded United States Institute of Peace - an event, according to Foner, that proved the US Administration "at least retains a sense of irony". Pipes, who is also director of the Middle East Forum, recently stood down from the board of USIP, which makes key research grants to academics working in Middle East studies, saying that "at times I felt frustrated". Khalidi is delighted at the development and also pleased that key members of the institute attacked Pipes publicly for objecting to the institute hosting a conference with the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy last year. But Khalidi concedes that academics can do little against the power of neoconservatives such as Pipes and the extensive and rich networks of pro-Israeli groups, such as the new Israel on Campus Coalition. Pipes, for his part, succinctly defends Campus Watch's mission to "alert outsiders about the problems in Middle East studies and to challenge Middle East studies specialists to think about their field". He says the aim is "to improve and balance, not to cause anyone to lose a job". Asked if he is fuelling an unhealthy bias in the US media, he says: "You must be kidding", then refers to the website of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, which gives examples of numerous anti-Israeli reports. The driving force behind the Israel Academic Monitor website is more forthcoming in his defence of his group's work. Steven Plaut, professor of economics at Haifa University, refers to his crusade against "the crazies" using the classroom "to impose their extremism on their students" and as a "bully pulpit for their political agendas". And he names US academic Noam Chomsky as an example of such people "who passionately hate their country". To which Chomsky, professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, replies: "He is borrowing from the lexicon of totalitarianism: Soviet dissidents were accused of 'passionately hating their country' because of their criticism of state policies. For the totalitarian mind, the state is identified with the country, its culture and its people." Gordon is suing Plaut for libel for, he says, alleging that he is a Holocaust denier. Plaut denies libel and his supporters accuse Gordon of censoring free speech. However, Gordon and other Israeli academics say that debate in Israel is far healthier than in the US. Khalidi comments that many Israeli journalists would not be published in American newspapers. Anat Biletzki, chair of philosophy at Tel Aviv University, says that only a handful of radicals are really targeted by the Right, but adds that there is self-censorship. She gives an example of such "undercurrents of McCarthyism". "I was called to the dean when two students complained about me sneaking politics into my teaching. The university constitution says we are perfectly within our rights to talk politics in class. Two weeks later the rector called me up to say he had heard I talked politics in class. He said 'in times such as these we have to think twice about everything we say'. I said 'in times such as these there are things that have to be said'." For now, European academics critical of Israeli government policies work in a less intimidating environment. Anoush Ehteshami, director of Durham University's Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, says the debate is more polarised in the US than anywhere else. "I have lots of contacts with colleagues here and in Finland, Germany and France. None of them has complained of intimidation." Ehteshami says the "poisoned atmosphere" in the US since 9/11 is deterring UK academics from applying for posts across the pond. He knows two, but refuses to name them. "They don't want pressure to be 'patriotic'," he says. But he adds that resistance to the neocons is taking hold, a view confirmed by Lynne Segal, professor of psychology at Birkbeck, London University, and a member of the international group Faculty for Israeli/Palestinian Peace as well as Jews for Justice for Palestinians in Britain. Such groups campaign in the name of academics who find themselves threatened, holding seminars and conferences and distributing their views to a wide audience. "I think intimidation is possible. These are very troubling developments and we need to be watchful," Segal says. Ehteshami says that, for now, inquiries by students about his political views are just "inquiries, not a challenge". He adds: "This is a witch-hunt that compromises academic integrity and freedom that, ironically, in the past the US was very proud of. God forbid it happens in the UK." 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. To Go To Top

THE LEFT AND SHARON ARE DELIBERATELY PUSHING ISRAEL INTO A CIVIL WAR Posted by Moshe Feiglin, January 28, 2005.

The Left and Sharon are deliberately pushing Israel into a civil war. We shall defend Gush Katif and the State valiantly. We shall not permit the Left, that desires Jewish blood to be shed, to create provocative acts of mutual firing. We shall never bring weapons to the regions of the confrontation. Anyone who does so will be regarded as an agent provocateur and removed from the area. We are happy to announce that the new Manhigut Yehudit website in English is on the air. It is the fruit of the initiative of Louis Gordon, who has devoted countless hours to the project, on a volunteer basis. The new features of the website include not only an improved appearance but the creation of a new virtual conception for the presentation of our messages. We intend to subsequently bring the websites in Hebrew and Russian into line with the English one. The website has a link to Shmuel Sackett's "Jewish Leadership Show". We HIGHLY recommend you listen to this very informative and entertaining program. The new website address is very simple. Since our goal is to make Israel Jewish, the website is simply: www.jewishisrael.org In addition, the website contains Moshe Feiglin and Shmuel Sackett's action packed schedules, details on upcoming events in the USA and ISRAEL, press releases, detailed bios and pictures of all Manhigut leaders and even a Manhigut STORE where you can buy anything from hooded sweatshirts to mouse pads with the new and exciting Manhigut Yehudit logo!!! The English website will be run by Dovid Shirel from Hebron, who will join Rabbi Elitzur Segal and Asya Entova, who manage the Hebrew and Russian websites, respectively. We should like to warmly thank Lewis for his efforts, and hope that this professionalism in the field of the Internet will accelerate the belief-based revolution. Publication of the Booklet: Clarification of the Obligation to Refuse to Obey Orders To view the booklet (in Hebrew only) http://he.manhigut.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=docclick& Itemid=105&bid=33&limitstart=0&limit=5 The intensity of the attacks caused by the publication of the booklet by Manhigut Yehudit clearly indicates that we have hit the target. 70,000 copies have been printed and distributed, and they have all been eagerly grabbed. We are preparing to print an even larger amount, to be distributed by Young Manhigut Yehudit at road junctions, bus stops, and in all other possible ways. Why did the publication of the booklet cause so much noise? Why is it so important? In his heart every soldier and civilian with a conscience knows that the expulsion order is a crime. Even Sharon attempted to bypass these feelings by giving a public direction that every soldier is permitted to ask his officer to exempt him from expelling his own parents. You see what he means? I shall expel your parents, you shall expel mine, and everyone will be happy. The entire uprooting plan is based on the assumption that we shall act as robots and not as humans. Those who raise their heads and explain to people that they were created in G-d's image, also explain that they have personal responsibility and should not take part in perpetrating these crimes. Those who do this are endangering the basis without which it will be impossible to carry out this devilish plan. Consequently we are witnessing panic-driven opposition to refusal to obey orders. Naturally this did not occur when the Left made extensive use of this weapon. About 10,000 soldiers have already signed the declaration circulated by the Mateh Homat Magen, led by Noam Livnat, stating that they will not obey this criminal order. In the face of the attack against refusal it is very important to explain to the broad public the justification for the action, and to strengthen it from aspects of belief and democracy. It was quite clear that the "nice guys" in the Likud would try to use the publication of the booklet to expel the heads of Manhigut Yehudit from the party. We knew this when we published it. However, we did not enter politics in order to match ourselves to the caprices of one politician or another. We came in order to lead, and if for tactical reasons we were to remain silent when fundamental issues related to the soul of the nation come into debate, there would have been no point in our entering the arena of leadership of Israeli society. The meaning of leadership is to designate a target and indicate the way to achieving it. Leadership gives backing, legitimacy, and a feeling of justice to the public. It does not hide behind activists or attempt to be strengthened by them. This may well be the difference between leaders and politicians, and we have to make sure that we remain on the right side of the equation. We shall of course oppose any attempts to expel us from the Likud, but it should be kept in mind that Manhigut Yehudit is not a personal affair, but a new awareness being developed by tens of thousands of people. Members of Manhigut Yehudit, and veteran members of the Likud who support them, now represent more than 10% of all members of the party and the Likud Central Committee, and it is impossible to expel them. The attempt to get rid of Manhigut Yehudit in the Likud by chopping off its head is ridiculous. It is based on the fundamental assumption of small-time politicians that the motive force behind Manhigut Yehudit is the same as theirs - personal political ambition. They are incapable of understanding what they are up against. Study Day for Likud Members Regarding the Subject of Refusal to Obey Orders As we have said, the right way to combat ideas is to convince people by means of an open, serious debate, free of threats. We are therefore pleased to announce that a study day will be held in the above subject. It will take the form of an evening in which all the views for and against refusal will be presented. Those who wish to hear serious opinions in the Likud, and not only threats voiced by Sharon's supporters, are invited to come. The following are details of the meeting: Hametzuda Issue #9 We are currently completing the preparation of issue no. 9 of Hametzuda. The hundreds of distributors, including members of Young Manhigut Yehudit, who every month bring copies of Hametzuda to the homes of Likud members, are the real front line troops in the belief-based revolution. The direct contact between the belief-based and national publics, and the development of direct channels of information as an alternative to the existing media, all create over the course of time a new awareness amongst Likud members. We call on all those who are prepared to take part in this fundamental strategic move to contact us now. (To join the ranks of the distributors email: mailto:jer-office@manhigut.org) We shall, with G-d's help, reap the fruits of this effort in the Primaries for the leadership of the Likud. It is important to remember that the struggle is not about Gush Katif, that is one of the battles along the way. The real struggle is for leadership of the country. In addition to the personal distribution we also mail the newspaper to all Likud Central Committee members, MKs, and ministers (and, of course, to the Prime Minister himself). To the copies of Hametzuda sent by mail we shall attach on this occasion the booklet Clarification of the obligation to refuse. We hope that our elected representatives will peruse the booklet objectively and take note of its contents. Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

ONE MUST NOT OBEY AN ILLEGAL ORDER Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 28, 2005.

This is called "Israel's former Deputy Atty. General, Prof. Nahum Rackover: One Must Not Obey an 'Illegal Order'" and was written by Michael Guttman, Staffer, Israel Resource News Agency. It appeared in IsraelBehindTheNews.com 21st January, 2005 (http://israelvisit.co.il/cgi-bin/friendly.pl?url=Jan-21-05!conscience) Israel's former Deputy Attorney General, Professor Nahum Rackover, now head of the Jewish Legal Heritage Society most recently convened a brain trust of Israeli experts in Jewish and Israeli jurisprudence to discuss the legal ramifications of Prime Minister Sharon's current policies. Specifically, Prof. Rackover's conference addressed the question what would define "illegal orders", as defined through both Israeli and Jewish law. Meeting Prof. Rackover at his home in Jerusalem, I asked him about the dimensions of the Israeli law on the topic of what would constitute an "illegal order". Prof. Rackover pointed to a 1977 law that deals with individual liability despite one's acting on the basis of superior orders. That statute clearly states that one is in fact normally not responsible for actions committed on the basis of such an order. However, an important exception is made for those orders that are "obviously illegal." In such a case, the individual is responsible and liable to any resulting punishment. According to Prof. Rackover, the individual then has a legal right and obligation to disobey an obviously illegal order. Prof. Rackover also referred to a section of the Israeli Military Code (no.125, enacted in 1955) which provides similar guidelines on the issue: IDF Soldiers have no obligation to fulfill a command that is obviously illegal. Rackover notes that Israeli military courts have repeatedly placed individual responsibility on soldiers who failed to act accordingly (the 1957 case in which IDF troops were convicted of following an illegal order to fire on a busload of workers from Cfar Kassam during a curfew at the time of the Suez campaign was cited as the most well known example in this regard. Every IDF soldier who participated in the incident was convicted of following what constituted an illegal order). Regarding the legality or illegality of Sharon's current policies, Rackover introduced the works of Law Professor Eliav Shochetman, and mentioned that Shochetman argues that there exists, based on historical and international agreement and law, a right for the Jewish people to settle the Land of Israel. Any actions devised to prevent or negate this right would therefore be considered illegal. Shochetman derives this historic right from the decisions and guidelines set forth by the League of Nations and the United Nations, among other sources. Rackover, drawing from Shochetman's work, has addressed the aspects of Jewish law involved. He cites the views of the former Chief Rabbis Shapira and Eliyahu, and the various positions and decisions of other authorities in Jewish law, to support the position that Sharon's current policies which require expulsion of Jews from their homes in the land of Israel as being an illegal act. Prof. Rackover referred to sources which explain that the Jewish legal obligation to settle the Land of Israel, in all areas according to the Rambam, as a divine precept from the Torah, and that it would therefore be illegal to withdraw Jews from any areas of the land, and is forbidden for one to participate in such actions. According to Prof. Rackover, citing Maimonides in "The Laws of Kings" (chapter 3), one in fact has an obligation to disobey a king who issues an illegal order. Additionally, Rackover briefly dealt with the human rights aspect. He pointed to the basic law of the state of Israel, including a 1994 Knesset law, which accords every individual the right to his or her own body, dignity, and property. Rackover also noted the opinion of the late Deputy President of the Supreme Court, Judge Haim Cohen, that it is worse than killing to force someone out of his/her home. One question that remains is what makes an order "obviously illegal": Is this to be determined by the individual or society at large? While Rackover personally believes Sharon's plan - which he labeled "undemocratic" - would fall under this category, and therefore necessitate disobedience, he noted that Israeli military courts at the present would not seem to support this view. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. To Go To Top

WHO'S STOKING THE WAR? Posted by Evelyn Hayes, January 28, 2005.

Who's Stoking the War? Who's feeding the fire? Who's paying for Jihad? Who's getting paid? Who's stoking another Jewish war? Who's building walls while taking borders down? Who's establishing tyranny while disestablishing democracy? Who's disengaging with patriots while engaging with "hatriots"? Who's playing with evil? Who's making green peace bloody red leaving Jews dead? Who's stoking the war and getting rich? Who's feeding the fire and getting dhimmis burnt? Who? Who? Who? It's the wise owl's cry! Why? Why? Why? It's the innocents' sigh. Again. Again. Again. Risen from hell. Reclaimed and Redeemed. Hell is being raised. Gan Eden is been sacked from within and hacked by the "hatriots". And the courts are prosecuting right and giving wrong rein. They're after the law abiders, patriots, gardeners turning plowshares into swords, churning out peace for disaccord. Who's gambling with good? Who's gambling on bad when they're making it worse? From intifada to armada turning rocks to stocks of rockets! How much is divested and when will they stop it? Who's letting loose war and attacking the lettuce? Who's attacking the army and arming jihad? Who's playing with "deathlords" and denying the praying? Who's unstalking the celery? Who's walking Israel out of Israel against its will? Who's denying the deeds and hiding the history? Who's erasing and replacing the replaced? Who's stoking the war? Who's dividing the Jewish nation and pocketing Jew's gold? Who's clashing with Hashem? When will the silencing be abated? When will truth and justice be liberated? Evelyn Hayes is the author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because hearts are softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

TO HELL WITH AUSCHWITZ, GIVE ME ISRAEL Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, January 27, 2005.

To hell with Auschwitz, and damn those people who invoke its memory, but ignore the injustices being done to the Jewish People today. A certain radical rabbi used to say, "I'd rather be a live Jew that everyone hates, then a dead Jew that everyone mourns over." Today, they mourn over Auschwitz, but are working hard to take away from the Jewish People its most basic national right, its homeland, Israel. Though most countries (about 150 out of 191 member nations) voted in favor of holding the 60th anniversary commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz (Jan. 27th) at the UN, the General Assembly was less than half full, and Jordan was the only Arab country that remained during Holocaust memorial speeches by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Israeli Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom. The UN Secretary-General spoke first, saying, "The evil which murdered 6,000,000 Jews in the death camps still threatens us today." He referred to more recent genocides, but then explained the "tragedy of the Jewish people was unique. Two thirds of all Europe's Jews, including one and a half million children, were murdered. An entire civilization, which had contributed far beyond its numbers to the cultural and intellectual riches of Europe and the world, was uprooted, destroyed, laid waste." The only representative of an Arab country to speak, was Jordan's UN ambassador, Prince Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein. Yet, he took advantage of the occasion to attack Israel's alleged mistreatment of the "Palestinians," rather than to express solidarity with the sufferings of the Jewish People at the Holocaust commemoration. Referring to "one people dominat[ing] another, deny[ing] the latter many of its most basic rights, and so, with the passage of time, also degrade[ing] it as a people." Where was Israel's peace partner, Egypt? About the UN commemoration, the Egyptian government-owned newspaper, Al-Ahram Al-Messa'i, commented on what it called Israel's "investment" in "the so-called Holocaust." The newspaper criticized the UN for holding the event, writing in its editorial, "The UN adopted the Israeli standpoint, paying no heed to the sufferings of the Palestinians under the Israeli occupation." On the contrary, "commemorating the Holocaust requires opening the issue of the daily Israeli violations against the Palestinians...." There you have it; the Egyptians (and the rest of the Arab/Islamic world) compare the Holocaust to the "Palestinian" situation. But what took the UN 60 years to discuss the Holocaust? Why did a major UN anti-racism conference a couple years ago in Durban, South Africa, ignore Anti-Semitism? Why did the UN declare, "Zionism is Racism" between 1975 and 1991, when the UN itself approved the creation of the State of Israel? Which was the culmination of the Zionist movement's efforts to liberate the Jewish People's homeland from foreign occupation. Who cares what the UN, the Quartet (US, EU, UN, and Russia) and the rest of the world thinks...they're a bunch of liars, hypocrites, and accomplices to murder. Has the past memorialization of the Holocaust prevented any mass murder in the last 60 years? The same hypocrites, who cry today about Auschwitz, watched as Cambodia and Rwanda happened, and now stand on the sidelines, while Arabs in Darfur, Sudan, slaughter black Africans (see my article "There They Go Again, Those Arab Racists"). That includes Kofi Annan. Jews too can get caught up in this duplicity. Recently, some Jewish Gazans adopted an orange Star of David, as a symbol of protest against Ariel Sharon's planned expulsion of Jews from Gaza. Well, you can't imagine how fast they got jumped on. It was a true media frenzy, leftists of all colors, Yad V'Shem (Israel's National Holocaust Museum), a few survivors of the Holocaust (although other survivors in Gaza put on the orange star), and even some assorted "right-wing" supporters of the "settlers" all complained that such a symbol (mimicking the Nazi's use of yellow stars to identify Jews) was too sacrosanct to be used for "political" purposes. Before that, a "right-wing" activist got into trouble writing a public letter comparing the head of the Transfer Authority, Yonaton Bassi, who is in charge of organizing the "settlers" that the Israeli government wants to throw out of their communities, to the "Judenrat" (the Holocaust-era Jewish committees that helped the Nazis organize Jews). People across the Israeli political spectrum criticized her for the comparison, with the usual assortment of leftists calling for a police investigation, with which they obliged. But an important point must be made here. The Holocaust, i.e. the mass murder of about six million Jewish men, women and children during World War II by the Nazis and their helpers, didn't happen overnight. It began by the demonization of Jews (for centuries throughout Europe) and in Nazi Germany in particular. It moved on to the deligitimization of fellow German citizens just because they were Jews, depriving them of home, study, occupation, and business. When the Nazis occupied other countries, mass expulsion of Jews from their homes began. They were moved to "Ghettos," then later deported to labor camps and murder camps. In other words, it was implemented in phases. Those in Israel, who don't like the comparisons to the Holocaust or use of Holocaust-era symbols or language, should act very carefully not to encourage the comparison. Stop the late night surprise expulsions of "illegal" outposts. Stop the brutalizing of Jews by the police, who protest expulsion policies. Stop the demonizing of "settlers". Stop acting like that NOW! The demonization of Jews has been taking place in the Ara/Islamic world for some time now, and the deligitimization of the Jewish People's national political rights (the State of Israel) has followed. Anti-Semitism (or better called Judeo-pathic behavior), masquerading as anti-Zionism is rife again today in Europe and among international leftist circles globally. I guess the "political capital" of the Holocaust has run out, even in Europe, today they barely mourn over dead Jews (except for our newly found friends at the UN). Some even plan the next massacre. While much of the world supports the enemies of Israel (the "Palestinians" for example), "for the sake of peace" no less, Ariel Sharon and his helpers have demonized the "settlers," deligitimizing them and their communities in the process. The democratic exercise of free speech, to voice opposition to Sharon's expulsion plans, has been labeled "extreme right-wing" behavior, and gone beyond some imaginary "red line". Plans to expel over 8,000 Jews from their homes are underway, and numerous "leaks" from high-ranking government officials (like Olmert and Peres) have stated that this is just phase one. Even the discredited former Prime Minister, Ehud Barak (who is planning his political comeback), is still bantying about the Clinton plan, that the late mass murderer Yasser Arafat rejected. That plan, would require the expulsion of about another 50,000 to 80,000 Jews from Judea and Samaria. So, expulsion of Jews from their homes and communities is high on the Israeli political agenda, as they maneuver to make nice with the "Palestinians". How could this be? How could Israel's right to exist be being questioned internationally, while Jew-hatred is flourishing in all quarters, yet Jews are being persecuted in their own homeland? The words of Shimon Peres, just after losing to Binyamin Netanyahu in 1996 (during an interview in the left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz) reveals a lot. When asked, "What happened in these elections?" Peres answered, "We lost." The interviewer then asked, "Who is we?" Peres replied, "We, that is the Israelis." The interviewer clarified, "And who won?" Peres said, "All those who do not have an Israeli mentality." Then, the interviewer asked, "And who are they?" Peres answered, "Call it the Jews." So, back in 1996, Shimon Peres already differentiated between, the "religious," the "settlers," and the "nationalists," as "The Jews" who rejected his "Oslo Dreams," and those cosmopolitans willing to compromise on their identity and homeland, "The Israelis". Sharon is just taking it one step further. Peres could only dream his Oslo dreams of peace with the enemies of the Jewish People, and the forced expulsions of the Jews from their homes. But now, Sharon, through his Gaza Expulsion Plan, is working to implement Peres' dream. While Jews as a whole and Israel in particular are under fierce attack globally (both politically and through terrorism), many Jews are also under attack locally in Israel (not only from Kassam rockets and suicidal-genocidal terrorists), but by "The Israelis". "The Israelis" (like Peres and Sharon) prefer to die and be memorialized by the world, rather than confront the world's ire while defending themselves against "Palestinian" terror. "The Israelis" are working hard to destroy "The Jews" lives in Gaza, Samaria and Judea, trying to please the world, rather than sticking to the eternal G-D given truth (that the Land of Israel belongs exclusively to the Jewish People). "The Israelis" are trying to uproot the Jewish People's millennia-old love for its homeland. It seems not only has the rest of the world not learned the lessons of the Holocaust, but also "The Israelis" haven't either. "Never Again" as used by international do-gooders has become an empty slogan. It hasn't prevented new genocides, and it hasn't prevented the rise of virulent Judeopathy either. "The Israelis" are just a couple steps behind, hardly preventing attacks against Jews by "Palestinians," always worried what the world will say, and now, planning their own expulsion program. To hell with Auschwitz...and the past, give me life, strength, the glorious future of the Jewish People, and my homeland, the Land of Israel. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY Posted by David Frankfurter, January 27, 2005.

Dear Friends, Today, January 27th 2005, is the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz. The world chose this as an international Holocaust memorial day, with activities and ceremonies throughout the month of January. Remembering the systematic attempt to round up and kill the Jewish population of Europe is intended to prompt the world to prevent such tragedies from recurring. Sadly, the evidence is not too encouraging. One need not look to the past - for example in Cambodia, Rwanda, Iraq, Chechnya - to realize how ineffective the world has been in this endeavour. As world leaders were mumbling the platitudes of "never again" from the podium of the UN, the Sudanese air force took off to bomb black villagers in Darfur, consolidating the ongoing ethnic cleansing in Sudan. Nevertheless, this is a time when countries around the world - including Arab nations who in the past declared explicit war against the Jews - have united to at least pay lip service to the lessons that the world has sadly not learned from the Holocaust. So how is the commemoration is received by the Palestinian Arabs? On a formal level, it would seem that the Palestinian Arabs have decided to join the family of nations. Newspaper reports noted that the PLO made a special application to attend the Holocaust memorial session of the General Assembly of the UN. The reports imply that they did not walk out when Kofi Annan severely breached protocol by arranging for the Israeli national anthem to be played and the Jewish mourner's prayer to be chanted in the UN plenum. This is a huge compromise step, especially considering that the current Chairman of the Palestinian Authority's university thesis was dedicated to Holocaust denial. Elsewhere, Palestinian Arabs and their supporters have been less unequivocal. The Muslim Council of Britain boycotted commemorations of the liberation of Auschwitz, as being not "racially inclusive" - using the code words that the event should include the "holocaust" of the Palestinian intifada to thinly mask an exploitation of every opportunity to push a particular political agenda, and a refusal to recognize the murder of Jews as a crime. Speaking on Israeli radio, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat explained away the Palestinian position very blithely. According to him, not a single Palestinian Arab supported the Nazis or their terrible holocaust of the Jews in Europe. The interviewer was too polite (or ignorant) to probe Erakat about Arafat's uncle - the fanatic Nazi collaborator Haj Amin al-Husseini and his influence on Palestinian Arabs at the time. In his role as Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini he personally consulted with Hitler over the extermination of European Jewry. The Mufti's speeches of encouragement were broadcast in Arabic to Islamic troops fighting with the Nazis. Erakat went on to claim that any association between Palestinians and anti-Semitism was a European attempt to shift the blame to Arabs for what they did to the Jews. Hatred of Jews is totally unacceptable in Palestinian Arab society, he explained. The only world evil to be addressed is Israeli occupation and violence. The interviewer, again polite, and did not remind the forgetful Erakat of the terrorists and suicide bombers sent to murder Jewish women and children in cold blood. She did not challenge him to explain European funded Palestinian textbooks, which refuse to recognize any historic or political presence of Jews in the holy land. Nor did she mention the Jew-hatred broadcast on Palestinian Authority controlled television. In fact, Itamar Marcus, director of Palestinian Media Watch, which maps current trends in Palestinian society as reflected in its own media, says that little has changed. "While the Israeli and foreign media are reporting moderation and a Palestinian desire to bring about an end to violent conflict, this message is not reflected in the Palestinian media. Official Palestinian Authority controlled television, even while the leadership speaks of hudna or 'tactical ceasefire', continues to cultivate an atmosphere of hatred and violence against Jews and Israel. Terrorist 'martyrs' are lauded as role models to be exemplified, and Jews are castigated as the embodiment of evil." It seems that Darfur is not the only evidence that the world has not internalised the lessons of the Holocaust. To subscribe to David Frankfurter's 'letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/ To Go To Top

U.S. FOREIGN POLICY; LEFT MONOPOLIZES FREE SPEECH? Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 27, 2005.

In the minds of US foreign policy experts, there is little connection between ethics and success. I disagree. I think unethical policies tend to fail. In the long run, regimes without legitimacy fall. Supporting them fails. Pres. Bush now admits this, at least in speeches. Appeasement of fanatical dictators is unethical, because it sacrifices decent countries or groups to aggressors, weakening its own resistance to evil. Appeasement has failed with the Nazis, Communists, and Arabs, among others. Thinking it pragmatic, a more civilized society may enlist unsavory groups against a common enemy. Such support may boost the unsavory groups into a first class enemy. That happened when our military aid to rebels against Soviet rule in Afghanistan went largely to Islamists, rather than to other Muslims. The experience that Arab volunteers got in Afghanistan, with our weapons, still is being utilized in a spreading jihad. The CIA and State Dept. should have been reformed, after that blunder. Unfortunately, there is little real reform in the US. We continue to let our defense agencies serve us poorly. Although the PLO committed much terrorism and is anti-American, the US has made deals with the PLO, for crumbs of intelligence information. Now, the US wants to set up a PLO state on Israel's flank. A better policy would be a US-Israel alliance against the anti-Western Arabs, starting with the overthrow of the P.A. and a jointly effected regime change in Syria, which sends fighters against the US, drugs into the US, and counterfeits US currency. The Arabs accuse the US of having this alliance with Israel, anyway. Already suffering the reputation for it, we may as well benefit from an actual one. Non-Arabs also think that the US is pro-Israel. They don't understand. The real story is like the following fable. The US wants Israel to jump out of a building to its death. If the US tried to dictate the whole effort at once - jump and die - Israel would balk, because its implications would be so obvious. Instead, the State Dept. tries to accomplish the same goal gradually. Thus the State Dept. demands that Israel walk over to the window. Then it tells it, don't worry, we support you, but meanwhile open the window. Next, it suggests that Israel take risks for peace, and step out onto the fire escape. Israel complies, feeling it should not jeopardize US support, and, after all, it has not jumped off. Then Arabs throw sand in Israel's eyes. Israel steps back. The US gives Israel a washcloth to get the sand out, and rebukes the Arabs for throwing sand. A new Arab leader advises his people, withhold the sand, so Israel will jump. Naively feeling it has US support in the form of a safety net, below, Israel steps back out onto the fire escape and reconsiders jumping. Jump, jump, the Left urges, the building is burning and getting out of it is the solution. The Arabs prepare to move into the building and bar a Jewish return. In the minds of many US foreign policy critics, the US can do no right. It dismays me to find my Democrat friends that unpatriotic. They weren't always that way. What happened to them? I think that they got so used to criticizing the government, that they lost awareness of America's great decency, and stopped loving their country. They are suspicious of every US policy initiative, except, unfortunately, its anti-Israel initiatives that they mistakenly think are favorable to Israel. Conservatives try to explain the seemingly contradictory stand of such critics, who oppose some US interventions and propose others. Some conservatives think that the opposition is to interventions that promote US national interests, and the support is for interventions that are humanitarian without specifically helping the US. Other conservatives find that the critics, mostly Democrats, base their position according to whether the President involved is a Democrat or a Republican. I think there is an element of truth to both explanations, but also that there are other explanations based on the issues, themselves. I think that even Democrats would have been more reconciled to the war on Saddam if we had a larger army, with overwhelming resources to have guarded against Iraqi looting, watched the border, smashed the insurgents, and not have to recall the same troops repeatedly. By keeping federal revenues low, Pres. Bush worries Democrats that there would not be enough for domestic needs, so Congress short-changes the military, on which liberals think we spend too much. THE STATE OF OIL SUPPLIES Last year, the world was awash in oil. Oil prices were moderate. Now they are high enough to dampen the US economic recovery, and volatile enough to dampen the US stock market. In the past, a reduction in one country's oil output could be compensated for by an increase in another's. No longer. The US has stopped conserving; China consumes ever more. Iraqi oil extraction has not returned to normal levels, as insurgents destroy Iraqi facilities. Oil output often falls after regime-changes. Russia's oil industry stagnates while the politics of who will dominate it is sorted out (Amy Jaffe, NY Sun, 1/21, p.9). JIHAD AT COLUMBIA, U. (more) "No matter how outrageous and factually untrue or unbalanced the statements of the anti-Israel professors at Columbia U., no matter how much they intimidate students who challenge this classroom propaganda, liberals frame the issue as one of freedom of speech and as an attack on academic freedom." The ACLU has taken this position (NY Sun, 1/21, letter). The professors are anti-academic and anti-free speech. A wiser ACLU position would be to suggest how to get jihadists out of the universities while allowing professors with academic integrity freedom to teach and students freedom to express opinions and raise questions. MORAL FERVOR & FREE SPEECH For years, the Israeli Left agitated among soldiers to refuse to serve in Yesha or even anywhere, until the Communist' policies were adopted for the Territories. The leftist media praised the agitators' motivation as high ethics and patriotism. Now many Israelis are signing petitions to refuse to expel Jews from Yesha. Leftists in and out of the Army are demanding that those who organize and even sign the petitions be arrested. The Left feels that only it has a right to defy authority, only it is ethical, and only it has a right to free speech (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/5, e-mail). In the US, the Left fears Pres. Bush will impose fascism, but it shouts down conservatives on campus and exhibits other fascist tendencies. "AXIS OF WEAKNESS" Europe is an axis of weakness. France is building the EU, with itself and Germany at the center (until they admit Turkey) to counter US influence. This Gallic rivalry is oblivious to the growing threat both to Europe and the US of Iranian nuclear and missile development. The EU relies upon the UN, another weak sister. How firmly did the UN act towards Saddam? "Saddam Hussein got 17 resolutions and 12 years (to violate them), at the end of which America received angry calls from Berlin and Paris for still more time to coax the Iraqi dictator to behave." (Jewish Political chronicle, 11/2004, p.7 from Jeoffrey Gedmin, Weekly Standard, 10/18.) Oddly, US liberals thought the patient Pres. Bush acted hastily in warring on Iraq. They seemed unaware of UNO resolutions and Iraqi violations. They focused narrowly on weapons of mass-destruction being ready and readily found. Europe's appeasement is the instinct for self-preservation being distorted by panic. Europe ought to sit back and ponder its earlier failures at appeasement and the need for the US to rescue it. SAUDI RELIEF FOR THE NEEDY S. Arabia has pledged $10 million for tsunami relief. Last year, it spent $150 million subsidizing the families of human bombs (op. Cit.). SEC. GENERAL ANNAN REACTS TO JIHAD AGAINST ISRAEL P.A. terrorists increasingly bombard Jewish communities in Yesha and in Israel. In a delayed attempt to root out the bombardiers, the IDF raided and patrolled P.A. areas of Gaza. In the course of those raids, some Arab children and alleged adult civilians in the line of fire were killed. Urging both sides to be more careful about civilians, Sec. General Annan expressed grave concern over the Arabs' deaths. He expressed no concern over the deaths of Israelis (IMRA, 1/5). Israeli soldiers are just as innocent as civilians murdered by Arab aggression. Is Sec. Annan unable to puzzle out the solution - that the P.A. eradicate rocket squads, in accordance with Oslo, so there would be no Israeli casualties and no Israeli counter-attacks? Why is there no world outcry against the increasing terrorist bombardment of Israeli towns, but there is a world outcry against Israel for the few Arab casualties, when terrorists allow children to stand around them during an Israeli counter-attack? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/5, e-mail). That is the low ethical level of world public opinion that people think Israel cannot afford to alienate, as if it weren't already antisemitic or alienated and as if it hadn't let millions of Jews be murdered by the Nazis. I would put innocent Israeli lives over sinful foreign opinion. How unbalanced was Sec. Annan's seemingly balanced statement! He treated identically the Arabs, who seek to harm Jewish civilians and use their own as human shields, and Israel, which seeks NOT to harm Arab civilians! His misleading statement aids terrorism. What does Annan expect Israel to do, let itself be bombarded with impunity, lest Arabs who wholeheartedly support violence be hurt? Why does he not blame the terrorists, guilty under international law for endangering civilians among whom they conceal themselves? IF LEGAL, IS ISRAELI GOVERNMENT LEGITIMATE? "Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who brought his Likud party a landslide victory in an election campaign that focused on one issue - unilateral withdrawal - to suddenly embrace and implement the very position he explicitly and emphatically campaigned against without going back to the voters? "Is it 'democratic' for Likud Party Chairman Ariel Sharon to commit to honor the outcome of a referendum of Likud Party members on unilateral withdrawal - and then ignore the vote when he lost the referendum by a landslide? "Is it 'democratic' for Likud Party ministers Netanyahu, Livnat and others who openly say that they know that Sharon's disengagement plan is a terrible mistake that Israel will pay dearly for - but opt to vote for the plan out of personal interests? "Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Sharon to fire ministers before the vote on the disengagement plan in order to insure the passage of the plan? "Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Sharon to refuse to test the public support for his disengagement plan via a national referendum because, as his office put it, he might lose?" (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 1/5.) 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

SHARON GAMBLES ON ABBAS BY CAPITULATING TO HAMAS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 27, 2005.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is no longer of any value to Israel and, in fact, has become its worst danger. Whoever has control over Sharon's thinking, mouth and policy - it is not Sharon. Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), is the Palestinian Authority's newly elected President. Nothing Hamas or Abbas demands is too offensive for Sharon to accept. Sharon has become a puppet for too many foreign and internal interests. Those strings must be cut if Israel is to survive as the world's only Jewish State. It would be a kindness to Sharon by removing him from office and the control exercised by numerous interests. It's now or never. Sharon has completely caved in according to DEBKAfile article and the JERUSAELM POST articles (see below). "Sharon Gambles on Abbas by Capitulating to Hamas' Terms," DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis January 26, 2005. Sharon says: "Put the war on hold!" Under the bewitching spell of a week-long temporary and partial lull in Palestinian terrorist attacks from the Gaza Strip, the Sharon-Peres government is capitulating to radical conditions for its continuation laid down by the extremist Hamas. Indeed, Israel is in effect negotiating with the Islamist terrorist group dedicated to the Jewish state's destruction. Handling the process through the newly-elected Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) provides a patina of respectability. Hamas overseas leader Khaled Mashal said bluntly that a cease fire is not on the cards, only a temporary calm - and that too must be paid for by meeting tough conditions. Abbas faithfully passed the conditions on to Jerusalem. Therefore, notwithstanding his failure to procure a cease fire from any terrorist group, Israel agreed Tuesday night, January 25, to suspend targeted assassinations of wanted terrorists. A few hours later, the Sharon government lifted the freeze imposed ten days ago on diplomatic contacts with the Palestinians after six Israeli civilians died in a multi-group terrorist bombing of the Karni goods crossing from the Gaza Strip to Israel at the peak of daily cross-border Qassam and mortar barrages. Suspension of assassinations and raids in the territory was agreed at the Tuesday meeting between IDF Gaza Brigade commander Brig. Gen Aviv Kochavi and Palestinian security chief Maj. Gen Mussa Arafat. Hamas has lost its top leaders to these attacks and by forgoing their continuation Israel is helping Hamas recover. Wednesday too, Israeli and Palestinian officers met at Khan Younes to coordinate the deployment of Palestinian troops in central and southern Gaza Strip after a similar deployment took place in the north. Israeli police broke up an Israeli protest against this meeting, putting two demonstrators in hospital. The conditions the Sharon government has already met are just the beginning. Hamas aka Abbas has more demands. 1. Its full incorporation as a power-sharing partner in the new Palestinian leadership. The Hamas has thus acquired legitimacy as a political entity which will also run for election to the Palestinian legislature in July, forcing Israel's acceptance. 2. Going into politics will not deprive Hamas or its fraternal terrorist group Jihad Islami of any resources for the continued practice of terrorism, including its armed bands and their arsenals. They will also enjoy immunity from Palestinian Authority law enforcement and interference and complete independence of action. Both will therefore be free to resume terrorist attacks at will. With Abbas' connivance and Israel's sanction, Hamas wins a breather from the current lull to transform itself into the best organized paramilitary force in the Gaza Strip. 3. Egypt will provide guarantees for Israel's commitment to refrain from attacking Hamas' installations and members. Amos Gilead, senior aide of Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, flies to Cairo Wednesday with backup for the Egyptian guarantee. 4. The Israeli army will pull back to the pre-September 28, 2000 lines held before Yasser Arafat declared his terror war. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz bowed to this demand in Paris Tuesday when he informed his French counterpart Michele Alliot-Marie of his government's willingness to hand all parts of the Gaza Strip and all West Bank cities to the Palestinians by the end of 2005. 5. Abbas has made every effort to secure the Hamas demand for prisoner release. Both fully expect to hear soon of hundreds of Palestinians under sentence for violent attacks being bused out of Israeli jails waving the V-sign. By surrendering to Abbas' (Hamas) terms, Ariel Sharon, deputy prime minister Shimon Peres and Shaul Mofaz are leapfrogging over their disengagement plan and even bypassing the first clauses of the Middle East Quartet's road map, which demand the actual dismantling of terrorist infrastructure, not a mere truce. They seem in fact to be hurtling forward to the roadmap's end-stage - final status discussions on a Palestinian state accompanied by an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank. The focus of talks with the Palestinians - and contacts with the Americans and Europeans - has thus gravitated towards discussing the scale and tempo of Israel's concession of territory rather than the dismantling of terrorist groups, which is relegated to the status of "peacemaker's fantasy". In the next few days, Sharon's political adviser Dov Weisglass will be reporting on this switch to Condoleezza Rice in Washington in her new capacity as secretary of state, assuming she is confirmed by the Senate by then. It is a bold Israeli gesture, one the United States would not think of making toward Sunni insurgents in Iraq or Hezb'Allah terrorists in Lebanon. Indeed, Sharon, egged on by his new Labor partners, may be running ahead of himself. Responding to Abbas' first moves in Gaza, the state department this week commended his progress as an "encouraging" beginning to a process that must lead to the dismantling of terrorist bodies. President George W. Bush is not yet ready to receive Abbas at the White House. Yet Sharon, Peres and Mofaz are making an end run around a second-term administration that has yet to formulate its policies for the next four years and presenting it with a package of far-reaching gifts for the Palestinians already wrapped up and delivered. Sharon's strategists believe that if this process fails and Palestinian terrorism resumes at full spate, no one - even in Europe - will be able to blame Israel for not going the extra mile for the sake of a peace accommodation. This tactic bears Labor Party fingerprints, easily recognized as belonging to veteran peaceniks Peres, Haim Ramon and, indirectly, Geneva Accords purveyor, left-wing Yahad party leader Yossi Beilin. They are now reliving their 1993 escapade when they piled on the concessions and presented a clueless Clinton administration with the irresistible temptation of signing onto the ill-fated Oslo Peace Framework accords. In no time, Israeli buses were being blown up, mainly in Jerusalem, in a campaign that led inexorably to the full-scale terror war Arafat declared in September 2000 and which ended thousands of lives. Will the Bush White House be lured into the same trap? It is worth mentioning that Clinton has since described his handling of Arafat as one of the two biggest mistakes of his presidency, second only to his failure to kill or contain Osama bin Laden. However the incumbent US president, after his experience in Iraq, should be a lot more savvy about handling terrorists than his predecessor. At the same time, Bush may well repeat his sink-or-swim comment to Sharon when he first heard about the Israeli leader's 'Disengagement' plan: If you want to implement it, do it on your own. Don't make us responsible and especially don't make it sound as though we are in charge. Unfortunately, DEBKAfile is virtually the lone cautionary voice against the hazards entailed in the Sharon-Peres government's attitude toward Abbas, who was after all the senior Palestinian negotiating tactician behind Arafat at Oslo in 1993. It is important to note that in stark contrast to the blind hopes Israeli leaders are pinning on Abu Mazen for ending the four-year war, Palestinian expectations of his durability are extremely low. Since his election, not a single prominent Palestinian has agreed to speak on Israeli media on Abbas' behalf, even the regulars who are usually ready to appear at the drop of a hat. Such power brokers as prime minister Ahmed Qureia, Gaza faction leader Mohammed Dahlan, national security adviser Jibril Rajoub and Gaza security chief Mussa Arafat are as silent as the lambs. DEBKAfile quotes a senior Israeli security official as reporting: "The entire Palestinian leadership is intently watching Abu Mazen performing his acrobatics on a high wire. They are keeping a safe distance, certain he will fall." If he does, so too will the second Peres-orchestrated Palestinian peace initiative in a dozen years - this time dragging Sharon down too. The trouble with this sort of gamble is that its failure will provide sustenance and cheer to the terrorists. Hamas and Islamic Jihad will not miss their chance of establishing themselves triumphantly as the dominant terrorist forces of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The story is headlined as: "Israel Must 'pay' For Calm, Says Hamas, Islamic Jihad" and is by Khaled Abu Toameh, and appeared in the Jerusalem Post. This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?gename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid= 1106623165882&p=1101615860782 [And so Sharon caves. Please note the conditions Hamas & Islamic Jihad put on Israel to agree to a temporary truce (Hudna). - EAW] Ending days of speculation about whether they had agreed to a cease-fire with Israel, Hamas and Islamic Jihad on Tuesday denied that they would halt terrorist attacks "without making Israel pay a price." Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, the Syria-based head of the movement's political bureau, said there would be no discussion of a truce before the Palestinians test Israel's intentions and receive assurances from the international community that Israel would halt its attacks on the Palestinians. He described the recent talks between Hamas officials in the Gaza Strip and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas as "positive." "We agreed that the message that we should send to the international community is that the Palestinian resistance is not the problem, but it is Israel's aggression," he said. "We also agreed that our message to the Zionist enemy is that there would be no solution unless the occupation ends." Asked if the two sides had discussed ways of calming the situation, Mashaal told the London-based daily Al-Hayat: "There is talk about calm, but a conditioned one. If the occupation meets our conditions, including ending the occupation and releasing all the prisoners, we will be prepared to consider a temporary truce." Mashaal also denied reports about a split between the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip, which is reportedly prepared to accept a truce, and the movement's hard-line leadership in Syria and Lebanon. Hassan Yousef, Hamas's prominent West Bank leader, warned that Israel's ongoing military raids in the West Bank jeopardize efforts to calm the situation. He was referring to the arrest over the past few days by the IDF of several Hamas suspects in the Nablus, Jenin and Tulkarm areas. "We condemn these arrests and stress that Hamas can't remain idle in the face of Israel's continued aggression against our people," Yousef said, accusing Israel of seeking to thwart attempts to end the violence. Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri said that, while progress had been made during the talks with Abbas on the need for major reforms, "there is no talk about calm without a price [from Israel] and as long as the Israeli aggression on our people continues." Masri listed his movement's conditions for accepting a temporary truce: a release of all Palestinian prisoners, an end to Israeli military operations and a withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the return of bodies of Palestinians killed in attacks against Israel. "If all these conditions are met, then we will respond positively to the issue of calm," he said. "Hamas is now following the events on the ground and we will determine our position once we see if Israel fulfills these conditions." Nafez Azzam, a senior Islamic Jihad official in the Gaza Strip, also stated that his group would not accept a unilateral cease-fire that does not include Israeli concessions. "Our position is clear - there won't be calm from one side without gaining something in return," he said. "We have always said that the problem lies with Israel, not the Palestinians. Israel is the aggressor and the Palestinians are only defending themselves. We want something in return [from Israel] that would convince not only Islamic Jihad, but the Palestinian people who must feel changes on the ground." Meanwhile, sources in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Abbas is expected to visit Cairo next week for talks with Egyptian officials on the possibility of holding a meeting of all Palestinian factions in the Egyptian capital to discuss a truce with Israel. According to the sources, most of the Palestinian factions have agreed in principle to Abbas's initiative to achieve a temporary truce with Israel. "We're closer than ever to achieving a hudna [temporary truce]," said a source close to Abbas, adding that a meeting would be held soon in Cairo between top PA officials and Hamas leaders. Gazan legislator Ziad Abu Amr, who played a key role in the recent intra-Palestinian discussions, said Hamas and Islamic Jihad have agreed to participate in July's elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council. He said that despite denials from Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders, all Palestinian factions have agreed to calm the situation to see if Israel is willing to accept their conditions. 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). To Go To Top

ISRAEL'S COUP D'ETAT Posted by Yrachmiel Elias, January 27, 2005.

Below you will find a detailed exposé of the truth behind the final Sharon doctrine of defeat and retreat - brought to life by Professor Ya'acov Golbert. So what? We living in Eretz ha'kodesh have had to put up with intrigue - lies, deceit, betrayal, planned assassination, government for profit and much more - since we gave up our direct protection program, designed to make this a safe homeland for all Jews! Now we find that those currently in power do not even care if you know how crooked and dirty are the tactics currently being readied for the expulsion of Jews from their G-D given land and the basic reason for the lie and expulsion plan is profit in the hands of those currently holding the reigns and gloves on the works of the government! Read the inside story and then ask yourself how a man like Arik Sharon could change so drastically from the General Hero to general traitor in such a short time? Who has what information on him and why has he succumbed to the pressures of the left and labor? Or has He? Then visit our website and look at what needs to be done and how you can be part of the immediate repatriation of Eretz Yisrael and the rescuing of the Jewish People! Can we or can we not bring about a general strike in Israel to proclaim our freedom and our inherent native rights to self-determined democratic government before the advent of King Moshiach or do we stand silently by and chew our cuds like the sheep we appear to be? For more inside truth contact: info@netzahyisrael.org or action@netzahyisrael.org or Golbert@netzahyisrael.org This article was written by Ya'akov-Perez Golbert, who was a full professor of law in Los Angeles until moving to Israel in 1984. He is a practicing lawyer in Jerusalem and is a co-founder/director of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishaqer, (http://www.netzahyisrael.org). Contact him by phone at (972) 50 7428100 What has happened in Israel in the last two weeks is a secret, bloodless coup d'etat. The stage was set a year or more ago, when the state prosecutors and the police were breathing hard down the neck of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his two sons on various charges of corruption, bribery and breach of public trust. Suddenly, all the investigations were cancelled because of "lack of evidence." Over the next few months, Eliakim Rubenstein, the Attorney General who served the Labor establishment with faithfulness and competence, was elevated to the Supreme Court; the chief prosecutor, Menahem Mazuz, a dyed-in-the-wool leftist, was moved up to Attorney General, one of the most powerful positions in the government and Sharon committed the government to unilateral abandonment of all of the Gaza Strip with its 21 Israeli settlements and four strategically placed settlements in Samaria. That was the very policy proposed by Amram Mitzna and the Labor Party in the election in 2003, which Sharon roundly lambasted and denounced and, on the basis of which, the Likud crushed Labor in the elections. It certainly looks like Sharon sold out the country's defense and foreign policies to Labor in exchange for dismissal of all investigations against him and his sons. The problem with submitting to blackmail is that, once blackmailed the victim is hostage to the blackmailer forever. So Sharon not only pursued unilateral retreat with ruthless determination, but he also brought Labor into the government, all "democratically," of course, by means of more breaches of public trust and suborning of breach of trust by the Likud Central Committee, blatantly above and beyond what is called in America "pork barrel." It looked more like bribery and extortion. Labor is not only in, not only has nearly half the ministerial posts in the government, even though is has less than half as many Members of Knesset as the Likud. The leader of the Labor Party, Shimon Peres, is also the Deputy Prime Minister, with complete control of everything in the realm of foreign affairs. Silvan Shalom is still the Foreign Minister but in name only. It is also clear that Labor owns Ariel Sharon, who will do anything and everything demanded of him. Peres and the Labor Party could demand that Sharon resign, for personal reasons, and leave the government formally in the hands of Peres as ranking Deputy Prime Minister but the left needs Sharon to front for them. Sharon has a reservoir of good will and personal faith that Peres and Labor do not have. Sharon saved the country, after all, and people have not forgotten. He can ram suicidal measures down the throat of the resisting public more and Labor cannot. People will accept from Sharon what would send hundreds of thousands out into the streets in protest if Peres did it. How can Sharon's Labor Party masters be sure he will not betray them as he has betrayed everyone else who has trusted him in the past? Sharon, after all, is resourceful, ruthless, wily and determined. Not more than one week after entering into a political marriage with Sharon, the criminal justice system, another leftist fiefdom, issued a charge sheet against Omri Sharon. That was not to fire a shot across Sharon's bow. It was to put a collar and chain on his neck. He will serve Peres and the left faithfully and energetically. At the end of the line, after Sharon has brought about the full measure of surrender, Sharon will be allowed to resign for reasons of health and leave Peres in control. The charges will then be dropped or dismissed, no doubt for "lack of evidence," or the prosecution will take a dive in the fifth with the full complicity of the court. If Sharon does not deliver, Omri will sit in prison and that is not all. "New" evidence against Ariel Sharon and both of his sons will certainly be "discovered" by the prosecution and they will all sit in prison after spending their entire fortune on legal defense. Now that the election of 2003 has been overturned by blackmail, intimidation and bribery and the government taken over by the very party that was creamed in that election, the junta is moving quickly to consolidate its control and entrench its program, which is the de-Judeafication of Israel. It was not announced but it became known that the Ministry of Education had decided not to recognize the undergraduate degree of anyone who received academic credit for post-high school yeshiva study. Furthermore, any graduate degrees earned by such a person would not be recognized because they are based on the "tainted" undergraduate degree. This is a regular practice of Yeshiva University, whose graduates are willingly accepted by the best graduate schools in the world. This is a blatantly anti-Jewish measure. The real objection is that the immigrants who have received a year's academic credit for yeshiva study are religious Jews, too religious, the kind the secular unJews definitively do not want in Israel. This measure is consistent with the very frequent refusal of the Ministry of the Interior to recognize Orthodox conversions performed in Israel and approved by the Chief Rabbinate, for purposes of the Law of Return; the closure by the Ministry of the Interior of immigration from India and Peru on the ground that all the conversions in those countries are Orthodox; the systematic practice of the Jewish Agency to encourage immigration of non-Jews from the FSU, even those who have no connection with the Jewish people at all and the uniform willingness of the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption to accept their immigration under the law of return. That is not the only measure being taken by the Ministry of Education to de-Judeafy the country. There are presently twenty six teachers' colleges and teachers' seminaries. Sixteen are to be closed, leaving only the ten operated by the kibbutz movement, the most anti-Jewish sector of the population, the ones who are being asked to volunteer to forcibly remove resisting "settlers" from their homes and farms, the ones who will make up the core of the psychopath squads who will do the brutal work. They will be the exclusive educators of the nations' educators. The Ministry of Education is ostensibly under the control of Likud MK Limor Livnat, but that makes no difference. Peres knows all the dirt on everyone. Remember who created the Shabak, who hand picked its first agents and directors: Shimon Peres, when he was Director General of the Prime Minister's Office under Ben Gurion. He has never lost the loyalty and control of the Jewish Section, whose task is to infiltrate and undermine the right and the religious sectors of the Jewish population. Peres rules now in the tradition of Putin and Ceausescu, both of them heads of their respective secret police. Government by blackmail and intimidation, but we grace it with the name "democracy." The same is happening in the military. Resistance among the religious, both soldiers and the general population, to unilateral abandonment of parts of the Land of Israel to implacable enemies has given the left the pretext they need to dismiss religious officer candidates from the courses and weed religious Jews out of the officer corps. Israeli television has already reported the news that the Hesder Yeshivot, a program in which religious Jews spend five years in the army, three and a half of them in a yeshiva on a military base, ready for immediate call. No more. Religious soldiers will be thrown into a secular army, run by secular officers who have proper contempt for the Jewish religion and religious Jews, the better to assimilate and de-Judeafy them. Religious soldiers at every level will be replaced by less motivated but ideologically pliable secular Israelis and also by Ukrainians, Turks, Egyptians, Americans and British MI5 agents, all of whom are already in the country in large numbers, and by "Palestinians" presently undergoing "special training" with Israeli government approval. These and the ideological kibbutznikim who volunteer to brutalize the "settlers" will form the psychopath squads who will do the dirty work of expulsion. Of course, they will all wear IDF uniforms so that no "settler" will open fire on them. But that is already taken care of. It has already been reported by Ha'aretz, the PLO's favorite Hebrew paper, that there are settlers who would open fire on other settlers to provoke them into firing on the army, which will force the army, yes force the army, to fire on the "settlers." (They will not be called "civilians," innocent or otherwise, as they call the "Palestinians" who willingly serve as human shields to protect the terrorist perpetrators of mass murder.) The modus operandi is clear: a Shabak agent provocateur, a latter day Avishai Raviv, disguised as a "settler," will fire the first shot in the direction of the IDF, justifying the ensuing massacre and civil war. Religious Jews today comprise substantially half of the officer corps. To eliminate them would inevitably "dumb down" the officer corps. No matter. Once the Israelis eliminate the "settlers" and end the "occupation," the Israelis will finally have peace. Won't they? Yrachmiel Elias is co-founder of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishaqer, (http://www.netzahyisrael.org). To Go To Top

HOLOCAUST, UN EMPTINESS AND JUDGEMENT Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 27, 2005.

Considering that Israel is not a member of any of the regional blocs and is generally denounced by UN, it was the rare victory - Israel obtained the required majority approval for a special session in the United Nations to conduct Holocaust memorial. The Arabs and their lackeys made it clear - they are not just against Israel. It's the Jews they hate. The UN General Assembly hall was half empty, and Jordan was the only Arab nation to remain during Holocaust memorial speeches. Kofi Anan did not reprimand the countries for deliberate boycott of Holocaust Memorial Ceremony. Even by doing something for Jews, "Useless Nothing" has done nothing! Anan opened the session saying, "The evil which murdered 6,000,000 Jews in the death camps still threatens us today." But, he did not say why and who is responsible for facilitating modern genocides and the rise of anti-Semitism. He did not admit his personal and UN's complicity in the past and the present genocides, including Holocaust. No wonder that since WW2 the genocides have being tolerated in Cambodia, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the WW3 still is going on in Congo! Honouring the memory of Holocaust victims is not about Jews only. It is about the moral advancement of Humanity! Speaking to an audience including several Auschwitz survivors German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said "The evil of the Nazi ideology did not come out of nowhere. The brutalisation of thought and the lack of moral inhibitions had a history. One thing is clear: the Nazi ideology was willed by people and carried out by people." It does not mean that modern Germans, Austrians, Poles, Ukranians, French have to feel guilty for what their grandperents did or allowed to be done. They must not allow the return of the inhuman ugliness again. They will be judged by their own deeds and attitudes! To Go To Top

SHARON'S ATTORNEY GENERAL DECLARES JIHAD AGAINST ZIONISM Posted by Steven Plaut, January 27, 2005.

Israel's Attorney General, Menachem "Manny" Mazuz, is a far leftist and a compatriot of Yossi Beilin, godmother of Olso. So naturally, when Ariel Sharon needed an Attorney General, Mazuz was the guy he picked. The Likud's main goal at the top of its agenda is to install leftist officials and implement the Left's agenda. Yesterday Mazuz declared war on the Jewish National Fund. The Jewish National Fund is a NGO (non-governmental organization) whose origins go back to the early days of Zionism. It would collect kopeks and pennies from Jews all over the world in little "pishka" tin cans and use the money to buy lands that would then be leased out for Jewish enterprises and farms. The lands being purchased were intended for the benefit of Jews and the use by Jews in nation-building. JNF land is alloted for things like settling new immigrants to Israel. Yesterday Mazuz declared that the JNF, even though it is not a state-agency but a NGO, cannot favor Jewish users and uses in allocation of its lands and has to give equal priority to Arab uses and users. That means that he wants to deny the right of all those little Jewish contributors putting their kopeks in the pishka to earmark their donations for other Jews. See http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/532493.html Now just to put this into perspective, there is another NGO whose lands allocation Mazuz is NOT going to direct or interfere in. That is the Moslem WAKF, a NGO that holds lands for Moslem religious purposes and explicitly discrminates against Jews and Jewish users. In other words, the JNF is "racist" in Mazuz' view when it uses its land for the benefit of Jews, but not the WAKF. There are other state-owned lands in Israel owned by the Israel Lands Authority, but that has long followed a policy of alloting these for general public uses (Jewish and Arab). It should be noted that much of the land in Israel is nationalized, something I as an economist oppose, but out of the privately-owned land Arabs own a far greater proportion than their percent in the population! For 1300 years Jews were discrimated against by Arabs in the Middle East and prevented from owning land. Hence one might legitmately regard the JNF's previous policy of favoring Jewish users as affirmative action. Mazuz' latest is a symptom of the "Post-Zionist" syndrome and its increasing control over the Likud itself. 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. To Go To Top

REMEMBERING THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE AND THE LIBERATION OF AUSCHWITZ Posted by 150 PLUS BLOGS, January 27, 2005.

"This article is posted as part of the January 27, 2005 BlogBurst to remember the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, sixty years ago, on January 27, 1945. THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE On January 20th, we marked the anniversary of the 1942 Wannsee Conference. In the course of that Conference, the Nazi hierarchy formalized the plan to annihilate the Jewish people. Understanding the horrors of Auschwitz requires that one be aware of the premeditated mass-murder that was presented at Wannsee. Highlighting these events now has become particularly important, even as the press reports that '45% of Britons have never heard of Auschwitz' (Jerusalem Post, December 2, 2004, www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid= 1101960938940). The meeting at Wannsee established the mechanism for "the final solution" -- shipment of Jews to eastern labor and death camps -- as the official policy of the Third Reich. Ever efficient and unashamed, the Nazi kept a record of the meeting, which were discovered in 1947 in the files of the German Foreign Office. The conference addressed every aspect of Nazi genocide in chillingly ordinary logic and language, e.g., " Europe will be combed through from West to East," "forcing the Jews out of the various spheres of life of the German people." Ever efficient, the participants foresaw that, "[i]n the course of the final solution and under appropriate direction, the Jews are to be utilized for work in the East in a suitable manner. In large labor columns and separated by sexes, Jews capable of working will be dispatched to these regions to build roads, and in the process a large number of them will undoubtedly drop out by way of natural attrition." The minutes reflect an intention to dispose of "roughly eleven million Jews." This figure was derived after a horrifyingly detailed discussion of those with only partial Jewish ancestry, sparing some only a quarter Jewish, and magnanimously exempting others from evacuation only if "sterilized in order to prevent any progeny . . . Sterilization will be voluntary, but it is the precondition for remaining in the Reich." Many conference participants survived the war to be convicted at Nuremberg. The conference, and the bureaucratic sounding murderous minutes, provide a prototypical example of Hannah Arendt's Banality of Evil. TODAY IS THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE LIBERATION OF AUSCHWITZ The Holocaust, symbolized by Auschwitz, the worst of the death camps, occurred in the wake of consistent, systematic, unrelenting anti-Jewish propaganda campaign. As a result, the elimination of the Jews from German society was accepted as axiomatic, leaving open only two questions: when and how. As Germany expanded its domination and occupation of Austria, Czechoslovakia, France, the Low Countries, Yugoslavia, Poland, parts of the USSR, Greece, Romania, Hungary, Italy and others countries, the way was open for Hitler to realize his well-publicized plan of destroying the Jewish people. "Work Makes You Free" Sign After experimentation, the use of Zyklon B on unsuspecting victim was adopted by the Nazis as the means of choice, and Auschwitz was selected as the main factory of death (more accurately, one should refer to the "Auschwitz-Birkenau complex"). The green light for mass annihilation was given at the Wannsee Conference, January 20, 1942, and the mass gassings took place in Auschwitz between 1942 and the end of 1944, when the Nazis retreated before the advancing Red Army. Jews were transported to Auschwitz from all over Nazi-occupied or Nazi-dominated Europe and most were slaughtered in Auschwitz upon arrival, sometimes as many as 12,000 in one day. Some victims were selected for slave labour or "medical" experimentation. All were subject to brutal treatment. In all, between three and four million people, mostly Jews, but also Poles and Red Army POWs, were slaughtered in Auschwitz alone (though some authors put the number at 1.3 million). Other death camps were located at Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec (Belzek), Majdanek and Treblinka. Nazi Experiments on Children Auschwitz was liberated by the Red Army on 27 January 1945, sixty years ago, after most of the prisoners were forced into a Death March westwards. The Red Army found in Auschwitz about 7,600 survivors, but not all could be saved. For a long time, the Allies were well aware of the mass murder, but deliberately refused to bomb the camp or the railways leading to it. Ironically, during the Polish uprising, the Allies had no hesitation in flying aid to Warsaw, sometimes flying right over Auschwitz. There are troubling parallels between the systematic vilification of Jews before the Holocaust and the current vilification of the Jewish people and Israel. Suffice it to note the annual flood of anti-Israel resolutions at the UN; or the public opinion polls taken in Europe, which single out Israel as a danger to world peace; or the divestment campaigns being waged in the US against Israel; or the attempts to delegitimize Israel's very existence. The complicity of the Allies in WW II is mirrored by the support the PLO has been receiving from Europe, China and Russia to this very day. If remembering Auschwitz should teach us anything, it is that we must all support Israel and the Jewish people against the vilification and the complicity we are witnessing, knowing where it inevitably leads. Think-Israel would like to thank Joseph Alexander Norland, a modest man who saw we should memorialize the victims of the Holocaust and persuaded over 150 blogs to participate in this BlogBurst. Please go to his website, IsraPundit for a list of participants. To Go To Top

THE TRIUMPH OF THE EAST Posted by Tamar Rush, January 26, 2005.

This was written by Anthony Browne, who is Europe correspondent for the Times. It is archived at http://www.spectator.co.uk/article_pfv.php?id=4835 A year ago I had lunch with an eminent figure who asked if I thought she was mad. "No,: I said politely, while thinking, "Yup." She had said she thought there was a secret plot by Muslims to take over the West. I have never been into conspiracy theories, and this one was definitely of the little-green-men variety. It is the sort of thing BNP thugs claim to justify their racial hatred. Obviously, we all know about Osama bin Laden's ambitions. And we are all aware of the loons of al-Muhajiroun waving placards saying "Islam is the future of Britain". But these are all on the extremist fringe, representative of no one but themselves. Surely no one in Islam takes this sort of thing seriously? I started surfing the Islamic media. Take Dr Al-Qaradawi, the controversial Egyptian imam who was recently fawned over by the Mayor of London even though he promotes the execution of homosexuals, the right of men to indulge in domestic violence, and the murder of innocent Jews. During the brouhaha it went unnoticed that he also wants to conquer Europe. Don't take my word for it, just listen to him on his popular al-Jazeera TV show, Sharia and Life. "Islam will return to Europe. The conquest need not necessarily be by the sword. Perhaps we will conquer these lands without armies. We want an army of preachers and teachers who will present Islam in all languages and in all dialects," he broadcast in 1999, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, which translates his programmes. On another programme he declared, "Europe will see that it suffers from a materialist culture, and it will seek a way out, it will seek a lifeboat. It will seek no life-saver but the message of Islam." Far from being on the fringe, his immensely popular programmes are watched by millions across the Middle East and Europe. The BBC cooed that he has "star" status among the world's Muslims. Dr Al-Qaradawi, who is based in Qatar, is also the spiritual guide of the hardline Muslim Brotherhood, which is growing across Europe, and whose leader Muhammad Mahdi Othman 'Akef declared recently, "I have complete faith that Islam will invade Europe and America, because Islam has logic and a mission." In the most sacred mosque in Islam, Sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudais of the Grand Mosque in Mecca uses his sermons to call for Jews to be "annihilated" and to urge the overthrow of Western civilisation. "The most noble civilisation ever known to mankind is our Islamic civilisation. Today, Western civilisation is nothing more than the product of its encounter with our Islamic civilisation in Andalusia [mediaeval Spain]. The reason for [Western civilisation's] bankruptcy is its reliance on the materialistic approach, and its detachment from religion and values. [This approach] has been one reason for the misery of the human race, for the proliferation of suicide, mental problems and for moral perversion. Only one nation is capable of resuscitating global civilisation, and that is the nation [of Islam]." Al-Sudais is the highest imam appointed by our Saudi government ally, and his sermons are widely listened to across the Middle East. When he came to the UK in June to open the London Islamic Centre, thousands of British Muslims flocked to see him, our so-called race relations minister Fiona Mactaggart shared the platform, and Prince Charles sent a video message. He is probably the closest thing in Islam to the Pope, but I haven't recently heard the Pope call for the overthrow of all other faiths. Saudi Arabia, whose flag shows a sword, seems unabashed about its desire for Islam to take over the world. Its embassy in Washington recommends the home page of its Islamic affairs department, where it declares, "The Muslims are required to raise the banner of jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world." Saudi Arabia has used billions of its petrodollars to export its particularly harsh form of Islam, Wahabism, paying for mosques and Islamic schools across the West. About 80 per cent of the US's mosques are thought to be under Wahabi control. Saudi Arabia's education ministry encourages schoolchildren to despise Christianity and Judaism. A new schoolbook in the kingdom's curriculum tells six-year-olds: "All religions other than Islam are false." A note for teachers says they should "ensure to explain" this point. In Egypt, the schoolbook Studies in Theology: Traditions and Morals explains that a particularly "noble" bit of the Koran is "encouraging the faithful to perform jihad in God's cause, to behead the infidels, take them prisoner, break their power - all that in a style which contains the highest examples of urging to fight". A popular topic for discussion on Arabic TV channels is the best strategy for conquering the West. It seems to be agreed that since the West has overwhelming economic, military and scientific power, it could take some time, and a full frontal assault could prove counterproductive. Muslim immigration and conversion are seen as the best path. Saudi Professor Nasser bin Suleiman al-Omar declared on al-Majd TV last month, "Islam is advancing according to a steady plan, to the point that tens of thousands of Muslims have joined the American army and Islam is the second largest religion in America. America will be destroyed. But we must be patient." Islam is now the second religion not just in the US but in Europe and Australia. Europe has 15 million Muslims, accounting for one in ten of the population in France, where the government now estimates 50,000 Christians are converting to Islam every year. In Brussels, Mohammed has been the most popular name for boy babies for the last four years. In Britain, attendance at mosques is now higher than it is in the Church of England. Al-Qa'eda is criticised for being impatient, and waking the West up. Saudi preacher Sheikh Said al-Qahtani said on the Iqraa TV satellite channel, "We did not occupy the US, with eight million Muslims, using bombings. Had we been patient and let time take its course, instead of the eight million there could have been 80 million [Muslims], and 50 years later perhaps the US would have become Muslim." It is difficult to brush this off as an aberration of Islam, which is normally just tickety-boo letting the rest of the world indulge in its false beliefs. Dr Zaki Badawi, the moderate former director of the Islamic Cultural Centre in London, admitted, "Islam endeavours to expand in Britain. Islam is a universal religion. It aims to bring its message to all corners of the earth. It hopes that one day the whole of humanity will be one Muslim community." In Muslim tradition, the world is divided into Dar al-Islam, where Muslims rule, and Dar al-Harb, the "field of war" where the infidels live. "The presumption is that the duty of jihad will continue, interrupted only by truces, until all the world either adopts the Muslim faith or submits to Muslim rule," wrote Professor Bernard Lewis in his bestseller The Crisis of Islam. The first jihad was in ad 630, when Mohammed led his army to conquer Mecca. He made a prediction that Islam would conquer the two most powerful Christian centres at the time, Constantinople and Rome. Within 100 years of his death, Muslim armies had conquered the previously Christian provinces of Syria, Palestine, Egypt and the rest of North Africa, as well as Spain, Portugal and southern Italy, until they were stopped at Poitiers in central France in ad 732. Muslim armies overthrew the ancient Zoroastrian empire of Persia, and conquered much of central Asia and Hindu India. Ibn Warraq, a Pakistani who lost his Islamic faith, wrote in his book Why I am not a Muslim, "Although Europeans are constantly castigated for having imposed their insidious decadent values, culture and language on the Third World, no one cares to point out that Islam colonised lands that were the homes of advanced and ancient civilisations." It took 700 years for the Spanish to get their country back in the prolonged Reconquista. In the meantime the Turks, a central Asian people, had been converted to Islam and had conquered the ancient Christian land of Anatolia (now called Turkey). In 1453 they captured Constantinople - fulfilling Mohammed's first prediction - which was the centre of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The glorious Hagia Sophia, which had been one of the most important churches in Christendom for nearly 1,000 years after it was built in ad 537, was turned into a mosque, and minarets were added. The Turks went on to occupy Greece and much of the Balkans for four centuries, turning the Parthenon into a mosque and besieging Vienna, before retreating as their power waned. In the Middle East, there are regular calls for Mohammed's second prediction to come true. Sheikh Muhammad bin Abd al-Rahman al-'Arifi, imam of the mosque of the Saudi government's King Fahd Defence Academy, wrote recently, "We will control the land of the Vatican; we will control Rome and introduce Islam in it." Not all conversion has been by the sword. Muslim traders peaceably converted Indonesia, now the most populous Islamic nation. But nor have the conquests stopped. Islam has continued spreading in sub-Saharan Africa, most notably in Nigeria and Sudan. Abyssinia - Ethiopia - is an ancient Christian land where Muslims have come to outnumber Christians only in the last 100 years. Just 50 years ago, Lebanon was still predominantly Christian; it is now predominantly Muslim. Of course, Christianity has been just as much a conquering religion. Spanish armies ruthlessly destroyed ancient civilisations in Central and South America to spread the message of love. Christians colonised the Americas and Australia, committing genocide as they went, while missionaries such as Livingstone converted most of Africa. But the difference is that Christendom has - by and large - stopped conquering and converting, and indeed in Europe simply stopped believing. Even President Bush's most trenchant critics don't believe he conquered Afghanistan and Iraq to spread the word of Jesus. It is ironic that by deposing Saddam, who ran the most secular of Arab regimes, the US actually transferred power to the imams. I believe in a free market in religions, and it is inevitable that if you believe your religion is true, then you believe others are false. But this market is seriously rigged. In Saudi Arabia the government bans all churches, while in Europe governments pay to build Islamic cultural centres. While in many Islamic countries preaching Christianity is banned, in Western Christian countries the right to preach Islam is enshrined in law. Christians are free to convert to Islam, while Muslims who convert to Christianity can expect either death threats or a death sentence. The Pope keeps apologising for the Crusades (even though they were just attempts to get back former Christian lands) while his opposite numbers call for the overthrow of Christendom. In Christian countries, those who warn about Islamification, such as the film star Brigitte Bardot, are prosecuted, while in Muslim countries those who call for the Islamification of the world are turned into TV celebrities. In the West, schools teach comparative religion, while in Muslim countries schools teach that Islam is the only true faith. David Blunkett in effect wants to ban criticism of Islam, a protection not enjoyed by Christianity in Muslim countries. Millions of Muslims move to Christian countries, but virtually no Christians move to Muslim ones. In the last century some Christians justified the persecution and mass murder of Jews by claiming that Jews wanted to take over the world. But these fascist fantasies were based on deliberate lies, such as the notorious fake book The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Now, many in the Muslim world are open about their desire for Islam to conquer the West. To Go To Top

CALLING NAMES TO SILENCE CRITICS; MEDIA FLATTERS ARABS Posted by Richard H, Shulman, January 26, 2005.

CALLING NAMES TO SILENCE CRITICS Black racists used to face down white liberals by calling them "racist." Now people who carry appeasement of the Arabs to an extreme, in terms of sacrifice by Israel for nothing, face down opponents by calling them "extremist." They employ a vocabulary of euphemisms, such as "moderate" for themselves or even for a terrorist who realizes that diplomacy-under-truce can boost their fortunes in resumed warfare. This war via diplomacy they call "peace process." If one objects to this process as under-estimating the Muslims' fanatical devotion to jihad, one is told, "give peace a chance." One gave it a chance. It failed. Nevertheless, the appeasement-minded continue pursuing it, because they are rigid in their ideology, in other words, truly extremist. They don't explain their case; they use adjectives either to laud it or lash you. Their presentation is entirely emotional, but they accuse opponents of being irrational. By contrast, they praise the current P.A. terrorist leader as being "pragmatic." Pragmatism is an ethically neutral term. It refers to efficacy. An evil pragmatist is all the more effective in his designs on the innocent. Thus Abu Mazen, reputedly a pragmatist, would be more dangerous than was Arafat, because he wields more strategies for imperialism. It is a natural abuse by the ruling classes to employ vocabulary to cow opponents. Unfortunately, the ruled classes allow themselves to be manipulated this way. They do not realize it, though the appeasement-minded journalists and politicians all catch on to its usage. I think that the practice is spreading to other issues. The ruling classes tout democracy but avoid democratic debate. Note that on most American (and at least some Canadian) campuses, the ruling class is leftist, as it is in the government, media, arts, and non-science academia of Israel. NEW YORK DEMOCRATS STILL DON'T GET IT I had five guests, all Democrats whose hatred for Pres. Bush remains high on the Richter scale. They are cocooned in their little world, in which Sen. Kerry was the more capable candidate, whom the media credited with having won the debates. If only he had a cleverer little tactic, they think, he would have won. They do not realize that the Democrats are on a losing streak, that their platform has fallen behind the times, they no longer are ahead of the voters or with the voters, and that the media they cite is biased in the Democrats' favor. They have not heard of most of the good-natured suggestions for improvement offered by conservative columnists. They thought that the swiftboat veterans took umbrage at Sen. Kerry only over his criticism of the war, but it also was over his slander of their patriotism while he was malingering and treasonous. When pinned down, the Dems had to admit that for raising that irrelevant issue, he blundered. Not only don't they comprehend the basic futility of their Party, they don't comprehend the Achilles heel of the Republican Party. They suppose that partial privatization of Social Security would subject the pensions to greater risk. I am sure it would. What they need to do is to connect what Pres. Bush proposes with what he does. He proposes privatization as freeing funds for more lucrative investment, but risks that recession would deplete it and forfeit the insurance aspect of Social Security. The system would require a huge infusion of funds to compensate for the privatized funds no longer going to finance current retirees. The Democrats fail to make a major case of Bush flip-flopping in proposing that no child be left behind, not funding the program, and then claiming credit as a beneficiary of education. As I've said before, they fail to criticize as a moral issue Bush's self-contradictory pollution plans he calls "Clear Skies" and "Clean Water," and his logging give-away and increased fire risk as "Healthy Forests." ISRAELI INVENTS EARTHQUAKE DETECTOR It is the size of a shoebox and costs $200. Some companies are installing them so as to stop elevators and give people time to get out of harm's way. Other companies want to extend the technology to warn against future tsunamis (Arutz-7, 1/5). STARBUCKS IN JORDAN After closing its stores in Israel, which lost money by not selling food with the coffee, Starbucks has set up shop in Jordan. Jordanian Islamist professional organizations, as usual flouting government policy in opposing normalization with Israel, proposed boycotting the Jordanian stores because the company chairman had stated his objection to antisemitism. "In 2002, at a synagogue in Seattle, Schultz called for action against antisemitism, but later issued a statement saying he regretted that his statement 'was misinterpreted as being anti-Palestinian'. IMRA remarked, "How revealing that a statement against antisemitism is categorized as anti-Palestinian." IMRA noted that the Jordanian government asks the professional organizations to stop breaching official policy, but it does not seek legislative penalties for their doing so. Corporate management declared that Mr. Schultz's views are personal and not those of the company and its practices (IMRA, 12/5). The context of his remark was not given. Does the company mean that in its practices, it does not share his opposition to antisemitism? Isn't it tiresome and dismaying how many decent or innocent statements are disavowed or even apologized for? Most of those are over political correctness, but this one was over commercial opportunity. HOW "HAARETZ" CONSIDERS ABU MAZEN If Israel cannot make peace with Abu Mazen, it cannot make peace with any other leader of the P.A., declares "Haaretz." The alternative to Abu Mazen is Mustapha Barghouti, Abu Mazen's rival candidate, who was endorsed by PFLP, a terrorist organization (IMRA, 1/5). This is the old leftist ploy of suggesting that Israel must come to terms with one terrorist, because, it maintains, his likeliest successor is more extreme. No thank you. Let "Haaretz" keep its sense of panic to itself. The latest terrorist with whom Israel is urged to come to terms is extreme, too. He, too, wants to dominate Israel. Therefore, his demands would be unacceptable. The object is to make peace while retaining national security and, in my Zionist opinion, the integrity of the Land of Israel. If Israel doesn't retain its national security, there wouldn't be peace. To enjoy national security, it must retain the Territories. In that case, it does not pay to come to the anticipated, concession-giving agreement with Abu Mazen. Besides, since the Arabs haven't kept their previous agreements and don't feel obliged to, it would be unwise to offer more concessions for the same agreements that they previously made and broke. IMRA reports that Abu Mazen would continue violating them, as by his pledge not to uproot Hamas (12/5). "NY TIMES" REPORTS ON THE P.A. ELECTION Hamas was thought interested in competing in the election, for the first time. That could be the beginning of a moderation in its violence. IMRA noted there is no sign of this. (The "Times" just wants to make the terrorists seem potentially decent.") Hamas had battened on its opposition to the "corruption that's marked Arafat's last years." IMRA noted that all his years were corrupt. (IMRA, 12/5 from NY Times). The "Times" does not depict the terrorists as indecent as they are. ISRAEL DOESN'T UNDERSTAND JIHAD The IDF Chief of Staff praised as a P.A. proposal for its troops to intervene against the firing of rockets at Israelis, as "understanding that terrorism does not pay." (Lara Sukhtian, NY Sun, 1/21, p.7 from Associated Press.) Does the P.A. intend to prevent that terrorism? We don't know - the P.A. rarely keeps its word. Suppose it does stop the rockets. What would that mean? Only that the P.A. finds that that kind of terrorism does not pay now. Other types it still supports. If the only P.A. objection to certain forms of terrorism is their current impracticality, then it thinks they may become practical later. Hence it does not disarm the terrorists. That attitude is not praiseworthy. It is cunning. ISRAEL PREPARES NEW APPEASEMENT Israel long had maintained that the Territories were not occupied, because they were not part of a sovereign country whose territory could be occupied. Therefore, the Geneva Convention on occupation did not apply. (Also, the Geneva Convention provisions were meant to protect civilians from a hostile presence. Israel is not hostile and does not commit the abuses to be protected from. The hostile presence is the Arabs, from whom Israel needs protection. Under the Mandate, Israel has a right and duty to live and settle its people in Yesha.) The rest of the world (unscrupulous and antagonistic towards Israel) pretends that the Territories are "occupied" and that Israel injures Arab rights there. The leftist Attorney General and Justice Ministries now share that view, as long has the Foreign Ministry. They mistakenly think that all the Arabs want, for peace, is the Territories. Those Ministries have been imposing their view about "occupation" on Israel. Thus, the Attorney General delayed Israeli construction of a railroad line between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, because part of it passed through the Territories. Finally he assented, with the rationale that it could benefit the Arabs, especially if part of the spur was in an area eventually turned over to the Arabs. Occupiers are allowed to build what may benefit residents. The Attorney General and the Justice Ministry are urging PM Sharon to apply the anti-Israel interpretation of international law, and therefore the Geneva Convention, to the Territories, recognizing them as occupied. This would greatly restrict Israel's rights in the Territories, such as to erect a security fence (IMRA, 12/5) and Israel's claim to the territories. EGYPT DEVELOPING NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Egypt signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. The Treaty commits it not to develop materials useful in nuclear weaponry, without at least informing the UNO's Intl. Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). IAEA has found evidence of Egyptian attempts over the decades to develop certain uranium compounds for military use. The last attempt for which there is evidence was only one year ago. The efforts appear to have been small-scale. Egypt criticizes the IAEA for not getting Israel to eliminate its nuclear capability (IMRA, 1/5). Israel, however, did not sign the Treaty and is under no obligation to disarm in any way. As the victim of aggression by forces that repeatedly have been built up greater than its own, it would be foolish to do so. It still is not fully known, or at least not fully revealed, how much Pakistan informed Arab states of the techniques for manufacturing nuclear weapons. It is known that S. Arabia financed much of Pakistan's program. How may Arab scientists were trained in the US? 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

OH HOW EMBARRASSING; DANE IS HEZBOLLAH SPY Posted by Steven Plaut, January 26, 2005.

1. Oh how embarrassing. The anti-Israel crowd, the Jew baiters, and the tenured traitors were having a field day this morning. A 3 year old Palestinian girl had been killed this morning in the Gaza Strip and it looked like she was killed when Israeli troops returned fire at Palestinian terrorists firing at THEM. Now that, you might say, would mean the Palestinians are responsible for the girl's death, since they opened fire, and they must be held accountable for any collateral damage from Israel returning fire. AH, but we know the real world does not work that way and the Jews are always to blame when they shoot back. So here we were witnessing the anti-Semites of the world having a celebration without precedent of Israel being blamed for the 3 year old girl's death - when the truth comes out. It was even more embarrassing than when the truth came out that the PLO had killed the little boy Mohammed al-Dura and not Israeli troops! It was revealed this afternoon that the girl was NOT killed by Israeli return fire. She was killed by a Kassam rocket. The Kassam rockets are PLO weapons fired into Jewish civilian areas, and the PLO has been continuing to fire tham at the Jews even during the current make-pretend ceasefire. Except that the one fired this morning had a structural default, and landed short, inside the Palestinian area of the Gaza Strip. It blew the girl to smithereens. 2. Regarding that film by an Israeli "producer" glorifyiong suicide bombers, which we discussed in yesterday's post, the evil Israeli in the film is played by a ... Palestinian actor. How Come? The Israeli producer Harel uses a "Palestinian" actor when he wants to portray an "edgy...Israeli" who looks like a thug. Is that racist typecasting - or what? Also, notice that this film was shown "in association with the Consulate General of Israel (SF)?" Is this sick, or what? An official sponsorship of this movie by the diplomatic services of Israel? "Palestinian actor Salim Daw is striking as the edgy, underground Israeli businessman. The Holy Land they inhabit is less the dream of milk and honey than a reality of abuse and misfortune. 3. For the past few days, the Loony Left here has been whining about the arrest of a Danish citizen suspected of espionage. No doubt one of those "peace solidarity" people, Rachel Corrie wannabes. Well, now the details have come out: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1106710064981 It's called "Dane under arrest is Hizbullah spy," and it was written by Yaakov Katz and Margot Dudkevitch. It appeared today in the Jerusalem Post. The Danish citizen of Lebanese origin currently the focus of a joint Police-Shin Bet investigation was identified Wednesday as a Hizbullah recruited agent by the name of Iyad al Ashwah, 39, after a gag order on the investigation was lifted. Al Ashwah, originally born in Lebanon moved to Denmark in 1986 and received Danish citizenship six years later. Al Ashwah was arrested on January 6 while he was on a train from Nahariya to Haifa after he raised a security officer's suspicions by videotaping the passing scenery through the train window. He was arrested by police and confessed that in July 2004 he had been recruited into Hizbullah by relatives living in Lebanon. In his interrogation, al Ashwah told police that he was ordered to travel to Israel disguised as a tourist to collect security information and most importantly to recruit Israeli-Arabs into the terror organization. Two Israeli-Arabs have also been arrested. In exchange for his work, al Ashwah was paid $2,000 by his Hizbullah operators. On December 29, al Ashwah arrived in Israel on a Turkish Airlines flight. He entered Israel with a brand new passport which had been issued right before his trip. During the six days leading up to his arrest, al Ashwah succeeded in recruiting two Israel-Arab suspects. He told police that he planned on renting a car and driving up north to locate security installations. He said he understood his mission to be a "test" which would be followed by a larger "more significant" mission. The suspect further told police that he maintained close contacts with relatives living in the Middle East and would visit Syria and Lebanon on an annual basis. Over the past two years, al Ashwah was unemployed and lived off of a government stipend. He said that in Denmark he gave most of his money to the Al Bureij Islamic charity association that maintains close ties with the refugee camp of the same name in Lebanon. "This suspect is just another example of the Hizbullah's growing interest in acting against Israel," the police said. "This time, the Hizbullah used an Arab with a Western passport to fool the Israeli security service." Foreigners recruited by Hizbullah This is not the first foreign national to be arrested by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) on suspicion of violating state security. In October 2002, Fawzi Ayoub, 38, a senior Hizbullah official who entered Israel on a forged US passport to carry out attacks in Israel and assist terrorist organizations in the territories was arrested by the Shin Bet. Ayoub, of Lebanese Shi'ite descent, participated in numerous attacks in and outside Lebanon and operated in a special unit headed by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah's deputy on military affairs, Amed Muaneh. After undergoing training, Ayoub was sent to Canada, where he lived for a number of years. He maintained contact with officials in Lebanon and carried out a number of missions on their behalf. On returning to Lebanon, Hizbullah recruited him to carry out a dangerous covert operation in Israel. He underwent intensive military preparation and was then dispatched to Europe where he received a forged US passport which he used to enter Israel. In January 2001 security officials arrested Hizbullah agent Jihad Shuman who bore a British passport with the name Gerard Shuman, who had entered the country in December 2000. Shuman, who studied computers at the Beirut University, is a Lebanese Shi'ite by descent and was ordered by his operators to travel to London and leave his Lebanese passport in the country, where he was instructed to purchase a cellular phone and fictitiously rent a mailbox and apartment, which he was to give out as his address once he arrived in Israel. He was told to locate a spot in Wadi Joz where certain items had been hidden for him, and was arrested six days after arriving in Israel. When arrested by security forces in his hotel room, Shuman had in his possession a kippah, timers, large sums of money, and three cellular phones. In November 1997, German citizen Stefan Josef Smyrek was arrested by the Shin Bet on his arrival at Ben Gurion airport. Smyrek, a convert to Islam, was recruited by the Hizbullah and sent to Israel to perpetrate a suicide bomb attack. Tried and convicted in Israel, he was in the middle of serving a ten-year jail sentence when he was released last year in a swap for the return of the bodies of the three soldiers abducted and killed in Har Dov in 2000 and the release of Israeli businessmen Elhanan Tenenbaum. In 1996, Hassin Makdad, who entered Israel on a British passport in April of the same year, was wounded when a bomb he was preparing exploded prematurely in his room at the Lawrence Hotel in east Jerusalem. To Go To Top

DISCREPANCY IN JTA FIGURES ON WEEKEND TERROR ATTACKS: 16, NOT JUST ONE Posted by Anita Tucker, January 26, 2005.

Similar discrepencies can be found in the JTA reporting over the last few weeks. I found it especially disturbing when the weapons used against Israel by PLO and associate terrorists land in the area where I live and then I read the JTA report leaving me with a feeling as if I was imagining things. I'm sure I wasn't! This is the story in question and David Bedein's comments on it: Anita Tucker Gush Katif The enclosed JTA story claims that there was one attempted Arab terrorist attack this past weekend in the south, when, in fact, there were 16 Arab terrorist attacks, all of which were duly recorded by civil defense officials in the south. That included eight kassam missiles and two anti aircraft missiles fired at civilians, and six machine gun attacks. Such a discrepancy needs to be brought to the attention of the appropriate people. While the current Israeli government may have its reasons to downplay the statistics on Arab terror attacks, it is the role of the media to report reality, not the wishful thinking of a government. David Bedein Bureau Chief Israel Resource News Agency Here is the story in question. Called "No news is good news: Unusual quiet reigns at border," it was written by Dan Baron. It appeared yesterday in http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead= Unusual+quiet+at+border+is+good+sign&intcategoryid= 1&SearchOptimize=Jewish+News Normally, a botched Palestinian attack on Israeli troops would raise no eyebrows, and would be just another dry statistic recorded in more than four years of fighting. But the mine that was detonated alongside an Israeli tank in the southern Gaza Strip on Sunday, causing no casualties, was noteworthy in that it happened at all. Otherwise, relative quiet reigned, a testimony to truce talks Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was leading with Palestinian terrorist groups. "The dialogue is making very good progress," Abbas told Palestine Television. "I can say we are bound to reach an agreement very soon." Just over the border with Israel, there was another show of confidence. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon convened his Cabinet in Sderot in an act of solidarity with residents reeling from months of Palestinian rocket strikes. "There is calm now," Sharon told fellow ministers, alluding to Abbas' efforts. "We don't know if this is a genuine change yet. We hope so. But one thing is clear - if terrorism resumes, we will act militarily." On Tuesday, American officials said they were encouraged by Palestinian efforts to restore calm and by Israel's response, creating an opportunity for progress toward peace. "This is the most promising moment for progress between Palestinians and Israelis that any of us have seen in several years," William Burns, U.S. assistant secretary of state, said Tuesday in Cairo on the first stop of a regional visit. According to reports, Abbas was close to reaching an informal cease-fire agreement with terrorist groups that would remain in force for a month - the period independent analysts believe the newly elected Abbas needs to reform his security forces. Hamas said a truce would be conditional on Israel suspending all military operations and on other unrealistic demands, such as the release of all Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. In a major step, Abbas deployed thousands of P.A. police around northern Gaza's border with Israel last week, providing a human buffer to ward off rocket launches. More police were to be deployed this week in central and southern Gaza - though not on the perilous Philadelphia Route along the border with Egypt, under which Palestinians dig arms-smuggling tunnels. For a lasting truce, Abbas aides say, Israel will have to reciprocate by scaling back its military operations and releasing Palestinian security prisoners. That may prove agreeable to Israel, which already has agreed to coordinate security with the Palestinian Authority before its planned withdrawal from Gaza later this year. "Until Abbas proves himself serious about diplomacy, a strategy of coexistence, we are thinking in terms of tactics," a Sharon confidant said. "There is nothing wrong tactically with helping his truce along." But the calm is fragile. Senior Israeli security sources said Jerusalem would ask for U.S. help in Abbas' efforts - not to apply more pressure on the Palestinian leader, but to look out for any intervention by Syria or Iran. "The Syrians and Iranians do not want quiet," a source said. "We believe they are doing their utmost to orchestrate an attack by their Palestinian proxies." Most attention is being paid to the northern West Bank, where the Al-Aksa Brigade takes orders and money from the Iranian-backed Hezbollah. Anita Tucker lives in Kush Katif, Gaza. Contact her at atucker@isdn.net.il To Go To Top

ISRAEL EXPLAINS DEMOCRACY; REAL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 25, 2005.

ISRAELI RADIO EXPLAINS "DEMOCRACY" Democracy, explained an Israeli radio commentator, is the decision-making process by the Knesset. PM Sharon's breaking of his campaign promises and post-campaign promises about his withdrawal plan has nothing to do with democracy (IMRA, 1/4/05). Yes it does. It affronts ands subverts democracy. The campaign is what voters base decisions on for electing the Knesset. If the campaign is largely false, the Knesset is based on false premises, and does not represent the will of the people. Knesset votes of no-confidence in the government and of funds, and parties' decisions to stay in the Cabinet depend on what the policy of the government is. When Sharon misleads and deliberately lies about that policy, he is subverting democracy. He resorts to one undemocratic trick after another. The worst one was usurping the power to fire Cabinet members until getting the rest to vote his way. Such transparent prestidigitation! It destroys the collegiality in which parties form a coalition government. Sharon was not elected Prime Minister but the head of one, minority party that needs other parties to form a Cabinet. TWO VIEWS OF ABU MAZEN & A RECOMMENDATION "Most Palestinians (i.e., certain Arabs) are sick of violence." "Optimists are convinced that the election of Mahmoud Abbas will solidify this trend and result in a long-awaited peace deal." On the other hand, Abbas embraced terrorists, advocates flooding Israel with Arabs, and is not "repressing" terrorist militias. His electoral victory by 40 percentage points hardly is democratic. Until the P.A. straightens out, the West should switch donations from the P.A. to independent P.A. human rights groups and other NGOs (Max Boot, senior fellow in Council on Foreign Relations, NY Sun, 1/17, p.9). Some of those statements were realistic, some unrealistic, and the rest reflect the Council's drive to take the Territories (and the Old City) away from Israel. Realistic is that Abbas was elected undemocratically, is keeping his fellow terrorists in power, and should not receive foreign aid. The term, "repress militants" is too vague. It would cover his current efforts for a ceasefire long enough to get concessions from Israel under the pretense that he has ended terrorism. The P.A. had signed agreements to disarm and dissolve terrorist militias, if not arrest them. To claim his Arabs oppose violence, when they favor murder, armed struggle, and the goal of conquest, is misleading. Violence is part of their culture. Far from eschewing violence, they merely seek ways of warfare that bring the least retribution from Israel. A "peace deal" is to be dreaded, not "long-awaited." The reason is that the Arabs make deals not for peace but to position themselves better for the next war. A deal is likely to undermine Israel by giving the Arabs what they do not deserve, what is rightfully Israel's, and which Israel need for secure borders and water. It is misleading to suggest donating to P.A. NGOs, as if they were independent of the P.A. or humanitarian. They use the language of human rights to advance the jihadist agenda. Rather than give foreign aid to any group in the P.A., foreign countries should let Israel smash the terrorist militias, including the P.A. police forces, reclaim vacant areas in the Territories, and itself stop being a source of income for Arab jihadists. As the Arab warriors depart, peace would filter in. ISRAEL BACK TO NOT DEMANDING QUID PRO QUO Israeli Defense Min. Mofaz has returned to the former criteria of willingness to turn territory over to the P.A. if the P.A. makes a 100% effort against terrorism. IMRA rebukes that non-standard: "Why 'effort' rather than 'results'? The problem with a 'results' requirement is that if DM Mofaz and PM Sharon want to hand over control of an area to the Palestinians (Arabs) even though the Palestinians haven't delivered on fighting terror, their critics at home can use performance data against them (for example, how many thousands of assault rifles were confiscated). On the other hand, "effort" is nice and amorphous - much harder to argue conclusively against a claim that 'enough effort' is being made. So instead of requiring a "results" standard, Mofaz talks about 'effort' with Israel only acting after it pulls out if there are 'no results' at all." "And what of the Philadephi Corridor that ISS head Avi Dichter insisted Israel should hold, just yesterday"? He said, "If Egypt and the Palestinians are willing and able to take responsibility for stopping the smuggling of weapons and explosives into Gaza from Egypt, then Israeli troops can pull out of Gaza altogether." "How is this tested? Does this mean Israel retreats when PM Sharon and DM Mofaz estimate that 'Egypt and the Palestinians are willing and able to take responsibility' or only after Egypt and the Palestinians actually finally take action to effectively stop the smuggling? After all, the Egyptians are already on the Egyptian side of the border and the Palestinians are in the area beyond the Philadelphi Corridor where the tunnels surface." (IMRA, 1/5.) The US has been certifying P.A. non-compliance with Oslo as compliance. Pres. Bush has been waiving penalties on the P.A. on the false grounds of their compliance or of US national interests. Is it in the US national interest to maintain a terrorist entity in the P.A.? REAL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE The leader of Yesha Jewry got protestors against the Sharon plan to sit in leaky tents opposite the Knesset, where nobody cares about them. >From experience, Barry Chamish proposes real civil disobedience. He explained the efficacy of the following suggestions: (1) Tie up the phone lines of government offices and radio talk shows; (2) Drive side-by-side at the minimum legal speed on highways; (3) Open safe deposit boxes and place a sizeable fish in each, to rot and drive out the bankers; (4) Don't buy Israeli products, sell all Israeli stocks and shekels for foreign ones, cancel Israeli vacations and buy foreign airline seats via internet rather than travel agencies; (5) Don't charge sales tax or pay income tax; (6) Buy tickets on El Al, and cancel at the last minute; (7) Let foreign visitors know what criminality has taken over the Israeli government, that the Left had PM Rabin assassinated, and that the cities are unsafe. Those imaginative but drastic measures would enable the protestors to tie up the country and its funds, without clashing with the Army. The government couldn't prosecute everyone in a hundred years! Such means, however, must be done only for something as serious as this cause, the one of national survival against the Sharon plan (Chamish, 1/5, e-mail). THE PERFIDY OF A TERRORIST ATTACK Considerate of Arab Muslims' religious needs, Israel opened an extra checkpoint to let pilgrims to Mecca pass through. A terrorist took advantage of it to open fire on Israeli troops. Fortunately, he swiftly was killed by the troops (IMRA, 1/5). It doesn't pay to be nice to the Muslim Arabs. ASSOCIATED PRESS SPIN "NY Sun" reporters are objective, and its editorials uphold Israel against Arab aggression and terrorism. Unfortunately, its Associated Press (A.P.) news comes with a pro-Arab bias. In "Israelis, Palestinians Resume Contact" (January 20, 2005), A.P. credits the Labor Party presence as moderating the Israeli Cabinet. It quotes Mr. Abbas' henchman that Israel should stop "aggression." Where is an Israeli retort about acting in self-defense? Why one-sided? The Labor Party proposes extensive cessions of strategic and historically Jewish territory, during wartime, to a jihadist enemy sworn to destroy Israel. Sounds like treason, not moderation! A.P. editorializes its news about the Labor Party, to make Labor seem moderate in appeasement of the Arabs. Appeasement no more works with fanatical jihadists than it did with fanatical Nazis and Communists. In "Abbas Commands Terrorists to Halt Attacks on Israel" (January 18, 2005), A.P. calls Abbas "an outspoken critic of violence" who will not use force against terrorists. No, he criticized attacks on Israel AT This Time, when Israel might make concessions. He admitted that the armed struggle would continue afterwards. Suspending terrorism would not meet his Oslo obligation to disarm and dissolve the illegal militias. In "Israeli Jets Bomb Hezbollah Positions in Lebanon" (January 18, 2005), A.P. refers to a "disputed area." Hezbollah terrorists claim that Israeli area as Lebanese, but the UN certified that Israel withdrew from all of Lebanon. The terrorist claim is a fig leaf for continued aggression. Hezbollah fights Israel out of bigotry, but gives excuses that A.P. dignifies by taking seriously. Also on January 18, an A.P. dispatch reports that the UNO banned its workers from Aceh province, where insurgents are fighting for independence. The article did not explain why they want independence. In Aceh, Muslim militias are attacking Christian villages and driving the inhabitants into the bush. Is the failure to explain the reason for the insurgency A.P.'s desire not to reveal anything embarrassing about Islam? It would be a piece of its failure to do so about the Muslims in the Israeli Territories. As an agency for syndicated news presentation, the A.P., like Reuters and the Jewish Telegraphic Press, is well situated to spread its melange of distortion and omission. The control of such agencies is a serious problem for Western civilization. Some of these agencies, like television networks, have come under anti-democratic or Islamist influence. MUSLIMS COWERING IN THE U.S.: DO THEY? NEED THEY? "And while we read about Roth's Jews feeling increasingly alien in 1940 and cowering in their apartments, are we not reminded of ordinary Muslim Americans, who have grown fearful in the context of the Patriot Act and the war against a corrupted form of Islam?" (Gerald Sorin, American Jewish Congress Monthly, 12/2004, p.18, reviewing a work of fiction.) Pres. Bush has made it plain that we are fighting against Islamism and not ordinary Islam. There is no justification for US Muslims to grow fearful. As soon as there was an initial outburst against Muslims, American society rushed to reassure ordinary Muslims that they had nothing to fear. Nor did anything fearsome against them ensue. Many Muslims here are hostile to the US. They magnify real concerns in order to appear as the victims worthy of sympathy and concessions. They paint themselves as besieged, in order to demand privileges that put us under siege. It is one of their ruses of war. Our problem is one of misplaced sympathy. The Talmud recognized that pernicious problem hundreds of years ago. 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

JERUSALEM-BASED NEWSLETTER BRINGS PLO STATE DEBATE TO CHRISTIAN ZIONIST HEARTLAND Posted by AFSI-Jerusalem-Based Newsletter, January 25, 2005.

New York (Jan.25th) - The first issue of OUT OF ZION, a national monthly internet newsletter emanating from Jerusalem, has been launched to a list of 16,000 individual Christian Zionist and Jewish subscribers and to church organizations across the U.S. with a combined membership in excess of 100,000. A joint project of Global Israel Alliance (GIA) and New York-based Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI-www.afsi.org), OUT OF ZION is the follow-on to a national referendum posted on the internet in the months leading up to the 2004 U.S. presidential election inviting Christian Zionists and other Bible-oriented Americans to voice their feelings regarding the proposed creation of a PLO state within the borders of the Land of Israel. "The response was overwhelmingly negative," said OUT OF ZION co-editor William Mehlman, "so adamantly opposed to this as a negation of God's word and His covenant with Abraham, that we felt the issue deserved the widest possible national exposure. OUT OF ZION is the result." Beyond its ideological commitment to the Land of Israel and its capital, Jerusalem, as an indivisible entity, the newsletter examines a wide spectrum of Israeli life and culture. The first issue includes sections on science and medicine in Israel, U.S.-Israel relations, Biblical history, Torah commentary and analysis, demographics, Christian Zionist activities in Israel, digests of selected articles from OUTPOST, AFSI's renowned monthly journal, as well as contributions by leading authorities on defense, economics, media and the American Christian Zionist Community. An opening letter to subscribers is signed by Mehlman, a member of AFSI's Executive Committee and AFSI/GIA representative in Israel, and co-editor Kim Johnson, director of GIA. It warns of the threat to Western civilization posed by "blind men groping for magical solutions to radical Islam's assault on the West and its Judeo-Christian underpinnings, concluding that the sacrifice of both Israel and a 2,000 year-old redemptive promise will somehow appease the ravenous hunger of the tiger at the gate." While conceding that "moral absolutes are the province of angels," the letter attests that "in any contest between the adherents to God's word and its denigrators, we know where we stand. We feel confident you occupy the same ground..." OUT OF ZION can be accessed by going to the website: www.globalisraelalliance.com ZionNet "For out of Zion shall go forth the Torah, and the Word of the L-D from Jerusalem" Isaiah 2:3 Shalom! A Letter to the Subscribers of Out of Zion To Our Christian Zionist and Jewish National Zionist Friends: Most of you, the recipients of this first issue of Out of Zion, Global Israel Alliance's new monthly Jerusalem-based newsletter, were respondents to GIA's 2004 pre-election internet referendum that invited you to voice your feelings about the proposed creation of a PLO state within the borders of Israel. By an overwhelming majority, you rejected the proposal as a negation of the first Covenant - God's promise to Abraham of the Land of Israel as a legacy in perpetuity to his descendants. That promise is being challenged as never before - even within Israel. Blind men, groping for magical solutions to radical Islam's assault on the West and its Judeo-Christian underpinnings, have concluded that the sacrifice of both Israel and a 2000-year-old redemptive promise will somehow appease the ravenous hunger of the tiger at the gates. In the words of the Psalmist, "They hold crafty converse against Thy people and take counsel against Thy treasured ones. They have said 'Come, let us cut them off from being a nation, that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.'" Europe has been sucked into a vortex of godlessness, disavowing all vows save that of material gratification at any price. The United Nations, the intended bright safe haven in a world grasping for justice, has mutated into a red-light front for every known form of corruption, vicious anti-semitism, unprecedented human rights violation, and the unabashed thuggery that characterizes half its member states. The United States (and its President), denigrated and vilified by a world profoundly focused on its headlong retreat from moral clarity, is compelled - even as it sheds the blood of its youth in a struggle to bring light and humanity to the darkest region of the globe - to fight a rearguard action against self-appointed elitists panting to join the retreating mob. Israel has not escaped the turmoil. We speak to you from a nation torn by the consequences of 56 years of unrelenting war and terrorism. The insatiable hatred of an enemy that believes it has found the keys to paradise in the murder of Jewish children has created mirages here as vivid as any the shimmering sands of Middle East have ever evoked. Half of a wearied Israel appears ready to lay any sacrifice before the altar of "peace," real or imagined. They are ready to abandon Judea, Samaria, Gaza, eastern Jerusalem, the Temple Mount - whatever is demanded - and retreat behind its deceptive "security fence." The other half, including 144 primarily Torah-based communities beyond the so-called Green Line, has declared it will hold fast against any attempt by any Israeli government to deliver its homes and land into the hands of an enemy sworn to the eradication of the Jewish national enterprise. Moral absolutes are the province of angels and principled compromise would be no sin if compromise were possible. But in any contest between the adherents to God's word and its denigrators, we know where we stand. We feel confident you occupy the same ground, for without the continued support of fhe American Christian Zionist community and its allies, we would indeed be in despair. We can assure you we are not. Beyond the seemingly impenetrable clouds, life - joyful life - goes on Israel. There are remarkable achievements being made here in science, medicine, high technology, the arts, Biblical archeology and research, and the study of Torah. It is a land of limitless spiritual and intellectual horizons. We hope to convey some semblance of that brimming energy through the aegis of this newsletter. Out of Zion has been fashioned for you. It is a monologue that yearns to become a dialogue. Write to us at our website. Tell us what moves you and how we can strengthen the bonds between you and this beloved land. Send us the e-mail addresses of those you believe would welcome this new voice from Jerusalem into their homes. For as long as Israel stands in peril, we promise it is a voice that will not be stilled. We thank you for your sponsorship to this newsletter and support for the land of Israel. Bill Mehlman Co-Editor AFSI/GIA Representaive, Jerusalem, Israel Kim Johnson Co-Editor Director Global Israel Alliance Taming A Runaway State Department When it comes to Middle East policy, Foggy Bottom all too often operates without, or in defiance of, congressional authorization and with the barest minimum of public awareness. Here are some prime examples from a list provided by David Bedein, Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem: State has ignored documents, records, minutes and recordings presented to it by Israeli intelligence demonstrating the direct involvement of Abu Mazen, Arafat's heir presumptive, in a five-year long PLO murder campaign that has resulted in the deaths of more than 1000 Israeli citizens. State has demanded that Israel NOT publish the documents it has acquired that link the Palestine National Authority and Fatah in the premeditated campaign of murder in Israel over the last five years. State has refused to demand that the PLO withdraw its sentence of death for any Jew who lives in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Gaza, or the Golan Heights. State, while approving massive arms shipments and weapons upgrades for Egypt, has not used any leverage with Egypt to demand that it put a stop to the mass construction of weapons tunnels into Israel. State, despite its protestations against those who aid and abet the terrorist structure, will issue no public call for Saudi Arabia to cease its funding of Arab terror organizations. State, mandated by the U.S. Congress to monitor education under the Palestinian Authority, hired IPCRI, a leading PLO advocacy organization to do the job. This hire has resulted in a whitewash of the PA school curriculum as a "peace curriculum." Meanwhile, State continues to ignore sharply contrary evidence provided in an analysis of PA textbooks by CMIP, the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace (www. edume.org) State, mandated by the Congress to provide a critical analysis of the status of religious freedom inside the Palestinian Authority, issued a report describing the "transformation" of Joseph's Tomb into a mosque as "an act of religious freedom." State, mandated by the President to seek ways to facilitate a "two-state solution" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, allocated $70 million to UNWRA (the United Nations Relief & Works Agency). UNWRA advocates policies that promote the "right of return" for an alleged four million Arab refugees which enables them to claim land that is the site of Israeli towns, collective farms and woodlands. State, mandated by the Congress to facilitate a system of human rights in the Palestinian Authority, has turned a blind eye to the PA's confinement of hundreds of dissidents on death row for the "crime" of criticizing the Authority. The PA calls them "collaborators" for media consumption. State authorized the resumption of direct assistance to the PA despite its failure to disarm and disband the Arab terror groups operating within its domain. American assistance was supposed to be predicated on such a crackdown. Memo to Condaleeza Rice: Are you sure you really want that job? Defenders of the Covenant Cementing the Christian Zionist Link In the wake of a sect of the Presbyterian Church's (PCUSA) decision to employ economic sanctions against Israel and with the prospect of the Episcopal and other mainline Protestant churches following suit, Kimberly Troupe, director of the US office of Christian Friends of Israeli Communities (CFOIC), has put out a call for a "whirlwind of support for Israel" on the part of every Christian loyal to the Covenant between God and His people. "Let's see if we can bring the number of Christian believers who support Israel to a level never before seen," she declares. "The time has come for Christians to act." Challenging Christians to "stand with Israel and to bring as many people with you as you can," Kimberly has come up with a list of actions Bible-oriented Christians should be pursuing in their effort to "get involved and make a difference" in this critical battle. Here are some of them: Write letters to the editors of the (unusually pro-Palestinian) Christian Science Monitor informing them that Christians do support Israel. Community involvement. Start a local prayer group for Israel and set aside one day a week or month to meet regularly with other Christians to "Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem." Get educated! Talk to Sunday school classes about Israel and provide them with facts they'll need to respond to those who raise false accusations against Israel. Pray, Pray, Pray!!! Write to US and Israeli leaders and remind them of God's promises to Israel as related in Scripture. Find out when speakers from Israel are coming to your area and go listen and support them. CFOIC at 1-800-551-3207 can help. Get your church or prayer group to adopt a community project. Nothing speaks louder than actions. Get involved in making a difference in the lives of Jews living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Visit Israel and don't forget to include Biblical Israel (from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean) in your itinerary. Zion Voices "Christian Zionism is at a turning point. Up to now it has hovered below the radar screen. It must now emerge as a full fledged partner in discussions and decisions that are made regarding Israel. Christian Zionism must have its own organizational identity with a constituency that is genuinely pro-Israel. While it may not be granted a seat at the table by its Evangelical and liberal opposition or by government decision-makers, the prophetic voice of the Christian Zionist must be heard by speaking truth to power." -- Dr. James Hutchens, President, Christians For Israel. Editor, The Jerusalem Connection.   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. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. To Go To Top

TODAY'S JEWISH ANTI-SEMITES Posted by Steven Plaut, January 25, 2005.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post. It is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1106537800595&p=1006953079897 Caroline Glick can be reached at caroline@jpost.com In a recent poll, 62 percent of Germans said they were "sick of all the harping on about German crimes against the Jews." Two thirds of Germans said they believe Israel is waging "a war of extermination" against the Palestinians. Jews often focus their attention on Holocaust sentiment among non-Jews to gauge anti-Semitic feelings. But while feelings about the Holocaust serve as an indicator of general sentiment about Jews, there are other indicators no less important or revealing. Sensitivity about the Holocaust may tell us what a person feels about Jews, but it may also simply tell us what that person feels about dead Jews. But let's say that most Germans did believe the Holocaust was a terrible crime. Would the German rejection of the Holocaust mean that the majority that believes Israel is today's Nazi Germany is less anti-Semitic? No, it would not. Yesterday the UN General Assembly for the first time held a special session to commemorate the liberation of the Nazi death camps and the Holocaust. Does this mean that the UN, which devotes some one-third of its resolutions to condemning Israel, is no longer hostile to the Jewish people? No, it does not. SINCE THE Holocaust, the rallying cry of Jews has been "Never Again!" But the enormity of the Holocaust must not blind us to its present-day mutation. Today the vast majority of anti-Semites are not calling for Jews to be deported to death camps. They are calling for the destruction of the Jewish state and, as was the case in previous generations, they are seeking out and finding Jews like Karl Marx who share their hatred for the Jewish people and willingly advance their evil agenda. This agenda is to again reduce Jews to a state of powerlessness where we will be at the mercy of the same world that either participated in or did nothing in the face of the extermination of European Jewry. Today this is done by striking out at the main safeguard against such powerlessness - the State of Israel - criminalizing it as the modern-day incarnation of Nazi Germany. The role of Jewish anti-Semites in this campaign is to decouple the dead Jews murdered by the Nazis from the live Jews who live in, or support, the Jewish state. Such a Jew was found by the British conservative magazine The Spectator in one Anthony Lippman. Lippman is actually an Anglican, not a Jew, but as the child of Jewish Holocaust survivors, he will do. In a recent article, Lippman writes hypnotically about his mother's sufferings in Auschwitz only to explain that the job of Holocaust survivors and their children is to speak out against... Israel. In his words, survivors have "a terrible responsibility - to live well in the name of those who did not live and to discourage the building of walls and bulldozing of villages. Even more than this, they - and all Jews - need to be the voice of conscience that will prevent Israel from adopting the mantle of oppressor, and to reject the label 'anti-Semite' for those who speak out against Israel's policies in the occupied territories." ANOTHER such Jew is Tony Judt. Since the start of the Palestinian terror war, Judt, a historian at New York University, has been outspoken in his rejection of Israel's right to exist. In a series of articles in The New York Review of Books, The Nation and The New Republic, Judt has led the charge in claiming that "the depressing truth is that Israel today is bad for the Jews," and that for Jews to feel good about themselves again Israel must cease to be a Jewish state - that is, Israel must cease to exist. This perverse line of reasoning, whereby the only way for Jews to be happy is for us to again be powerless, has brought Judt under attack by prominent Jews who have exposed the anti-Semitism inherent in his argumentation. In a new article in The Nation magazine, Judt takes a stab at responding to his many critics. The article is a ponderous attempt to argue that there is no relation between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. On the one hand, he says that it is anti-Semitic to say that Jews control the US. But on the other hand, Judt allows that "contemporary US foreign policy is in certain respects mortgaged to Israel," adding, "To say that Israel and its lobbyists have an excessive and disastrous influence on the policies of the world's superpower is a statement of fact." Judt allows that there has been a rise in anti-Semitism in Europe in recent years, but he blames this on "the policies of Israeli government." Echoing Anglican Lippman, Judt writes that for anti-Semitism to be dealt with in Europe, "Jews and others must learn to shed inhibitions and criticize Israel's policies and actions." In Judt's view, "once Germans, French and others can comfortably condemn Israel without an uneasy conscience, and can look their Muslim fellow citizens in the face, it will be possible to deal with the real problem [i.e., anti-Semitism]." Since the September 11 attacks Muslims have been called upon to decry the preaching of hatred in their community. It is argued that until Muslims themselves delegitimize the voices of hatred in their communities the poisonous message of jihad will continue to attract thousands to its genocidal cause. The 60th anniversary of Auschwitz's liberation is a good time to call for a similar Jewish condemnation of hate-filled Jews and those that use them to advance their anti-Semitic agenda. These are not legitimate voices. These are not legitimate views. They are the views of deranged Jew-haters which, if listened to, will do nothing other than pave the way to the next calamity. 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. To Go To Top

THE LARK PROGRAM Posted by IsrAlert, January 24, 2005.

This comes from Bruce. The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20016 Dear Concerned Citizen: Thank you for your recent letter roundly criticizing our treatment of the Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees currently being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Our administration takes these matters seriously, and your opinion was heard loud and clear here in Washington. You'll be pleased to learn that, thanks to the concerns of citizens like you, we are creating a new division of the Terrorist Retraining Program, to be called the "Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers" program, or LARK for short In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided to place one terrorist under your personal care. Your personal detainee has been selected and scheduled for transportation under heavily armed guard to your residence next Monday. Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of admonishment. It will likely be necessary for you to hire some assistant caretakers. We will conduct weekly inspections, in conjunction with the Red Cross, to ensure that your care for Ahmed is commensurate with international standards and those you so strongly recommended in your letter. Although Ahmed is sociopathic, extremely violent, and was trying to kill at least 20 women and children as we captured him, we hope that your sensitivity to what you described as his "attitudinal problem" will help him overcome these character flaws. I might add that he will bite you, or worse, given the chance. However, perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere cultural differences. We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home schooling. Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers. We do not suggest that you ask him to demonstrate these skills at your next yoga group. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless (in your opinion) this might offend him. Ahmed will not wish to interact with your wife or daughters (except sexually) since he views females as a subhuman form of property. This is a particularly sensitive subject for him, and he has been known to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the new dress code that Ahmed will recommend a s more appropriate attire. I'm sure they will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the bhurka - over time. Just remind them that it is all part of "respecting his culture and his religious beliefs" - wasn't that how you put it? Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like you, who know so much, keep us informed of the proper way to do our job. You take good care of Ahmed - and remember...we'll be watching. Good Luck! Cordially, Pres. Geo. W. Bush CC: Donald Rumsfeld Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

HORSES, CARTS, EGGS AND CHICKENS Posted by Batya Medad, January 24, 2005.

This morning I heard one of those offers on the news. It reminded me of the jokes I heard as a kid about gullible people buying the Brooklyn Bridge, or the children's story about the small animal who trusted the fox to give him a ride across the river and made it to the other side in the fox, rather than on him. The offer I heard actually put the cart before the horse; it's a reversal, a perversion, of reality. The Israel-Arab "conflict" is not a philosophical problem, like eggs and chickens - which came first. And what's the offer? If you haven't already guessed, the Arabs offered to stop terrorism if we stop our military activities. Yeah, sure. http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=75775 It seems like they've conveniently "forgotten" something, ignoring a "minor" detail. They're the aggressors, the initiators, and we're just trying to defend ourselves. They bomb homes, schools, civilians, families and school children. We wipe up the blood, dig graves and on occasion try to carefully capture terrorists without harming anyone "who may be just an innocent civilian." There wouldn't be any Israeli military activity if the Arabs weren't attacking and murdering us. There is no country more ambivalent, less enthusiastic, about its military than Israel. Catholics consider sex to be "the necessary evil," and Israelis treat its military that way. Without an army, we would never have achieved statehood and would never have had been able to defend ourselves in the wars the Arabs made against us. People here bless newborn males with: "he should never need to be a soldier." After the Yom Kippur War in 1973, there was a top hit song, sung by Yoram Gaon, "Ani mavti'ach lach, yaldah sheli, k'tana, shezot t'hiyeh hamilchamah ha'achronah," "I promise you, my little girl, that this will be the very last war." Another favorite was "Shir Hashalom," "The Peace Song," based on the philosophy sung by John Lennon in "Imagine." Its theme is that there's nothing worth dying for, neither religion nor nationality. This philosophy is extremely dangerous for a country whose very existence is threatened daily. The songwriters have been brainwashing the Israeli public for years. Educators and anthropologists have always known for that the easiest way to learn something is to sing it. A pleasant tune can overcome almost anyone's inhibitions. You don't even know that there's a message; it's so singable. That's the danger. People will believe anything if you say it long enough. The natural consequence of that philosophy is that if nothing's worth dying for, then nothing's worth living for either. Unfortunately we see that more and more as the escape to drugs, materialism and mystic searches are becoming more and more common. There is a terrible emptiness is sections of Israeli society, since they are "disengaged" from their heritage. The schism in Israeli society can be seen in how the cart and horse are arranged. We, in YESHA and our supporters, have something to live for. We're building our country and we're not trying nor willing to pander to anyone. Our goals are clear. Our security and independence are paramount. Our cart is hitched behind the horse, and we're working hard. If we have to fight our enemies, we will. When they stop attacking us, and not for a few hours or a day, when they hand us their weapons and surrender, then we can cease our "military activities."  But we will always have to be on the alert to safeguard our country. And for those who believe the Arab promises, I have this bridge?. This is Musing #96. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il To Go To Top

THE LITTLE BUS THAT COULD Posted by Angela Bertz, January 24, 2005.

For days, it stood outside the courtroom, believing its burnt-out, hollow interior would speak louder than any Israeli delegation's words ever could. On the 29th of January 2004, a Palestinian policeman boarded the number 19 bus in Jerusalem. He took a seat at the back. This representative of Palestinian law and order was about to commit a savage crime of mass murder. As the bus made its way up Gaza Street, he detonated an explosives belt, tearing the bus into a twisted wreck of metal, blowing out every window and killing 11 innocent people. Fifty more were wounded, ten of them seriously. Rose Boneh, 39, took the 19 bus to work everyday. One of her best friends described her as a woman with a huge heart. Her boyfriend described meeting Rose as akin to winning the lottery. She had been more than a mother to his 14-year-old son, who, upon hearing the news of her death, collapsed. Yechezkel Goldberg, 41, had immigrated to Israel eight years ago from Canada with his wife and was father to seven children. He worked as a social worker, devoting a lot of his time to troubled youth. He was also an active and respected writer. Avraham Balashan, 28, originally from France, had immigrated to Israel six years ago. He had been married for four years. A few months previously, his mother had also immigrated. He felt a deep sense of belonging to Israel and would pray every morning. Hannah Anya Bonder, originally from Russia, had immigrated to Israel 12 years ago. She had just turned 38. She was proud to be Jewish and embraced life. One of her work colleagues, upon hearing of the explosion, was alarmed, as she was always so punctual. She was mother to two teenage sons. Anat Darom was a pretty, young student of 23. She had grown up in Tel Aviv and Netanya. She was studying statistics and sociology at the Hebrew University. She was planning to complete her BA and go into social research. Octavian Viorel, 42, had immigrated with his wife and little daughter from Romania only three years ago. He was hard-working and described by his wife as a super person and good husband. That Thursday morning, he had just taken their five-year-old daughter to kindergarten. Natalia Gamril, 53, was also an immigrant, originally from Russia. She had been in Israel for 10 years. Her daughter described her as a very sociable person and a wonderful mother. She was on her way to work to take care of an elderly lady. Baruch Hodiashvili had lived in Israel most of his life and was an accomplished chef at Jerusalem's Great Synagogue. Every morning, he took his children to kindergarten. His wife said of her husband, "There never was, and never will be, a husband, father and son like Baruch." Dana Itach was 24 and had dreams of raising a family with her husband, whom she had married only a year before. She had the choice of two buses from her home, tragically getting on the No. 19 that morning. She was only one stop away from her work when the bomb detonated. Those closest to Dana described her as a gentle and patient girl. Manbara Valid Tzadik, 35, was an illegal foreign worker from Ethiopia. She had originally come to Israel as a tourist eight years ago and decided to stay and work. She was only identified by DNA samples taken from her apartment, after her husband reported her missing. Eli Zfira, 48, worked at a school as a maintenance man. He had a strong bond with all the children. His wife said it had been Eli's dream to bring their 20-month-old son a little sister. Five and a half months later, this blown-out bus was shipped to The Hague, standing outside the International Court of Justice, while judges deliberated on Israel's security barrier. It took with it its sad memories of those 11 innocent people who had once led full and useful lives. For days, it stood outside the courtroom, believing its burnt-out, hollow interior would speak louder than any Israeli delegation's words ever could. Unbelievably, the bus and its poignant message remained almost unheard above the din of Palestinian propaganda. The United Nations' predominantly biased International (Kangaroo) Court of Justice voted 14:1 to condemn Israel's security barrier. These 14 judges, no doubt paid a combined salary that could wipe out the third world debt of many African countries, decided in their infinite wisdom to condemn the barrier, claiming it infringed on the rights of Palestinians. The court also said that Israel was obligated to return confiscated land and pay damages to people whose homes, farms or businesses had been affected. The news was met with jubilance by the Palestinians, showing yet again how excellent Palestinian propaganda can make perpetrators appear victims and innocent victims appear aggressors. The judges were able to churn out dozens of pages of drivel, basically apologizing and endorsing terrorism, all the while, turning blind, ignorant eyes to the number 19 bus and what it represented. The burnt-out bus, when faced with such total one-sided bias, had tragically failed dismally, not only the 11 who had died that January, but the 1,000 more innocent Israelis who had been victims of Palestinian terrorism. The United Nations, which for years had never once churned out a resolution about the more than 100 bus/restaurant bombings perpetrated by the Palestinians, had reached an all-time low. The number 19 bus has since been purchased by a humanitarian group of Christians called the Jerusalem Connection. It was consequently shipped to the United States, where its empty, burnt-out shell was loaded onto the back of a trailer. In the last few months, this bus has spoken volumes at any number of anti-terror rallies across the US. On January 16th, this much-traveled bus reached Berkley, California. It was brought there by a group called the Israel Action Committee of the East Bay, which would use it for a three-hour exhibit. At none of its previous appearances across the United States did the bus stir much controversy. Word soon spread to the pro-Palestinian groups in the area. They arrived with the sole aim of disrupting the rally, bringing with them their own brand of contempt for anyone who failed to recognize the Palestinians' resistance as a just and noble cause, whatever the means. The bus, yet again, took second stage to supporters of terrorism, and the number 19 bus' tragic tale could easily, but for police intervention, have been drowned out by angry roars of "Allahu Akbar!" Even more horrific than this much-abused rhetoric was the sight of kindergarten children walking around with signs depicting hideously disemboweled bodies below the words "Organ Thieves". This was a sad attempt to use innocent children to vent the ridiculously held farce that Jews actually steal body parts from dead Palestinians. It is even more farcical that a burnt-out bus, not the truth alone, has to be Israel's most powerful message to a world hell-bent on looking the other way. Angela Bertz made aliyah from England. She can be contacted at angela03@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

ORTHODOXY - THE FUTURE OF JUDAISM? Posted by Daniel Pipes, January 24, 2005.

This is a fascinating new piece by Dan Pipes.It appeared on FrontPageMagazine.com, January 25, 2005. It's archived at http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16754 Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and author of Miniatures (Transaction Publishers). (It should be emphasized that Dan is not himself religiously observant) Until the eighteenth century, there was basically only one kind of Judaism, that which is now called Orthodox. It meant living by the religions 613 laws, and doing so suffused Jews lives with their faith. Then, starting with the thinker Baruch Spinoza (1632-77) and moving briskly during the Haskala (enlightenment) from the late eighteenth century, Jews developed a wide variety of alternate interpretations of their religion, most of which diminished the role of faith in their lives and led to a concomitant reduction in Jewish affiliation. These alternatives and other developments, in particular the Holocaust, caused the ranks of the Orthodox to be reduced to a small minority. Their percentage of the world Jewish population reached a nadir in the post-World War II era, when it declined to about 5 percent. The subsequent sixty years, however, witnessed a resurgence of the Orthodox element. This was, again, due to many factors, especially a tendency among the non-Orthodox to marry non-Jews and then to have fewer children. Recent figures for the United States published by the National Jewish Population Survey point in this direction. The Orthodox proportion of American synagogue members, for example, went from 11 percent in 1971 to 16 percent in 1990 to 21 percent in 2000-01. (In absolute numbers, it bears noting, the American Jewish population went steadily down during these decades.) Should this trend continue, it is conceivable that the ratio will return to somewhat where it was two centuries ago, with the Orthodox again constituting the great majority of Jews. Were that to happen, the non-Orthodox phenomenon could seem in retrospect but an episode, an interesting, eventful, consequential, and yet doomed search for alternatives, suggesting that living by the law may be essential for maintaining a Jewish identity over the long term. These demographic thoughts come to mind on reading a recent article in the Jerusalem Post, US haredi leader urges activism, by Uriel Heilman, in which he reports on a landmark address in late November 2004 by Rabbi Shmuel Bloom, executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America. Agudath, an Orthodox organization with a stated mission to mobilize Torah-loyal Jews for the perpetuation of authentic Judaism, has a membership ranging from clean-shaven men to black-hatted ones (the haredi), from Jews educated in secular universities to full-time, Yiddish-speaking students of the Talmud. Rabbi Bloom told an Agudath audience that Jewish demographic trends imply that American Orthodox can no longer, as in the past, bury themselves in their parochial interests and expect non-Orthodox Jewish institutions to shoulder the major burden of communal responsibilities. Rather, the Orthodox must now join in, or even take over from their non-Orthodox co-religionists such tasks as fighting antisemitism, sending funds to Israel, and lobbying the U.S. government. The things we rely on secular Jews for, he asked, whos going to do that if the secular community whittles down? We have to broaden our agenda to include things that up until now weve relied upon secular Jews to do. He exaggerates, in that some Orthodox Jews in the United States have been prominently involved in both national (think of Senator Joseph Lieberman) and communal affairs (Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America comes to mind). But he is accurate in so far as Orthodox institutions have generally stayed out of the American fray except to pursue their narrow agenda. Others in Agudath agree with the need for the Orthodox to broaden their ambitions. David Zwiebel, the organizations executive vice president for government and public affairs, notes that, With our growing numbers and the maturing of the community and the greater self-confidence that comes with that maturity and those numbers, theres no question that we need to at least recognize that there may be certain responsibilities that now have to shift to our shoulders. Heilman understands this intent to assume a greater role in national and Jewish life as a sign both of the success of the American haredi community in sustaining its numbers and its failure to translate that success into greater influence in the community at large. It also could portend a much deeper shift in Jewish life in the United States and beyond, being a leading indicator of Orthodoxys political coming of age and perhaps even its eventual replacement of non-Orthodox Judaism. 2. "Sharansky: PA promotes genocide," Hilary Leila Krieger, The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 25, 2005. At a press conference timed to coincide with events marking the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, Diaspora Affairs Minister Natan Sharansky will on Tuesday assert that the Palestinian Authority, even under new chairman Mahmoud Abbas, is engaged in the "promotion of genocide" against the Jewish people. The "Kill a Jew Go to Heaven" presentation, compiled by Palestinian Media Watch, an Israel-based organization that monitors incitement in Palestinian society, and distributed under Sharansky's auspices, accuses the Palestinian media of dehumanizing Jews similar to ways the Nazis did. A fundamental message broadcast in sermons, academic discourse and even children's shows, according to report co-author Itamar Marcus, is that "the Jews are an evil force, and it's inherent to the Jews, and therefore they have to be killed." In the run-up to the PA election on January 9, Abbas met with the head of the Palestinian Broadcasting Authority and asked him to check all programs aired on PA television to prevent the broadcast of inciting material. Since then, Marcus said that nationalistic programming calling for violence against Israel has decreased somewhat, but that anti-Semitic rhetoric has remained unabated. He pointed to January 14, when he said an imam gave a sermon declaring, "The days of the pilgrimage to Mecca remind the Muslim of the connection to his history and remind him of his past glory and the lowliness of the Jews, who today rule the world; how Muhammad expelled them from Medina in retribution for their actions and their hostility and their corruption, and not on false charges, not unjustly. No, it was retribution for their hostility toward Islam." 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. To Go To Top

CREDIBILITY OF POLITICIANS; INTELLIGENCE WARNS AGAINST WITHDRAWAL Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 24, 2005.

ISRAELI RESEARCH POTENTIAL UNFULFILLED Israeli news services have been pouring out briefs about Israeli inventions. These affect not only military and economic survival, but also political survival by enabling Israel to project an aura of power and usefulness to others. Although its population is tiny, and its government hampers private initiative, Israel accounts for a surprisingly high proportion of the world's medical and technical research. The innovative Israeli military industry has spared American lives and funds. Research is expensive. However worth while its costs, often it does not necessarily pay for itself. New medical approaches reduce hospital costs, but may not bring revenue to the laboratories. New weapons may be required, but unless Israel can recoup its costs from exports, they are a net financial drain. A high-tech invention may face stiff competition or heavy tariff. When money must be saved, research often is thought expendable. For lack of funds, Israel has slowed some military development and reduced military training. It is like a desperate farmer, eating his own seed corn. Facing invasion and terrorism, Israel cannot afford such economies. Something has to give. It behooves Israel to focus more on boosting its economy and stop hampering companies, so that more funds for research would become available. CREDIBILITY Pres. Bush lost much credibility for the same reason that PM Sharon should have but didn't. They failed to explain certain foreign policy consistently. Instead of stating the half-dozen reasons for launching the war on Iraq, Pres. Bush sometimes stated one, sometimes another, and then, a third. He seemed to be floundering and rationalizing. Each reason was good and sufficient, but all should have been presented jointly, not as if one gainsaid the other. PM Sharon has presented a series of reasons for his policy of territorial abandonment, as if the reason he gave the week before were insufficient. All his reasons are unsubstantiated; all objections are uncontested. Instead, his opponents are denigrated as "extremist." In supposedly democratic Israel he rules beyond his authority, but there is no independent power center to either depose him or check him by using the media to mobilize public opinion. There was a time when the media generally acted as the public's watchdog against demagoguery by such leaders. Now most of the media pursues advocacy journalism. If the daily or station agrees with the leader, it cuts him much slack. If it disagrees with him, it just plain cuts him. The media does not analyze much of what happens. It reports what the leaders say. The impression is given that what they say they mean and what they mean they will do. How often do politicians say what they mean and do it? When Bush declared a war on terrorism, he was given credit for warring on terrorism. So far, however, he has attacked only a couple of centers of terrorism. He has a mixed record of trying to deny terrorists funding from the US but lying about the nature of Islam lest citizens be roused into a war fever. He has a poor record of continuing to aid the Palestinian terrorists and to seek to wrest from Israel historically Jewish territories that would give Israel secure borders and maintain its water supply. Nevertheless, conservatives find no weakness in his war on terrorism and liberals find him too aggressive. Neither school of thought (what thought?) realizes how little he is doing against terrorism, with his small military and limited action but great spending to build up Iraq at US expense. He is living on an undeserved reputation. Likewise, Sharon having at one time built settlements, still is called a right-winger as he restricts and destroys them. Lifelong terrorist Abu Mazen makes a vague statement against terrorism and is given undeserved credit from then on for opposing violence, even as he calls for a form of it. INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WARNS AGAINST WITHDRAWAL The head of Israel's intelligence agency warned that abandoning the Philadelphi Route in Gaza, through which small arms are smuggled into Gaza, would make that area like southern Lebanon (and let heavy weapons in). He had forewarned that the abandonment of southern Lebanon would endanger Israeli security. It did. (From there Hizbullah aims 13,000 missiles at Israel, deterring powerful Israeli counter-attacks against Hizbullah-sponsored terrorism). He further warned that abandoning northern Samaria, as per the Sharon plan, would enable P.A. Arabs to position rockets within range of Israel's cities. From northern Samaria, terrorism would radiate forth, as it does from Gaza, now. "The only way to protect cities within Israel's pre-1967 borders is to maintain an Israeli presence throughout Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza), Dichter said, adding that the firing of mortar shells and rockets can be stopped only by forces on the spot. He said, "however ... that he sees no security necessity in having a Jewish civilian presence in Gaza." (An email source, 1/4/05.) That presence gives the Army eyes and cover. Conclusion: Israel should take over all the vacant parts of Yesha, and get the Arabs out of the rest. Then there would be no terrorism. This is so obvious and just, that almost nobody sees it. ANTI-DOCUDRAMA: ARAB HATE FILMS The P.A. produced a film depicting ancient Jews bribing Romans to let them stone crucified Christians (IMRA, 1/4/05 from Palestinian Media Watch). There is no historical record of this. The Jews did not fight with Christians. The P.A. is not satisfied with distorting current events to foist Arab crimes upon Israel's reputation. It fabricates historical events so as to turn Christians against Jews. Actually, Muslims historically persecute Christians. Christians should be against Islam. HYSTERIA OF OFFICIAL EGYPTIAN NEWSPAPER "Al-Ahram" is a daily owned by Egypt. It depicts the limited Israeli self-defense as ethnic cleansing. It condemned Chechnya terrorism against Russia but not P.A. terrorism against Israel. It complained that the "international community" (whatever that is) did not work to stop the mass-murder in Sudan. IMRA: neither did Egypt or the Arab League (IMRA, 12/31). Rather hysterical of Egypt, to call casualties of a couple of dozen a week out of millions "ethnic cleansing." As for the P.A. Arabs, they try to kill as many Jews as they can. Fence and checkpoints are in the way. Conveniently for the Arab attempt at genocide, organizations from Human Rights Watch to the World Bank agitate against the fence and checkpoints. PERVERTING INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES International law was created to protect human rights. Israel's enemies are seeking to reinterpret those laws in order to protect aggressors from Israel and undermine Israeli self-defense. They abuse the UNO General Assembly and, in turn, the Intl. Court of Justice (having judges from totalitarian societies), to suggest that Israel has no right to stop infiltration of terrorists by erecting a security barrier (Congress Monthly by American Jewish Congress, 11/2004, p.3). International law took centuries to build, and only a few years to neutralize. This problem is serious. It is like the Islamist use of US democratic procedures and rights to subvert the US. Democracies have a right to defend themselves from totalitarians. The task now is to stop these abuses without curbing legitimate rights. FRENCH JEWRY CHANGES Citizen lobbying is not a French practice. French Jews were afraid of foreign Jewish complaints about antisemitism in France upsetting the rulers of France (who already were condoning antisemitism). No longer. American Jewish Congress activists have helped French Jewry organize and lobby. The French Jews have taken to it, and the government did not resent it. To the contrary, it asked the American Jewish Congress to help improve US-French relations (Congress Monthly, 11/2004, p.3 from AJC). Can't. French foreign policy is anti-American, based on envy, greed, and domestic Muslim sentiment. P.A. POPULATION HARDLY EXPANDING The P.A. was thought to have the highest rate of population growth in the world. Perhaps it once did. Demographers had forecast that the Arab population increase in the territories and Israel would swamp the Jewish population. They concluded that Israel had better separate itself from the Arabs in the territories by giving up the territories. (I would have concluded that Israel had better get the Arabs to give up residency in the territories AND in Israel.) This fear of being overwhelmed is one of the motivations for those who support PM Sharon's policy of abandoning Gaza and at least parts of Samaria. Deputy PM Olmert said so. (Doesn't mean it is so.) It turns out that the population statistics came from the P.A. and were falsified, probably to give the effect they did. A new study by Israelis found large errors in the P.A. figures: (1) The 230,000 Arab residents of Jerusalem were counted both as part of Israel's population and as part of the P.A. population. (2) P.A. natural population increase was counted as 4-5% a year, but P.A. Health records show the rate was about 3%. The birth rate has been falling steadily, so that the increase by 2003 was 2.6%! (3) The P.A. projected a further increase of 1.5% a year from immigration, but emigration is greater than immigration. (4) P.A. figurers count 200,000 Arabs who lived abroad. The 200,000 are adults. If their children were counted, the real figure would exceed 400,000. (This depends on whether their children were counted as not loving broad or not counted; (5) Another 150,000 Arabs who moved legally from the P.A. to Israel, remain counted in P.A. population figures. If all those Arabs were removed from the supposed annual growth among Israeli Arabs, that growth rate is 2.1%, or less than the Israeli Jewish growth rate! The Jewish majority has remained stable since 1967 (Caroline Glick, NY Sun, 1/17, p.1). Wow! This is as significant as Joan Peters' book showing that most Arab families came into Israel to be near job opportunities created by Zionism, and were not age-old residents. This finding validates my proposal that Israel stop letting Arabs in, and start getting them out, by means of equal enforcement of the law, beginning with the illegal ones. LIBERAL OR TOTALITARIAN ARTS AT COLUMBIA U.? Columbia advertises itself a providing a liberal arts education, with its "diversity of thought and dispassionate scholarly approach." Actually, it provides a "narrow, one-sided, and politically correct" education. "If Columbia chooses to have a Middle E. Department that focuses on the Jewish state as the cause of ills in the Arab-Islamic world, and to that end treats it as it would no other nation-state, and in addition purposely excludes or downplays the histories, cultures, and plights of ethnic, racial, and gender minorities in the Arab Middle east - the black jihad slaves today in Sudan, the Christians oppressed in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, the African Muslims enslaved and/or dispossessed in Mauritania, Arab women, Arab labor, and gays - fine. But let it not falsely sell this Arabist tall tale -- at high prices - as 'scholarship.'" (NY Sun, 1/17, letter.) The watering down of higher education in Western civilization is a major problem that the mutliculturalists have wreaked on American universities. The regimentation in totalitarian values by the Middle Eastern studies departments is another. The two problems hobble American resistance to jihad. We need reform. 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 ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

CRITICAL CURRENTS: ISRAEL AS FOOTNOTE Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, January 23, 2005.

Dear Jewish friends, Please read this article and consider whether what's written in it is true. It was written by Naomi Chazan and appeared in The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 20, 2005. It is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellitepagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1106191075823&p=1006953079897 To us Jews, this article, if true, should be extremely disconcerting. Yuval. Israel is a diminishing item on the agenda of world Jewry. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the US, where the interests of committed Jews obviously lie elsewhere. A history of passionate engagement with Israel is fast being replaced by manifestations of remote curiosity and cackles of polite concern. The long-held truism regarding the centrality of Israel for contemporary Jewish life is now in danger of dissipating entirely. If Israel does not respond vigorously and sensitively to this belated wake-up call, its relationship with American Jewry and Jews elsewhere will be irreparably damaged. Instances of the dwindling role of Israel in American Jewish life abound. Lectures on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict attract shrinking audiences, while talks on Jewish revival are packed. Social and economic issues in Israel are virtually ignored, just as the demand for more instruction on biblical and rabbinical sources is growing. Israeli matters are acknowledged, but rarely wholeheartedly embraced. A cursory glance at the program of a recent three-day festival of Jewish learning organized by Limmud is more instructive than 1,000 words. Of the more than 200 sessions offered, only 18 had anything directly to do with Israel. The richness of the options in Jewish philosophy, culture, spirituality and history made this event a truly celebratory experience of voluntary Jewish study; its Israeli component was a mere footnote. Confronted with these and other examples, apologists hasten to counter with evidence of the growing number of Jewish missions to Israel, and the steady stream of birthright israel participants. Some take pride in the strong Israel-orientation of the organized American Jewish leadership, in the activities of AIPAC, and in the growth of Israel advocacy groups among college students. Others point, in contrast, to the astounding record of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom (The Progressive Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace), whose circle has expanded to more than 20,000 sympathizers in less than three years. But none would honestly deny the uncomfortable fact that the relationship between Israel and strong Jewish communities elsewhere is in severe distress. THE MAIN reason for this growing separation lies in the diverging needs and aspirations of Jews in Israel and abroad. In the US, questions of community, religion, spirituality and civic norms predominate. These preoccupations have little to do with the existential concerns of most Israelis. But behind the obvious lies a growing rift between the Israel-focused stance of the Jewish establishment and the vast majority of American Jews. Uneasy with Israeli policies in recent years and unwilling to embarrass Israel, they have chosen to opt out of the Israeli scene. The burgeoning Israel advocacy industry (Project David, for one) is a very poor, and frequently counterproductive, substitute indeed. The call for unwavering loyalty is gradually quashing the deep-felt commitment to Israel. A growing number of American Jews are attempting to reconcile the clash between their consistently liberal values and their reliance on Israel as the source of their identity by bolstering their autonomous communal foundations and injecting them with familiar humanistic contents. Knowledge of Israeli affairs may fit into this rubric; the unquestioning defense of Israel clearly does not. Israel is far from blameless in this process. Policies are formulated and carried out with scarcely a thought to their impact on world Jewry. Israeli leaders and intellectuals systematically turn down invitations to serious Jewish gatherings if they don't deal directly with matters Israeli. Their contempt is matched only by their rising ignorance of the Jewish communities they claim to hold dear. To stem this deleterious dynamic, it is necessary to drastically alter the prevailing rules of the game and find new avenues for constructive Jewish reengagement with Israel. This can be accomplished only if Israelis stop seeing Jews abroad merely as sources of financial and political support, and begin to treat them as substantive partners. Such an approach requires transparency, along with the encouragement of debate. Most importantly, it entails an explicit commitment to strengthening the linkage between democratic and Jewish values that provides the declared normative compass of the State of Israel and of the Jewish world today. Articulation of these joint conceptual, ethical and practical guidelines involves both recognition of their diverse expressions around the globe and a healthy respect for these differences. It also means that Israelis must understand that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict touches not only on the core of the Jewish and democratic character of Israel but also of Jewish communities elsewhere. Similarly, Jews outside Israel can no longer overlook the implications of Israel's peace and security policies for their own Jewish cohesion and democratic coherence. What is needed now is not a second house of the Knesset for the Jewish people but a mature two-way interchange. Israel and the Diaspora can no longer avoid the challenge of redesigning their ties. This article can also be read at Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

WILL JAR JAR BINKS-STYLE LOGIC SAVE ISRAEL'S DAY? Posted by Yocheved Golani, January 23, 2005.

In one of the Star Wars movies, accidental hero and native of the city called Gunga, Jar Jar Binks reacts to a soldier's alert about "... the sound of a thousand terrible things heading this way." Jar Jar sucks in his breath as his commander remarks, "And if they find us, they will CRUSH us, GRIND us into bits and then BLAST us into oblivion!" Jar Jar shares his thought that it would be wise to retreat, saying in his native dialect, "Eh...yousa point is well seen. Dis way, hurry!" Jar Jar is an intellectual lightweight, but his instincts make sense. Jar Jar's approach to the reality of an imminent threat that worsened over time provides food for thought to Jews in the Middle East. This essay is going to consider Jar Jar's worldview along with the adage that "The Jewish People are above Nature," a thought which rabbis have repeated for thousands of years, to reassure the beleaguered Jewish nation. Some days, the threats against us seem beyond all versions of reality; even Hollywood's suspended one. But what if Jar Jar, separated by several levels of wisdom from the intellectually superior rabbis, was on to something correct, kosher, and more profound a little later in the film? As Jewish citizens of Israel wonder when we'll reach the flash-point of civil war, the religious residents know that it has not happened because halachically observant Jews are loathe to raise a violent hand to their own people, religious or not. It seems that this religious reluctance to rumble has some secularly inclined Knesset members in a daring mood. Professor Gail Winston has alerted readers of his syndicated writings to provocation from the Oslo camp. The mass media is also informing the public at large of similar goings on. Here is a brief and far from inclusive recap of current events: * From Professor Winston's January 19 2005 update: "How do we know the Terrorists will enter the Gaza when Israeli Jews are ethnically cleansed from the homes? The Head of the General Security Service (Shabak) Avi Dicter says so. He spoke out unambiguously against aspects of PM Sharon's withdrawal plan. Leaving northern Samaria and removing the IDF presence there will 'turn the region into Gaza' in terms of terror activity, while leaving the Philadelphi Route (border between Egypt and Israel at Gaza) will 'bring southern Lebanon to southern Israel.' He also warned that the number of arms smuggled through the corridor to Gaza is liable to increase dramatically and turn into a 'river.'" In other news: * Israel's Supreme Court partially accepted the appeal by Sgt. Yossi Pilant, the IDF paratrooper imprisoned for encouraging his comrades to refuse orders to destroy two Jewish homes on January 4. [Filant's parents have posted a website in support of their beleaguered Zionist son at http://www.aboutyossi.org] * Jerusalem Newswire's January 18 2005 update Israel to Lower the Boom if Abbas Doesn't Act informed readers that: As the bombardment of Jewish towns continues unabated, Israel Tuesday reached into its seemingly bottomless reservoir of tolerance for PA leader Mahmoud Abbas and decided to give the longtime terror boss yet another opportunity to fulfill his peace obligations. Should Abbas fail to use his power to curb rocket and mortar attacks on Jewish civilians in the coming week, however, senior Israeli officials said the IDF would launch a massive raid on Gaza-based "Palestinian" terrorist forces. But Abbas, sticking to his policy of protecting rather than combating the terror groups, traveled to Gaza Tuesday to persuade the killers to temporarily halt their artillery attacks in order to enable him to extract further Israeli concessions. The besieged residents of Sderot, meanwhile, marched on the nearby northern Gaza PA-controlled town of Bet Hanoun to protest their government's failure to protect their lives. More than 600 Kassam rockets have been fired from Bet Hanoun at Sderot over the past four years. Jar Jar summed up his precarious plight in war, and made a case for Israel's, by saying "Monsters out there, leaking in here. Weesa all sinking and no power. Whena yousa thinking we are in trouble?" Tiny Israel, threatened every minute by who-knows-what falling from the sky, is riddled with citizens agitating for adequate and unified military response. Global consumers of media outlets have been noting Abbas' request for quiet without necessarily learning about and understanding Israel's plight under his "presidency." Jews around the world have been clamoring the media for fair reporting. Some are warning that if Israel were to fall, the rest of the world would lose its best barrier against encroaching terrorism. The situation is not unlike our celluloid hero's realization that if his companions get slaughtered by their enemies, then "Gungans get perched toosa?" The fictional warring factions become more embroiled as the Star Wars saga continues. Jar Jar Binks' observation to an enemy combatant that "Gungans have grand army. That's why you no liking us meesa thinks" sums up Israel's real-life situation in a moment. Like the underdog he is, Jar Jar leads his rag-tag colleagues to military victory by accidentally unloading a mighty weapon on the battlefield. Audiences laugh as Jar Jar runs from the scene, alarmed at the destruction he's unleashed. Can it be that much-maligned Israel will be forced to succeed this way, too? Israelis wonder, especially in the wake of Prime Minister Sharon's announcement that the IDF has a "free hand" to deal with terror. PMO spokesman Ranaan Gissin declared that "The real test will be the test of performance [of how well PA security services implement the decision to curb their violence]. So far we haven't seen any real steps. Mortar shells continued to be fired at the Jews of Gaza." References to Sharon's insistence that there would be no "grace period" for the cessation of violence, at http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php?articleid=407, boggle the average mind. Like Gissin's thoughts about increasingly closer persecution from Palestinians, Jar Jar's reflections on the chances of imminent demise by nuclear reactor are so upsetting: "Better dead here than deader in the Core. Ye gods, whatta meesa sayin'?" Meanwhile, Israelis of various religious identification prepared saplings while snacking on produce native to the Holy Land, in preparation for the holiday of Tu B'Shvat, the new year for trees. As Jews ponder the parsha of the week, we recall the Toraitic passage "Not by bread alone does a man live," (Devarim 8:3). The essential is the bread; it's the package that delivers holy nutrients. Rashi (Sanhedrin, ibid.) explains: "When the Land of Israel will generously give her fruit, then the End will approach." And soon will be established "for they will soon be coming." Jews are able to come, since there is food to eat. Try not to think of Jar Jar getting his tongue stuck when he licks a recently used machine. Reality on that level seems to check out, somewhat. We're gobbling goodies for the holiday before it even arrives. But there's more to the Biblical thought than superficial reality. "The Jewish People are above Nature," our rabbis assure the beleaguered Jewish nation. Some days, it seems beyond reality. Or perhaps it is merely beyond earthly reality, as the rabbis teach. News outlets reported a mind-boggling development on January 19th, 2005: Saturday's Kassam rocket attack left ten-year-old Tamir Abukasis of Sderot moderately wounded. Tamir then asked what so many Israelis in and outside Sderot want to know: "When is Prime Minister Ariel Sharon going to finally defend his town against incessant Palestinian aggression? Tamir's 17-year-old sister, Ella, critically wounded in her brain stem by that attack, was pronounced brain dead on Tuesday. Sharon's schedule called for convening his security cabinet that day, to consider new IDF options for curbing ongoing rocket and mortar attacks on Jewish civilians both in and around the Gaza Strip. The IDF has long warned Sharon that withdrawal from Gaza is suicidal. The grace period that Sharon had not extended continues unabated to this day. Like Jar Jar in his accidental journey to the battlefield, Israeli Jews continue to walk around very confused by the situation surrounding us. Abbas is not confused, however. He's appealed to Israel via world media, to halt the reprisals on the militants he's been inciting before and after his "election." Meanwhile, reports indicate that Abbas considers Jews outside 1967 borders to be fair targets. Hamas is doing its personal best to support him. Back to Star Wars. As the military leader of the group he is supporting asks, "How did you end up here with us?" the increasingly wiser Jar Jar responds "I don't know. Mesa day startin pretty okee-day with a brisky morning munchy, then BOOM! Gettin very scared and grabbin that Jedi and POW! Mesa here! Mesa gettin' very very scared!" Mentally collected Israelis gathered at the Western Wall on Wednesday January 18 to pray for Ella Abukasis to experience a miraculous recovery. Wounded while trying to protect her brother during Saturday's Palestinian rocket attack on Sderot, Ella died of her injuries before the next Shabbat. Sderot's Mayor Eli Moyal declared "a local day of mourning for the victims of the rocket attacks... more than 600 Kassams and other rockets have slammed into his town since the start of the Arab-initiated Oslo War in September 2000." The occasion and sentiments are no Hollywood fantasy. They long ago became frequent Israeli reality. United Press International quoted Moyal's accusation that the Sharon government has been "playing games" by repeatedly sending troops into Gaza for limited raids following rocket attacks, but withdrawing before the job is done. "A government that cannot defend its citizens cannot stay in power," he insisted. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz eventually informed Channel Two News that Israel would launch such a raid soon if Abbas failed to act. If? The situation begs for a reality check. Perhaps some frustrated Israelis should pay heed when Jar Jar's juvenile companions remark that "All slaves have a transmitter placed somewhere in their body. Any attempt to escape... And they blow you up! BOOM!" and Jar Jar replies, "How wude!" According to Channel Two's Ehud Ya'ari, Abbas convinced members of his own Fatah organization to temporarily halt attacks on Negev towns adjacent to the Gaza. Jews living in the Strip would remain fair game, however. Abbas added that he'd persuade Hamas and Islamic Jihad to accept similar terms. Senior PA security official Bashir Nafe said the Abbas regime also planned to eventually collect all illegal weapons currently in the hands of recognized terror groups. Hamas has repeatedly stated it will not willingly lay down its arms until the Jewish State is annihilated. Think about this when you consider that, in order to help ensure the end of rocket attacks on Sderot, Abbas won concessions from his compatriots. The PA said it would deploy a special force along the Gaza-Negev border. Then think of this foxes guarding the hen house quip by Jar Jar Binks: "If me be returnin, the Bosses will do terrible things to me! Tewwwwible things!" Colonel Uzi Buchbinder, head of the Home Front Command's civil defense department, recently announced that if Sharon's plan is implemented, 46 Negev and coastal towns would be under direct threat of "Palestinian" artillery attacks. General Security Services chief Avi Dichter has already warned that without an Israeli presence Gaza would resemble southern Lebanon, which has become a virtual terrorist state under Hizballah control following Israel's May 2000 withdrawal. Israel can't engage in pinpoint retaliation due to diplomatic considerations to eliminate the threat of Hizballah attacks on the Galilee region, according to news reports. Jar Jar would mock that diplomacy with a quick "Wesa dyin' here!" Yoda, the Jedi Master and superb diplomat of Star Wars, would understand that the politicians differ vastly from military leaders. He'd dryly say about them, "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you." Some Israelis would be inclined to agree with both of them. Rabbis would. Protesters at the Knesset and throughout the GUSH and Shomron have. But, the world at large and Israel's society itself, are having difficulty facing the issues. Something must be done to overcome the globally muffled screams of "Looki, Looki!! Wesa all in big doodoo over here. Wakea up!!!" Thank G'D the rabbis are correct that the Jewish Nation is above nature. Otherwise, we'd have been wiped off the map long ago. Nevertheless, we remain endangered by violent realities and dangerous politicking. Living in the natural world as we do, something must give to ensure our survival. Too bad Israel lacks Jar Jar's political colleague with a sense of moral urgency. Queen Amidala emphatically stated in the same Star Wars movie, "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee!" Jar Jar, without a duplicitous cell in his simple but sincere brain, would respond to the dilemma by rallying the troops and the stay-at-home citizens by saying, "Gungans no giben up witout a fight. Wesa warriors!" The Jewish nation isn't thriving under political pressures and by appeasing those who impose them. Jar Jar's simple logic just might save Israel's day. And every day to come. Yocheved Golani provides a journalist and writing service; she does author reviews and book reviews. She can be reached at her websites: www.ygolani.com, www.yochevedgolani.com To Go To Top

SHARON: THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE NOT YOUR EXPERIMENTAL GUINEA PIGS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 23, 2005.

When is it legal and proper to indict politicians who knowledgeably risk the lives of their citizens as if they were guinea pigs to experiment on. I am now speaking of Israel. Like all others, I am aware that politicians are only human and can make bad decisions. However, if the mistakes were glaring, they should merely be voted out of power as untrustworthy or simply stupid. Your "Disengagement Plan" has confirmed to the Arab Muslim Palestinians that we Jews can be driven out of Gaza as we were driven out of Lebanon. But, suppose that first judgment (as in Oslo) resulted in making your citizenry vulnerable to the point where many people were killed (murdered, blown up, burned up, shot in ambush) by their very well-known enemy. Suppose those same people (politicians) and other followers who are subsequently elected, choose to make the very same mistake, resulting in more deaths? Now, these politicians have had their chance, resulting in grievous mistakes and it is all on the record. Suppose they again deliberately choose the same previously failed tactics using the people as simply another experiment, resulting in more deaths? We cannot expect the highly politically warped Israeli High Court system to intercede as a fair and objective Judicial body - given their clear record of leaning toward the Left and Dovish rulings. In brief, the biased High Court of Israel cannot be relied upon to rule against a government and her individual politicians who are perpetrators of crimes against the Jewish nation. Is it not right to indict and try those politicians who, for reasons benefitting themselves or ignoring their past mistakes, have sacrificed their own people in more failed experiments dedicated to unremitting enemies of the nation? Are they not de facto co-conspirators with those enemies, denials and explanations notwithstanding? Are not the victims of their repeated bad decisions - made despite prima facie evidence that more murders will occur, are they not entitled to Justice, even satisfaction, even vengeance? Why not make such decisions a capital crime, warranting long term prison or even execution? Why not have the legal system recognize that some things like pre-meditated murder through political decisions, mandate justice for the victims when it can be shown that those decisions were made frivolously and without a care for the risk? Today we observe Israeli politicians agree to allow 2,500 PLO Terrorists called "policemen", to be armed and to scatter across the area which is separating Kassem-firing rockets from the Jews. All the while they are restraining IDF troops from attacking. Early reports indicate PLO "police" are being greeted by those fellow Terrorists as old friends, ready to operate together as they did under Oslo. Sharon's first grievous mistake was to encourage the ramping of attacks on the Jews of Gaza/Gush Katif. His next mistake was to allow more than 5000 Kassam Rocket strikes on Gush Katif and S'derot without massive retaliation. His coming mistake is to put Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists near Ashkelon and other Israeli towns and cities, after having been told that Rockets with more than a 12 mile range have been smuggled into Gaza. Finally, you, Mr. Sharon would shame all Jews by having Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists occupy the homes of the Jews you forced out as a signal of your betrayal. If the people are put at death's door through so-called "legal" means, why cannot those who sentence the citizenry to risk, vulnerability and death be themselves sentenced to equal results? LET THEM SHARE THE PAIN! Why should a politician who conspires with the enemy, with foreign governments and puts at risk the citizenry not share the pain of the results of those decisions. I am not referring merely to the expected usual sleaze of politicians who are well known for their willingness to plunder the public treasury, hire only relatives and friends with little or no competence and general corruption. (Note! There are competent and responsible public servants, although few in number, who are working for the people.) I speak of high level thievery where they use the power of office to enrich themselves which is an ordinary crime, compared to putting whole segments of the people at high risk of death - which is treason to the Jewish state and the Jewish people. Let the politicians know that they have not signed on for a free ride with excellent salaries, excessive months of vacation, perks of cars with drivers and other privileges - without consequences for their decisions which cause deaths of their own people. Let the politicians know that, like the soldiers who honorably risk their lives, they too must take the risk of making rash decisions and experimenting with the safety of the nation and the people. If prison and execution is there as a persuader, perhaps they will think long and hard in coming to decisions critical to the nation's safety. Making bad decisions would not in itself warrant a legal judgement but, decisions that put the people at mortal risk in the face of prior failed decisions of the same order, should face severe punishment. Let them share the results of their rash and dangerous decisions. The people are absolutely not caged guinea pigs upon whom the politicians can experiment with impunity. Apparently, when lab animals are 'experimented on' and they die, this process is called a "Sacrifice". Politicians are theoretically allowed their share of mistakes but, not when lives have already been 'experimented on' and died due to their first misjudgement. We watched in horror when a group of politicians met in secret, using amateur advisors to evolve the Oslo Accords in concert with a foreign government. During its 12 years of implementation, many Jews were made vulnerable and were murdered. Since Oslo was signed, more than 1700 Jews were murdered by Arab Muslim Terrorists and tens of thousands more were wounded, many maimed for life. The Oslo developers made little or no effort to revise their errors of judgement but, even as Oslo failed, they went further in making it easier for Yassir Arafat's Terrorists to get near or into the Israeli populations to blow up buses, caf's, outdoor markets and much more. These planners walk the street as free men, not even willing to apologize for their gross misjudgments which killed their fellow Jews. The Military was restrained by the Osloids to prove their Oslo Accords were correct - even as they failed repeatedly - further enhancing the abilities of the Arab Muslim Terrorists to plan, move freely and develop their organizations and plant their bombs. In the meantime, the Osloids increased their efforts to protect their plans, evolved in secret and protect themselves. Regrettably, they continue to do so with impunity, while encouraging the Arab Muslim Terrorists to greater feats of horror. In the Oslo years their repeated efforts to pretend their work didn't cause one long intifada was ongoing while the dead Israelis piled up. Later they (especially Peres and Beilin) evolved Institutes paid for by European nations allied to Arab nations and Terrorist organizations in order to continue their moribund Oslo Accords - that repeated or extended itself under the Sharon government - now called "Disengagement". No investigations, no indictments, no jail terms. Are we more horrified when Josef Mengele (called the Angel of death at Auschwitz) experimented on Jews as one does to laboratory animals? Why aren't we similarly horrified when venal politicians treat the people as merely one big laboratory where they can experiment on them as guinea pigs certain, that Justice and retribution will not arrive at their door? It's not just corruption, greed, criminal planning but, it is casual murder of the people whom they pledged to defend and protect when they took office. Granted, they can simply lie and tell us that bringing self-declared Terrorists closer to Israel's population centers is just a "Plan to bring Peace and Trust". Now, we watch in horror as Sharon provides a unilateral Hudna (cease-fire) as the Terrorists re-organize and replenish their explosives and ammunition. Let no Jew raise his hand against such political figures but, let us bring new laws into play where those who play with our lives no longer have immunity from crimes against the Jewish people. If we cannot include execution for such crimes where citizens are murdered then, at least have mandatory prison terms of no less than 25 years and up to life. Jews are a people of Law but, laws must be made to fit the crime. Such a message to politicians would tell them that political jobs are not a free ride at the public's expense. Only serious and competent people will want the job. Party hacks who feed off the public treasury like parasites with no responsibility will jump ship if responsibility is connected to the job. At the moment, high ranking criminals from the Prime Minister's office on down to corrupt Army Generals, hoping for political appointments or crooked Bankers rarely, if ever, go to jail. This would change if there was a price to be paid for corrupt and/or frivolous decisions, where they can steal, plunder, even arrange murder without consequences - knowing that somehow they can bribe their way out of a conviction. IF Israel is to be "the Light Unto the Nations", that light bulb cannot be red. 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). To Go To Top

IS THIS A JOKE? Posted by Marion Dreyfus, January 23, 2005.

THE COWS: Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amazing that when it comes to mad cow disease, the United States government can track a cow born nearly three years ago in Canada, right to the stall where she sleeps in the state of Washington. And then track her calves right to their current stalls. But, they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering around our country. Maybe we should give each one a cow. THE CONSTITUTION: They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it's worked for over 200 years and we're not using it anymore. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a Courthouse: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building! full of lawyers, judges and politicians! It creates a hostile work environment. Marion Dreyfus can be reached at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com To Go To Top

BEHIND "DISENGAGEMENT" Posted by TheRaphi, January 23, 2005.

This article was written by Prof. Eidelberg, a political scientist, author and lecturer. He is co-founder and president of The Foundation For Constitutional Democracy and is the President of the Yamin Israel movement. Consider today's Sharon government. Those who gave the Likud an stunning victory over Labor in the January 2003 election never expected they would be ruled by a government, almost half of whose ministers come from a party responsible for Oslo and rejected by overwhelmingly majority of the electorate. They never expected a government whose parliamentary approval would eventually depend on the support of Arab MKs and Meretz, a far-left party that wants to transform the Jewish state into "a state of its citizens." The 2003 election was an affirmation of Zionism. Ariel Sharon nullified that election! The central issue of that election was "disengagement" - a euphemism for the expulsion of Jews from Gaza and other parts of Israel. The only reason why the Likud trashed Labor in that election is because Mr. Sharon campaigned against Labor's disengagement/expulsion policy. Whereas Labor won only 19 seats, the Likud won 38 - a disparity unprecedented in Israel's history. Yet the new Sharon government, with Labor chairman Shimon Peres as Sharon's viceroy, is hell-bent on the expulsion of Jews from Jewish land! To appreciate the extent of Sharon's betrayal of the nation, let us tally the number of seats won by parties that opposed disengagement/expulsion on security and Zionist or religious grounds: Likud - 38 seats Israel B'Aliya - 2 seats (which subsequently joined the Likud) National Union - 7 seats National Religious Party - 6 seats Shas - 11 seats United Torah Judaism - 5 seats The above electoral results produced a Knesset with 69 of its 120 members opposed to disengagement/expulsion! But there is more to be said about Sharon's betrayal of the nation. In the 2003 election, Shinui, which won 15 seats, spoke against unilateral disengagement (but subsequently yielded to Israel's Machiavellian prime minister). And so, thanks to Sharon, Israel has an ostensibly democratically elected government committed to a policy that was decisively rejected by the electorate! But how can one rightly attribute this undemocratic state of affairs to the treachery of one man? Such treachery could only occur in a country lacking institutional checks and balances, a country whose system of government is intrinsically susceptible to dictatorship. Yet there is not a single party or faction in the Knesset - not even Manhigut Yehudit - that exposes this despotic state of affairs and insists that systemic reform is an urgent and necessary precondition for reversing the disastrous course of this nation. Why not? Because all have a vested interest in preserving the existing system. No less than the illustrious Alexis de Tocqueville defines this system as "democratic despotism" - a system that enables a democratically government? hence based on public opinion, to ignore public opinion with IMPUNITY. What perpetuates this system is this simple fact: In Israel the entire country constitutes a single electoral district in which fixed party lists compete on the basis of proportional representation. The result is party dictatorship on the hand, and, on the other hand, a Knesset whose members are not individually accountable to the voters in constituency elections. This renders a Knesset subservient to the government, above all its prime minister. And now, the prime minister, instead of being primus inter pares, can dismiss cabinet ministers as if he were a President of the United States. (In America, however, Mr. Sharon would have been impeached long ago for malfeasance of office.) Therefore, those who oppose the expulsion of Jews from their homes in Gaza and elsewhere, but who remain silent about the grotesque structure of a government that has made Ariel Sharon the Labor's Party's surrogate prime minister, are not innocent. Unless they have the courage to reveal - contrary to six decades of disinformation - that Israel is not a genuine democracy, hence that Israel too is in need of "regime change," they will perpetuate democratic despotism and thereby facilitate "disengagement," a policy they rightly call evil. TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/index.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays. To Go To Top

RACIST DISENGAGEMENT Posted by TheRaphi, January 21, 2005.

This article is by Shmuel Neumann, Ph.D., who is actively involved in creating communities for English-speaking olim, and in an emigration program for Palestinians. He currently resides in the Shomron. He can be reached at http://www.shomron.homestead.com It is illegal to advocate ejecting Arabs from their homes and forcibly removing them from Israel. How can it be legal to advocate forcibly removing Jews from their homes? Racism is not a laughing matter. Especially after the Holocaust, racism against Jews, even by Jews, is intolerable. During the Holocaust, Jews, called kapos, were forced by the Nazis to implement racial genocide. It is also a horrible tragedy and a pathetic sight to see certain Israeli government officials compelled by "their good friend" the United States to implement ethnic cleansing, not by genocide, but by expulsion. This expulsion of Jews, not necessarily Israelis, is racist. It is illegal to advocate ejecting Arabs from their homes and forcibly removing them from Israel. How can it be legal to advocate forcibly removing Jews from their homes? While the government may elect to dismantle Israeli army bases and outposts, they have no legal right to remove only Israeli Jews and not remove Israeli Arabs or Christians. It has no right to remove Jews of other nationalities who purchase a farm in Judea or Samaria and wish to farm their private property and live on their farm. If it has such a right, then it must remove any non-Israeli Muslim or Christian farmers from their independent farms, as well. If certain Jewish settlements are deemed illegal and therefore slated for demolition, then illegal Arab settlements must be demolished as well. The Israeli government is in possession of aerial photographs of each village and town from 1917 until the present, and is well aware that many villages and towns existing today were built by squatters who grabbed land and illegally built houses. Often the houses were built on other people's land, even land purchased decades before by individual Jews or by the Jewish National Fund. All of these communities must be demolished if any Jewish communities are to be evacuated and demolished. If the government refuses to demolish illegal Arab houses, then their policy of evacuating Jewish houses, farms and communities is racism against Jews and must not be tolerated. One might speculate if there were, hypothetically, 10 Christians living in a Jewish settlement that was slated for evacuation, and 10 Israeli Jews living in Jenin, then wouldn't the Christians be evacuated with the rest of the community and wouldn't the Jews be permitted to remain in Jenin? Certainly, the Christians would be evacuated together with the Jews from a Jewish settlement. However, if they had a monastery in Bethlehem or anywhere else in Palestinian-controlled Judea, Samaria or Gaza, then they certainly would not be evacuated, nor would their church or monastery be demolished. The 10 Jews in Jenin, however, would not be evacuated, but imprisoned, because Israel makes it illegal for Jews to enter Area "A". That is, unless the Palestinians got to them first, in which case they would torture and mutilate the Jews as they did to those Jews who made a wrong turn and found themselves in Ramallah. The central point is that Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice would never tolerate removing blacks from any neighborhood, not just in the United States, but anywhere in the world. They do, however, insist that Jews, not just Israelis, be forcibly removed from all areas of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. When they speak of pre-1967 borders, they are talking about removing Jews from Ramat Eshkol, the Old City, Mamilla and many neighborhoods of Jerusalem. This reverse discrimination is not only in relation to settlements, but to land registration. If an Arab registers a land sale in Beit El's land office, the land registration is recorded seamlessly. If a Jew records a sale from an Arab, the land office notifies the Palestinian Authority of the land sale and the land registration can take 15-20 years. In the interim, the Arab seller and real estate agents are killed by the so-called Palestinians, eliminating all witnesses to the sale. As a result, often the land sale is never recorded. This is racism, pure and simple. This racism against Jews goes beyond the issue of settlements or land registration. The Israeli government interprets its own laws against racism to protect Arabs, but not Jews. For example, in Israel it is illegal to hire only Jews, but it appears to not be illegal to hire only Arabs. For instance, there is one chain of gas stations that I frequented throughout Israel, and every single one of them had only Arab employees at the gas pumps. While it is their prerogative to employ Arabs, it is not their prerogative to hire only Arabs. This is a violation of racism laws and should be prosecuted not just in a civil action, but in a criminal action, as well. While ironically, blatant racism against Jews is rampant in Israel, it is the United States that initiated and perpetuated racist policies against Jews. Their dogged insistence that Jews must be forcibly removed from their farms, even those that were bona fide purchases, is unconscionable. Their insistence that all Jews be removed from Gaza, from Judea and from Samaria, is not only repugnant, but violates America's own constitutional laws. While the Constitution is not extraterritorial and applies only within the United States, employees of the United States government are barred from violating the civil rights of other Americans overseas. The attorney-general of the United States has the jurisdiction to examine any illegal, racist action by an employee of the federal government. While the public entity enjoys immunity from suit, as do federal employees, there are exceptions - including civil rights violations. Furthermore, the United States offering financial aid to the Palestinians is also illegal. In order to compel South Africa to end apartheid, the United States passed laws to prevent trade with racist regimes. As such, the United States is barred from contributing to racist activities and from providing aid to racist regimes. The laws are on the books, but it takes precedent-making legal actions to compel adherence to these laws. There are moments in history that a status quo was reevaluated. For centuries, there were certain conventions regarding Jews in Europe: they were categorically forbidden to own land and to participate in certain professions. As a people, they were expelled from country to country or restricted to a certain region. They certainly were not equal citizens. During the French Revolution, everything was at a standstill for three days. In the transition from monarchy to republic, the French revolutionaries couldn't make up their mind whether or not to allow Jews to be citizens. After three days of heated debate, they finally felt compelled to permit Jews to be full citizens, to be consistent with their stated ideals of equality, fraternity and liberty. The new state of Palestine that the free world is eager to create must similarly decide whether they will continue with their racist policies or permit Jews to purchase land in Palestine, to do business there, to live there and to be equal voting citizens. Currently, an Arab that sells land or houses to Jews is executed. This is not an extra-judicial, terrorist act, but the direct implementation of the PA's racist laws. There is a trial and the land dealer is killed, either by firing squad or by execution by their security force, after being tortured and mutilated. The property sale need not be in Judea, Samaria or Gaza, but any Arab selling property to Jews in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, the Galilee, or anywhere else within the Green Line, is also subject to the death penalty. The Abus (Ala and Mazen) are making a big show of the single national election since Yasser Arafat was elected to illustrate that Palestine is a democracy. However, before a Republic of Palestine is established, even if it is restricted to portions of Gaza, they will have to determine the future role of non-Muslims in their country, just as the French had to put the Dark Ages behind them in the French revolution. In a real democracy, people would not have to be forcibly removed from their homes because of religion. If the government changed, the residents would have the option of becoming citizens of the new regime. There is absolutely no justification to remove one Jew, not from his farm and certainly not his entire Jewish community. In a democracy, there is no reason that the current residents could not become dual citizens of Israel and Palestine. After all, all Jews that lived in Israel before 1948 were Palestinians. Non-Israeli Jews, for example, American Jews, should be permitted to remain and be awarded Palestinian citizenship in addition to their American one. Conversely, if all Israelis must be removed, then Israeli Arabs and Christians must be also forcibly removed. There is no alternative but to challenge the patently illegal racist activities of the United States State Department, the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government. Professor Jack Golbert is heading a team of attorneys that will research and initiate legal actions both in the United States and Israel. Lawyers who wish to join the class action civil rights suit, American citizens living in Gaza and Samaria regions that are slated for expulsion, and those who can contribute to legal costs (not legal fees) are asked to email us at yeshahomestead@hotpop.com TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/index.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays. To Go To Top

VETERANS OF THE ISRAELI WAR OF INDEPENDENCE: RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FREE-WORLD DEFENSE LEADERS Posted by Joseph Doriel, January 21, 2005.

Based On Our Paid-In-Blood Experience In Defense Of Israel We are of the handful of warriors who stood up to defend the State of Israel when Arab states invaded this country - in criminal violation of the November 1947 UN decision of independence for Israel. It was not a war for borders or territories, but a genocidal war - to exterminate the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. A war backed by leaders of the (old) British Labor Party, who initiated an arms embargo on us, while the Arab armies were supplied with plenty of arms, instructors and even experienced British commanders. Under these conditions we lost one quarter the best of our comrades before succeeding in overcoming the invaders. We see it as our moral duty to contribute from our experience - in enlightening the political leaders defending the Free World from the Militant fanatic-Islam bloodthirsty terror, which has escalated since 1947 into its present monstrous shape. 1. The inciters, planners and leaders of that genocidal war resided then, as now, in the capitals of Arab states. Amin al-Husseini, formerly Hitler's main agent in the Muslim world, as well as Yassir Arafat, the Egyptian "Palestinian", with his PLO chieftains, who succeeded him, used Cairo as their main base. Arab leaders used the Moslem population of the Land of Israel only as cannon fodder for the armies and gangs they sent to exterminate Israel, which they viewed as an outpost of Western Civilization. Their war created a flood of about a million of Jewish refugees - Jews who fled from hostile Arab countries and about half a million of Arabs who fled from the battlefields in Israel. But, in contrast to the Israelis, who absorbed their refugees, Arab leaders decided to perpetuate and inflate their refugee camps, to continue and sacrifice them as cannon fodder in their political war, after they had lost the war on the battlefield. About 100 million refugees, of various nationalities, were forced to leave their homes in the wake of the 20th century wars. Almost all of them were rehabilitated in their new places of residence, while only 500 thousand Arabs who fled from the Land of Israel were cynically manipulated by Arab dictators and their UN friends, becoming an entity of "4 million refugees" in order to serve as a tool in perpetuating the Arab-Israeli conflict (and using UN money - mostly donated by the US - for this purpose). 2. September 11, 2001 tore off the mask from the "Palestinian liberation" seekers, and revealed the true nature of the bloodthirsty Islamic hatred towards the Free World. It was not "desperate Palestinians" who blew themselves up in New-York and Washington but well-off Saudis and Egyptians, brain-washed by Saudi-paid Ideology imams. The Saudi Osama Bin Laden succeeded in uniting the animosity-filled civilization of the Koran, on a world-wide scale, for the "Holy War" against the civilization of the Bible, regarding Israel as its outpost in the Middle East, In the "holy war" that civilization of the Koran is waging against the civilization of the Bible. Israel is considered the eastern outpost of that civilization, which must be annihilated. But the Militant Islam is looking for an additional advantage by attacking Israel and the Jewish People: They learned from the way Hitler manipulated the European anti-Semites in assisting him in swallowing up their own lands - by the criminal incentive of free murder of Jews. It is not accidental that the descendants of those Europeans developed into today's European turned out to be the "axis of hypocrisy" that defends the axis of evil, which have been promoting and promotes by every means their preferred replacement for the defeated Sadam Hussein, namely - Yassir Arafat and his PLO chieftains, as leaders of a reduced-scale terror-state called "Palestine" in the middle of the Holy Land. To be reminded: the UN was never asked and never decided to approve the establishment of a state called "Palestine", but will be asked now by the Axis of Hypocrisy to protect a new center of international terror - from the fate of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This is the same Axis of Hypocrisy who supplied Iraq with 70,600 tons of forbidden materials and 300 units of equipment - to turn them into WMD - as was admitted by Saddam's government itself. 3. Throughout History, a "Palestinian" nation or state has never existed. The majority of Arab inhabitants of the Land of Israel arrived to this land from neighboring countries after Jewish repatriation to the Jewish Biblical Homeland led to the development of the deserted land and its economy. The Arabs in this land never behaved as a distinct nation eligible for sovereign statehood. When offered the establishment of an independent state, they violently rejected the proposal, time and again. The only common goal, incited by the surrounding Arab dictators, was the destruction of the State of Israel. These dictators, if they occupied the whole Land of Israel, would annex its territory to their states, as they actually had done with the territories of Judea, Samaria and Gaza which they occupied in 1948. The "Palestine Liberation Organization" was established long before the Arab-Israeli 1967 war brought about the Israeli "occupliberation" of Samaria, Judea and Gaza (the so called "Territories") these territories from foreign occupation. This PLO was a Soviet-Egyptian project to destabilize the Middle East with a "legitimate" pretext of "liberation of oppressed people". This is how the descendants of NAZI Germany Arab agents became devoted agents of the Evil Empire and its murderous KGB. We were not surprised that when granted autonomy, after the Oslo accords, their society disintegrated into gangs of thieves, robbers and murderers, led by a multitude of war-lords, most of them connected to foreign hate-mongers and directed by Saudi or Iranian Militant-Islam ideology. This is the ideology which disseminates the propaganda demanding from each "good Moslem" to take part in "Jihad", knowing that the main goal of Jihad is to kill or enslave the Judeo-Christian "infidel" communities. The murderers of 9/11 as well as the Gaza and Baghdad suicide bombers came from the same ideological origin. Arab gangs call themselves "Palestinians", religious brainwashers. They believe in the same ideology, and cannot be partners to any international agreement, or demand the status of an independent nation. They must be treated like the Taliban criminals: extinction or unconditional surrender. 4. The first step to achieve peace in the Middle East and eliminate the infrastructure of incitement, and terror and development of WMD against the Free World is - by demanding that all Moslem dictators assume responsibility for stopping these activities within their jurisdiction, as well as financial or political support to such activities anywhere. If not - their oilfields, which finance these activities, will be confiscated by an appropriate Free World trusteeship. (In the case of Iran, a US-Russian agreement can be reached - to control the Northern oilfields of Iran by Russia, and the Southern - by the USA). 5. The Arab states responsible for the 1948 criminal war they waged against Israel have to be charged with proper reparations for the damage, casualties and suffering they have caused the Jewish and Arab populations of the country. The first step in fulfilling this demand should be to the Arabs - aiding their absorption, granting citizenship and rehabilitation upon request to every person (at the person's request) who had to leave and left the Land of Israel due to the war or who is still in the country but is not ready or is unwilling to be a faithful citizen of the Jewish State. The Arab dictators possess vast uninhabited territories, which they received from irresponsible colonial powers and which are hundreds of times the size of small and densely populated Israel . These territories are suitable for the immediate rehabilitation of all Middle-Eastern refugees. 6. The government of Israel will carry out the resolution of the League of Nations, which was adopted and ratified by the UN, to allot all the unpopulated land which was registered in Palestine as property of the Ottoman Empire till the end of WW1, for the purpose of repatriation of Jewish communities from countries expressing hatred towards them, beginning with Europe's "Hypocritical States Axis." 7. The present American Leadership of the Free World will organize and support and back-up an axis of stability between Iran and the Mediterranean Sea, to secure Middle-Eastern oil resources from exploitation by terrorist-supporting regimes. In this axis, American-ruled Iraq, the Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel will provide strategic bases for American forces which will act independently of the "Hypocritical States' Axis". The Port of Haifa can serve the US Navy, underground storage depots - built as an extension to the Mount of Carmel Tunnel project - to secure strategic supplies; the (existing) Kirkuk-Haifa Pipel-Line can serve as main export outlet of ME oil to the West, and a Haifa-Baghdad business-enterprise railway can provide efficient transportation along the Stability Axis, as well as an essential means for the economic rehabilitation of Iraq. And no less important: The ME Axis of Stability will liberate the US from exaggerated dependence on Saudi air bases and the Egyptian Suez Canal, thus limiting their extortionary capabilities. 8. America's actions in its war against terrorists are rightful and commendable. It must be remembered, however, that the first major battles in this war in Afghanistan and Iraq represent only the beginning of a campaign that will last many years. (Israel has, from its very beginning to the present day, been forced to defend itself in this very same war.) We believe that the war being waged by Islamic "holy" warriors (as they perceive themselves) can be successfully fought. The alternatives, defeat or perpetual war, are unacceptable. Not less than targeting the terrorists, the issue of incitement must be dealt with severely and continuously. Incitement must be criminalized as an international "act of war", and persons and countries participating, encouraging or allowing this heinous act must be dealt with appropriately and forcefully. We must bear in mind that a war was never won when it stopped half-way (as happened with the 1991 Gulf War). The entire Axis of Evil has to be neutralized without paying attention to the united chorus of Third World kleptocracies and European hypocritical democracies. Capturing Baghdad can not be the last step in this war. On behalf of the Forum of Veterans of the Israel War of Independence (listed in order of their military ID numbers): 5902 GIDEON ALTSHULER, 7793 YEHUDA KLAUSNER, 7797 AVIEZRI FRAENKEL, 7812 ADIR BAR-LEV, 7825 JOSEPH DORIEL, 7841 JOSHUA PELLEG, 9272 YOSSEPH OFFER, 10154 PESACH NAVOTH, 11446 YOSEF SAPIR, 11546 ELHANAN LIVNONI, 12022 HAIM GUREL, 14134 ITSCHAK KASPIT, 19905 ZAMIR BEN-AMI, 24798 NAFTALI MAOR, 30103 ABRAHAM PELED, 30609 YOASH TSIDDON, 50550 AMNON LYNN, 50690 JOSEPH ROM, 50875 EPHRAIM PERRY, 51830 ITZHAK HARPAZ, 57774 YOSEF NACHMIAS, 72041 JACOB LEVY, 72612 DAVID N. ABRAHAMOWICZ, 84595 YEHIEL GOLDBERG, 88774 MOSHE DOLGIN, 89073 SHIMON FRIEDMANN, 91503 SHMUEL SAMUEL, 94212 ZVI BARZEL, 94352 ZVI HIRSH COHN, 95432 ELYAHU GWIRCMAN, 97124 MENACHEM LEWIN, 98412 NAPHTALI SILETZKI, 107241 DAVID HAGOEL, 109629 DAN VON WEISL, 112797 BEN RONN, 114275 CHAIM ZINES, 123053 MOSHE BARLEVY, 127032 YARKONY SHLOMO, 131784 BARUCH WINER, 149374 YA'AKOV EL'AZAR, 152898 YEDIDIA BERRY, 155314 YEHUDA HORESH, 159308 MOTI BEN-CHORIN, 192930 BEZALEL WEINSHALL, 467331 SHLOMO LEV-AMI, 639872 DOV H. MILMAN. For comments and support: email Doriel@012.net.il or write to P.O.Box 21131, Tel-Aviv, Israel. To Go To Top

ISRAELI 'DISENGAGEMENT': EUPHEMISM FOR ETHNIC CLEANSING Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, January 21, 2005.

This appeared in http://chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=12511 In removing the Jewish residents from their legitimate homes in Gaza, Samaria, and Judea (a.k.a. West Bank), the Sharon government of Israel is guilty of egregious human rights violations against its own Jewish citizens who are also the innocent targets of Arab terrorism. The Bush Administration is guilty of complicity in this human rights crime. The effect of this is to weaken both Israel and America ideologically and morally in their efforts to combat Islamo-fascism and the global terrorism that it spawns. As such this undermines the security interests of the American people. At the core of our strength in the current struggle is a set of moral values that are under enemy assault. We cannot prevail over a philosophy that promotes and rationalizes hatred, bigotry and even mass murder unless we adhere firmly and without compromise to civilized norms. For example, our response to revelations of human rights abuses of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison is our attempt to correct an injustice once it became known and to show the world that we reject such conduct and will punish the guilty prison guards. We Americans have adopted the symbol of justice depicting a blindfolded woman holding a set of scales. That is meant to indicate an objective and consistent approach to justice, to be applied without fear or favor. In the present situation the human rights crime of the Sharon government is ethnic cleansing pure and simple, against innocent people who happen to be Jewish. In theory American policy is to oppose ethnic cleansing. In practice our actions are inconsistent. In Bosnia and Kosovo there were allegations of ethnic cleansing by Serbs against Albanian Muslims. The American response was to use military force to halt the crimes and to punish the alleged violators. But when the victims are Christians and Jews, our response ranges from passivity to complicity. Christians are victims of bigotry, violence and ethnic cleansing occurring mostly inside Arab/Muslim countries. In newly liberated Iraq, Christians are being brutalized and driven out by Muslims with no response from the American Army. In Bethlehem the former Christian majority has been largely driven out under PLO/PA rule. In Lebanon, in Egypt, in Sudan and elsewhere in the Arab world Christians suffer persecution and even death while the U.S. administration fails to respond adequately. Arab countries have robbed and expelled some 900,000 Jews during the decades from the 1930's through the 1950's. The Christian and Jewish presence in the Middle East pre-dates the Arab invasion and conquest of lands outside of Arabia. The spirit of militant Islam is conquest, conversion, expulsion and, if the victims resist, death. Our struggle should be against this evil, to halt it and to reverse it, as part of the announced American effort to spread freedom and democracy to the Arab peoples. But now we see the Sharon government of Israel preparing to expel Jews from their homes in its cowardly response to Arab intolerance and terrorism. Instead of Israel's being a partner in spreading freedom and democracy, we see the Sharon government itself now becoming a proxy for Arab extremism and for ethnic cleansing. Civilized people of mixed ethnic and religious backgrounds should be able to live together peacefully anywhere and everywhere, as they do inside America and inside Israel. That is a basic human right. But we now see the submission to ethnic cleansing in places where Arabs dominate. Ethnic cleansing is a high crime regardless of who is the perpetrator and regardless of any other name or deceptive euphemism that is applied. It is the same crime regardless of the identity of the victims and of the perpetrators. The heroes in this tragic episode include the brave Jewish residents who refuse to be intimidated by Sharon's threats. Other heroes are the thousands of Israeli soldiers who announced their refusal to carry out orders that are both illegal and immoral. American soldiers at the recent Abu Ghraib trial were told that "just following orders" is no excuse for clearly immoral conduct and they will be punished. There must be a line where conscience of civilized people trumps blind obedience to following orders. The Sharon government deserves to be condemned for this crime and also for the high handed and undemocratic means used to pursue this action. The Bush Administration also deserves condemnation for supporting Sharon in his illegal actions. >From now on the Islamo-fascists will be able to gleefully mock us as hypocrites when we criticize their actions and thus weaken our moral claim to oppose their hateful ideology. Please see the following links for more intormation on this subject: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1105932028233 http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/527873.html http://216.26.163.62/2004/me_israel_12_21.html An item by Emanuel Winston on this topic is of particular interest: http://www.think-israel.org/winston.hatesettlers.html Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee. To Go To Top

ARAFAT IS DEAD. LONG LIVE ARAFAT! Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, January 21, 2005.

This article was written by Zak Lieberberg. I translated it. The first Soviet constitution was adopted in 1936, soon after Stalin asserted his uncontested power over the country. It was officially called Stalin's Constitution. In 1953, after Stalin was posthumously denounced, his name was dropped from the title of the document, but the document itself remained unchanged. If I am not mistaken, it was cosmetically and meaninglessly amended under Brezhnev. Those familiar with both the Constitution of the United States and Stalin's Constitution could not have possibly missed some striking similarities in the structure of the government and the rights of citizens. Freedom of speech, religion, peaceful assembly - you name it, it was there. To be sure, it was not all there; the entire Bill of Rights, with the exception of the crudely adapted First Amendment, was dropped. But even that would have been much better than nothing, because nothing was exactly what the Soviet citizens got. What's especially interesting to us in the context of recent international developments is that the Soviet Union, in compliance with its constitution, held regular elections. Each political party nominated one candidate. On election day, a voter reported to her precinct and was issued a voting bulletin, which was a sheet of paper containing the list of all candidates for a particular office and simple instructions printed at the bottom: "Cross out all candidates except the one you are voting for." The precinct provided booths where voters could do their crossing out, allegedly, without the KGB watching over their shoulder. Such a procedure guaranteed anonymity of the voter, unless, of course, she wanted to write in her own candidate, which was allowed but happened very rarely. Despite all these similarities, the Soviet Union was not a democracy. Its citizens never experienced any of the freedoms promised by their constitution, because the mechanism of oppression was codified in that very same constitution. It allowed only one political party - the Communist Party. Accordingly, the number of candidates in each election was also one, which made Soviet elections a bit less meaningful than a rain dance performed by a Cro-Magnon medicine man. The single-party system made the Soviet Union similar to modern-day Iran. Iran, as you probably know, is not a democracy either, even though it also has a constitution and holds elections. However, the real power there belongs not to the government, but to the clergy. In the Soviet Union, the real power belonged to the Communist Party. In both cases, the power of the real rulers was absolute and included the right to act contrary to the laws of the state. The Soviet Union is no more. There are a multitude of political parties in today's Russia; elections are held regularly; and electoral aberrations there, unlike in the neighboring Ukraine, are reasonably rare. But is Russia a democratic country today? I don't think so; actually, I don't even believe there is any hope for democracy there in the foreseeable future. My pessimism is not only based on my strong gut feeling about the country where I grew up, but also on a number of solid facts, and I will share one of them with you. A couple of years ago, the Duma (Russian Knesset) adopted a law demanding all ethnicities within its jurisdiction (and there are almost two hundred of them) to use the Russian alphabet with their own non-Russian languages. At first glance, the law sounds perfectly senseless; I believe, however, that it constitutes an attempt to legislate the hegemony of ethnic Russians over everyone else in the country. I hope you will agree with me that such an attempt is utterly anti-democratic. Therefore, elections do not democracy make. After all, elections are regularly held in Egypt and were conducted in Saddam's Iraq, where their sole purpose was to convey an appearance of legitimacy to a perfectly illegitimate (but only from the Westerner's perspective) tyranny. Why is this important to us? Let's see. In response to 9/11, President Bush declared his War on Terror, only to stumble over the fact that our overwhelming military victories in Afghanistan and Iraq have failed to affect the global threat of Islamic terrorism or even to render the United States any safer than it was on the eve of the attack. Today, it is perfectly clear that no matter how many American soldiers lose their lives or limbs there, no matter how many Iraqis are killed in the process, no possible outcome of that war can benefit the United States. If I had been the Commander-in-Chief, I would've been tempted to order our soldiers to pack and go home, leaving Iraqis and Afghanis to sort out their differences with their respective countrymen without any further sacrifices from American soldiers or American taxpayers. I would have also been tempted to announce that my original opinion that Islam is not the enemy had been convincingly proven wrong, and ban the practice of Islam in this country for all eternity. President Bush, of course, is not so simpleminded. He decided to redefine victory instead. Now, instead of fighting for the safety of our own country, we are fighting for democracy in the Middle East. The folly of this is overwhelming. Even if democracy in the Muslim world is possible, it is highly questionable whether it will make Muslims any less hostile towards the West. After all, the only difference between democracy and tyranny is the procedure that is used to arrive at decisions. There is no guarantee that democratically adopted decisions will necessarily be benign. An impeccably democratic Great Britain, in the recent past, attacked a more or less democratic Argentina. A proudly democratic France is anti-Semitic to its rotten core and hates the US with a passion it is unable to contain. President Chirac recently urged the international community to resist American cultural influence; the French, meanwhile, are not even trying to resist the catastrophic influence of their Muslim community, which is growing like a cancerous tumor, gradually and irreversibly turning France, along with the rest of Europe, into a Third World country. That's why, even if democracy could coexist with Sharia, I don't see how it can help us. Imagine, for example, a referendum among the population of Arab countries with just one question on the ballot: Should every Jew in the world be slaughtered? I don't need to tell you what the overwhelming majority would respond. Jimmy Carter would be happy to ascertain that the votes are counted according to lawfully established procedures; preventing the next Holocaust would not be his concern. He has proven this convincingly by endorsing the outcome of the recent "Palestinian" elections. After doing his bit, he went home; but, even before he had time to unpack, news reached the world that the elections he endorsed were shamelessly rigged. But don't worry. Our venerable ex-president won't commit seppuku, because only decent people can feel shame. Besides, even the most decent person can lose face no more than once, since such a loss is inherently irreversible. Even if Jimmy Carter ever had a face, he probably doesn't remember where it is now. There is no question that Saddam Hussein is an Arab Hitler and deserves to hang. But how is he different from Muammar Kaddafi? Hosni Mubarak? Bashar Assad? Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? King Abdullah of Jordan? Arafat? Abu Mazen? Any other Arab ruler? And yet, I don't see how the United States of America has benefited from Saddam's removal from power. If the Iraqis were so unhappy under Saddam's rule, they should have removed him from power themselves instead of waiting until we did it for them. Judging from what's going on in Iraq today, Arabs are perfectly capable of opposing a superior force. They daily risk their lives fiercely resisting our occupation and the establishment of a pro-US government. If they had been unhappy with Saddam's cruel rule, they would've kicked him out themselves. I don't remember them doing anything for us to deserve such a generous gift. I know that many of my readers believe that, having saved Iraq from a brutal dictator, the United States have done a deed so noble that it constitutes its own reward. I remain skeptical about that. I test the situation with a single, simple question: Who will the liberated Iraq support, Israel in its struggle to survive the Arab onslaught or all other Arab countries in their effort to destroy Israel? I find it difficult to believe the former; and if the latter is true, then I say let them rot in hell. Why do I think Israel is central for the assessment of the situation? Because ours is a Judeo-Christian civilization. It cannot survive without Israel, just like it cannot survive without its Christian component. When, a few months ago, President Bush made the implementation of his road map conditional upon democracy among the "Palestinians", I thought he understood the murderous fallacy of his plan and had found a way out. Even if you believe that democracy is possible in a Muslim society, you don't think it is possible within a terrorist organization, do you? And even if you believe that "Palestinians" are really a people rather than the biggest criminal gang ever assembled, you should also know that one of the cornerstones of democracy is the concept of universal equality of all human beings. - All men are born equal? - you must've heard that somewhere. How is the equality of all men compatible with the incessant propaganda of murderous anti-Semitism in all "Palestinian" educational institution, from kindergartens to universities? Unless, of course, you believe that all men are born equal except Jews. Well, on today's earth, this is an increasingly popular opinion? Unfortunately, I was wrong. President Bush never considered abandoning his idiotic brainchild. He simply announced democracy a universal panacea and, at the same time, redefined it as the outcome of the elections endorsed by Jimmy Carter. How simple and yet, how elegant. He is not risking much: four more years, and he is going to be reviled by his successor's groupies for everything he has done, no matter what he does or abstains from doing. The rest of us will have to live with the consequences. Thanks to his efforts to resume the "peace process", many Israelis will die with them. A horde of pundits wrote countless articles expressing their brightest hopes for the new "Palestinian" leader. Here's something they forgot: no leader can lead his followers where they do not want to go. This is equally true whether the leader's ascent to power was approved by Jimmy Carter or not. As of today, the "Palestinian people" has been extant for approximately 36 years and 6 months. In all this time, they have done absolutely nothing that could be possibly interpreted as an expression of nation-building aspirations. An anti-Semite will tell you that they are fighting for their independence. As everything an anti-Semite says, this is a blatant lie. They could have their state by lunchtime tomorrow if they stopped killing Jews by the close of business today. That would have been grossly unfair, because they have no claim to even a square inch of Israel's land; but Israel, with the cowardly stupidity that has since become its trademark, has agreed to exchange land for peace more than a decade ago. Very few people remember today the argument in favor of the "land for peace" scam offered by peacemongers at the time when Oslo wasn't yet a done deal. If it doesn't work, they kept saying, if Israel gives the "Palestinians" the land, and they do not deliver peace in return, Israel can always take the land back. Considering the disastrous consequences of the Oslo accords, this is exactly what Israel should have done a long time ago. A hopelessly naïve optimist, I thought that the entire reason for Israel to agree to the scam was the intention to use the first opportunity provided by Arafat's gang to throw them out of the country once and for all. More than a thousand Israelis have been murdered by Arabs during this intifada alone, the intifada that was the Arafat's response to the offer of a state. How hard is it to understand that Arabs occupying Gaza, Judea, and Samaria are not interested in creating a new state, that they only want to destroy the old (thousands of years old) one? Isn't it too bad that taking the land back from the deadly enemy does not seem to be such an obvious option today as the peacemongers promised a decade ago? Meanwhile, the Arab Meine Kampf keeps unfolding. The new Arab fuehrer continues the struggle of his predecessor, using the same methods and even the same rhetoric. Why not? It worked for Yasser I; surely, it will work for Yasser II. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com To Go To Top

FREE U.S. PRISONER OF ZION JONATHAN POLLARD NOW Posted by Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi, January 21, 2005.

Dear friends, No words about this shame: Jonathan Pollard is denied the official status of Prisoner of Zion. After two decades in prison, he is denied this honor. Who deserves it more than he does? I am asking you to send Arutz Sheva [mailto:feedback@israelnationalnews.com] an email of protest against the decision of the official Prisoners of Zion Authority and to send Jonathan Pollard [mailto:Justice4JP@aol.com] an email of solidarity. Whoever believes is also asked to pray for his liberation. The article below appeared in Arutz-7 News, Friday, January 7, 2005. Shabbat Shalom from Rome, Jonathan Pollard has been dealt yet another blow. This time, a request to recognize him as an official Prisoner of Zion has been rejected, once again, by the official Prisoners of Zion Authority. The stated reason for the rejection astonished many of those who have been following the Pollard case. "How can we know that he will want to live in Israel upon his release from prison?" the members of the decision-making committee wrote. Pollard, in his frequent letters and messages from prison, has often stated his deep desire to live in Israel. Pollard is serving his 20th year of a prison sentence in the U.S., for passing classified information to Israel. The information in question was critical to Israel's security, and Israel was entitled to it in accordance with agreements it made with the U.S. The decision to reject the Prisoner of Zion request was made by an appeals committee of the Prisoners of Zion Authority in the Absorption Ministry. The appeal of a previous rejection was submitted by Israeli inventor Dr. Felix-Azriel Kochubievsky (inventor of a trans-cranial electro-stimulation apparatus). The committee noted that one of the criteria for recognition as a Prisoner of Zion is that the candidate must be an Israeli citizen and resident. "No one disputes the fact that Pollard is not an Israeli resident", the committee member states. "It may be claimed that it is only his incarceration that prevents him from being a resident... But this claim, in our opinion, is artificial. Furthermore, how can we know that upon his release he will want to live in Israel, against which his bitterness in light of the above is fairly understandable". Adi Ginzberg, a leading activist for Pollard's release, told I.N.N.'s Ruti Avraham in response: "I can't think of a better example than this to depict 'Have you murdered and also inherited?' What the committee is saying is that the fact that Israeli governments betrayed Pollard and their obligations towards him -- that's the reason to take away his deserved rights. Furthermore, questioning his desire to live in Israel is totally ridiculous; there is no letter or interview he gives in which he does not express his exclusive desire to move to Israel". Yosef Mendlevitch, one of the most famous Soviet "Prisoners of Zion", has long promoted Pollard's case, calling for American and Israeli Jewish leaders to work for his release. He recently wrote that Israel has nothing to "lose" by granting Pollard the status of Prisoner of Zion: "Prisoners of Zion don't receive special payments, and Ariel Sharon won't be forced to wrangle with his good friend George W. Bush over his release". Mendlevitch wrote, "The U.S. Administration sinned against Israel by concealing important information from it, in violation of agreements. Granting Pollard the status of 'Prisoner of Zion' would be an important statement on the part of Israel, declaring that Jonathan acted correctly and properly when he bravely went against the American establishment's hiding of the truth from Israel. He set a new standard of Jewish and human responsibility for all of us. He should be considered a Prisoner of Zion, as 'from Zion will come forth' the light of truth and justice for all the nations". Yosef Mendelovitch Letter Protesting Denial of PoZ Status, 14 Jan 2005 J4JP Release - January 14, 2005 [Translated from Hebrew by J4JP] To The Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon Shalom rav! I have learned that the government committee which awards certificates to Prisoners of Zion has rejected the request to grant Prisoner of Zion status to Israeli national hero, Jonathan Pollard, G-d bless his soul! The committee claims that it is not authorized to rule on such governmental issues. What administrative committee is authorized to decide that Mr. Pollard is a national hero?! Fortunately, it is not up to government functionaries to determine something which the People of Israel determined long ago. It is without a doubt, utterly ridiculous [that the committee has] determined that according to some administrative norms, a national hero who sacrificed himself to save Jewish lives, and who was arrested for his self sacrifice on behalf of Israel, is not a Prisoner of Zion! I, and the rest of the Prisoners of Zion, strongly demand that you personally intervene to correct this slap-in-the-face and use your governmental authority to extend this honor to Mr. Pollard. Moreover, it is certainly time for the Government to end its shameful behavior regarding the endless calls to secure the immediate release of Mr. Pollard. If, from your point of view, Mr. Pollard is not deserving of this honor, then I, a holder of this certificate, prefer to be what I am without any certificate. So shall many, many other prisoners of Zion. Yosef Mendelevitch Former Prisoner of Zion, 11 years in prison on behalf of the Zionist struggle. See Also: Hebrew Text: Yosef Mendelovitch Letter Protesting Denial of PoZ Status http://www.jonathanpollard.org/ Is Espionage a Zionist Activity? -- by Esther Pollard -- Special to I.M.R.A. http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010905.htm Israel Won't Recognize Pollard as a Prisoner of Zion http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010705a.htm Esther Pollard: Refusal of Prisoner of Zion Status "Petty and Mean-spirited" http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010705.htm "Israel's Debt of Gratitude to Jonathan Pollard," by HaRav Shlomo Aviner, B'Ahava U B'Emunah, January 15, 2005. HaRav Shlomo Aviner is the Rosh Yeshiva of Ateret Cohanim and the Rav of Beit El. [JP Note: Originally published in Hebrew in two parts, (B'Ahava U B'Emunah, Machon Meir, 20 Tevet and 27 Tevet 5765), the following speech by HaRav Shlomo Aviner was first presented at a recent demonstration for Jonathan Pollard. It was translated to English by J4JP]. We have been standing here in the rain for a long time, getting drenched. It is good that we are doing this for Jonathan's sake; he got soaked for us with every fiber of his being. Jonathan Pollard is a man who never thought of himself, only of others. He nullified himself for the sake of others. One might suppose that a man like this, who never thinks of himself, only of others, would be someone easily destroyed by his enemies, quickly wiped off the face of the earth. After all, in this world -- at least according to Darwin -- only the strong survive. Kindly people disappear. In G-d's world, however, that is not so. The huge and mighty dinosaur which neglected and abandoned its own offspring became extinct; but the small, fragile bird which carefully nurtures its young is still in existence today. Similarly, historically, what became of all of the mighty Kingdoms that persecuted the Jewish People? Egypt, Babylonia, Persia and Medes, Greece and Rome? They disappeared! But we, the Jewish People, are still here! What nation represented the height of self interest in ancient times? Sodom! The people of Sodom refused to give a cent to the poor, for fear of being deprived themselves. A girl in Sodom who took pity on a poor person was burnt to death. Another was smeared with honey and left to be stung to death by bees. Who, at that time, represented the polar opposite of self interest, nullifying himself and thinking only of others? Avraham Avinu! Avraham ran to receive guests, to take them in and care for them with all his might, even when he was in great pain, still suffering from his circumcision. Avraham put his nephew Lot first, nullifying his own desires by allowing Lot to choose first whatever territory he preferred. When Avraham learned that Lot had been taken captive, he did not think twice. He immediately enlisted all of his disciples to save him. Avraham prayed for Sodom. One would think that a man like Avraham, so self-sacrificing and not concerned for his own welfare, would be poor. Not so! Avraham was very wealthy! So much so that our sages said, "Better the fertilizer from Avraham's orchard than the wealth of Avimelech". Avraham had a good heart. He thought of others, not of himself. Under his direction, Eliezer, Avraham's bondsman, sought a bride for Yitzhak (Avraham's son), with the same qualities, who did not think about herself, only of others. When Eliezer first encountered Rebecca, she ran from the well to the drinking trough to bring water for all who were thirsty. Eliezer concluded that she was the one that G-d had designated as a bride for Yitzhak (Genesis 24:14). Rashi expands on this: "As a doer of kind deeds she was worthy of Yitzhak, and she deserved to become a part of Avraham's family". The same is true of Moses. Moses was a Prince of Egypt, but he chose to go forth to be with his brothers (Exodus 2:11). He was consumed by concern for his brothers. Pharaoh offered him numerous positions, but he preferred to work in the Jewish concentration camps so that he might assist his People. When he saw an Egyptian smiting a Hebrew, he did not think twice; he killed the Egyptian. He knew that from now on the entire Egyptian security forces would be after him, and indeed that is what occurred. But G-d performed a miracle for him and "saved him from Pharaoh's sword" (Exodus 18:4). He didn't think about himself; only about others. When Moses arrived in Midian, he saw the shepherds harassing Jethro's daughters and he immediately intervened. It was his first day as a stranger in a foreign land. As such, it might have been wiser to keep a low profile and not stand out by intervening; but he did not think for a second about what was best for him, only for others. There are those who have no self interest, who think only of others; and there are those who think only of themselves. Jonathan Pollard is in the former category. Did he not know that he was taking a risk? Did he not know that the Americans are chauvinist, cruel and harsh in this matter? (Ed: America is proud of its vast covert spy operations spanning the globe and penetrating deep into the heartland of friend and foe alike, Israel included. Yet America is outraged by any effort on the part of Israel to defend its own national security interests in a similar fashion). The truth is Jonathan risked himself, not just one time, but for every piece of critical information he attained. This is like the Sea of Reeds in Epypt. It did not part from end to end when Nachshom jumped in (Rabbenu Bachaye). Rather, the more he advanced, the more it parted: "The sea saw and fled" (Psalm 114:3). Every piece of information was a piece of self-sacrifice. Even when Jonathan was arrested, he delayed his interrogators as much as possible to enable the rest of the Israeli team to escape. Jonathan is a man whose whole life is devoted to the good of others. Even now in prison, he is concerned about others. He writes; he speaks out; he does good deeds; he sends his wife to comfort mourners in Israel, and does every thing he can do from afar. Jonathan epitomizes the essence of the Jewish People. The entire essence of the Jewish People is a People with no self-interest who care only for others. Regarding choosing a mate, the Shulchan Aruch counsels that one should investigate well to ensure that the person one chooses is not self-centered, lest he or she turn out to be not a Jew, but a Gibeonite (Even HaEzer 2:2). The Gibeonites are not Jews. They are a hard-hearted people. Jews, by contrast, are known by 3 traits. They are humble, merciful and doers of kind deeds (Yevamot 79a). We, the Jewish People, who are concerned for others, and who stand here on behalf of a man who thought a great deal about others, must show gratitude. Gratitude precedes good-heartedness. Even people without a good heart are grateful to those who have done them favors. The book "Chovot HaLevavot" makes clear that the foundation of all morality and all good traits is gratitude. Gratitude is of supreme importance to the Jewish People. The Torah demands it even regarding Egypt: "Do not despise the Egyptian, since you were an immigrant in his land" (Deuteronomy 23:8). This is in reference to the terrible "hospitality" of backbreaking labor and harsh edicts which mandated throwing infants into the river or slaughtering children for their blood! Even so, at the time we had nowhere else to be but Egypt, so we are required to show gratitude. We are similarly required to show gratitude to dogs, because as we exited Egypt, "not a dog barked" (Exodus 11:7). We left at midnight with the Angel of Death in the city, and the dogs wept (Bava Kamma 60b). Had the dogs barked when millions were leaving, it would have caused a terrible panic, causing people to be trampled and crushed. Therefore as a reward to the dogs, animal carcasses (judged to be unfit for Kosher consumption) are given to dogs (Exodus 22:30). Are these the same dogs that helped us in Egypt? Of course not. Does a dog have free will? The answer is: Nevertheless, in expressing gratitude we Jews always go to the extreme, because gratitude is the foundation of everything! Another example: Prior to the Exodus, the plague of blood in the Nile was not unleashed by Moses, since the water had saved him as an infant. Does water have free will? Nevertheless, Moshe shows gratitude to the water! Likewise, with the plague of boils, it was Aaron who threw the furnace soot into the air, causing the plague. Moses did not, since he had a debt of gratitude to the earth, because the sand had saved him when he "buried the Egyptian in the sand" (Exodus 2:12). According to the Torah, gratitude was required to be shown to Egypt, to dogs, to water and to soil! That is how far we go in teaching the importance of showing gratitude. Shall we then show no gratitude to Jonathan Pollard? Impossible! All of Israel owes a debt of gratitude to Jonathan Pollard. The entire Jewish People ought to enlist to save him. That is how a righteous people acts, and all the more so a country. "One for all and all for one". These words by Alexander Dumas ought to ring true for us as well. Unfortunately, we live in a world of falsehood; we do not see the truth. We don't see who has a good heart. How do we fight in a world of falsehood? With the help of the truth! Truth contradicts and eradicates falsehood! The world is full of lies. Lies about Jonathan, lies as though Eretz Yisrael is not ours, lies about the Torah. You can't fight falsehood with physical weapons, but only by stating the truth again and again. Falsehood, the Evil Impulse, wickedness, disgracefulness -- all fear the truth more than anything. We must constantly pursue the truth. With the help of a single truth, mountains of falsehood can be toppled. The truth of Torah, kindness, and humanity repels evil and falsehood. We are therefore called upon to cry out the truth all the time. It is all one war: The battle for truth and the battle for Jonathan. Truth was given to Yaacov (Michah 7:20), and truth is G-d's seal. Whoever does kind deeds without ulterior motives is emulating the traits of G-d. The Master-of-the-Universe has many traits, but first and foremost, the root and foundation of all else, is kindness: "The universe is built from kindness" (Psalm 89:3). G-d performs kind deeds every day, constantly, every hour and every moment. This is a supreme spirit that stirs in man from On High. Rabbi Avraham HaKohen Kook wrote, "The longing to be good to all stems from a heavenly source" (Orot HaKodesh 3:316). This refers to being good not for an ulterior motive, but because goodness itself is good. This is the supreme trait of G-d and it precedes all else, all science and all philosophy, all Torah and all holiness. It comes before all else -- Kindness! This is the trait that characterizes Jonathan, who took upon himself such an enormous mission. There is an American saying that sometimes events are greater than the men who shape them. Divine Providence chose Jonathan to perform this great kindness and to bring great salvation to the Jewish People. We must proclaim the truth all the time! It will banish the darkness, the materialism, the selfishness, the lust, the man preoccupied with nothing but himself. A person concerned with others is a happy person. We have assembled here in the rain for this great mitzvah of freeing Jonathan. Everyone here is an emissary of truth, and he should proclaim it everywhere. Others will hear, and they too will repeat it. By such means truth will spread throughout the entire Nation. We look forward to the day when Jonathan will go free and will stand here, expounding words of Torah. We will hear them, and we will be able to crowd around together in the shadow of a man of whom we will be able to say: "He has no self-interest, but only the interest of others at heart". We will continue to follow in his path, working for his cause and praying for complete salvation and his swift return to our midst. Speedily in our day! Amen! See Other Articles by HaRav Aviner: Putting Fellow Man First: Jonathan Pollard http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010605.htm The Nation is with Jonathan! http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2003/121803.htm Fighting for Our Brother Jonathan; Saving Ourselves http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/051204.htm Over There is A Man Who Loves Israel http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2003/061503b.htm Where is Jonathan? http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/043004.htm Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi is Muslim Co-Chair, R&B Islam-Israel Fellowship. He is Secretary General, Italian Muslim Assembly. Contact him at islam.inst@flashnet.it or on his website: www.amislam.com To Go To Top

THERE WILL BE NO INTERNAL WAR Posted by David Ha'Ivri, January 21, 2005.

A civil war is one of the biggest nightmares of the Jewish people, but it is not something unheard of. On the contrary, fighting between Jews has followed us throughout history, and often for good reason. In Israel a civil war is called mechemet achim, which means "a war of brothers" and the Tanach tells us of many such wars. For instance, at the end of Shoftim (the Book of Judges) we learn that all the tribes of Israel went to war against the tribe of Binyamin at Givah. At that time, the tribe of Binyamin was almost totally annihilated because they adopted the atrocious ways of the Canaanite nations. In Melachim (the Book of Kings) we learn of other wars between the tribes. The Israelite tribes were eventually exiled from the land as punishment for following the ways of other nations. At the time of the second Temple, the Maccabim fought the Hellenists Israelites who wanted to corrupt the Jewish people with Greek culture and idolatry. In modern history there were Jews who assisted our enemies. For instance, the Kapos, in the Shoah, to save their own skin, assisted the Nazis. During the foreign rule by the British there were Jews who enlisted in the ranks of the British Police. The Haganah actively took part in what was called "the season" - short for "hunting season" - in which Jews were sent out to hunt other Jews and give them over to the British. A boy from Haifa named Yedidiyah Segal, who was a member of the Irgun, was abducted by the Haganah and tortured to death at their hands. During the War of Independence there was the shameful incident of the Altalena in which Yitzhak Rabin commanded the bombing of an Irgun ship that was bringing soldiers and weapons in order to liberate Jerusalem. 18 Jewish soldiers were shot dead while swimming to shore from the burning and sinking ship. No inquiry was held for the violation of international law forbidding shooting soldiers in the water. The next day, David Ben Gurion, speaking on the podium of the new Knesset, praised "the holy cannon" that sunk the Altalena. Menachem Begin, who was head of the Irgun at that time, and was on the Altalena while it was being bombed by the Haganah, ordered his men to refrain from returning fire, thus avoiding a civil war. In tears, Begin called on his men to enlist in Ben Gurion's army, thereby surrendering to Ben Gurion's demand to control the fate of the nation. The arms that the Altalena brought in to liberate Jerusalem went down in the shallows of the Sea of Tel Aviv, along with the dream to unite Jerusalem at that time. Menachem Begin's unrealistic sentimental notions of brotherhood caused him to choose a questionable unity with Jews who were not loyal to our values. This resulted in a divided Jerusalem and set the precedent for choosing a false political unity rather than achieving our national goals. Again and again, civil war in Israel is forced upon us by those who are not loyal to Jewish values and sovereignty and who are not afraid to lift their hand against their fellow Jews. At the same time they point a finger at loyal Jews whom they claim are a threat to the unity of the nation and manipulatively take advantage of sentiments that they themselves do not possess. And so Jerusalem fell to the hands of the Jordanians, the Sinai was given over to the Egyptians, pork is sold in the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, and our land is being given over to our enemies - all in the name of "Jewish unity". Unity of the Jewish people is important as long as we are united by our loyalty to HaShem and His Torah. Unity in treason to HaShem can only bring tragedy to our people. There will be no war of brothers, but only because those loyal to HaShem to His land, and to His Torah stand strong and do not give in to the weakness and emptiness of those Jews who are willing to give up our national heritage. In the end, they will join us or they will disappear into history like all those before them who took the path of assimilation. We are determined to have a proud Jewish country in Israel based on Jewish values. The land is ours, as set down in the Bible, as God's gift to the Jews. We will not give our heritage over to our enemies in the name of a false unity with those whose goal is to erase the holiness of our nation and land. We will stand strong with our convictions and they will be forced to acknowledge that we are here to stay. David Ha'ivri, chairman of Revava, is also editor of Darka Shel Torah and Ideas in Action newsletters, and the publisher of books teaching Jewish pride and faith in HaShem. He has set a goal to put the Jewish people back on the footpath of our fathers, and build a proud and strong nation whose national policy is based on Jewish values. He can be reached by email at haivri@hameir.org or at his website: http://www.hameir.org/ To Go To Top

INFORMATION ON THE BRUTAL MURDER OF COPTS IN N.J. Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 21, 2005.

Friends, Don't expect to hear this information on CBS. This is from http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004740.php. A close friend of the Coptic Christian brutally murdered in New Jersey along with his family, Hossam Armanious, is the source of this information, which comes to you exclusively from Jihad Watch: The Armanious family had inspired several Muslims to convert to Christianity - or thought they had. These converts were actually practicing taqiyya, or religious deception, pretending to be friends of these Christians in order to strengthen themselves against them, as in Qur'an 3:28: "Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful -- he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah -- except in self-defense." It was these "converts" who knocked on the door of the Armanious home. Of course, the family, not suspecting the deception, was happy to see the "converted" men and willingly let them in to their home. That's why there was no sign of forced entry. Then the "converted" Muslims did their grisly work. Many Copts are regarding the murders as a warning to the Coptic community as a whole, related to the increasing strife between Copts and Muslims in Egypt and the Copts' energetic efforts in America to get the truth out about the differences between Middle Eastern Christians and Muslims -- differences that the Islamic lobby, with its disingenuous talk of "Arab Americans," routinely glosses over and hopes you don't notice. The Copts, to their immense credit, have been particularly outspoken among Middle Eastern Christians about Muslim oppression. And yes, many are active on Pal Talk debating Muslims. The nature of the warning? The murders send a signal from the Muslims to the Copts: we are going to behave here the same way we behaved in Egypt, and the First Amendment and American law enforcement will not protect you. Don't expect America to keep you safe from us. The oppression and harassment you thought you had left behind in Egypt has now come to you. This means, if Armanious's friend is correct, that this is indeed America's Theo van Gogh murder: indication that all Muslims in the nation do not, as we are supposed to believe, unanimously accept the parameters of American pluralism. That at least some are willing to enforce Sharia penalties right here, right now. But there are so many nominees for the Walter Duranty prize this time that most Americans have no clue of what's going on. Duranty, of course, was the New York Times reporter who knowingly covered up information about the genocidal famine Stalin caused and fueled in Ukraine, and won a Pulitzer Prize for his efforts. The Pinch Sulzberger Times of these dark days should dedicate the whole paper to Duranty's honor, and put his picture on the front page right next to "All the News That's Fit to Print." Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. To Go To Top

THE DECAYING OF THE UN Posted by Penelope Knight, January 20, 2005.

There is something definitely wrong going on over at the U.N. Oil for Food programs rife with corruption. The UN funding of terrorists through well-known terrorist aiding organizations filling our noses with obscene rot. (See below article) And I am 100% sure there are hundreds more debacles awaiting investigation in that crumbling body called the U.N. Most Americans do not wish to have our tax monies sent to aiding terrorists - past, present or "Future Terrorists of the World". Can the UN be rebuilt and can its reputation redeemed? I say NOT. It is time to dissolve the UN or at least withdraw from it, and send it from our shores. I protest any support of the UN. And I want action now. This article is called "The U.N. At Work." It's by Dore Gold, and appeared in the Wall Street Journal, January 19, 2005; Page A12. Mr. Gold, Israel's ambassador to the U.N. from 1997-99, is author of "Tower of Babble: How the U.N. Has Fueled Global Chaos" (Crown, 2004). In 2003 and 2004, the Israel Defense Forces captured documentation showing how the U.N. Development Program was regularly funding two Hamas front organizations: the Tulkarm Charity Committee and the Jenin District Committee for Charitable Funds. The donations varied -- sometimes $4,000 and sometimes $10,000. Receipts and even copies of thank-you notes to UNDP were discovered. The U.N. should have exercised considerable caution with transfers of this sort, considering that in 2002, Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement described Jenin as "the capital of the suicide bombers." Nonetheless, one might ask, how was the U.N. to know that these were actually Hamas front groups? Here's how: In June 2003, the Office of the Coordinator of the Activities of the Israel Defense Forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip asked UNDP to stop all assistance to the Jenin District Committee because of its Hamas connection. Israel knew that Hamas operatives ran the charity; its deputy director had been a member of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the elite terrorist unit of Hamas. Timothy Rothermel, UNDP's special representative in Jerusalem, turned down the Israeli request. Another disturbing revelation from captured documents is the support provided by the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for the "Koran and Sunna Society" of Kalkilya. UNRWA has been heavily penetrated by Hamas for years; Hamas members dominate many of its unions, including the teachers union. But this new link represented a further deterioration in the U.N.'s connections, for the "Koran and Sunna Society" defines itself as salafi -- it adopts doctrines from militant Islam. Indeed, the "Koran and Sunna Society," which has six branches in the West Bank, distributes pamphlets published in Saudi Arabia that are often written by radical Wahhabi clerics. References to the value of martyrdom and jihad are not uncommon in these materials. One of the Society's schools, called "The Martyrs of the Al-Aqsa Intifada," received payments from UNRWA for educating children of Palestinian refugees in March and June of 2004. This glaringly bad judgment by U.N. agencies is not confined to the West Bank and Gaza. In October 2004, the "Arab International Forum for Rehabilitation and Development in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" held a conference in Beirut under the auspices of the U.N.'s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). The conference announced a joint initiative between ESCWA and the "Coalition of Goodness," an organization led by a spiritual head of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradhawi. This U.N. partner, a year earlier, appeared in Sweden and spoke in favor of suicide operations against Israeli civilians. And two months before the Beirut conference, he signed a communiqué calling on Muslims to support the forces fighting the U.S. in Iraq. Besides getting to the bottom of the Oil-for-Food scandal, it is equally vital to get the U.N. to halt its backing of recognized international terrorist groups. The Bush administration gave the U.N. a special status in the Arab-Israeli peace process by making it part of the multilateral "Quartet" -- along with the U.S., the EU and Russia. But because of this behavior on the part of its agencies, the U.N. should not be granted this diplomatic standing by any of the parties to Middle Eastern negotiations. Since the U.N. presents itself as the source of international legitimacy, Hamas fronts can now argue in domestic courts that they are legitimate humanitarian agencies that benefit from U.N. recognition. True, the U.N. is a huge complex of many sub-organizations -- and it may be difficult to monitor everyone. But the U.N. has a duty today to clean up its act before it asks for the trust of Israel or any law-abiding member of the international community again. To Go To Top

A COPTIC-AL ILLUSION Posted by Carrie Devorah, January 20, 2005.

Most people know New Jersey as Frank Sinatra's home state or a place one drives through on the Interstate. Long linked to Tony Soprano types and the big "M," the Garden State was overcoming their Family reputation. Then Saturday happened, Sylvia's birthday. Police interrupted a private party at 4:00am, not for too much noise but lack of it. A "religious family with no enemies" appears to have had few close friends. They lay in their own blood for days before being found hog tied, slaughtered ritualistically, their necks slashed top to bottom. Father. Mother. Two daughters. Emad Fahmy, a relative, said "They have no enemies." The sweet 16 birthday girl's great-uncle Milad Garas identified Sylvia by a tattoo on her wrist, her face battered beyond recognition. Burglary wasn't the motive for the 1997 emigrees' murder, relatives said. The blue collar family's gold was stolen last year. 50 mourners, maybe, attended their funeral. Outwardly, they were regular people. Their life style wasn't lavish. You read about their daughters in community bulletins not headlines. 8 year old Monica, the youngest, a third grader at PS 6, sang in the church choir. The mother, 36 year old Amal, a letter carrier for the United States Post office, provided their family's income stability with government benefits and promise of pensions. Hossam the dad, a catering hall server, achieved America's dream. Four years ago, November 2000, he bought a house for $96,500, according to one newspaper. 16 year old Sylvia, cast regularly in Dickenson High School's plays shared her father's platform on the world stage of Islamic politics. They were outspoken. New Jersey, promoting itself as "the getaway state" with sandy beaches and lighthouses decorating postcards sold at truck stops, had been discovered as a hideaway for runaways from religious persecution in Muslim countries. Like the Hossam Armanious family. Now, the whole world was discovering, through the Armanious massacre, Coptics' political quest for religious salvation from Muslim hatred. Hossam and his family, active members of the St. George & St. Shenouda Coptic Orthodox Christian congregation Church, were Egyptian Coptics. Months earlier, Elizabeth Goldhirsh a New York writer described neighboring New York's community of Coptics, Egyptian Christians, as vibrant "truly one of its hidden cultural treasures." Few people knew about the Armanious', off line that is. Church deacon Fred Ayed knew Hossam thirty years back from Egypt. In the virtual world of the Internet, Hossam was as open with his Coptic Christian beliefs as he was in Egypt before moving to America. "A most outspoken Christian" reputed for fiery dialogue with Muslims on paltalk.com, a Muslim website, Hossam regularly debated religion in the Middle Eastern chat room, espousing his Coptic beliefs. While zipcodes change, rarely do people's politics. Rumor has it a fatwa, edict for death, was ordered on Hossam before he moved to America. The New York Post reported Hossam "was threatened for making anti-Muslim remarks online." Another Middle Easterner reported one online exchange. Hossam was told, "You'd better stop this bull---- or we are going to track you down like a chicken and kill you." Hossam wrongly interpreted America's Freedom of Religion guaranteed his Freedom of Expression and offline anonymity. On the record, Jersey City Mayor Jeremiah Healy told reporters." Whoever is responsible for this horror will be brought to justice." Jersey City Police Chief Robert Troy acknowledged "They probably knew their killers." A "former disgruntled tenant is being sought." Off the record, the FBI was called in. Immediately. Coptic Reverend Makarious wants Coptic youth growing up American "to know where they came from." Sylvia's friend at Dickenson HS, Jessica Cimino, said Sylvia knew. "She was very religious and very opinionated." Sylvia tattooed a Coptic Cross on her wrist. It, too, was viciously slashed. Coptology began after the Arab conquest of Egypt, 641 AD. Coptologists, descended from Egyptians, refused to convert to Islam when it first arrived 7th Century, in their country. They were named "Gypt," after an Egyptian God, from the Greek word Egyptos, Egypt. Coptic was Egypt's native language before Arabic prevailed. Copts and Muslim compatriots banded together in the 19th and 20th century to revolt against British rule, p